to not be insistant that the sexes are equal?

[elmoandella]

why do we have to be equal in all aspect of life??

we are not the same.

women are better at some of life's tasks. men are better at others.

obviously there are exceptions to this.(women with high levels of testerone for eg. tend to have a more "male" attitude and way of doing things)

i was raised by a liberal mother who did everything for herself. raised 5 kids while running a business. with no childcare and as a single parent for the most of that time we were growing up.

i was encouraged to do follow lead and be successful.

however, it seemed a very unhappy life.

i have to ponder the idea that perhaps she would have had a much more satisfactory life if she hadn't been so determined to be equal and get her own way.

is it really so terrible to just accept women may sometimes, in certain fields of work, get paid less.

I also dont see why so many women strive to equal there partner in pay.

what is wrong with your other half being the greater earner. it is half the battle then when you go for maternity leave. you will be able to relax a little and enjoy it. than worrying that the main salary is cut drastically as the female is the higher earner.

i know a few on here will want to flame me. but i would actually like to see a reasonable debate on why so many women are so determined to do everything.

tell me why you want equality so badly.

convert me!!

No one has said it VH, but the arguments against it imply opposition, no?

Presumably that refers to me, Violet, as I've outed myself as a feminist?

Actually thinking about it, the term "man-hater" has simply replaced the term "feminist" as an insult, now that the term feminist has become respectable.

oh sorry, in my world feminist is respectable. I keep forgetting that in the great wide world out there, it quite often isn't.

'Zactly, LB.

I really resent the implication that I'm not 'fairly sane', actually, too.

LB, the arguments have been about making the workplace adaptable and family friendly without compromising service delivery/work-life balance for other employees etc

Which all seems entirely reasonable to me.

But of course, in the face of perfectly reasonable argument, it's always easier to misquote rather than present a counter argument!

It's incredibly sad that women see other women in this way. So much fighting has gone on throughout history for womens rights and still ongoing. If reincarnation is true I hope I am not reborn a woman as chances are it would be a pretty shit life if born elsewhere.

Perhaps more should be taught about it in school to educate.

"Single-sex gyms are presumably because people don't want to flash their bodies in front of the opposite sex (I can see it appealing to certain cultures, in particular). Yet I can't see any justification for male-only golf clubs - are they worried women will beat them, or something? Especially objectionable as a lot of business is discussed over golf, lot of business relationships surround it."

well i'd imagine it is for exactly the same reason as the gyms.the men want to enjoy their recreation in the company of other men and i simply think that if they are privately funding this themselves (i'd never agree with it on a public golf course) then that should be their right.in exactly the same way i'd support the rights of a female only golf course/anything as long as it was privately funded.
i'd whole heartedly agree with you on objecting if a company was using it to do business there to the exclusion of one gender, but surely that is an abuse of the institution whatever it may be rather than an abusive institution. i.e. you could still have two female colleagues discussing business in the female only gym to the exclusion of a male.for instance if the 3 were working on a project together and the 2 women were coming up with ideas in the gym and thensteam rolling them through by coming back and announcing "we've decided that we're going to go in x direction"
i know it's a fairly laboured analogy but in that instance t would be the women in the wrong due to their own actions,not the gyms fault,and ditto with golf clubs.

i'm afraid we'll just have to agree to disagree on the academic library front, as i just don't agree with the logic but can understand why some would.i just simply see nothing wrong with having some facilities as adults only. but etto

No they haven't. People have stated categorically htat some jobs have to be done full time. And implied that only low-level, badly paid jobs can be done part time.

That's not a debate about how you can do pt without compromising service imo.

only read op. I suspect the debate has moved on but imo under NO circumstances should a woman be paid less than a man if doing the same job.

to do so is appalling sexism of the very worst kind. "you are worth less than this person by virtue of your genitalia".

I really hope you have expressed yourself badly.

There is so much nonsense in the OP that I don't know where to start.

Some jobs do have to be done within specific hours, equating to full time, without compromising clients, colleagues, employer etc.

That is a fact.

I disagree that it is only low status low paid jobs which can be done part time.

Certainly some jobs do have to be doen that way.

But I think people overestimate how many jobs need to be done that way. Many, many jobs which are currently done that way don't need to be and in the future won't be.

You are contradicting yourself all over the place LB.

Just now you criticised other posters saying:
'People have stated categorically htat some jobs have to be done full time.' (sic)

Now you are agreeing that
'Certainly some jobs do have to be doen that way.'

Yes, maybe some people do underestimate how many jobs could be more flexible.

But I think you also need to accept that those of us with employment/management responsibilities do know our own specialist areas and we do have a pretty good idea of what works and what doesn't!

You only had to read the original post to discount it. It is proof that what helps women most is a good education but it's certainly true men and women are different though.

I have said some jobs can't be done part time - like an 18 hour operation or a court case as a barrister and that's true but i ever said only the low grade jobs could be. Plenty of low grade jobs can't be done part time anyway and anyway not all women want to work part time. Some of us like being normal full time workers adn are more than happy to subcontract to others mindless domestic tasks rather than wanting to rush home at 2 to clean the bathroom by the way.....

Full time work can be lovely and fun for plenty of women. We aren't all sitting here in tears wanting to leave the court, office or operating theatre at 2pm every day.

Nicola Horlick always left work at 5.30pm to 6pm because the nature of the type of financial services work she did. Other types you can't. Plenty of people male and female pick work which has slightly more flexible hours and others don't.

Obviously all people are equal but they are not all the same. Some male and female have an IQ of 80 and others 150. Some are ugly, some pretty. Some are horrible to be with and others a delight to be in relationships with. We just differ. Some are worth what I get paid an hour, some worth double that and some worth the minimum wage an hour but that doesn't mean we aren't all equal under the law. That's all femininism means - equality under the law and fairness at home but I never use the words as it's got tainted.

You;d have to go into the deeper reaches of Islamic Bradford or mid West fundamentalist Christanity in the US to find even men who think women shouldn't be allowed to vote, own property or work or who should be paid less for the same work thankfully although plenty of women on this planet don't yet have those rights and I hope all mumsnetters would continue to campaign to ensure all women get those rights.

Oh well of course I'm contradicting myself, I'm writing in a hurry while I try adn clean the house up. When I criticise people for saying some jobs have to be done ft, I'm criticising them for assuming that most jobs have to be done ft. The 18 hour operation again - I've said that, you can still be a part time surgeon (actuaally AFAIK being part time is the norm for a surgeon, isn't it? Isn't the stereotype of them mainly being on a golf course).

In the financial markets, that's one of the few jobs where you do have to be in a certain place as a certain time, because of the nature of the way the job is.

And as for wanting to rush home to clean the loo - what kind of patronising bullshit is that? Why would anybody want to rush home to clean the loo? Perhaps they want to rush home to write their book/ do some research for their book/ spend some quality time with their children/ socialise with their friends/ have sex with their lover/ go for a run etc. etc. etc.

You seem to think that if people want their time freed up from work, it's automatically in order to do something domestic and dull Xenia. Quite often, it's in order to do something as much fun (or even more, shock horror) as work.

And VH I don't agree that you do know what works and what doesn't. People don't know what works until they try it - years ago, job shares were considered unworkable outside a tiny minority of low grade jobs. Nowadays they're quite common in charities and public sector in quite senior jobs and the only reason they are, is because doubtful people tried it.

I'm not suggesting that small businesses should be the trailblazers though, I simply don't think they can be. It's right that big corporations and the public sector, with the massive infrastructure they have, should be the ones who take the lead in trying out new ways of working.

yes, traditionally MOST NHS surgeons - overwhelmingly a male profession at the time, and still mostly so - worked part-time. Three-quarters time was standard, so they had quarter of the working week for private practice.

Part-time is only a dirty word when it's women asking for it. No problem at all when it's a bunch of high-status men, even back in 1948.

LB I find your posts as patronising as Xenia's can be - and that's quite an achievement!!

Are you honestly saying that people don't know the nature of the business they work in, and don't have an understanding of what can be flexible/how it can be flexible etc?

Yes, in the past I agree that jobshares were only seen as viable in a small number of jobs. Things have now progressed. I am all for progression. I am all for the workplace adapting to the needs of modern society.

But at the end of the day, I know, in the area that I work in, where jobs can be flexible without having a negative impact, and where they can't. That's the truth - and if you can't accept that then I think you show a total disregard for my professional ability.

And I speak as a parent of 3 children, and as someone who has a vested interest in appointing people who will be excellent at their jobs, and in providing them with good working conditions!

Good point. My father forwent, if that's the word, NHS salary as a consultant in order to be allowed to take on private patients although he did pretty much work full time for the NHS. if women cannot get the hours they want they should start their own female firms and set their own hours if they have the ability to do so and then show that that can work. I think in marriages women get the worst of all worlds if they work part time however as they're then the lower earner, the pin money, subsidiary unimportant person but nor do they get the freer time a house work gets. I think it can be the worst deal in the pack actually but clearly many don't agree.

LOL vh don't get so aerated.

All of us know exactly what works for us and what doesn't. Until we try something new. Which sometimes confirms the fact that we were right all along and sometimes surprises us. I'm not trying to patronise you, I'm pointing out that years ago, people also knew what worked and what wouldn't work and then when they tried something different, as is usual when people try something different, it was a fuck-up - there were teething problems, comms break downs etc., but then as more and more people did it and started to learn from each other, a base of knowledge built up as to how you could make pt/ flexibility / job share work.

Stop taking it so bloody personally, i'm not attacking you or your profession I'm not that interested, I'm just discussing generalities.

Xenia I agree with you that if you're in an unsatisfactory domestic set up, pt can be the worst of all worlds. In a good set up though, it can be the best. I'm not suggesting it's a panacea - for some people it would be, for others it would be one extra thing to fit in along with all the other stuff they have to do. But then I think that comes back to equality in the home as well and whether your DP respects you as a person. I think if you have a DP that doesn't respect you, going out to work ft isn't going to make him do so, but as you ssay it may give you more negotiation power oor at least the wherewithall to get out of an unsatisfactory relationship.

LOL at you LB - I'm not 'aerated' just a little exasperated at the huge assumptions that you make!

Do you really think that those of us who combine motherhood with management really haven't tried out new systems? Or networked with other people to find out what works for them? Tried new ways of looking at things?

I manage a team of around a dozen people and among them are several part timers and a couple who job share. You don't have to preach to most people on MN about the advantages of flexible working or family friendly practices! Well, maybe only Xenia!

But alongside this, I defend the right as a manager to be honest about what doesn't work. I've seen people offered flexible working arrangements that quite frankly are a mess - they don't work for the client or other colleagues. And I hasten to add that I blame the employer in those situations, because it was obviously a bad decision on their part, not the fault of the employee.

The only thing that irks me though, is when people misunderstand the whole concept of flexible working, and see it as a way to rewrite the job and turn it into something that suits them exactly without any regard to anyone else. And I do think that people who do that are actually doing all working parents a disservice.

But vh, as you said in your earlier paragraph, it is the employers who are at fault for implementing impractical flexible working, not the employee.

If the employer is any good, then any kind of flexible working which impacts negatively on people's colleagues/clients/job at hand wouldn't happen.

Incidentally, I work flexibly in a management position. I don't think most people even realise that I do it to be honest as I'm very good at managing my workload.