Do we?

The magic hour by Robert Duncan
'We want as many women as can be to have challenging and demanding careers rather than having to fit a bit of work in around the edges,'' 
Tony Abbott, Conserative leader . . . Leader of the Opposition (Sydney Morning Herald, 25th April 2012)

Do we?

Both sides of government want as many women as possible in the workforce as it is good for the economy. Both sides agree that there isn't enough women working and both would say that part of the problem is access to childcare and the cost of childcare. Neither party are likely to say that some women want to remain at home with their children and they should be allow to without pressure from government.  No government is likely to encourage women to remain at home for however long they wish. And from this comment, Mr Abbott doesn't want to encourage to women to work part-time either . . .  hours that better allow mothers to juggle their family needs.

Most mothers with young children do not want "challenging and demanding careers" that mean they come home late, tired and exhausted and unable to care for their families.   Many women would love to work fewer hours and spend more time with their families and certainly don't want more pressure and demands on their already time poor lives.

Even though I have chosen to work full time, I completely understand why women choose to remain at home and both sides of governments (Labor and the conversatives) needs to understand and recognise this and not expect that they will ever get full participation of women into the work force. They need to be respectful of women at home and see it as a valable contribution to society as much as people at work. 

When governments talk about the economy they are referring to the money economy.  Therefore they completely disgard the contribution that women at home make to their community that cannot be measured in terms of money.

But in the end, women such as you are not doing what you do for any government, you are doing this for your families and for our Lord. And that in the end is all that matters.

Just a few ramblings from me.

Comments

  1. AnonymousMarch 27, 2012 at 10:08 AM

    Well said, Joluise! You know, Tony Abbott is quick to tell everyone that he is a practising Catholic, but he is actually going against certain precepts of the Catholic Church. The Catholic church encourages women to embrace their roles as wives and mothers and honours homemaking. It sees the home as the mini Church wherein mothers of the faith will nurture children and teach them to be good Catholics. Seems to me Mr Abbott is as hypocritical as what he purports Julia Gillard to be. Just a few thoughts of my own.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Finding JoyMarch 27, 2012 at 8:51 PM

      Glenys, What you said is very true indeed. For those Christians who do vote and want to vote for someone with Christian values, what are their choices - both parties are offering the same, they both might say no to gay marriages, but that is it.

      Delete
  2. ClaraMarch 27, 2012 at 6:11 PM

    I really don't care what the government wants me to do - as you said at the end of your post, in the end it's what we do for our families and the Lord that really counts... As time goes on, I'm sure the government quite likely will see fit to punish or harass or stigmatize women who choose to stay at home by one means or another (it's well within their power, I'm sure), but if we are staying home for the Right reasons, God will be there for us just the same as He always is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Finding JoyMarch 27, 2012 at 8:49 PM

      Clara - I think the only way governments can target families where mum is at home is through taxation and at this stage it wouldn't be a vote winner. But to be honest, it really doesn't matter what these people say, it is what is best for your family is what is important.

      Delete
  3. Mary E. StephensMarch 28, 2012 at 11:44 AM

    As a married keeper at home with no children, I can also say that there are some of us who desire to stay at home even without the motivation of children, as we feel it's a biblical thing to do. For my own part, due to struggles that I have, working outside the home would be traumatic for me and probably exhaust me to the point where even caring properly for my husband, house and self would be a real challenge. Consequently, I'm very thankful that I have this option. My other sister-in-law would love to stay at home too despite the fact that she doesn't have children either, but at this point it is not an option for them financially. People probably wonder more than ever what we do at home with no children to mind, but really, I find plenty and more than enough to keep me busy. I'm even making a venture into a home based business this year, as the Lord wills. I realize it's not possible for all, but I surely agree that governments ought not to discourage it with legislation. It is hard enough to make a go of it as it is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Finding JoyMarch 28, 2012 at 5:29 PM

      Very true Mary, sadly there are very few married women without children remaining at home - partly due to financial pressures, but modern women find it odd I think. I look forward to hearing about your new venture - many women in the past did participate in the workforce through cottage industries, it allowed them to be at home with their young ones, but assist financially.

      Delete
  4. AnonymousMarch 28, 2012 at 6:56 PM

    Personally, I think the government needs to mind their own business. With them, it's always a matter of money so that their top administrator's pockets are lined with cash, while getting perks at the expense of the public. Government seems to be interested in their own well being, and not really care about the people they are suppose to "serve."

    Your opinion regarding this matter was tastefully done. Great blog post!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment