Abbottcallmost

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Sunday, April 21, 2013

A man who supports his family now a bad thing?

Posted on 3:55 AM by Unknown
The Sydney Morning Herald has run an article by a senior writer, Mike Wade, complaining about the survival in Australia of.... the male breadwinner.

Yes, the idea of a male breadwinner is offensive to contemporary liberalism:
An economic dinosaur lives on in Australia: the male breadwinner. Despite decades of sweeping social and economic change he's survived surprisingly unscathed. And there's evidence our male breadwinner model is especially potent.

Researchers have found the male breadwinner is proving much more resilient in Australia than many comparable countries...
 
Why the panic about male breadwinners? It seems that new research shows that only a minority of mothers with young children choose to work full-time:
The male dominance over full-time employment is most pronounced among parents with small children. About 85 per cent of all fathers with a youngest child under the age of five work full-time - but for mothers in that category, the rate is about 19 per cent.

There are also signs the long-running increase in female participation rate, under way since the 1960s, has stalled. The proportion of women aged 15-64 in the workforce is now lower than it was four years ago.
 
I've pointed to this trend many times at this site: in my workplace there are no women with children of any age who work full-time - they are all part-timers (about a third of Australian women overall return to full-time employment in the long-run).

What do liberals think the solution is? Here's one suggestion:
Patricia Apps, professor in public economics at the University of Sydney, argues that if childcare worked more like the school system, women's workforce participation would surge...
 
She wants the care of children to be entirely socialised. And then we get this comment from Mike Wade:
The dominance of the male breadwinner means men have far more retirement income than women because they spend more time working. The superannuation industry estimates nearly 90 per cent of women have insufficient super to support a comfortable standard of living in retirement.
 
Mike Wade might feel woozy having to recognise the fact, but the super that husbands earn will help to support those 90% of women. It is family income, not husband income.

How did we get to the stage where it's thought wrong for men to go out to work to support their families and wrong for mothers to look after their own young children?

Well, part of the answer is that liberals believe that career is more important than family. And one reason for this is that they believe that women achieve more autonomy - more independence from men - through careers. Sweden's EU minister, Birgitta Ohlsson, recently attacked housewives on the basis that:
Having your own money is a source of both power and independence for women.
 
So if career is necessary for "equal freedom" then that is what liberals will push for: they will want more career involvement from women and less from men. It doesn't really matter to the political class if women are choosing to work part-time, that is considered the wrong outcome and so action is taken to get a different result.

There are any number of problems with all this. For instance, if independence really is the aim then why marry in the first place? And if you value autonomy above all else, then why have children? Little wonder that in Sweden, where such liberal values have been pushed the hardest, a record 47% of people live alone.

And the liberal view glosses over the fact that we are not just interchangeable units of labour, but men and women, and that part of our fulfilment in life comes through distinct paternal and maternal roles.

And is it really in women's overall interests to discourage a culture of the male breadwinner? Won't larger numbers of women just end up going out to work to support an unemployed partner? Won't there be fewer men earning that superannuation to support women in their retirement?

But, most of all, what kind of society pushes against men working to support their families?
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Posted in the family | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home
View mobile version

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • We're breaking the mould
    I had a go at completing a political compass that supposedly tells you where you fit on the political spectrum. As I suspected the compass c...
  • A new party in Germany
    The breaking up of political orthodoxy is a good thing for us. So I was interested to read that a new German party, the Alternative for Ge...
  • What are the liberal advantages?
    The liberal team has done better than our team over a long period of time. Therefore, we have to carefully consider where they have managed ...
  • A new blog: Upon Hope
    It's always pleasing to be able to announce a new traditionalist blog. The latest is called Upon Hope and is being run by a Melbourne t...
  • Lawrence Auster
    Sadly news has arrived of the passing on of Lawrence Auster. Laura Wood has written a fine tribute to him at her site. I can't write as...
  • Stay at home dads still barely register
    There are not many fathers in the U.S. who are choosing to be stay at home dads. If you look at the graph below you'll see that the numb...
  • The Senate race in Australia
    An article in The Age has reignited my interest in the forthcoming Australian elections. It seems that the smaller parties have done prefe...
  • How is history made?
    When I write a post describing a positive political strategy or some political work that is happening on the ground I often get comments tha...
  • Attractive architecture by Lutyens
    Here's a place I wouldn't mind owning. It was built in 1902 at Thakeham, West Sussex, and designed by the famous English architect S...
  • Enjoyable meeting
    We had another get together of the Eltham Traditionalists last week. Once again we had a new face and the conversation was very engaging (s...

Categories

  • Aborigines (2)
  • administrative class (1)
  • Africa (1)
  • Andrew Bolt (2)
  • architecture (8)
  • arts (17)
  • atomised individual (2)
  • authenticity (2)
  • authority (1)
  • autonomy (14)
  • Brandis (4)
  • business (1)
  • caritas (1)
  • choice (1)
  • Christianity (5)
  • classical liberalism (1)
  • common good (1)
  • connectedness (2)
  • cosmic enemy (1)
  • creative spirit (2)
  • Cultural Marxism (1)
  • dehumanisation (1)
  • delayed family formation (17)
  • diversity (3)
  • divorce (1)
  • domestic violence (4)
  • drugs (1)
  • economic man (3)
  • economy (1)
  • education (1)
  • essences (8)
  • ethnic double standard (5)
  • ethnicity (19)
  • European Union (3)
  • existentialism (1)
  • fatherhood (4)
  • femininity (8)
  • feminism (4)
  • feminism and autonomy (2)
  • feminism and equal pay (7)
  • feminism and fertility (1)
  • feminism and military (7)
  • feminism and separatism (1)
  • feminism and work (4)
  • film review (2)
  • France (2)
  • gender (37)
  • happiness (1)
  • Hegel (1)
  • history (1)
  • human nature (1)
  • human status (1)
  • identity (6)
  • immigration (3)
  • immigration and the economy (1)
  • inclusiveness (1)
  • individuality (3)
  • justice (1)
  • left liberalism (13)
  • liberalism and discrimination (3)
  • liberalism and equality (4)
  • liberalism and freedom (9)
  • liberalism and individualism (9)
  • liberalism and nationalism (20)
  • liberalism and neutrality (3)
  • liberalism and non-discrimination (2)
  • liberalism and social solidarity (7)
  • liberalism and tolerance (3)
  • love (3)
  • male income (2)
  • marriage (16)
  • masculinity (6)
  • men's rights (2)
  • misanthropy (1)
  • morality (18)
  • motherhood (11)
  • multiculturalism (4)
  • music (2)
  • nationalism (3)
  • nihilism (2)
  • nominalism (1)
  • ontology (1)
  • paid leave (3)
  • patriarchy theory (3)
  • philosophy (1)
  • poetry (2)
  • polygamy (1)
  • pride (3)
  • privilege (10)
  • progress (1)
  • provider role (1)
  • rationalisation hamster (1)
  • rationalism (1)
  • reason & truth (1)
  • reductionism (2)
  • refugees (3)
  • relationships (16)
  • religion (21)
  • right liberalism (26)
  • rights (1)
  • same sex marriage (3)
  • Scandinavia (12)
  • science and gender (1)
  • scientism (1)
  • sexual liberation (3)
  • sexual morality (4)
  • sexuality (1)
  • social offices (1)
  • songs (1)
  • the family (25)
  • the good (1)
  • the Other (1)
  • the past (1)
  • timing (2)
  • traditionalist community (1)
  • traditionalist conservatism (1)
  • trivial aims (4)
  • undefined family (2)
  • virtues (5)
  • welfare (1)
  • whiteness studies (7)
  • women priests (1)

Blog Archive

  • ▼  2013 (186)
    • ►  September (12)
    • ►  August (24)
    • ►  July (29)
    • ►  June (24)
    • ►  May (19)
    • ▼  April (19)
      • Some good reads
      • Hostility in the manosphere
      • A moment of time, 1920
      • In bed with the inmates
      • You're invited!
      • A man who supports his family now a bad thing?
      • Leaving yourself open
      • More Alecia: she doesn't like her inheritance
      • Alecia & the politics of meat
      • Upholding the four relationships
      • Motherhood role no longer a source of value?
      • What was that about equal pay?
      • Margaret Thatcher 2
      • Margaret Thatcher
      • Criticising the old right
      • An impressive mass
      • My moment in the mass media
      • Which way for the churches?
      • What Murdoch and Packer tell us
    • ►  March (21)
    • ►  February (16)
    • ►  January (22)
  • ►  2012 (225)
    • ►  December (15)
    • ►  November (14)
    • ►  October (20)
    • ►  September (19)
    • ►  August (18)
    • ►  July (20)
    • ►  June (19)
    • ►  May (19)
    • ►  April (27)
    • ►  March (19)
    • ►  February (14)
    • ►  January (21)
  • ►  2011 (89)
    • ►  December (25)
    • ►  November (15)
    • ►  October (17)
    • ►  September (17)
    • ►  August (15)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile