Discrimination Against Women of Child Bearing Age

[munchingfoo]

So I was reading the "Have Your Say" on the BBC website (I know, I know!!!) and the current one is regarding this topic.


What are everyone's opinions?


Mine is simply this:

Picking another equally qualified applicant because the one under consideration intends to become a mother(or is already a mother) during the scope of the contract is acceptable.

Picking another equally qualified applicant because the one under consideration is of child bearing age is discrimination.


So I guess the real question is, IMO, Is it acceptable to ask women if they intend to become mothers? and if so, how would this effect regulations applied to them? and would this ever be enforcable?




[hr]

Tired Freudian references aside - your mother played my mighty skin flute like a surf crowned sea nymph trying to rouse Poseidon from his watery slumber!

[nighteyes]

Had a quick look, blood pressure rose and I had to stop after one page. I love HYS - Women get everything for nothing and we men are letting them get away with it, they are taking too much time off I am sick of paying for those spongers. They should take time off and make sure the kids dont turn into gun wielding hooligans Women shouldn't be working in the first place. ARGH!!!!!!

[hr]

i didnt say i was consistant, just right!

[munchingfoo]

Yes, I know have your say is full of idiots, but my point was not to start a topic about have your say but instead to steal their topic about women in the work place and gather opinions from those here.

Perhaps I should remove the link.

[hr]

Tired Freudian references aside - your mother played my mighty skin flute like a surf crowned sea nymph trying to rouse Poseidon from his watery slumber!

[nighteyes]

As for being asked if you intend to have children, ok - as long as men are asked if they intend to take time off to help too. Its long past the days when women should do work, childcare and cooking and cleaning.
And as for women who have unplanned pregnancy, would they be fired off the bat for breaking contract or not disclosing intent or some such rot?

[hr]

i didnt say i was consistant, just right!

Sorry, typing is worse than usual. Review Essay is melting my brain.

[munchingfoo]

Quoting nighteyes from 12:54, 28th Feb 2007
Its long past the days when women should do work, childcare and cooking and cleaning.

No, its long past the day when women would do childcare and cooking and cleaning.

Work is a relatively new addition.

I think a lot of people forget that men and woman ARE different. This is a fact, biologically proven and observable daily.

I personally believe that women are designed to raise children and men are designed to provide for the females and children. Thus when given the choice of a woman caring and a man providing or the other then I don't think there is much of a decision to be made.

Added to this I think that one parent should always be the full time child carer/homemaker with no other job (be this man or woman if you disagree with my first opinion)

Edit: Of course all of this depends on families not breaking appart, which is another issue all together.

[hr]

Tired Freudian references aside - your mother played my mighty skin flute like a surf crowned sea nymph trying to rouse Poseidon from his watery slumber!

[ka25]

I think the above seems resonable. if companies are looking to fill a gap in their staffing, then someone who is going to go on maternity leave 6 months after starting is not the right person for the job. unplanned pregnancy is just that and so contracts wouldn't come into it. There would be no deception as if you didn't plan it then you wouldn't be able to disclose it.

[hr]

http://standrews.facebook.com/profile.php?id=37102222

[nighteyes]

I take it you wouldnt agree with gay parents foo as by your rationale then two men would not be 'motherly' enough to look after children or two women would not beable to provide well enough?

It is a fair point that perhaps one parent, be it male or female should remain at home but there is the age old 'it never did me any harm' having both parents working. Nor did it harm my mother or my aunt or even my
grandmother.

I know within myself that I could not be a stay at home mother. I would go insane and potentially resent the child which would not be good for either of us. I would do what my aunt does and continue to work part time. Although if my partner wanted to stay at home with the baby I wouldn't stop her.

I agree with it not being a good idea to hire someone who is going to leave after 6 months but where is the cut off? Would the woman still be unemployable if she says she wants to have a child in the next three years? Or would she be hired but have to inform her employer at any given time should she be attempting to get pregnant and lose her job?

[hr]

i didnt say i was consistant, just right!

[munchingfoo]

Although this is a different line of discussion I will touch on it since you raise the point.

I believe gays

(i much prefer the term homosexual, refering to both lesbians and men with men, "homo" meaning same, but some idiot ages ago decided that it only meant men)

are fundamentaly different on a biological level too, so thats a different kettle of fish altogether. I don't mean this in a nasty way, but I just think everything comes down to biology in the end.

Before someone asks if I therefore think people are born who they are rather than develope I say no. I simply believe that the biological differences can be changed by external factors.



[hr]

Tired Freudian references aside - your mother played my mighty skin flute like a surf crowned sea nymph trying to rouse Poseidon from his watery slumber!

[Senethro]

You're getting into dangerous territory foo. Your appeal to the "naturalness" of a situation is akin to the naturalness of the White man being better than all these damn darkies.

While I agree that biology has the lion's share of influence on all aspects of a person, there is huge overlap between supposedly "male" qualities and supposedly "female" qualities. Really, it would be better to just let people do what they want rather than forcing all the square pegs through round holes.

Finally, if you give some employers the chance to be cunts they'll take it. Women are still far from equal in the workplace although I think the big work has been done and we're just waiting for the older generation to be replaced. While asking women if they intend to become mothers would be technically fair, I'd be suspicious of its wider consequences.

[nighteyes]

Thats a fair point and I just wanted clarification on your beliefs. Sorry I am even more Homosexually minded today given my review essay is on Homophobia in mental health care and so am reading papers getting angry and depressed at the same time. Last post and I will get back on topic.

It is true that for men at least there is found to be a biological predisposition for being gay and so it is nature over nurture (so homosexuals raising children are not about to create an army of homosexuals, after all I was born and raised by two straight parents but that didn't meke me one.) The biological findings for lesbians at this point is less concrete but there are some that show a much more masculinised brain.

The problem with finding homosexuality to be biological is the fear of going back to the days of trying to 'cure' the nasty gay man. If external enviroment was the key then surely there would be no such thing as an efeminate gay man as men traditionally have been brought up to be burly and all things pumped up with testosterone while women sew by the fire. The debate rages on.

As for the place of women in the workplace I feel that you and I are goign to have to disagree. Women may have the anatomy for the actually birthing process but that does not mean that she is therefor unsuited to the workplace, that she is too soft or hormonal. Woman are designed to give birth but thats not all she is good for

Quoting munchingfoo from 14:19, 28th Feb 2007
Although this is a different line of discussion I will touch on it since you raise the point.

I believe gays

(i much prefer the term homosexual, refering to both lesbians and men with men, "homo" meaning same, but some idiot ages ago decided that it only meant men)

are fundamentaly different on a biological level too, so thats a different kettle of fish altogether. I don't mean this in a nasty way, but I just think everything comes down to biology in the end.

Before someone asks if I therefore think people are born who they are rather than develope I say no. I simply believe that the biological differences can be changed by external factors.



[hr]

Tired Freudian references aside - your mother played my mighty skin flute like a surf crowned sea nymph trying to rouse Poseidon from his watery slumber!

[hr]

i didnt say i was consistant, just right!

[flossy]

As a "woman of childbearing age" who doesn't intend to bear children, this kind of thing annoys me.

But I can appreciate how crippling it can be for small business when a member of staff goes on maternity leave and I have been pissed off at colleagues leaving work early to do their parental duty whilst the rest of us have to do their work.

I think when you decide to have kids, you should in principle decide that one parent works FT and the other doesn't work until the kids are at school and then only works PT hours. To me, it doesn't matter whether mum or dad is the primary care-giver - I'd be interested to know if dads of young kids are discriminated against, I would think not.


[hr]

Nobody worries about kids listening to thousands, literally thousands of songs about heartbreak, rejection, pain, misery and loss. Did I listen to pop music because I was miserable? Or was I miserable because I listened to pop music?

[oddly familiar]

well yes, but statutory paternity leave is a lot shorter than maternity leave.

[hr]

saru mo ki kara ochiru

[munchingfoo]

Quoting nighteyes from 15:07, 28th Feb 2007

As for the place of women in the workplace I feel that you and I are goign to have to disagree. Women may have the anatomy for the actually birthing process but that does not mean that she is therefor unsuited to the workplace, that she is too soft or hormonal. Woman are designed to give birth but thats not all she is good for

Please show me where I said women are unsuitable for the workplace. I believe all I said was that they are more suited than men at bringing up children.

[hr]

Tired Freudian references aside - your mother played my mighty skin flute like a surf crowned sea nymph trying to rouse Poseidon from his watery slumber!

[Senethro]

Not really an issue given that there are a large number of parents who seem incapable of raising children at all.

[edinburgh_emma]

Actually, my mother was once asked in an interview if she intended to have any more children. She lied as she felt telling the truth may have affected her prospects and didn't feel they had the right to ask that question anyway.

From personal experience I don't believe my parents did me any harm by both having full time jobs. Even if some children are neglected when both parents go out to work, I've not seen any evidence to convince me that a woman must always be the principle caregiver. Men and women should both have the right to choose to stay at home or go out to work without facing discrimination from mean-spirited employers or narrow-minded individuals.

And please, no more nonsense about men and women being "designed" to have certain roles.

[hr]

TheAmazingDrK

[edinburgh_emma]

Actually, my mother was once asked in an interview if she intended to have any more children. She lied as she felt telling the truth may have affected her prospects and didn't feel they had the right to ask that question anyway.

From personal experience I don't believe my parents did me any harm by both having full time jobs. Even if some children are neglected when both parents go out to work, I've not seen any evidence to convince me that a woman must always be the principle caregiver. Men and women should both have the right to choose to stay at home or go out to work without facing discrimination from mean-spirited employers or narrow-minded individuals.

And please, no more nonsense about men and women being "designed" to have certain roles.

[hr]

TheAmazingDrK

[munchingfoo]

I base my belief on scientific observations. Where does your assertation that it is all "nonsense" come from?

[hr]

Tired Freudian references aside - your mother played my mighty skin flute like a surf crowned sea nymph trying to rouse Poseidon from his watery slumber!

[Senethro]

Quoting munchingfoo from 16:38, 28th Feb 2007
I base my belief on scientific observations. Where does your assertation that it is all "nonsense" come from?

[hr]

Tired Freudian references aside - your mother played my mighty skin flute like a surf crowned sea nymph trying to rouse Poseidon from his watery slumber!

Get citing boy.

[Frank]

Quoting edinburgh_emma from 16:24, 28th Feb 2007I've not seen any evidence to convince me that a woman must always be the principle caregiver.

My dad was principle caregiver when I was a wee laddie. Well, up until I was about five, I think. From about then he was doing his OU Maths Degree so he could get a better (and more settled) job near where we lived at the time (where my mum had a reasonably decent job), that he couldn't have got with his degree/experience in languages.

I never felt we missed out. That said, we did go round to a 'baby sitter' (childminder) each night after school for an hour and a half after school until our parents came back.

As for the discrimination thing: I suspect if it's between two equal candidates and it's the only discriminator....ach, even then I still don't know.

[hr]

"There is only ever one truth. Things are always black or white, there's no such thing as a shade of grey. If you think that something is a shade of grey it simply means that you don't fully understand the situation. The truth is narrow and the path of the pursuit of truth is similarly narrow."

[Insight]

By the time I was in school, both my parents were in FT jobs, and my grandparents watched me for the period between me gettinghome & my 'rentals finishing work.

This means I saw my parents (roughly) 5.5 hours less than someone with a stay-at-home guardian. Not really that much overall.

Before that (exclusing my half-days at nursery) I was looked after by various members of my extended family. I can't see how it would affect me adversely, in fact, I can only surmise it helped me with social interaction skills & development. I was surrounded by a diverse group of people at all times: other playmates, older cousins, mature uncles & aunts and grandparents. In addition to the useful education provided by preschooling (a seperate matter, btu I feel this is an extremely vital stage in learning, and should be available to all tots).

I realise this arangement is not available to everyone, but from a family with 3 dependant children, I think the money provided by a double income, with a secure extended family support network, was a much preferable arrangement than having a smaller social circle & tighter financial conditions (with the additional stress that applies.


[hr]

Former SRC Member for Sexualities & Gender
Current Dumbfounded fool of Hospital-Land
http://standrews.facebook.com/profile.php?id=37101378