Women in Queensland
I happened to pick up a glossy copy of the Queensland Government's 'Strategy for Women 2016-2021' at my local library the other day, knowing it'd be good for a laugh - or a cry.
Flipping through the pages that had no-doubt cost the tax-payer a lot, I wasn't surprised to see the usual lines and half-truths about women, men and our society.
So here's my rebuttal to this glib and smarmy document that has a few myths and lies in amongst the admittedly admirable noble ideas of aiming for the empowerment, safety and appreciation of Queensland women.
1. Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk says in her message ".....there is still much work to be done as we move towards a society where gender equality truly exists."
Um, no. Much work has been done in the past (giving women the right to vote, allowing women to be paid the same amount as men for doing exactly the same job, etc). We're now in a place where men are suffering too, and often worse than women. Male suicide is much higher than women. Gender equality is merely a catch-phrase for narky angry feminists to push for abortion on demand and the leftist/socialist agenda.
2. Shannon Fentiman also has written a message in the front of the document. She is the Minster for Communities, Women and Youth, Minister for Child Safety and Minister for the Prevention of Domestic and Family Violence. Unfortunately, Shannon Fentiman is a member of Emily's List, a pro-abortion group of MPs who receive funding to support abortion in their role as MP. Yet Shannon Fentiman is supposedly representing 'child safety' and 'prevention of family violence'. I don't buy the titles - until Ms Fentiman supports the right of ALL Queenslanders to the most basic right to life, I don't think she can push for 'gender equality'.
3. "The gender pay gap in Queensland is unacceptably high at 18 per cent. Women are vastly underrepresented in leadership positions, particularly on boards of management. Women are more likely to work in a narrow range of lower paying occupations and continue to be underrepresented within traditionally male-dominated industries."
There is no gender pay gap. It's a myth. Women are vastly underrepresented in leadership positions, etc, because women have to take time off to have babies. No-one can expect their career to continue the same rate when they take 1-2 years off in bits and pieces. It's common sense and fact. It's a hard fact, yes. But it is what it is.
Furthermore, forgive me for asking this highly offensive question, but why is being on a board of management seen as the pinnacle of achievement for women? Newsflash, Annastacia and Shannon - women like staying home and having babies.
I agree with the next statement: Women are more likely to work in a range of lower-paid professions - true. Why? We're more likely to choose jobs that are about serving and loving others than men. These jobs are truly unappreciated and I think the standard should be raised first and foremost (teaching, for example, has a very low entry score needed to gain acceptance to the teaching degree at university) and then reflected by increased pay.
Women continue to be underrepresented in male-dominated industries because women are drawn to traditionally female-dominated industries. Duh. Women like being women and doing what they're good at. Men like being men and doing what they're good at.
Should women be prevented from entering male-dominated industries? No, of course not! Should they be bullied and subjected to porn in the work place? No, of course not! Industry should be open to employing both men and women if there is interest. However, implying that women should be in male-dominated industries is wrong and illogical.
4. Woman, 63, is quoted as saying, "Without gender equality, only half the population receives the best opportunities and therefore only half the population can participate and contribute fully to society."
I hardly know where to start with this! This woman seems to be implying that women can only be fully women if they do what men do.
'.....best opportunities....' - is this woman referring to the drives within the QAS, QPS, QFRS and mining industries to only recruit women? What? Maybe in 1960-1970 this would have been true, but in 2018 it's very different.
'....therefore only half the population can participate and contribute fully to society....' - I find this, as a stay-at-home parent, extremely offensive. Am I not participating in society because I choose to raise my children at home? No way. I am raising the future society!
The next part of this misguided woman's comment I find the most hurtful.......saying that because I'm not working in the workplace, I'm not contributing to our society. This is so utterly misguided and plain wrong, I can hardly believe it's been said.
Say that this woman is a nurse. Can a nurse be a nurse if there are no children to treat? Can she be a nurse if there are no adults to treat? Of course not. Giving birth to the members of our society props up all the other jobs in our society. I'd say that's the best opportunity a person can have in life - actually birthing, nurturing, mentoring and helping grow members of our society.
5. The document lists four priority areas for women: Participation and leadership, Economic security, Safety, Health and Wellbeing. Let me summarise the main points in each section and comment on them:
Particpation and leadership is more lamenting the fact that women choose to do jobs suited to women and aren't doing what men do in the workplace, the glass ceiling, inflexible working hours and conditions. Our government is paying money for strategies to increase female participation in the workplace and encourage girls to work in STEM industries (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mining). It's like paying for water to go up the waterfall instead of down. It's going against biology. Simple as that. If a women is interested in entering a male-dominated profession, let her do it by all means, but forcing a culture on women that is biologically incorrect is illogical.
The only redeeming feature of the list of six 'snapshots' of what the government is doing (the programs) is the 'Queensland Entrepreneurs of Tomorrow- Home-based Business Program to help stay-at-home parents establish or grow home-based businesses'. This allows parents to be with their children but build their businesses. It puts the focus on home and family where it should be - first, and business where it should be - second.
I love the snippet about 'The Spice Exchange' which draws together women from other cultures to make up the spices they use in their countries for their cooking. The business is also a place for women to develop skills in business, communication and of course, provides a social link. This is an organic way to developing strong women and communities - not encouraging women to be like men!
Economic security is more lamenting the fact that women don't earn the same as men. But as I've mentioned, this is a myth. The 'snapshots' section highlights what the government is doing and I like the second of the four practical things listed: providing housing and support for women at risk of insecure housing and homelessness. Sadly, the funding hasn't reached a resource in Toowoomba which has recently closed.
Safety is a huge issue which I don't know a lot about in terms of the current climate (I suspect it's horrid for a fair chunk of Queensland women), but I am a child of a domestic violence situation so I understand the pain and trauma of DV. However, my main problem with this section is that while sexual and physical violence is overwhelmingly committed by men, emotional and verbal abuse is overwhelmingly committed by women on their intimate partners. I can tell you as a child who was never hit or raped, words and emotional neglect have exactly the same results as physical and sexual violence. My suggestion to this disgusting situation where men and women are abusing each other is to preach kindness and patience to EVERYONE instead of dividing women against men by painting men as the aggressors and women as the victims, which is obviously the case in some circumstances, but in other circumstances is not. My psychologists maintains it's fairly even.
Of course, of the seven 'snapshots' of practical things the government is doing, I totally and utterly disagree with their assessment that 'Respectful Relationships' is a wholesome program aimed at protecting people. Respectful Relationships is about sexualising, grooming children for sex and teaching gender theory. It's nothing to do with protecting women at all!
Furthermore, the success story listed in this section of the document highlights Aurizon's involvement with White Ribbon, a highly hypocritical organisation who supports abortion. Abortion, of course, kills young unborn women. The case of Aurizon supporting White Ribbon is moot.
Health and Wellbeing is a complex area to comment on. I am disappointed that our local library had a a yoga instructor come along for the International Women's Day celebration (funded by the tax payer, of course), which has deep eastern spiritual roots. This automatically counts Christian women out from taking part and I had to wonder why there couldn't be a neutral health and wellbeing demonstration or class like pilates or a PT?
Final Comment: This strategy is not only highly offensive to stay-at-home mums in places, but also shows that the government is creeping more and more into our personal lives. This is a socialist/Marxist agenda and it's deeply concerning. While the document had it's highlights, I found it on the whole a very pretty, depressing read. Ultimately, I think we as a society are 'barking up the wrong tree'.
Conservatives are often accused ( sometimes rightly) of always saying "No" and resisting change. So in the near future I'll be posting my own Queensland Women's Strategy (using the frame work of the one I'm commenting on here). I understand it's easy to criticise and harder to come up with solutions, so I'm going to do it! Stand by, peeps......
....I'm off to make lunch for my family and hang the washing........oh, the oppression! :p
Flipping through the pages that had no-doubt cost the tax-payer a lot, I wasn't surprised to see the usual lines and half-truths about women, men and our society.
So here's my rebuttal to this glib and smarmy document that has a few myths and lies in amongst the admittedly admirable noble ideas of aiming for the empowerment, safety and appreciation of Queensland women.
1. Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk says in her message ".....there is still much work to be done as we move towards a society where gender equality truly exists."
Um, no. Much work has been done in the past (giving women the right to vote, allowing women to be paid the same amount as men for doing exactly the same job, etc). We're now in a place where men are suffering too, and often worse than women. Male suicide is much higher than women. Gender equality is merely a catch-phrase for narky angry feminists to push for abortion on demand and the leftist/socialist agenda.
2. Shannon Fentiman also has written a message in the front of the document. She is the Minster for Communities, Women and Youth, Minister for Child Safety and Minister for the Prevention of Domestic and Family Violence. Unfortunately, Shannon Fentiman is a member of Emily's List, a pro-abortion group of MPs who receive funding to support abortion in their role as MP. Yet Shannon Fentiman is supposedly representing 'child safety' and 'prevention of family violence'. I don't buy the titles - until Ms Fentiman supports the right of ALL Queenslanders to the most basic right to life, I don't think she can push for 'gender equality'.
3. "The gender pay gap in Queensland is unacceptably high at 18 per cent. Women are vastly underrepresented in leadership positions, particularly on boards of management. Women are more likely to work in a narrow range of lower paying occupations and continue to be underrepresented within traditionally male-dominated industries."
There is no gender pay gap. It's a myth. Women are vastly underrepresented in leadership positions, etc, because women have to take time off to have babies. No-one can expect their career to continue the same rate when they take 1-2 years off in bits and pieces. It's common sense and fact. It's a hard fact, yes. But it is what it is.
Furthermore, forgive me for asking this highly offensive question, but why is being on a board of management seen as the pinnacle of achievement for women? Newsflash, Annastacia and Shannon - women like staying home and having babies.
I agree with the next statement: Women are more likely to work in a range of lower-paid professions - true. Why? We're more likely to choose jobs that are about serving and loving others than men. These jobs are truly unappreciated and I think the standard should be raised first and foremost (teaching, for example, has a very low entry score needed to gain acceptance to the teaching degree at university) and then reflected by increased pay.
Women continue to be underrepresented in male-dominated industries because women are drawn to traditionally female-dominated industries. Duh. Women like being women and doing what they're good at. Men like being men and doing what they're good at.
Should women be prevented from entering male-dominated industries? No, of course not! Should they be bullied and subjected to porn in the work place? No, of course not! Industry should be open to employing both men and women if there is interest. However, implying that women should be in male-dominated industries is wrong and illogical.
4. Woman, 63, is quoted as saying, "Without gender equality, only half the population receives the best opportunities and therefore only half the population can participate and contribute fully to society."
I hardly know where to start with this! This woman seems to be implying that women can only be fully women if they do what men do.
'.....best opportunities....' - is this woman referring to the drives within the QAS, QPS, QFRS and mining industries to only recruit women? What? Maybe in 1960-1970 this would have been true, but in 2018 it's very different.
'....therefore only half the population can participate and contribute fully to society....' - I find this, as a stay-at-home parent, extremely offensive. Am I not participating in society because I choose to raise my children at home? No way. I am raising the future society!
The next part of this misguided woman's comment I find the most hurtful.......saying that because I'm not working in the workplace, I'm not contributing to our society. This is so utterly misguided and plain wrong, I can hardly believe it's been said.
Say that this woman is a nurse. Can a nurse be a nurse if there are no children to treat? Can she be a nurse if there are no adults to treat? Of course not. Giving birth to the members of our society props up all the other jobs in our society. I'd say that's the best opportunity a person can have in life - actually birthing, nurturing, mentoring and helping grow members of our society.
5. The document lists four priority areas for women: Participation and leadership, Economic security, Safety, Health and Wellbeing. Let me summarise the main points in each section and comment on them:
Particpation and leadership is more lamenting the fact that women choose to do jobs suited to women and aren't doing what men do in the workplace, the glass ceiling, inflexible working hours and conditions. Our government is paying money for strategies to increase female participation in the workplace and encourage girls to work in STEM industries (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mining). It's like paying for water to go up the waterfall instead of down. It's going against biology. Simple as that. If a women is interested in entering a male-dominated profession, let her do it by all means, but forcing a culture on women that is biologically incorrect is illogical.
The only redeeming feature of the list of six 'snapshots' of what the government is doing (the programs) is the 'Queensland Entrepreneurs of Tomorrow- Home-based Business Program to help stay-at-home parents establish or grow home-based businesses'. This allows parents to be with their children but build their businesses. It puts the focus on home and family where it should be - first, and business where it should be - second.
I love the snippet about 'The Spice Exchange' which draws together women from other cultures to make up the spices they use in their countries for their cooking. The business is also a place for women to develop skills in business, communication and of course, provides a social link. This is an organic way to developing strong women and communities - not encouraging women to be like men!
Economic security is more lamenting the fact that women don't earn the same as men. But as I've mentioned, this is a myth. The 'snapshots' section highlights what the government is doing and I like the second of the four practical things listed: providing housing and support for women at risk of insecure housing and homelessness. Sadly, the funding hasn't reached a resource in Toowoomba which has recently closed.
Safety is a huge issue which I don't know a lot about in terms of the current climate (I suspect it's horrid for a fair chunk of Queensland women), but I am a child of a domestic violence situation so I understand the pain and trauma of DV. However, my main problem with this section is that while sexual and physical violence is overwhelmingly committed by men, emotional and verbal abuse is overwhelmingly committed by women on their intimate partners. I can tell you as a child who was never hit or raped, words and emotional neglect have exactly the same results as physical and sexual violence. My suggestion to this disgusting situation where men and women are abusing each other is to preach kindness and patience to EVERYONE instead of dividing women against men by painting men as the aggressors and women as the victims, which is obviously the case in some circumstances, but in other circumstances is not. My psychologists maintains it's fairly even.
Of course, of the seven 'snapshots' of practical things the government is doing, I totally and utterly disagree with their assessment that 'Respectful Relationships' is a wholesome program aimed at protecting people. Respectful Relationships is about sexualising, grooming children for sex and teaching gender theory. It's nothing to do with protecting women at all!
Furthermore, the success story listed in this section of the document highlights Aurizon's involvement with White Ribbon, a highly hypocritical organisation who supports abortion. Abortion, of course, kills young unborn women. The case of Aurizon supporting White Ribbon is moot.
Health and Wellbeing is a complex area to comment on. I am disappointed that our local library had a a yoga instructor come along for the International Women's Day celebration (funded by the tax payer, of course), which has deep eastern spiritual roots. This automatically counts Christian women out from taking part and I had to wonder why there couldn't be a neutral health and wellbeing demonstration or class like pilates or a PT?
Final Comment: This strategy is not only highly offensive to stay-at-home mums in places, but also shows that the government is creeping more and more into our personal lives. This is a socialist/Marxist agenda and it's deeply concerning. While the document had it's highlights, I found it on the whole a very pretty, depressing read. Ultimately, I think we as a society are 'barking up the wrong tree'.
Conservatives are often accused ( sometimes rightly) of always saying "No" and resisting change. So in the near future I'll be posting my own Queensland Women's Strategy (using the frame work of the one I'm commenting on here). I understand it's easy to criticise and harder to come up with solutions, so I'm going to do it! Stand by, peeps......
....I'm off to make lunch for my family and hang the washing........oh, the oppression! :p
Comments
Post a Comment