Long weekend reflections

I’m going to celebrate Easter by taking a break from the computer. Feel free to chat among themselves, or to post your own thoughts at any (reasonable length). Please remember to be particularly polite and friendly in my absence.

134 thoughts on “Long weekend reflections

  1. Alice,
    Pay rates are not sufficient evidence for gender discrimination. There are a lot of alternative (and much more plausible) explanations. My favorite: employers are a little less likely to employ women given the possibility of litigation under anti-discrimination legislation. Most sensible: many women like having babies so stay out of the workforce for a long time and don’t seek promotion to highly stressful and time-consuming roles.

    Wait a minute! Why aren’t they being paid for all that baby rearing? Damn market!

  2. 127# Terje
    From the Sun King of snark to the Grand Queen – Ill take that as a compliment Terje and try to reign myself longer (oops I mean in). LOL.

  3. Bingo

    If you choose to believe that markets didnt fail women (not at all in history, not in pay rates, not in discrimination, not in career advancement, not in glass ceilings, not in university ivory towers, not on executive board composition, not in political party composition, not in wealth or income or savings) then it is you who lives in a bubble. It wasnt only markets who failed women Bingo. It was also social and public institutions and it was also deliberate exclusion by men. Just like your overuse of the expression “ham-fisted” which is rather inelegant to say the least I too find your right wing cocoon of denialism more than ham-fisted.

    As for your comment

    “neoliberalism tends to break down the conservative social relationships that nourish patriarchy…”

    Sorry Bingo – but that comment really takes the cake. Where is the evidence for that? Logic? None – just a pronouncement without a trial and without any evidence whatsoever. “I think therefore I know”.

  4. “Where is the evidence for that? Logic?”

    The logic is that liberalism promotes cultural difference and dynamism, which are anathema to conservative social relationships. The evidence is all around you.

  5. Jarrah

    Liberalism by itself does not exist but only in a society.

    In Australia, Liberals such as Menzies exploited cultural differences and Australia was stuck in old fashioned views without any dynamism.

    The Liberal Fraser also damaged cultural dynamism compared to the achievements of Whitlam in this area.

    The Liberal Howard was not a supporter of liberalism, as others may understand this term.

    But I tend to agree with you, provided the liberalism you seek is not Liberal Party stuff and provided that liberalism for some is not funded by or based on oppression and exploitation of others.

  6. Chris#132 on Jarrah’s comment 130

    “But I tend to agree with you, provided the liberalism you seek is not Liberal Party stuff and provided that liberalism for some is not funded by or based on oppression and exploitation of others.”

    Chris, In suspect we both know the answer to that one. Wasnt it Howard that went for sedition laws and attempted to censor research in universities and silence the ABC and locked up refugees in inhumane conditions? Is that included the “liberalist tradition” or is it just liberal when it suits some?

  7. Chris, of course liberal and Liberal are very different things.

    As I see it, liberalism brings both economic and cultural dynamism. The Left don’t like the former, and the Right don’t like the latter. Libertarians like both.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s