Men and Women and Having It All

Interesting opinion piece in today's IT: Why politics and family life simply do not mix.

I'll have to say I generally agree with her description of how politics works in Ireland, and most Western democracies, at a 'grass root' level. Personally, I've been to a few of these meetings over the years, but frankly go only on sufferance.

I couldn't do a politicians job. In part because someone like me is frankly unelectable - your average man on the street is unlikely to identify with me and I certainly am unlikely to identify with them, and often make little effort to hide this. I lack a politician's patient capacity to listen to tripe from constituents and to reflect back their views with a sense of empathy and conviction that makes them think that you care.

This is just one of those things. Not everyone can or wants to be a politician and I learned a long time that influencing rather than being them was often just as effective and far less tedious. We make our choices.

However, and more to the point, the article's author blamed the barrier to entry into politics on it being family unfriendly - which it is - and this meant women were at a disadvantage. Then towards the end, she betrayed a key sentiment - "I have a great husband, but that’s not the same, and anyway, call me a control freak, but I like doing the wife stuff."

And this is the core of the problem. A century ago, the traditional model had the man providing and the woman caring. A century of female emancipation and Feminism has meant that women now can choose between caring and the previously male role of providing - while men still have very limited choices where it comes to the reverse, due to a combination of prejudiced social attitudes and biased laws.

In short, you can't have you cake and eat it. If you want the provider role, then you're going to have to sacrifice much, if not all, of the carer role and if you want the carer role, you need to accept that you're not going to be the provider.

Unfortunately, because of how things stand legally and socially, this choice is really not open to either gender. Such are the attitudes and laws towards men adopting the carer role while their better half becomes the provider that it makes it difficult to impossible for men to do this. Child custody and rights laws are heavily skewed in favour of women, who are seen as the 'natural' child carer and even the role of homemaker is officially only recognized as a female one in our Constitution:

Article 41.2.1 In particular, the State recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved.

It's hardly surprising that, as a result, we live in a society that tacitly views house-husbands as lesser men, who are assumed to be home simply because they are lazy or somehow deficient in character.

This leaves the choice for women with a problem that can only be solved in one of two ways; either change those laws and attitudes so that the roles may be exchanged freely or seek a means whereby you can choose both, and ultimately, I don't think you can do that.

As such, I think the piece was a disappointment in that it did not realistically examine the limitations that will inevitably be placed upon our lives by our lifestyle choices and instead chose to bellyache about how we can't have it all.