If Cameron were a conservative, then he would indeed be calling for money to be diverted from a scheme which provides the well-to-do wives of seriously rich husbands with baby-sitting at the expense of low-paid men, and thus of those men’s children and those children’s mothers.
But he would be calling for that money to be diverted to the mothers of small children, to pay them to look after their children rather than hand them over to strangers in order to return to the wage-slavery that feeds our deeply sick society’s insatiable greed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Stop assuming that your skewed view of life should be supported by everyone. I am a working mother who chose to work, not to fund holidays et cetera but because I love my job and am perfectly able to combine that with bringing up well-adjusted happy children. As there is no mention of the fact that the father could be funded to stay at home I presume that this is just one of your openly misogynistic views.
ReplyDeleteLet me guess - you are not married and do not have children? If so, that speaks volumes about you.
"I am a working mother who chose to work, not to fund holidays et cetera but because I love my job and am perfectly able to combine that with bringing up well-adjusted happy children."
ReplyDeleteGood. And what would be wrong with working to fund holidays, anyway?
"As there is no mention of the fact that the father could be funded to stay at home"
Well, he could be. But he really isn't likely to be in the first years, and especially months, of the child's life. If he were, then fair enough.
"And what would be wrong with working to fund holidays, anyway?"
ReplyDeleteWell according to you that represents a:
"return to the wage-slavery that feeds our deeply sick society’s insatiable greed"
....are you forgetful or an idiot? Or both?
Neither. Wanting to give yourselves and your children a holiday is hardly insatiable greed!
ReplyDelete