Feminism scorned

The ink has barely dried on the millions of Mother’s Day Cards handed over by little hands across Australia.

Yet the major parties have already forgotten about the most important mothers in our country – the ones who sacrifice everything to personally raise their children.

That’s right. I’m talking about the humble stay-at-home mum.

She is not well regarded by the elite, the media or the major political parties.

This is not surprising. She has spurned their addiction to riches, their unending pursuit of tertiary education, and the coveting of career and prominence.

Instead, she has taken a hit to her income, status, sleep and body to play an unrecognised but vital part in the future of this nation. It is the most feminine role possible, but in the feminist world it is scorned.

That is because she has chosen to have children and put them first. They will be the next generation of Australians.

There is no more important role than ensuring that they are raised well. It is vital that they are cared for and loved.

And there is no better way to do this than to have ‘Mum’ at their children’s sides as they take little steps, return home from school for afternoon tea or deal with the emotions of teenage years.

Any sensible government would work to make it easier for women to stay with their children.

But the major political parties don’t believe in this vital role. In fact, they are doing all they can to ensure that mothers are forced away from their children and pushed into the workforce.

Apparently that is more productive and therefore better for the nation. And it is a big assumption.

Julia Gillard, as we keep hearing, believes that work gives us dignity. It is a nice way of saying we were made to be slaves.

And as she has no children of her own, it is not surprising that she is a Prime Minister that cares little for stay-at-home mums.

But, and I won’t often say this, she is not as bad as Tony Abbott on this issue.

For Tony is so disdainful of the stay-at-home mum that he plans to rip all support from her and instead increase taxes. In Tony’s world, the stay-at-home mum and her husband will subsidise extremely well paid working women up to $75,000 if they have a child.

In many cases, that will probably be more than the combined income of the stay-at-home mum’s family.

Tony’s decision to scrap the Baby Bonus – the only assistance for stay-at-home mums – presumably comes about, in part, due to the cry that poor women will have children simply to take home the cash.

Given the Baby Bonus has been around for quite a while and no-one has yet been able to point out the hordes of women who have done this, I can only surmise it was a well-intentioned concern with little basis in reality.

But now Tony seems to have no problems in a scheme that may well result in rich working women having kids for cash. Seems a little hypocritical, doesn’t it.

It is also worthwhile noting that Tony’s budgetary priorities now place taxpayer funding of his own political party above any support whatsoever for the stay-at-home mum.

Good one Tony, you’ve really let yourself down with Australia’s stay-at-home mums. And their husbands.

Author: Bernard Gaynor

Bernard Gaynor is a married father of nine children. He has a background in military intelligence, Arabic language and culture and is an outspoken advocate of conservative and family values.

Share This Post On

1 Comment

  1. At least as a atheistic socialist Gillard has an excuse for this madness, but what’s Abbott’s excuse? He’s supposed to be a Catholic conservative. Maybe he’s neither of those things.

    Post a Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Pin It on Pinterest