Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site druxo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!drutx!druxo!nap
From: nap@druxo.UUCP (Parsons)
Newsgroups: net.women,net.abortion
Subject: Re: Gosh, I hope this doesn't bury me
Message-ID: <806@druxo.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 19-Feb-85 10:08:30 EST
Article-I.D.: druxo.806
Posted: Tue Feb 19 10:08:30 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 22-Feb-85 06:45:25 EST
References: <1330@hou4b.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Information Systems Laboratories, Denver
Lines: 27
Xref: watmath net.women:4503 net.abortion:1278

>             If raising a future generation is important to us, women ought
> to be given vast allowances of time off (with pay) for childbirth and for
> a child's early years, and such women ought to get preferential treatment
> when they re-enter the workforce.  This is where ``sharing the burden'' comes
> in.

"...and for a child's early years"?  This is "sharing the burden"???  Nothing
in "nature" keeps a woman from working during a child's early years.  (I
know of a company that makes it possible for women to breast feed their
babies while employed.)

If men are to "share the burden," they need to start thinking in terms of
*their* taking time off during their children's early years, especially if
they feel that children should be kept with a parent rather than left with
a sitter or in daycare.  (By the way, pro-lifers, it is your unwillingness
to deal with this issue, more than anything else in my opinion, that
discredits you in the eyes of many women who see you as utterly unconcerned
for them.  You are willing to tell them to sacrifice for the life of an
unborn child, but are you willing to insist on men "sacrificing careers"
so that the burden is shared?)

No amount of "preferential treatment" is going to make up for lack of
experience in a profession (which staying home, out of the profession,
guarantees happening).

Nancy Parsons
AT&T ISL