Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-24-Speech-3-079"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011024.4.3-079"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The pursuit of the second wave of the feminist movement in the 60s and 70s was strongly focused on enabling women to get on in paid jobs. On average, women were not as highly trained as men, and even if they were, due to male domination, they often got the jobs with the lowest status and the lowest income. Moreover, many women were financially dependent on their husbands. Highly trained women were right to claim access to jobs from which, in those days, they were almost automatically excluded. For women who were less highly trained, the situation was often different. Cleaning offices or stacking shelves in supermarkets are not demanding jobs, and, in many cases, not to be preferred to the role of housewife. That group of women experienced it, in many cases, as liberating if the income of their husbands obviated the need for them to work. Most women now have a paid job, while men do not work fewer hours to look after and raise the children. Feminism has become the employers’ accidental instrument to solve staff shortages and to limit government spending. Certainly under those circumstances, it is even more important to actively fight any form of discrimination and intimidation at work."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples