I was a bit late reading this from yesterday’s Observer. Is this really a thing deserving of an article? I mean on two levels, the article seems to be discussing families with both parents where the father stays at home. There are lots of people out there where there is only one parent and no income, surely these are the people worth talking about and helping and not worrying about stay-at-home fathers being ghettoised. GHETTOISED. If only single parent families had the luxury of this ghetto.
Secondly, why are we looking at this ‘phenomenon’ affecting men? Why should that matter? Because (very) slowly society is moving to a position where EITHER parent might be afforded the luxury of being a stay-at-home parent. And while it might not be a choice in the current economy, it is a choice – nay luxury – some people cannot afford. (90 hour week with a 7 -year-old and an 11-year-old? Do these children not attend school or sleep? I think Edmund Farrow might be exaggerating his hours.)
God forbid a man should be disadvantaged in the workplace, those poor bastards. I’m not saying there isn’t a disadvantage for these 62,000 men and that is insignificant but what about the 2 million stay-at-home mothers and the disadvantages they suffer when returning to the workplace.
And while we’re at it how about the inequalities women suffer anyway? Edmund fucking Farrow my arse. Women earn less than men and are less likely to rise to positions of power. As this blog on The Guardian website highlighted recent figures show that less than a fifth of positions in institutions are occupied by women. I’m not quite sure why culture of sexism is in inverted commas in the blog, though, is this in any doubt such that it would need to attributed to a voice that is not the writer/newspaper’s?
While I do not dismiss the struggles that anyone must face after staying at home to raise a child/children when they return to work and, indeed, the hard work of raising a child, forgive me if I think there are bigger inequalities in society than those face by the stay-at-home fathers.
I collected some more of the medals of my avarice on my lunch today. DHL have been backwards about getting these to me. I have had to go and collect the spoils myself..from a Staples, can you believe? That’s right, as well as selling paper, printing cartridges and correction fluid, certain Staples stores now also have DHL desks. Whatever next? Post Offices in mini-markets? Bureau de Changes in banks?
DHL, for their part, neither left me a card when they failed to deliver nor informed me when the parcels were redirected to the Deansgate branch of the aforementioned office retail store. After I chased it up I was told I could collect it – as long as I took along a passport and a utility bill (I wrote ‘utility belt’ initially, LOLZ). Did the chap at Staples ask for any ID? Did he fuck. I suppose expecting someone to be able to sell lined A4-pads AND adhere to DHL’s proof of identity policy. So I had carried my passport around with me for no reason. Unbelievable; I could have been attacked for that. Basing this on no evidence whatsoever I would assume my passport has a street value of £12,000.
I did get to carry a big box around with me, though. People looked at me like I imagine polite people looked at mixed-race couples in the early 70s; slight surprise and then looking away. Though not the undisguised disgust of the working classes looking at a mixed-race couple of the early 70s – and there certainly wasn’t the physical violence that would have followed (Yes this is just the joke I already used on the comments underneath the picture, what of it?)
It was an umbrella in the box. A nice one, like one you can use as a walking stick. But I carried it around in a big box. The other parcel included a bag that could fit inside it all the things I had – aside from the umbrella – but instead I carried the parcel as well as my other bag. And the carrier bag carrying what I had purchased at Boots (the chemist). I am nothing if not unable to carry things economically.
Clearly you are desperate to know what I got from Boots (the chemist). Well, aside from some shower gel I got a shower cap. Yes, a shower cap. I am fed up of washing my hair twice a day on the days I run/gym/football. I have never bought a shower cap before. There was a choice of a good, solid white one for £1.99 or some patterned ones for £3.49. Two of the three patterns were subtle and very discrete. Then there was a pink one with white spots on it. Whichever did I buy?
Thank you Downton Abbey, it’s about someone else said it. Maggie Smith’s Countess Violet was asked why she disliked someone and she pointed out that not liking someone IS NOT THE SAME as disliking someone. I have been telling this people for years. I don’t like most people but that doesn’t mean I dislike them. As a matter of a fact I do dislike lots of people as well, viciously so – really quite magnificently viciously and spitefully so, with a level of malevolence that would make you sick. But most of the rest, if not the rest of the people I just don’t like.