The idea of anti-sexism has hardly scratched the surface of the popular male imagination

The usual view of handss room room anti-sexism is that it centres around workforce who f only out it personally crucial to challenge the pressure to conform to a macho sincereize show plus a touchful of politically awargon men absentminded to assist on what be seen as feminist cont wind ups. In incident any man giving it serious thought testament fol pocket-sized to see domestic violence, rape, c be of their fryren and suchlike as being mens issues. However, the average man will not be drawn into mens groups by these issues, and will tend to see mens anti-sexism as a endeavour without a cause.But I believe its a movement which has remained marginal by failing to acknowledge its biggest cause. Mens groups tend to panorama for a personal response to the contradictions their processs face THEY are the problem, they must change. This depends to be unrelated to the impersonal world of politics and the hard realities of jobs, pay, souring hours and conditions, etceter a But this is exactly the area where anti-sexism could have its greatest impact. Because, in anguish of the effect of massive unemployment, little has changed mens ideas about go.The classic picture of man-as-incomplete-person that mens groups invoke emotionally retarded, distant from his squirtren, competitive at lean and dominant at home describes a man well moulded to the calling world. The stereotypical male values closely match the qualities desirable in competitive take a shit. Despite the personal politics of a few men, the nature of operation itself has not changed and continues to reinforce the same traditional male values. But there are now women functional successfully in most professions so why should male values continue to dominate? It is because of the strict discrepancy between full-time and half-time control.Its in full-time work in the majority of occupations that men and traditional values prevail women in these jobs work on mens terms. Part-time work on the other hand is clearly the province of women oer 90% of parttimers in Britain is female. In fact, hardheadedly of the recent increase in womens employment has been in the part-time sector. So what are the differences in these two areas of work? Full-time jobs are precious to a greater extent highly, often paid a family wage, and require the specialisation of skills and keep commitment that would merit the title biography (though the principle is the same from bricklaying to brain surgery).This perseveration is in truth important women (in Britain) are permitted usually only a souvenir divorce for maternity and men widely distri exclusivelyedly none for paternity. Outside this shell outer world, there is both unpaid domestic work, including childcare, and formal part-time work with pay, conditons, prospects and job interest generally worse than full-time work. There are two results of this duality of working situations. Firstly, because of womens unavoidable in volvement in sympathize with for their babies, career work favours men.Full-time work has changed little to accommodate the increase number of women in it, who have to accept the limitations imposed by men such as avoiding children or delegating their care to the domestic/part-time sector. Secondly, the domestic and part-time workforce is not only economically middle-level to the career sector plainly actually services its interests and sustains it. This relationship is the theoretical account for exploitation of both capitalist and patriarchal nature. So, women having children must be unloosen from work from late pregnancy until the baby is weaned at the very least.As men are generally not permitted any sensitive paternity conk it is necessarily the mother who continues to look after the child at least until school age (unless the parents are willing and fiscally able to pay someone else to do so). If these considerations did not keep the fair sex out of full-time work in t he first correct, they are potential to do so for some years at this stage, especially since this unit situation increases the likelihood that the father will be earning more than her at this financially critical time.While this rigid division of work exists, therefore, women lacking children will be disadvantaged in full-time work, and umteen women having children will have to accept the limitations of part-time work. Men, if they are able to get full-time work, will almost al elbow rooms take this in preference to part-time work and when they become fathers are likely to be under financial pressure to keep their full-time job, at the expense of their involvement with their children. round European men, notably in Belgium, have come up with ideas that could break down the rigidity of this full-time/part-time division.They have lobbied the European parliament for the establishment in the atomic number 63 Constitution of what they call the Flexible model Right. This would be t he legal right of anyone to choose how numerous hours a hebdomad to work, being paid accordingly. It would be a move against the binding subordination of full-time work and the undervaluing of part-time work, which would allow a balance of working and domestic life to suit the priorities of individual men and women. In particular, parents would be free to share childcare and earning according to their own values.A practical shift in the statistical distribution of the tasks between the sexes would open the door to many other changes. If the responsibility for financial support was no longer borne principally by men this could undermine the damaging tendency for manhood to be measured by economic success which is often won at the price of being a second rate parent. And for women, work on these terms would mean not only an increase in real economic power and independence, but with this a greater participation in public and political life.Also any overall reduction in average hour s worked could help to reduce unemployment in the right circumstances. So how efficiency these ideas be realised in practice? Three possibilities for change are better provision for job sharing, more flexibility of working hours (especially amount of money hours worked) and better parental pull allowances. As far as transaction unions are concerned, defending the interests (primarily financial) of those in work comes before freeing members to work less.So small reductions in the working week, (which would probably serve in general to increase overtime payments), take priority over genuine flexibility of hours and job-sharing provisions. Some forward-looking unions ARE seeking better paternity render most men take some time off whether it is officially available or not (94% in a recent refer Opportunities Commission study). Better parental leave entitlement would go some way toward the goals of this anti-sexist mens politics, especially since the right to flexible work will sure only be won in slow stages. And here the europium is already playing a part.The EEC Commission has issued a directing aiming to set minimum standards for parental leave in all member countries (three months for men and women during the childs first two years, in addition to maternity leave and at no extra cost to employers). Despite agreement of all other members, and within Britain support of the House of Lords and the Equal Opportunities Commission, the British organization has so far vetoed the passage of this Directive into Community law. So theres no doubt that some aspects of anti-sexist thinking are as political as they are personal.But the anti-sexist angle on work doesnt end there. silly working conditions and occupational safety may be sustained by ideas of what is manly. The notion that men who complain of bad conditions and risk are fluffy is sexist and encourages mistreatment of workers not to mention alienating and excluding women. The response to noise, pollution and laboured lifting may be headaches, ulcers, heart disease and backache human conditions too are important if work is a hostile or authoritarian place men may take it out in drinking or violence outside work. A humane workplace is essential for a humane world.The goals of this mens politics in fact complement those of feminism condescension their separate and apparently selfish motivation. This motivation is crucial since the issue of work as a major limitation in their lives is one with which many could identify. This idea men seeing themselves as work objects paves the way for a wider view of anti-sexism, encompassing the aspects of personal change and feminist causes important to mens groups now. It would offer too, a positive attitude of relating some of the less desirable housings of maleness to the situations which shaped them, rather than blaming them on maleness itself.If men looked objectively at the unnecessary sacrifices they make on the altar of work, a nti-sexism would suddenly seem relevant to many more men than the few involved at present. (C) Five Cram POSTSCRIPT The above article considers one fire proposal for breaking down the male-dominated character of paid work. For example, as this issue went to press, a Bill faced by the Labour MP Harry Cohen, which would introduce a statutory right to a period of parental care for parents of young children, was due to receive a second reading in the House of Commons.Under this Bill, employees with children under two years old (five if the child is disabled or adopted) would be entitled to 13 weeks paid leave if both parents are in paid work, 26 weeks if he or she is a single parent and 4 weeks if the other parent is unqualified for parental leave, for example because of unemployment. The entitlement is not transferable between the parents. The scheme would be paid for by employers and the Government. Under this Government and probably any before long realistic alternative it is u nlikely to become law. I think it is an important step forward, but how can we as men help it to kick downstairs?Schemes of this dissever, although less generous, already exist in ten of the twelve EEC countries why not here? Even if employers, unions and the Government could be persuaded that this sort of parental leave provision is in their interests, there is a danger that it would divert attention away from the need to extend workplace nurseries and local anaesthetic authority childcare provision, and further privatise the provision of care in our society. some other important issue is how, parental schemes like this should be linked to more general ones like a Flexible Work Right.Which should have higher priority, and what would their effects be on the level of unemployment? Finally, I doubt if such self-imposed schemes would be enough to bring about major changes in the distribution of labour between the sexes. Particularly in times of high unemployment and low wage incr eases, when the perceived priority of maximising the breadwinners earnings is greatest, many men would not willingly reduce their hours worked. Schemes involving paid leave avoid this problem, but inevitably involve smaller changes in hours worked so as not to be prohibitively expensive.Compulsory schemes, such as legal limits on basic hours of work and overtime (to encourage men to invest more time and effort in the home) would probably also be needed, but care would be needed to avoid reducing low-paid workers wages oven further. But, to end on a positive note, it is true that there is a semipermanent trend towards fewer hours worn-out(a) in paid employment by each male worker the average has fallen by over one third in the last 100 years. Lets hope it continues and that utilize men make good use of the growing part of their lives spent outside paid jobs.