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

The usual view of be given forces anti-sexism is that it centres around custody who find it personally important to contend the pressure to conform to a macho image plus a handful of politically aw be men wanting to assist on what ar seen as feminist issues. In circumstance any populace giving it serious thought testament come to see domesticated furiousness, rape, c ar of their children and suchlike as being mens room issues. However, the average opus will not be drawn into mens groups by these issues, and will tend to see mens anti-sexism as a movement without a cause.But I believe its a movement which has remained marginal by failing to acknowledge its biggest cause. Mens groups tend to bet for a personal response to the contradictions their members face THEY are the problem, they must change. This seems to be unrelated to the impersonal orb of politics and the hard realities of jobs, compensate, deceaseings(a) hours and conditions, etc. But this is exactly the are a w here(predicate)(predicate) anti-sexism could deliver its greatest impact. Because, in spite of the effects of massive unemployment, little has changed mens ideas intimately playact.The classic picture of man-as-incomplete-person that mens groups advance emotionally retarded, distant from his children, matched at work and dominant at home describes a man well moulded to the career world. The stereotypical male values closely match the qualities desirable in competitive work. Despite the personal politics of a few men, the nature of work itself has not changed and continues to reinforce the same traditional male values. But there are now women working successfully in most professions so why should male values continue to dominate? It is because of the strict division between full-time and parttime work.Its in full-time work in the majority of occupations that men and traditional values prevail women in these jobs work on mens monetary value. Part-time work on the diffe rent hand is clearly the res publica of women oer 90% of part-timers in Britain is female. In fact, much 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 valued to a greater extent highly, very much paying(a) a family wage, and require the specialisation of skills and continued commitment that would merit the title career (though the tenet is the same from bricklaying to brain surgery).This continuity is very important women (in Britain) are permitted usually only a figure break for maternity and men generally none for paternity. Outside this career world, there is both unpaid domestic work, including child care, and formal part-time work with pay, conditons, prospects and job interest generally worse than full-time work. in that respect are two results of this duality of working facts. Firstly, because of womens unavoidable involvement in caring for their babies, caree r work favours men.Full-time work has changed little to accommodate the increasing number of women in it, who have to accept the limitations impose 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 inferior to the career sector but very services its interests and sustains it. This relationship is the framework for exploitation of both capitalist and patriarchal nature. So, women having children must be assuage from work from late pregnancy until the baby is weaned at the very least.As men are generally not permitted any reasonable paternity leave it is necessarily the m other who continues to look by and by the child at least until school age (unless the parents are willing and financially able to pay slightlyone else to do so). If these considerations did not keep the woman out of full-time work in the branch place, they are likely to do so for some years at this stage, especially since this whole situation increases the likelihood that the father will be earning more than her at this financially critical time.While this rigorous division of work exists, therefore, women wanting children will be disadvantaged in full-time work, and many 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 unceasingly take this in preference to part-time work and when they break fathers are likely to be infra financial pressure to keep their full-time job, at the expense of their involvement with their children. both(prenominal) 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 EEC Constitution of what they call the Flexible Work Right. This would be the legal honorable of anyone to choose how many hours a week to work, bein g paid accordingly. It would be a move against the binding domination of full-time work and the undervaluing of part-time work, which would al depressed a balance of working and domestic life to suit the priorities of individual men and women. In particular, parents would be free to share child care and earning according to their own values.A practical shift in the distribution of the tasks between the sexes would open the entre 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 hours worked could help to ignore unemployment in the right circumstances. So how might t hese ideas be realised in practice? Three possibilities for change are better provision for job sharing, more flexibility of working hours (especially total hours worked) and better parental leave allowances. As far as trade unions are concerned, fend for the interests (primarily financial) of those in work comes before freeing members to work less.So small reductions in the working week, (which would plausibly serve mainly to increase overtime payments), take priority over genuine flexibility of hours and job-sharing provisions. Some forward-looking unions ARE seeking better paternity leave most men take some time off whether it is officially available or not (94% in a recent pair 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 surely only be won in slow stages. And here the EEC is already playing a part.The EEC Commission has issued a direct ive aiming to set borderline standards for parental leave in all member countries (three months for men and women during the childs first two years, in improver 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 government has so far vetoed the passage of this directional 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. Poor working conditions and occupational arctic may be sustained by ideas of what is manly. The notion that men who complain of bad conditions and danger are soft is sexist and encourages mistreatment of workers not to mention alienating and excluding women. The response to noise, pollution and heavy lifting may be headaches, ulcers, heart disease and backache human conditions too are important if w ork 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 despite 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 visual perception 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 suggest too, a positive attitude of relating some of the less desirable trappings of maleness to the situations which wrought them, rather than blaming them on maleness itself.If men looked objectively at the unnecessary sacrifices they make on the communion table of work, anti-sexism would suddenly seem relevant to many more men than the few involved at present. (C) five dollar bill Cram POSTSCRIPT The above article considers one interesting proposal for breaking down the male-dominated caseful of paid work. For example, as this issue went to press, a Bill predated 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 live a second reading in the House of Commons.Under this Bill, employees with children under two years elder (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 ineligible 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 currently realistic alternative it is unlikely to become law. I think it is an important step forward, but how can we as men help it to emit?Schemes of this sort, 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 authority childcare provision, and further privatise the provision of care in our society. Another important issue is how, parental schemes like this should be colligate 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 voluntary 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 increases, 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 in addition 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 long-term trend towards fewer hours spent 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 employed men make beneficial use of the growing part of their lives spent outside paid jobs.