Is maternity leave too long? Laura Perrins on Sunday Morning Live.

Our thanks to a supporter for editing this (video, 17:19), first broadcast by the BBC on 16 October. Laura Perrins was faced with a feminist presenter and three feminist guests – one of them a man – and as usual, managed to make more sense than all of them collectively.

About Mike Buchanan

I'm a men's human rights advocate, writer, and publisher. My primary focus is leading the political party I launched in 2013, Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them). I still work actively on two campaigns I launched in early 2012, Campaign for Merit in Business and the Anti-Feminism League. In 2014 I launched The Alternative Sexism Project, aiming to raise public understanding that the sexism faced by men and boys has far more grievous consequences than the sexism faced by women and girls.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
  • cheannaich

    It’s just me, isn’t it? Yesterday on the BBC I watched their programme about the Somme commerations. They had Rainworth and an ex afghan vet presenting. They told the story of a former marine retracing his father’s footsteps in France. All well and good.
    They then contrasted the care veterans get nowadays with what care they had in WW1. Then the BBC’s diversity guff kicked in. They interviewed a Fijian female aircraft technician, 3 tours of Afghanistan and had then been injured in a car crash. (Fijians have served in HM forces with some distinction e.g. sargeant Talaiasi Labalaba) She was receiving rehabilitation and admitted that some of her mental pressures were, like most youngsters, from leaving home, i.e. homesickness. Why oh why couldn’t they have interviewed an actual wounded veteran of Afghanistan? Well, that wouldn’t have ticked the diversity boxes e.g. female, ethnic minority.
    To explain my incredulity let me explain about aircraft technicians working on high value assets. They have 3 square meals a day, sleep soundly in a nice comfy bed, access to showers, laundry facilities, the American BX AAFES, in short, shopping heaven. They are safer than even General Haigh was during WW1. Utterly and absolutely no comparison with the hell that soldiers experienced in WW1. Not only that but some areas were designated at the time as Afghan free zones, so distrustful were the coalition of their Afghan Allies.
    The BBC then went on to outdo even this. They showed a film taken on the Somme battlefield by army cameramen. The BBC stated it was the era of silent movies and some female composer was introduced to add a musical score played by a school orchestra. That orchestra was highly accomplished but I would really have preferred to watch the actual film, that film became secondary and shown mainly in the background. I then noticed something even more telling of diversity, the BBC seemed to focus twice as long on the ethnic minority kids as on the white kids.
    I just knew the BBC were going to grate on me.

  • Personally I would say yes. The US twelve weeks unpaid seems reasonable to me, as inter alia it drives home the point that children should be the responsibility of their parents, not the State. If you cannot support your child you should not be having it.
    Secondly pregnant women should go into the redundancy pool with everyone else. Why should somebody more capable, who will prioritise work, and who the employer would probably prefer to keep, lose their job because these brood mares – particularly if it is a second back to back pregnancy, i.e. they come back from their year’s paid holiday pregnant again – have preferential retention?
    Then there is their right to “flexible” working. They are usually absolutely rigid in their requirements, it’s extremely hard, nay impossible to refuse, and they are protected against the consequences. If someone prioritises being home for little Jenny’s bath time above their clients, then they should expect to see that priority reflected in their pay, career progression and chances of retention. The less committed SHOULD be the first to be selected for redundancy.
    Finally when Osborne announced, 2 or 3 years back, that henceforth the personal tax allowance could be assigned as between married couples/civil partners, ultimately only about 500,000 took it up. The reason? The assigning partner had to have some income, which excluded SAHMs at a stroke; if someone with no income could assign their allowance it might both incentivise marriage and get these uncommitted part timers out of the workplace.