Lead balloons: ideas only slightly too outrageous to be taken seriously.
Recently, Mr Hawke has passed Mr Fraser as the second longest-serving Prime Minister in the history of Australia. It has not been as tumultuous a reign as Mr Whitlam’s, but Mr Hawke has led our nation through a time of rapid social change. Some of it has been for the better and some for the worse—as is the character of social change—but we can rejoice that we continue to be governed in peace and quietness, and are free to meet and to get on with our work of preaching the gospel. It is important that we follow the injunction of the apostle and continue to pray for those in authority.
A couple of the changes which on the surface appear to be for the better during the time of Mr Hawke’s Prime Ministership have been the increase in the number of jobs and the rise in the status of women within the workforce. These two things, strangely enough, have gone hand in hand. Many women have gained a degree of acceptance and economic equality by going to work. The creation of interesting work and the removal of household drudgery has been encouraged by a government keen to provide opportunities for employment. Especially during the first years of Mr Hawke’s reign as Prime Minister, the creation of jobs went ahead at a great pace. The single group that were the greatest beneficiaries of these increased employment opportunities was undoubtedly women.
However, has the community really benefited from this social shift? While there have been rising numbers in employment, there remains a great number of unemployed youth. The rising percentage of employed women—often middle-aged, responsible, financially committed women—has left many young working-class people unemployed and relatively unemployable. Furthermore, we have witnessed the emerging social problem of ‘latch-key kids’ and unattended youth. The financial advantage to the community of having more women in the workforce seems to have been matched by the financial disadvantage of having young people in poverty and hostility on the streets.
Has women’s freedom to choose work or home duties ever really eventuated? For who can afford the luxury of writing ‘home duties’ on their tax form these days?
The chief financial concern of most Australian families is the purchase of their own home. And the purchase price of homes has risen at a rate strangely equivalent to the increasing percentage of women in the workforce. The double income family will outbid the single income family at the house auction every time. The single income family now finds it almost impossible to buy their own home.
The only people who seem to have been economically advantaged by women in the workforce are the real estate developers and the capitalists. They have now got twice as many people working for what is still the one basic wage. The great losers are those who are most committed to family life and the raising of their children. Therefore, the big losers are the children, the next generation, whose mothers first of all chose to work for stimulation and interest, and then were forced to work for their family’s survival.
They say that it is hard to argue against apple pie and motherhood, but the Hawke years have demonstrated that it is very easy to act against motherhood. And which mother now has time to bake her family an apple pie? I guess we will need to get used to factory-made apple pies bought off supermarket shelves; they might lack emotional warmth but they heat up well in the microwave.
