Have the 1950s returned?
Re MPP’s balancing act isn’t child’s play Letter, Jan. 4
I had to check the calendar before responding to Margaret Trusler’s misogynist response to the plight of females in politics and business visà-vis child care. Yet another member of that mysterious third gender attempts a smack-down on working women with children.
With June Cleaveresque disdain, Trusler reproaches MPP Lisa MacLeod for “whining” about the lack of child care that she has encountered in her chosen career. She opines that MacLeod should have thought about that, presumably before she had the temerity to look for work outside of the home.
Newsflash: MacLeod wasn’t the only one who “had” this child; her husband had it with her, so it was not just “her” child to look after, but theirs. To further assert that the “obvious” answer would be to bring along a live-in caregiver is absurd. Does that mean that only those who can afford this luxury can run for office?
No, the more obvious answer is universal child care — whereby all of us, even those such as myself who do not have children, invest in the future so that all parents can feel safe leaving their children to be cared for and educated while both can follow their career paths, thus contributing to the general economic well-being of society.
Trusler then questions MacLeod’s ability to fulfill her political obligations when she “is not able to organize her own life.” It’s appalling in this day and age that women still have to justify having a career outside of child-bearing/rearing. Even more appalling is that we have to justify it to other women.