Teaching Assistants-Sex Discrimination?

Person_one

jackieblack wrote: »

No, of course it isn't, but for some women with school age children, the convenience of term time/school hours working outweighs the low pay.

No men have school age children?

jackieblack

Person_one wrote: »

No men have school age children?

My apologies, I should have said 'people' not 'women'

My point is that alot of parents working in schools, in all sorts of support roles not just TAs, accept the job despite the low pay because of the convenience of school hours/term time working.

Person_one

jackieblack wrote: »

My apologies, I should have said 'people' not 'women'

My point is that alot of parents working in schools, in all sorts of support roles not just TAs, accept the job despite the low pay because of the convenience of school hours/term time working.

You were right the first time really, women still do the vast majority of childcare in this country, its still seen as 'women's work'.

Men wanting to be TAs (or primary teachers) will actually find it much easier to get a job than the women.

Paranoid

KiKi wrote: »

I'm very sure s/he was joking.

There's a slight irony here. You've posted because you think people might believe the worst of men wanting to be TAs, and yet you are believing the worst in the poster who commented...

You are living up to your name, Paranoid!

KiKi

I'm much obliged for your astute insight into my thinking- wrong of course....!

Spongbong

KiKi wrote: »

I'm very sure s/he was joking.

There's a slight irony here. You've posted because you think people might believe the worst of men wanting to be TAs, and yet you are believing the worst in the poster who commented...

You are living up to your name, Paranoid!

KiKi

Thank you, of course I was being facetious! It seems men can't look at a child sideways without being accused of !!!!!philia these days. It's no wonder a lot seem hesitant to work with children.

Anyway, my post has been removed by the forum police which says it all really.

This wouldn't have happened if the sarcastic smiley was still around!

KimYeovil

nzmegs wrote: »

Most "traditional" female roles tend to be poorly paid. men don't go into those roles[STRIKE] because they don't have the same restrictions that women get lumbered with ie: having to work around school times and holidays or needing to do part time as they care for relatives.[/STRIKE] men can choose to do better paid jobs, women have less choice. this amounts to discrimination.

the sooner men realise that they need to take 50% responsibility for the care of children and the government offers half the maternity leave to men, then the sooner we will see a balance in the numbers of men taking on jobs which are currently left to the women. oh and the pay will increase too probably.

traditional female jobs also need to be viewed as being more worthwhile. people see being a teaching assistant as being a "little job on the side" for "the wife". Inconsequential and unimportant. This view needs to be challenged at the highest level.

As soon as women want to shack up with men who earn a pittance, as soon as women only want to buy one pair of shoes per year, as soon as women ignore the genes and hormones raging through every fibre of their body, as soon as women find men who are left behind attractive, blah blah blah. It takes two to tango.

Men are easy and flexible. They will do whatever women want - they are just dumb, playful dogs who want to share their bone. A man in rubber Marigolds or a man in deerskin Pineiders... it's the woman's choice.