MSE News: ’Women's state pension petition secures second Parliamentary debate

Goldiegirl

Once again, an attempt to portray all 50's women as down trodden and disadvantaged.

Although I was born in early 1960, I was in the same class as some '50's girls, and our experiences were nothing like those you describe.

The 11 plus was done away with the year I was due to take it, so all of my year of 11 year olds went to a comprehensive school. However, prior to that, there was an excellent grammar school for girls in the area, and girls who went to the grammar school were encouraged to be academic and prepare for a career. I don't know what the pass rates were for the 11 plus, but, considering girls outstrip boys these days accademically, I doubt if it'd have been too difficult for bright girls to achieve the right results.

I went to a mixed comprehensive - and was never treated differently to any boy. All pupils regardless of the sex were encouraged to achieve - accademically and artistically. It was never assumed that girls would do a job for a couple of years and get married and leave work and girls did subjects like metal work and technical drawing if they wished.

I was very fortunate that I started work in 1976, and always was paid the same as a man in my pay grade when we did the same job.

When I married, I was never financially owned by my husband - we've taken equal reponsibility for finances, and I do the bulk of the financial admin

If I'd divorced, it would never have crossed my mind to take part of my husbands pension pot - why would I, when I had my own occupational pension.

This stereotyping of women is very disappointing in this day and age, but it seems to suit WASPI to promote this negative and dated image

jem16

purplecarSJP wrote: »

Girls had achieve higher score than boys to pass for Grammar School (coz too many girls passed otherwise), so impacted on Opps to Achieve Income, aspirations were squashed too as boys were considered much more important

Common myth;

There are two myths that are frequently expounded about the standardisation process. Firstly, the myth that older children have marks deducted because they are older. That is not the case. Secondly, there is the myth that boys 11+ scores are standardised differently to those of girls because boys tend to develop more slowly than girls.

purplecarSJP wrote: »

Started work age 16 on wards and earlier for some

Many stayed on at school and went onto further education too. I have friends born 1952, 53, 54, 55 and 56 - all went onto higher education and it was pretty common at my school. The opportunities were there for anyone who wanted to take them.

Expectation in 1970's women leave job after having children and lose income and turned away from occ pensions and promotions

I started work in 1977 - occupational pension was there, Maternity leave was there and no expectation to leave work. Certainly true of most Public Sector jobs where a lot of women worked.

Please stop portraying all 1950s women as tied to the kitchen sink as it certainly was not true. There would have been some who followed this path naturally but a good many did not.

mgdavid

purplecarSJP wrote: »

A simple factually correct formula to work from..................................

Your post is not simple,
neither is it factually correct,
and it does not contain a formula.
Credibility? - it's not looking good.

missbiggles1

It seems that WASPI has marshalled its forces and decided to invade MSE!

xylophone

If you are now over 55, are you able to access your pension from the voluntary sector scheme?

jem16

Scotswimmen wrote: »

so that this forum, in effect, does not represent me/the majority of women who have clearly voiced their concerns about this on WASPI

Have you ever considered that the Petitions Committee wanted to ask opinions of people other than WASPi so that they can get opinions from a broad representation of people, rather than just the views of one side?

Maybe I should have looked in the women's magazines DWP supposedly notified us in, re: Pension changes in 1995.

You would probably have been better simply looking at the TV News or the hundreds of media articles in newspapers now being unearthed.

At time of that pension hike, I was at home with my children (for 5 years),

1995 - I had gone back to work by then after having 5 years off to look after young children. Was back in the workforce by 1989. Which 5 years were you off work?

However even at home I still managed to look at the TV News and keep up to date.

The Benefits System currently treats me as a ‘dependant’ on my husband's pension-i.e. JSA only available for 6 months (if contributions based) so no Benefits at all after that.

This would be the same for a man too. Why should you be treated differently?

We want equality with men but this process needs to be fair with adequate notifications.

1995 Act was 20 years ago. If you want equality then start taking some personal responsibility.

The most important points in the first debate were voiced by supportive MPs (especially Mhairi Black)

Do you include the "nobody knew comment by Mhairi Black in that? Obviously untrue as many knew.

There were many points raised by the MPs that were incorrect too.

In relation to the Grammar School debate-a tiny group of us (more boys than girls though boys not any more clever in Primary tests) were allowed to go to the Grammar in the area where I lived-the rest went to Comprehensives (the girls I knew got typing & the boys metal/woodwork there)-this didn't change till I was in 3rd/4th year (the 1960s), so she is also correct that women born in the 1950s, in general, had reduced opportunities for various reasons).

The didn't have any reduced opportunities. Those that passed 11 plus ( or the equivalent in Scotland ) went to Grammar school, those that did not went to Comprehensives as you say ( Junior secondary in Scotland ). It was all down to what you could achieve academically - some were more suited to using their brains and some their hands.

This misogyny is alive & well-look at some of the posts on this thread about women being 'lazy & greedy'. Welcome to the sad world of the internet troll. Some of them are, I understand, paid to promote divisions & disrupt debate.

Ah the usual. If you can't debate properly then accuse the other side of being paid.

lisyloo

The Benefits System currently treats me as a ‘dependant’ on my husband's pension-i.e. JSA only available for 6 months (if contributions based) so no Benefits at all after that.

Why would you expect younger people with an older pension age to support you but you appear to think your husband should not?
If as a couple you have income then you should use that before expecting others to support you.

As for children, that was your choice to have them and therefore your responsibility, so shouldn't be put forward as an excuse. If you were the main child carer for a number of years then it makes perfect sense that your husband would need to support your pension provision if he worked for a longer number of years, but having the time off was a matter of your choosing.

Btw - my age went up from 60-67 but I made arrangements and not excuses.

Scotswimmen

Parliament suggested this site in relation to the forthcoming debate 1st Feb-I only got notified today through a friend via another MP. If you spend time to read my post you would see that!

Scotswimmen

Oh not the old Young versus Old divide. I don't agree with their pension increase either-that is mentioned in my post.

jem16

Scotswimmen wrote: »

Parliament suggested this site in relation to the forthcoming debate 1st Feb-I only got notified today through a friend via another MP. If you spend time to read my post you would see that!

So Parliament did not suggest this site at all. Basically as you say a friend told you and she was told by an MP.

No-one here has any problems with anyone who wishes to join in and add their comments. However you need to be prepared to debate constructively and starting off by suggesting we're all paid by someone to derail the debate was not a good move.

This is not Facebook where all opinions that don't fit in with the WASPI way of thinking are removed.