Double standards
Despite having witnessed the mass media hoopla around International Women's Day this year — celebrating how far we've come and women who have "made it" — I wasn't overly surprised to be informed at a recent job interview that trendy dressing and makeup wearing were requirements of the job.
I wasn't too surprised because society as a whole demonstrates in so many ways that what women look like is more important than what we think or what we can do. Which job doesn't pressure women to conform to society's pressures about how they should look, whether newsreaders, sales assistants or women trying out for Popstars?
But it's interesting that while we're being told that feminism is no longer relevant; while $60 breakfasts are organised commemorating particular women's achievements; while some feminists are saying we shouldn't be too demanding about what we want; every year new women are attracted to the radical, political protest marches held for IWD around the country.
I didn't go to an expensive breakfast, or go to a seminar on how to break through the glass ceiling. But marching and rallying with hundreds of women and men who want to see an end to double standards and sexism (imagine men being told they have to wear makeup all day long!) was infinitely more empowering and effective in fighting to change this sexist system, so that one day what will be most socially valued is a person's contribution, not their appearance.
Trisha Reimers
Geelong Vic
Perplexed by PLP
I was left feeling rather perplexed after reading the two letters in last week's Write On (GLW #440) that came from leading members of the Progressive Labour Party (PLP).
Chris Warren from Canberra states that "individual members of the PLP will choose their own level of involvement should it [the Socialist Alliance] become established".
In contrast, Linda Gale, the PLP Melbourne branch secretary states that "Joining the Socialist Alliance is now a matter for the PLP's internal democratic structures to discuss".
If the PLP's national convention is yet to decide formally how to relate to the Socialist Alliance, why has Chris Warren already decided and publicly stated what the PLP's position is?
Chris Pickering
Wollongong NSW
Race card
Once again the Northern Territory government is playing the race card in an election year, this time over the Kenbi land claim, which now only awaits the consent of Minister Ruddock.
Not satisfied with appealing the Land Commissioner's decision and attempting to influence the minister to withhold consent, the NT Government now has the amateur fishermens' association (AFANT) in full cry over their imaginary inalienable rights to fish in any patch of water that is not fenced in. There is no such right.
The NT government is relying on emotion to smother common sense. The tacit support shown by the ALP for the political fray by AFANT is indicative of the commonality of interest between the CLP and the ALP.
There is nothing mature or restrained about this latest blatant attempt to dispossess the Larakia people. To peddle the lie that this land is needed for the expansion of Darwin is as despicable as the lie that the damming of the Elizabeth River was essential for the same reason.
Col Friel
Alawa NT
User-pays unionism
OK. I'm forced into it, given the gung-ho Workers Online support for non-unionist levies. I think we need to be fairly careful about the trade union bureaucracy's push for fees from non-unionists.
I'll admit to being concerned about these fees. The Workers Online (23/2) headline "Union Members Tell Scabs: Sing for Your Supper" only re-inforces my concern.
First, where are all these union members telling non-unionists to sing for their supper? Not in my workplace.
Secondly, I had always understood a scab was someone who crossed a picket line to undermine a strike or other industrial action. People who are not members of a union are not scabs per se.
The headline implies that non-unionists are incapable of being persuaded to join a union. Crap. If the union movement mounted a concerted campaign to increase wages and conditions then non-members would join.
Thirdly, to say to non-unionists "sing for your supper" means that passive non-unionist workers should be penalised for their class stupidity.
If a union was strong enough to impose a closed workshop I would support it. But fees are a substitute for organising and developing union consciousness in the workplace.
And that's the rub. The trade union leadership, from their capitulation to the Accord to their surrender to Howard, fails to challenge the rule of capital — or even to defend wages, jobs and conditions through industrial action. The consequence of this lie of class collaboration — what's good for the bosses is good for workers — has been a loss of membership.
The real trade union response should be a general industrial reply to increase wages and better conditions and defend jobs. Of course, given the pro-capitalist politics of almost all of the trade union "leaders" it won't happen. Instead of attacking the bosses, and thus attracting workers to join, our "leaders" will attack fellow workers. Just like the pro-capitalist trade union leadership has done since 1983.
John Passant
Sydney
Thanks to John Howard
I've just rushed down to the petrol station and saved 1.5 cents. My car petrol tanks were unfortunately full so I could only squeeze in one more litre but I will remain eternally grateful for the Howard government for its magnificent gesture.
While I was down at the service station I thought about the 200,000 unemployed people which the government breached last year for outrageous things like failing to attend an interview at a Centrelink office.
I also noticed that this week the Howard government said it was only going to give pensioners half the consumer price index (CPI) rise to which they are entitled because it had compensated them in advance nine months ago when it introduced the GST. You will no doubt remember the riotous parties in all the old folks' homes that occurred at the time.
I am also this week eternally grateful to the Howard government for scrapping plans to tax family trusts as if they were companies. My accountant said that if they had taxed family trusts I would have had difficulty avoiding paying a proper rate of tax on my income.
John Tomlinson
Brisbane