In fact, if Julia is raising the issue of work/family balance she has definitely let us know where “blanaceâ€? is. Work 1, Family 0.

Actually I think what Julia’s let us know is that for her, politics has taken priority over popping out sprogs. Not everyone’s choice, but she’s not trying to force it on anyone else.

Plenty of other women have entered politics, raised a family and eschatalogical reassurances of regular church attendence.

Yes, plenty of women. Oh SO many women with kids who we see crowding the front benches. And as for the “reassurances” of regular church attendence, ugh, I can only assume you’d rather vote for a hypocrite than someone who tells the truth about their beliefs.

Julia has basically told the Australian public that her values and preferences have little in common of those whose votes she covets Silly Julia!

Has she now? How many Australians exactly go to church regularly? I would say in those terms, she’s pretty much on a par with the majority of the population. No problems there. As for the statements about motherhood and leadership being incompatible, well, anyone with half a brain will see where she’s coming from, no woman with kids is going to think it would be easy to be Prime Minister and still do a good job of raising them, and it’s really only the men who think women are walking ovaries who Jules is going to have alienated – and let’s face it, they weren’t voting for her anyway.

As for this:

On Ove’s “big black mamaâ€? idea, have you asked any of the said “mamasâ€? what they think of the idea? I think it sounds wonderful for all parties concerned: the parents; the children; and the mamas. Win-win-win.

Yes, let’s exploit some uneducated black women with no geniune opportunities by bringing them over here and getting them to do the domestic work us white ladies don’t want to do. Hey, it worked perfectly well in America until that pesky Lincoln started interfering.

OK. thanks for clearing that up. But I think you and a few others have gone way over the top here.

Is this really the core issue of “feminism?” I put scare quotes around ‘feminism’ because once I introduced a friend as “completing a Ph.D on feminism.” My friend corrected me that things have moved on and that in the 21st century it is called “Gender Studies.”

And who are these bogey-men/womyn “essentialists” You seem less interested in “feminism” than slaying the evil “usual suspects” who, by the way, seem to be er, er,…working “mothers!”

And as for Oves and kelly being “ridiculous.” Come on, the absurd one is Julia (whom I admire and respect very much by the way), for raising a red flag that her lifestyle choices are a political issue. Ove’s quite rightly questions the political wisdom of this. As Ove says, “she’s running for Deputy Prime Minster, not the school council.”

In fact, if Julia is raising the issue of work/family balance she has definitely let us know where “blanace” is. Work 1, Family 0. Plenty of other women have entered politics, raised a family and eschatalogical reassurances of regular church attendence. Julia has basically told the Australian public that her values and preferences have little in common of those whose votes she covets Silly Julia!

Still, now that Sussex Street has put La McKew on the payroll, Julia may end up spinning this very cleverly. Let us hope, for her sake, that she does. I have no doubt that the Divine Maxine will counsel Julia against denouncing cookie-baking!

On Ove’s “big black mama” idea, have you asked any of the said “mamas” what they think of the idea? I think it sounds wonderful for all parties concerned: the parents; the children; and the mamas. Win-win-win. Who could ask for more. Or perhaps only a owman with degrees in Developmental Psychology and Cultural Studies should become nannies?

An interesting point made earlier suggested that modern yuppies have to pay six times as much as two-income families, as the single income “traditionalâ€? unit a generation or more ago, for their Mac mansion.

It’s not just McMansions. My one bedroom flat cost just under four times the average income – if you think you can buy anything that’d fit a family in it for twice the average income you’re very much mistaken – it’s not just that people want to live in a McMansion. It’s that they want to live within commuting distance of their work.

but simply by comparing them to their most obvious binary counterpart, white middle-class men, they hardly come off as significantly worse

I call bullshit.

Anyone who thinks women aren’t STILL doing signicantly more unpaid domestic work, check out the difference in number of hours of unpaid work (women do more than double), and the differences between whether men and women expect to have their career goals modified amily, and whether they have had their career goals modified by care of dependents – and they’re doctors, working at the same hospital. You can’t get more middle class than that (I don’t see what race has to do with it, frankly) – click here

And then there’s the fact that women still on average earn 25% less than their male counterparts.

So, if you think that’s hardly significantly worse, perhaps you’d like to donate 25% of your salary to me, and come round and do about 10 hours of housework a week. Then we’ll be even.

Obviously, I think that the comments of Overington and Kelly are absurd. That’s clear from the post.

I would like to join this discussion, but I cannot for the life of me understand why you have posted this. Do you have a position on any of these quotes or the issues generally?

Have now updated it with reference to the debate in comments here!

I agree with Angharad, I really don’t understand why anyone who had young children and didn’t live in Canberra would want to become a politician. It would be terrible to be away from your family for so long. But then, I love to have my family around me – I’ve recently moved within 10 minutes walk of my parents’ place!