Tradwives and homemakers
Sir, – Fintan O’Toole’s column earlier this week provoked much comment among my own extended family (“Ireland was once the tradwife capital of the world”, Opinion, September 2nd). Our matriarch, Monica – like many of her peers, I suspect – was much aggrieved at being obliged to resign her home economics teaching post following her marriage in the early 1960s.
However, looking back on an idyllic childhood, myself and siblings greatly profited from having a trained culinary expert as a full-time homemaker, providing quality cuisine that even as a 10-year-old child, I knew to be superb.
Moreover, as Mary Kenny correctly suggests (Letters, September 3rd), we also greatly benefited from her constant presence as an “accessory educator / facilitator”.
Many of your readership will doubtless well remember the Holland & Madden maths text books for secondary schools, years one to six. Each chapter ended with about 20 questions to be worked through, with answers provided as an addendum at the end.
READ MORE
Monica’s passion for the education of her offspring was such that each evening, she worked her way through the problems to be solved. She did this to both assist and keep tabs on her brood as we struggled with the rigours of the honours maths course.
As the old proverb puts it: “If you educate a man, you educate an individual. If you educate a woman, you educate a nation.” The late Christina Murphy was indeed correct that “it was the mothers’ energetic pursuit of education that drove standards”. – Yours, etc
PAUL HARRINGTON,
Grangebellew,
Drogheda,
Co Louth.
Sir, – Fintan O’Toole reminds us of 20th century Ireland, where until the 1980s most married women worked full-time in the home raising their children and doing the housework. If that wasn’t bad enough, they were all happy – as assessed by reliable surveys! O’Toole accounts for this happiness by explaining that “surrendering to oppression can be a form of contentment”.
I think this explanation is somewhat unfair. I remember the 1960s, 70s and 80s, and I recall many perfectly contented couples who worked their marriages as true partnerships. I don’t know what fraction of total marriages these very contented marriages represented, but I do know that the oppressive family model was far from universal. I also know that many marriages today are very stressful, where the wife must work outside the home in order to bolster family income sufficiently to get a house loan and to pay for childcare.
O’Toole writes to counter “tradwife” ideology, which advocates that women should now return to their traditional roles as full-time housewives and mothers. And not only that, wives should submit to their husbands in all important matters I feel sure that proposal sounds bizarre to most people. The proposal is being canvassed on social media in United States with little success and it has gained almost no support in Europe.
The traditional-wife culture that persisted for so long was, of course, very unfair because it severely limited women’s career choices. But it has been swept away in the tide of reforming history. Some women still prefer to remain full-time in the family home raising their children. They are perfectly entitled to make this choice and should not be subjected to negative judgments.
I tend not to enthuse in about judging historical practices too harshly, even though we would consider many of them to be very unfair today. I prefer to take solace in the fact that, generally, things naturally evolve for the better as time goes on. For example, when I went to university in 1963, only 2.5 per cent of students who completed the Leaving Certificate went on to university. Today, 76 per cent of students who complete second level go on to third level – the highest transfer rate in Europe.
Just as the biological world evolves, so too do the conventions of our social engagements with each other and thankfully these evolutionary changes are mostly for the better. We can of course learn from social history but looking backwards and pointing the finger is generally not helpful. – Yours, etc,
WILLIAM REVILLE,
Emeritus Professor,
University College Cork.
National Disability Strategy
Sir, – We attended the Government’s launch of its National Disability Strategy at the Mansion House to great fanfare (“More public sector and Civil Service jobs earmarked for disabled people”, Social Affairs, September 3rd).
One ambition stated in the strategy is for disabled children and young people “to have full access to inclusive learning and education in which they are empowered to reach their full potential, fulfil their ambitions and live full lives of their own choosing. The importance of an inclusive education system is ... underpinned by Article 24 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”. An entire section of the education strategy commits to helping educators and staff to create learning spaces that are friendly and supportive of all disabled children.
It is therefore worth noting that, at the same time as this strategy was being launched in such elegant surroundings – undoubtedly involving not insignificant expense – the National Council for Special Education was conducting a tendering process for a nationwide schools training programme to create “autism-friendly environments”.
The budget for this national training programme for over 4,000 schools including all primary, post-primary and special schools is a paltry €50,000. This money is supposed to stretch to both online and in-person implementation support.
Divided by 4,000 schools, it means the Minister and Department of Education have allocated €12.50 per school to learn how to become “autism-friendly”. The total is less than HSE’s pay scale for one senior occupational therapist. In a similar vein, the HSE’s in-school therapy support service has been unable to employ the therapists needed for its implementation.
The stark reality of this Government’s commitment to properly resourcing inclusive education is clear.
At the same time as the strategy launch, the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities heard submissions from Irish disabled persons’ organisations. It amounted to a grim account of the Government’s consistent failure to honour the rights of disabled people in all aspects of Irish life, including in education.
The launch of the National Disability Strategy feels like another exercise in pretence, at the same time that our charity struggles to deal with requests for support for children who have no access to any educational setting. Some of these children are unable to attend school due to lack of support for their needs, while others are from families with no access to disability services.
A properly funded nationwide educational programme for schools, focusing on creating inclusive environments for all learners, would go a long way to achieving some of the ambitions of the National Disability Strategy. – Yours, etc,
NESSA HILL,
CEO,
Neurodiversity Ireland,
Dublin 4.
Public-transport rage
Sir. – I read Emer Mc Lysaght’s article of (“Public-transport rage has taken me: open-mouth coughers, backpack users, phones on speaker”, People, September 4th) with great empathy. Part of the article dealt with the now pervasive noise of mobile phones on public transport. Like Emer, I am one of those people who find it unpleasant. To say the least, it spoils the journey.
I frequently travel on the Enterprise train to Belfast. I decided that as a treat, I would go first class and I expected a pleasant journey. Unfortunately, for most of the two-hour journey I had to listen to music via a mobile phone at high volume. When I politely asked the person to turn it down or use earphones I was told to “get lost”. Since then, I no longer travel first class.
I appreciate that Irish Rail are trying to educate travellers, but without a deterrent I’m not sure if it will have any impact.
I wonder how many more travellers suffer in silence. – Yours, etc,
MICHAEL ROBERTS,
Holly Park,
Shankill,
Co Dublin.
Essential school staff
Sir, – As a retired school principal I spent many happy years working very closely with two wonderful school secretaries and a fantastic caretaker. It is shameful that the Department of Education is not out to the fore in a bid to settle this ongoing dispute.
Secretaries and caretakers are hugely important to the safe and efficient running of schools, regardless of their size. Like all staff paid by the Department of Education, secretaries and caretakers deserve pension rights, reasonable bereavement leave, sick leave etc.
The Department of Education needs to step up, discuss the issue in an open and transparent way and solve this disgraceful dispute which no one wants. − Yours, etc,
SONIA GIBBONS,
Athy Road,
Carlow.
Sir, − Diarmaid Ferriter rightly observes that there appears to be huge support and sympathy for striking school secretaries and caretakers (“Teachers should refuse to pass pickets of secretaries and caretakers”, Opinion, September 5th).
His belief that the teacher unions should instruct their members not to cross the picket line seems obvious. However, what must be more troubling for the secretaries and caretakers is the approach to the dispute taken by their union, Fórsa.
Fórsa also represents many special needs assistants (SNAs) who have been told that they should continue to work as normal and cross the picket line, but that any SNA who decides not to cross the picket will receive the help of the union.
As a consequence, you now have the situation whereby SNAs cross the picket line of their fellow union members during working hours but on a voluntary basis join them on the line “in solidarity” at break times.
Perhaps most worrying of all for the strikers is the reality that schools are not closing. If the “backbone” of schools has been removed and nobody is apparently doing the secretarial and caretaking work, how can this be so?
The actions of the unions and the seemingly limited impact of the strike would indicate that despite all the plaudits they have received, nobody is actually helping the strikers in any meaningful way. – Yours, etc,
SEAN KEAVNEY,
Castleknock,
Dublin 15.
Friday voting
Sir, – Every time a voting day is announced, there are always some well-aired thoughts. Firstly, why in school time? Secondly, why not on a Saturday?
The answer is always the same. The Government wants as many people as possible to vote. There are those who venture away for weekends as well as school holidays. On that latter point, it may be the only time during the school year that holidays can be taken, as the Government has rules about taking children out of school in term time. So it’s a no-win situation.
Scheduling voting days for Fridays during term time is a strategic plan that is unlikely to change soon. – Yours, etc,
VICTORIA MADIGAN,
Terenure,
Dublin 6.
It’s all in the name
Sir, – Is there any reason why the term “(the) Republic” is so often used in the printed media, including your own publication, instead of “Ireland” when referring to this country.
As an example, I refer to your front-page article on Thursday (September 4th): “Republic seeks allies to help block Mercosur trade deal”. Clearly, of course, its use can be necessary in contexts where a distinction is being made with Northern Ireland, or where referring specifically to our system of government.
However, like it or not, according to the Constitution, the name of this state in the Irish language is “Éire”, or in the English language “Ireland”. Until that is amended, I suggest that you start using the correct term, or else consider changing your paper’s name to “The Republican Times” – Yours, etc.,
DON O’GRADY,
Lucan,
Co Dublin.
