It's got EVERYTHING to do with boobs, and a pretty face. Confidence is everything and let's face it, if you're the average looking Jane, the pretty boob-face is more likely to get the job. This is how it used to work back home before I gave up trying to make a living there.
Maybe I'm too idealistic then...but I'd like to believe that people are hired based on capabilities and not how they look. However, good looking people do have intelligence too. Just because someone is attractive doesn't mean they're unintelligent. Some people are just lucky to be attractive and intelligent.
Sure, looks help with initial impressions such as job interviews, but if a person keeps screwing up their job, they won't last very long.
And men shouldn't be allowed into the early childhood roles. As teachers and principals for the senior kids, sure, yeah, fine. They want to get a guy in at our kindergarten to 'learn' and smut but I'm very uncomfortable with it. Men aren't cut out for teaching little ones, not unless they are a single parent with no female company.
You won't know until you give men a chance. It's unfair to say a man working with children is a potential paedophile.
I don't see the difference between a man being a principal or being a carer of small children. A principal is still working with children, so by your reasoning, he would still have the opportunity to molest children...maybe even more opportunity considering how much influence a principal can have.
I know you're worried about children, but I've seen more cases of women molesting, beating and killing children in their care than men. There was a very bad case a few years back with a woman who worked at a nursery and started a porn business using the children, and got away with it for months. Then there are cases of mother killing their children, and cases where female teachers have raped underage boys. So don't tell me all women have this magical 'maternal instinct' when they are capable of doing something as sick as that.
The worst of it is, these women get away with it because they claim mental ilness, post natal depression, a divorce or drinking problem. If it was a man, he'd be locked up. It's not fair to have this double standard. A crime is a crime and should not be judged differently based on the gender of the perpetrator.
They lack that maternal instinct, which is what the little ones need. I'm not saying they can't do it. I'm just saying I personally am not at ease with the idea.
To me, 'maternal instinct' is a myth. If that was real, all women would isntantly love their baby, there would be no cases of infanticide or toddlers being starved and beaten; there would be no women on internet forums or blogs saying they hate their baby, that they feel depressed and overwhelmed and that the baby was a mistake.
The idea of maternal instinct is just as damaging to women as it is to men.
Saying only women have maternal instinct pushes men away from being involved in their child's life. No wonder men don't want to interact with their children when there's this idea that only mothers truly know how to do it. Men need to be given a chance.
What appalls me is when a father goes to a baby group with his child, he's treated like a potential molestor. It's just wrong to treat a man like that, espeically if he wants to be involved with his childs life. I hear women complaining that men do nothing for their babies, then treat them like potential paedophiles when they do.
If it's going to be that attitude towards fathers who want to be involved, then mothers might as well throw the fathers out as soon as the baby is born just in case he turns out to be a molestor to other children or his own. Heck, you might as well just make a baby using a sperm bank if men are so useless and dangerous to babies and toddlers.
Why would you bring a guy around 3 and 4 year olds who are just learning about the world and how to communicate properly? You know, they would be perfect targets for pedophiles because little children are easily manipulated and threatened and gullible. A lot of them probably won't even understand if they're molested.
Why not let a man around a child? There is just as much chance of a female nursery nurse or teacher being a molestor as a male nurse.
Besides, boy children need male role models in nursery and school, especially with so many fathers leaving and abandoning their children....I don't know....you have one lot of people complaining men aren't men anymore because of the feminisation of education and call for more male teachers, while the other half brands all men as potential child molestors if they so much as express an interest in working with children.
You're right, children are manipulated, but women do that to them as well as men. The worst cases I have seen have been perpetrated by females because of the idea of 'maternal instinct'. People who hired them assume all women have this instinct, and as such, would never be molestors. Boy were they wrong....It's dangerous to assume all women know how to care for babies and toddlers. There are some sick women out there who get away with it because they are women and use this assumption that they have maternal instinct to their advantage. Because of that, you're left with devastated parents, feeling betrayed by the people they trusted their children to, and children who are going to be damaged, maybe for life.
So it's best not to assume that women know best, have maternal instinct, and will never molest children. You could be proven tragically wrong.