Does Jackie Jones Have Tourettes? Part 1


“Tourette syndrome (TS) is a neurological disorder characterized by repetitive, stereotyped, involuntary movements and vocalizations called tics. The disorder is named for Dr. Georges Gilles de la Tourette, the pioneering French neurologist who in 1885 first described the condition in an 86-year-old French noblewoman.” [1]


It goes without saying, or it should, that whenever one of the Irish Times female “columnists” writes anything about so called “women’s issues” you are in for a screed of unadulterated rubbish, a toxic, biased, prejudiced and misrepresentative picture of……………..well…everything, but especially about men.

Not only that, but it’s usually interspersed with outright lies, deliberate fraud, and selectively dodgy “facts” and in Jones’ case an inability to articulate one thought at a time or write a sentence that makes any sense. It’s the “I’ll just throw out a bunch of random and disconnected whines then…..”

And no-one is more adept at this that Jacky Jones – in fact Jones is distinguished among her fellow female columnists because not only is she an idiot, she is obviously delusional and possibly suffering from some form of Tourettes. But it is the manner in which she literally vomits out random “issues” and perceived calumnies perpetrated against wimmin that makes me ask the question – Does Jackie Jones have Tourettes?

Second Opinion: Inequality, abuse and the cost of childcare preserve the marriage bar – Jacky Jones – link here.

The title of her piece says it all.

She uses three undifferentiated “issues” “Inequality” “Abuse” and “The Cost of Childcare” to protest against something that doesn’t exist – in Ireland – in the present day. It did – up till 1973, 41 years ago, and was a product of the times, but, let me repeat – that was 41 years ago. The “Marriage Bar” as it was known was introduced in 1932, and applied to married women employed by the State.

It was abandoned in 1973, so was in force for 41 years – years which included the period 1939 – 1945 – WWII. Years which also included the depression, recession, massive unemployment and massive emigration of the 1950’s and early 1960’s.

That’s the short version – the long version requires a look at Irish history – and when I say Irish history I mean our actual history – as a culture, not the pseudo history cited by feminists and usually wrapped up in some vague reference to “traditional gender roles” alluding to some equally vague period of history in some undefined place where “women were traditionally oppressed” but we’ll get to that in a moment.

With regard to Jones’ article – pppfft – it garnered four comments, two each from two male posters, succinct and spot on, in rightly dismissing the entire article as a piece of rubbish. I’ll take her article apart separately, but first I want to put a bit of historical fact on the table, and put some things into context so to speak.

Yes I know, I know, feminists are allergic to facts, they break out in rashes and have an uncontrollable urge to scream like banshees when facts rear their ugly heads – but – bummer.

Like all “women’s rights” windbags (like Jackie Jones) and/or Irish feminists they use things like the “Marriage Bar” as some kind of all encompassing justification upon which to shriek about “inequality” and other really really important “wimmins stuff” – Jones naturally enough fails to put that (the marriage bar) or anything else into historical or cultural context – particularly in relation to Ireland – which is rather unique among the nations of Europe for so many reasons.

But from her rather limited perspective, it’s a handy little device upon which to manufacture some suitably artificial outrage and beat the feminist drum with, or the “wimmins’s rights” drum or just have a whine about……………

“I’m unhappy about something, I’m a woman, therefore ALL women are unhappy about… whatever it is…..and its men’s fault. I know fuck all about anything, but as long as I throw in the words, abuse, inequality, violence, blah blah blah, then I’m right, because I’m a woman, and all men are bastards”

I think that about sums up the basic premise upon which all feminists and “women’s rights” windbags ground their “arguments” on.

Anyhoo – I have no qualms about stating that – yep – the Marriage Bar existed, on its face it was discriminatory towards married women – but – it had sod all to do with patriarchy or some patriarchal conspiracy against women – and more to do with the actual economic. social and cultural realities of the times.

Let’s start with the history – and in relation to Ireland where it all started to go wrong.

“The 1922 Free State Constitution granted women over the age of twenty one the parliamentary franchise and so gave Irish women the same rights of political citizenship as men, the right to vote. All citizens were guaranteed equal religious and civil liberty, equal rights and equal opportunities, regardless of their gender.[11] Under the terms of the new Constitution the future for women in the Irish state looked bright.

The parliamentary franchise had been extended to women on equal terms with men, six years before women in Britain could claim such a victory.[12] The Constitution also guaranteed the equal rights of men and women “without distinction of sex” which, it was hoped, would prevent further discrimination against women. It is not surprising, therefore, that feminist activists were optimistic about the future of Irishwomen. Esther Roper, in a letter to Hanna Sheehy Skeffington, expressed her hopes for women in the Irish Free State.

My noteup until that point Ireland was not an independant sovereign nation and had not been for several hundred years (a discussion for another time)

She wrote that “never had there been such a firm foundation of justice and freedom guaranteed by any country of its women citizens”.[13]Within a few short years, however, the promise of equal citizenship for women in the Irish Free State had been dashed. The first government of the Irish Free State, Cumann na nGaedheal, led by William Cosgrave, introduced a number of measures during the 1920s which were to have serious repercussions on the right of women to equal citizenship. These policy decisions reflected the growing influence of Catholic teaching on Irish social legislation. As early as 1925, the influence of the Church on Irish legislators was becoming clear.” [2]

What is worth pointing out here are two things – the largest numbers of advocates and supporters of distinctly Catholic inspired social policies were and still are women.

Secondly, at that time, and even right up until the present day Ireland has never been an industrialised country. This is important to bear in mind when discussing “employment” in Ireland and in particular female employment. The industrial revolution passed us by more or less in the sense that we had, and have no major heavy industry, this had and has had a major influence on the structure of Irish society.

“Ireland has changed from being a predominantly rural country to a more urbanised one during the course of the last 50 years. The 1946 population could be characterised as mainly rural with over 60% of persons living either in the countryside or in smaller towns and villages with a population of less than 1,500 persons.

In contrast, over 58% of the population lived in urban areas in 1996, as revealed by the most recent census. In the 50-year period 1946 to 1996, Leinster’s population has grown from 1.3 million to over 1.9 million. The increase in population in the Munster area was far less pronounced (from 900,000 to just over 1 million).” [3]

But, up till 1996, 42% of the population lived in rural areas – compared to the rest of the western urbanised world that’s rather unique.

It has been said that what we excel at producing and exporting is our own people.

Let’s put that into context – Jones attempts to imply that married women or women in general are or were kept out of the workforce, though, with how she has conflated all sorts of disparate “issues” and bounced around like a jack rabbit on speed from one “issue” to another it’s like trying to nail jelly to a wall – but from her title she has used the “marriage bar” as some kind of symbol to infer that………married women are especially discriminated today just as they always have been? Or something like that.

“Society should be structured in such a way that women can easily combine children and a career. The egg-freezing stunt shows that their right to have children and a full-time job is just not taken seriously.” [4]

Right. Is there some part of Ireland has been a predominately rural country with little industrialisation for most of its history, that people like Jones don’t get? The vast majority of people lived on small family farms, and any jobs available that were not related to farming or to the small mining industries were in the Civil Service or in State paid occupations, like teaching or nursing?

The other thing worth noting is our falling population – it reached its lowest point in 1961 – we’ll get to that later.

While not the smallest country in the world or the least densely populated there are less people in the entire country than they are in some cities – so where the ever loving fuck are all these high-powered “career women” supposed to work? Doing what? Teaching pilates to sheep?

People didn’t have “careers” they had jobs – they worked – if they could – to earn money to live on – to feed their families.

Until the 1990’s we had neither the funds or the inclination to “make up jobs”, or “create jobs” so that women could have “careers” – people were employed when there was actually something for them to do, when there was an actual need to employ someone to do…………………….whatever.

What is worth noting here is that the biggest employer of women in this State – is the State.

Ok – let’s have a look at more recent data in relation to male/female employment in Ireland, shall we?

“Occupations: There were 851,300 women and 970,000 men employed in Ireland in 2011. Nearly a quarter of women (23.7%) in employment were in professional occupations and just over a fifth (20.9%) in administrative and secretarial occupations. Nearly a quarter of men (24.7%) in employment in 2011 were in skilled trades occupations while 15% were employed in professional occupations (Table 2.7).

Economic sectors: The Education and Health sectors employed the highest proportions of women in 2010 with women accounting for more than 4 out of 5 people at work in the Health sector and nearly three quarters of those in Education.

The sectors with the highest proportions of men in 2010 were Construction, Agriculture and Transport. In primary education, 85% of teachers are women. And in second-level education, 63% of teachers are women. Despite this, women are not well represented at senior level positions: only 36% of medical and dental consultants are women, 53% of primary school managers, and 41% of second-level school managers (Tables 2.8, 4.6, 4.8 and 5.14).” – [5]

Apart from the reference to women not being well represented at senior level positions can you see what I see? The vast majority of women are employed in cushy pensionable State jobs – and the vast majority of men are employed in exactly the kinds of occupations that are vulnerable in times of economic recession.

As for the “only 36% of medical and dental consultants are women” nobody says it better than angryharry [6] – except to add that becoming a consultant requires 100% dedication and commitment and this extract– from an article in the Irish Medical Journal press release, whining about discrimination against female doctors says it all.

“They propose a possible solution “The majority of interviewees saw that more job sharing and part time work as the mechanism to retain women and some noted that flexible work practices would benefit both genders in medicine.” All of the childless and single women interviewed were satisfied with their work life balance.

The majority of mothers (17/21) were dissatisfied and felt expectations of them were unrealistic and colleagues assumed they should just make the necessary commitments. Sacrifices were made by all mothers to deliver at work and their children were considered to have suffered. Older mothers expressed bitter regrets and three had dissuaded their daughters from pursuing a career in hospital medicine.” [7]

Ah well – part-time consultants? That’s what we need to inspire patient confidence – someone in whose hands we are being asked to put our health and in some cases lives into, showing up – part-time. Being totally focused and committed on the job apparently is characterised as “expectations of them were unrealistic and colleagues assumed they should just make the necessary commitments”

As for the other percentages – need I point out that higher level managerial positions require increased responsibilities and accountability – and women especially are not noted for either being willing to assume extra responsibilities or more particularly, being accountable – for anything they do. The percentages are just fine – in fact in one instance they are 53% female primary school managers – ergo more women than men – but no-one is screaming about men being discriminated against – are they?

I wasn’t even going to bother with the “gender pay gap” rubbish except for this:

Employment: The employment rate for men in Ireland stood at about 75% over recent years, but in 2009 it plummeted to 67.3%, decreased sharply in 2010 to 64.5% and dropped again to 63.3% in 2011.

The EU target rate for women in employment is 60% by 2010, a target that was met by Ireland in 2007 and 2008, but not in 2009, 2010 or 2011, when the rate had fallen to 56%. In 2011 46.7% of those in employment were women.

Men worked an average of 39.4 hours a week in 2011 compared with 30.6 for women and married men worked longer hours than married women, with nearly half (44.5%) of married men working for 40 hours or more a week compared with only 14.7% of married women (Tables 2.1, 2.7, 2.9 and 2.10).” [8]

Sooooooooooo, men work on average 8.8 hours more per week than women.

44.4% of married men work 40 or more hours per week compared to

14.7% of married women.

And yet according to Jones’ one of the burning issues apparently is this.

“Women still do five hours of unpaid work every day compared with men’s two hours.” [9]

Maybe because they’re at bloody work, if they’re lucky enough to have a job – and if they’re really lucky, a job paid for by the State?

“The long-term unemployment rate (unemployed for one year or more) for Irish men was stable between 2001 and 2008, at about 2% or just below, but increased in 2009 to 3.6%, rose sharply in 2010 to 8.1% and increased again to 10.4% in 2011.

The long-term unemployment rate for Irish women was less than 1% between 2001 and 2008 before rising over the last three years to stand at 4.5% in 2011.” [10]

I don’t know, is it just me or do those figures look pretty shit for Irish men? What with more than twice as many men consistently unemployed as women.

Having said that, let’s just take a moment to reflect on what the core message of feminism is – that historically for millennia; “all women have been oppressed by all men”. There’s a lot of hoo hah about “traditional gender roles” spouted by present day Irish feminists without actually pointing out the historical basis for these presumably oppressive “traditions” or where they came from.

I read it all the time on feminist articles/blogs etc and it’s all grounded in a particular cultural paradigm – chivalry – dashing white knights and fair maidens – where men were lords and masters of all they surveyed and women were……………….supposed to be grateful. Lots of other tosh about women being chattels and to all intents and purposes enslaved by nasty patriarchal men.

I cannot recommend highly enough Gynocentrism and its Cultural Origins for a thorough and comprehensive analysis of not just the historical reality of women’s lives but for how feminism is merely an offshoot of cultural gynocentrism.

All very well and good you might say – but what has that got to do Ireland and in particular the legitimacy of Irish feminism – bearing in mind that Irish feminists are singing  the same “all women are and were oppressed by all men for millennia” tune?.


Irish feminists are grounding their claims in an alleged history of oppression that didn’t exist – in Ireland – in fact has never existed anywhere – but in particular not in Ireland.

But they’re like those wind up toys – ever since the first hairy arm pitted lesbian man-hating nutjob with a face like a bulldog chewing a wasp, started screaming about oppression, one hint that women might be inconvenienced and they’re off – “oppression, oppression, discrimination, abuse, violence, wah wah wah wah” they made up this “history” – literally invented history and started screeching – only one tiny flaw in all of it though – it’s all bullshit.

You see our history, our culture, is starkly different from the European history that informed and was transplanted via colonialism to the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand and any other place that can trace its history back to the one common source – England.

All that lords and ladies, chivalry, knights in shining armour stuff? All that trapped in the kitchen in the 1950’s crap. Nope – didn’t happen in Ireland – our culture was unique, distinct, and has no comparison to any other civilisation or culture in the western world. We lived under a system of laws called the Brehon law – which was egalitarian and based on the concept of equality of men and women – traced back to around the Iron Age and managed to stay as the law of the land till around the 17th century.

“The laws are significant because they shed light on the complex sophisticated society of early Ireland that the laws reflect,” she says.

“The laws reveal a culture in which modern concepts such as equity, social mobility, negligence, unbiased witnesses and fair and open process of law and women’s rights were developed.”

 Brehon Law was generally operational in Gaelic areas until the completion of the English conquest of Ireland in the early 17th century. They were first set down on parchment in the seventh century and were named after wanderings lawyers the Brehons.
By the time of Elizabeth I, the Brehon Laws were considered to be old, lewd, and unreasonable. They were banned and English common law was introduced. [11]

So, there you have it – whatever historical oppression that feminists are talking about in some vague ill-defined time and place – that time and place wasn’t Ireland.

Our history from the 17th century to the early 20th century is well known – no need to go into it here. We emerged from that in 1922 as The Irish Free State – and enacted our first Constitution 1922 [12] – the one referred to in the first extract.

It was replaced 15 years later by our current Constitution 1937 [13] Bunreacht na hEireann 1937 – and we became The Republic of Ireland in 1948.

So that’s grand – except – our society had changed – apart the ongoing misery and deprivation, we were now Holy Catholic Ireland – and again – that history is well known. Between the 17th Century and the early 20th century the Catholic Church had tightened its hold on Irish Society.

The reality of people’s lives was harsh.

“During World War II (or The Emergency as the war was called in Ireland), ordinary life was severely affected. There was widespread rationing, covering butter, margarine, bread, tea, flour, clothes, coal, firewood, gas and matches.
There was a shortage of fuel for cooking and heating. As the war wore on, private motoring ceased to exist and horse-drawn vehicles were brought back into service. The hardship continued for some years after the war. In 1949, life began to return to normal and most rationing ceased. But normal life in 1949 was very different from what it is today.

The risk of death from tuberculosis and other infectious diseases was high. Very few people had telephones or cars. The radio was widespread, though the television had yet to be seen. Society was, by current standards, very conservative.

Censorship was severe—George Orwell’s 1984 was banned in 1949. There was little cohabitation, and births outside marriage were rare. Women, when they married, usually ceased working outside the home. We were a still a mainly rural society: only two-fifths of the population lived in towns of over 1,500.” [14]

From the extracts above you can see that between 1926 and 1946 we are talking about a society that was mostly rural, one where marriage was not always on the cards, and where women who worked in the tiny State bureaucracy were expected to stand aside in favour of either single women, or married men.

Irish society was centred around family, and part of the reason for this marriage bar was economic – to protect male employment and ensure a family income. The notion that a married woman would continue to work if she was married to a man who was working, and be in receipt of two wages was considered selfish, in a society were jobs were hard to come by, life was harsh, and generally shit. State jobs were good jobs, pensionable jobs, highly sought after.

“Under the Fianna Fail administration, the right of women to work outside the home was once again under threat. A public service marriage bar was introduced in 1932 which prevented women teachers, and later female civil servants, working after marriage. Mary Kettle, chairman of the Joint Committee of Women’s Societies and Social Workers, was outspoken in her opposition to the marriage bar. She claimed that women in the civil service “from their entry until they reach the ages of 45 or 50 are looked on as if they are loitering with intent to commit a felony – the felony in this case being marriage”.[57]

Despite the objections raised by organisations such as the Joint Committee of Women’s Societies and Social Workers, it was not until 1972 that the public service marriage bar was finally removed. The 1936 Conditions of Employment Act was the most serious attack on the right of women citizens to work outside the home. Section 16 of the Act gave the Minister for Industry and Commerce the power to control and restrict the number of women working in any given industry. In an effort to alleviate male unemployment, the government was willing to restrict the employment opportunities of women. The Irish Women’s Workers Union[58] campaigned against the new legislation but failed to have the offending clause removed.[59]

Opinions regarding the employment of women were mixed within the Trade Union Movement. Women working in industry faced long hours and low rates of pay. As a result, the employment of women was thought to jeopardize not only men’s jobs but the family wage traditionally earned by men. Even Louie Bennett, President of the Irish Women Workers’ Union, had her doubts about the recruitment of women into the workforce. She suggested in 1932 that the employment of women in industry had “not raised their status as workers nor their wage standards … it is a menace to family life in so far as it has blocked the employment of men”.[60]” – [15]

What this does not make clear is that the marriage bar applied to State jobs, Civil Service jobs – not private sector jobs.

Let’s take a pause here and consider that concept – family wage – Ireland is a distinctly family orientated culture – both for men and women – people, when they did get married – got married with a view to starting families – for most of our history since independence the economy has been shaky to say the least – but – people still wanted to get married and start families.

Rightly or wrongly the marriage bar was an attempt to ensure that there was at least a fair distribution of what were relatively scarce resources – such as jobs – jobs that could provide a decent income for as many people as possible. The kinds of jobs available were limited – farming, teaching, nursing, a bit of tourism, a bit of mining, some light industry. Up until the late 1980’s early 1990’s “careers” were some ridiculous concept that had no basis in reality for the vast majority of people. You got a job, you worked to put bread on the table. End of.


“Fifty years ago, statisticians did not have computers at their disposal. Graphs* such as these, which appeared in The Trend of Employment and Unemployment in 1951, were drawn by hand. They portrayed the likely future experience of 1,000 males and females aged 14 in 1946, up to the age of 50, using the latest data then available on emigration, marriage, mortality and the labour force. In a sense, this was a precursor to the CSO’s subsequent population and labour force projections.

There were earlier forecasts. In 1935, R C Geary (who was to become the first Director of the CSO in 1949) predicted, in a paper entitled The Future Population of Saorstát Éireann and Some Observations on Population Statistics (in the Journal of the Statistical and Social Inquiry Society of Ireland, Vol. XV, 1934-1935) that the population of Ireland was “unlikely to exceed 3,700,000 during the next 80 years”.

His prediction for the total figure held true for the following 63 years, and only in 1998 did the population increase to over 3.7 million. The graphs in the 1951 Trend illustrated how things would turn out over the next 36 years if current patterns continued. So, what story did these graphs tell? How well did the forecasts turn out?

The graphs reflected some harsh realities of the times. Mortality was higher (and life expectancy shorter) in the 1950s.

Only 90% of the imaginary cohort were expected to live beyond the age of 50, whereas today about 95% of boys and 97% of girls aged 14 can expect to reach at least their 50th birthday. Life expectancy for children born in 1996, at around 73 years for boys and almost 79 years for girls, was a considerable improvement on the 1950s. Indeed, with the continuing advances in medical science, today’s young people can look forward on average to even greater longevity.


As many as 30% of males and 40% of females were expected to emigrate, most before the age of 30. The men and women who remained would have very different lifetime experience of the labour force. The majority of men were expected to be gainfully occupied. However, a much lower percentage of women would remain in the labour force after their early 30s. The career options available to women were fewer and, in general, women left their jobs when they married. The label “not gainfully occupied”, which applied to those women who married and became homemakers, looks quaint today!” [16]


What we are talking about here is a period of some 92 years, from 1922 to the present day – the first 50 years of our Independence were dire – poverty, recession, high unemployment, massive immigration, stagnant economy, high mortality rates, a totally repressed, insular and depressing place – it was shit – and it was shit for everybody – men women and children.


“To gain a fuller appreciation of recent population trends, it is necessary to view them over a longer period. As the graph shows, the population of the area comprising the Republic of Ireland was over 6.5 million in 1841. The deaths caused by the famine of 1846/47 as well as the large-scale emigration that followed in its wake and which continued through the second half of the 19th century resulted in a halving of the population by 1901.


Further declines, albeit more modest compared with earlier periods, followed between 1901 and 1926. The population then stabilised at around 2.9 million for the next quarter of a century, before falling to a historical low point of 2.8 million in 1961. Apart from the slight decline experienced between 1986 and 1991, the direction of population change has since been firmly upward. The change in population between two periods is due to changes in the number of births and deaths as well as the difference between inward and outward migration.

The table shows each of these components of population change on an annual average basis for each of the intercensal periods since 1946. In the earlier part of the period, net outward migration exceeded the natural increase in the population (births less deaths), resulting in the population declining to its 1961 low point. The main factor causing this fall was the high emigration that occurred during the 1950s. [16]


Again – let me put that into context – in the year 1841 the population of Ireland was 6.5 million – 120 years later it reached its lowest point in 1961 of 2.8 million – and it’s not like we weren’t having babies – we were – for export – millions of people emigrated. Left. Vamoosed. Skedaddled.

“Births began to increase in the 1970s to reach a peak of 74,000 in 1980. During the same period migration turned from outward to inward with the result that the population grew by 465,000 in the ten-year period from 1971 to 1981. Net outward migration strengthened during the eighties and this resulted in a slight decline in overall population levels between 1986 and 1991. However, since then the fall in outward migration has given rise once more to population growth.” [17]

What’s the point of all this? Well, the population of Ireland has only risen very slowly since the high point of 1841 – when it was 6.5 million – 170 years have passed since then – and the population has still not reached that high point of 6.5 million. In 1950 the number of births were 63,565, 56 years later in 2006 it was 65,425. [18] The increase of the last 10 years can be attributed to a combination of inward migration and low immigration – but those trends are being reversed – emigration is once more a feature of Irish life and many of those who immigrated into Ireland are leaving or have left.

We are once more economically up shit creek without a paddle, we have a housing crisis, we have a health service in shambles, we have people living in poverty on the streets, we have an epidemic of male suicide, we have children on years long waiting lists for surgery and treatment, we have every bloody social ill you can name – and we have people like Jackie Jones whining like this.

“Society should be structured in such a way that women can easily combine children and a career. The egg-freezing stunt shows that their right to have children and a full-time job is just not taken seriously.” [19]

Women’s “……right to have children and a full-time job is just not taken seriously” yep – you read that right – not just a job – a full-time job – and not even a full-time job – a career – because you see, even though there was grumbling about the marriage bar at the time – people were much less selfish and self-absorbed then – people didn’t demand “careers” useless made up pointless occupations to make them feel important or massage their over-developed egos, most people were grateful to have a bloody job – to be able to earn enough money to feed their families – or to be able to stay in their country and not have leave.
She also has a whine about;

“Full-time childcare for two children costs about the same as a medium-sized mortgage, or about €1,200 every month. Women in Ireland will never be equal until we have affordable childcare funded by the taxpayer.” [20]


By taxpayers I presume she doesn’t mean the thousands of people who leave and have left this country since the foundation of this State? Just the poor sods who are left.

€1,200 every month – paid for by Irish taxpayers – that’s €14,400 per year – do you know what the rate of payment is for a single man on Jobseekers Allowance? [21]

Its €188.00 per week, that’s €9,776.00 per year, or to make the comparison €814.66 per month – that’s to live on – to buy food, clothes, pay for heat – everything – out of that, even if you are granted Rent Supplement you still have to pay €30.00 per week for rent – that takes approx €130.00 out of your monthly payment of €814.66, leaving you with a massive €684.66 per month to live on.

From approx Oct to the end of March you get an extra €20.00 per week payment called Fuel allowance – works out at about an extra €500.00 per year – bringing your yearly total up to €10,276.00 or €856.33 per month.

So, according to Jackie Jones – women are entitled – ENTITLED – to have up to €1,200.00 in childcare costs paid by the taxpayers of this State so they can have the “careers” that they are ENTITLED to.

There would of course be those with hearts of gold who might suggest condescendingly that men should just get off their arses and get a job. Ever heard a phrase called “the working poor”?

“Poverty: The proportion of men at risk of poverty in 2010, after pensions and social transfers, was 15%, just above the rate of 14% for women. At risk of poverty rates were considerably lower for those in employment, at 10% for men and 5% for women (Table 3.6).” [22]

You might find yourself wondering why is the risk of poverty twice as high for men in employment than for women? It’s odd isn’t it?

Ah, but you see, here’s something that Jackie and her fellow harpies won’t mention;

298,000 men in employment are separated/divorce in comparison to 473,000 women separated/divorced and you can bet your bottom dollar that a large number of those separated/divorced women are not only claiming OPFP (One Parent Family Payment – which they can do even if they have jobs, and are also demanding and receiving maintenance/child support from a large number of those 298,000 separated/divorced men.


Makes sense now, doesn’t it? Why a man with a job would be at twice much risk of poverty as a woman with a job – I would posit that the woman with a job at risk of poverty has no poor bastard of a man to leech off – but – having said that – I can also guarantee that the 5% of women at risk of poverty will evince all sorts of hand wringing and outrage – while the 10% of men will be…………………….ignored.

Over the lifetime of this State – poverty, economic instability, unemployment, and vulnerability to unemployment have almost all been borne by Irish men – the burden of providing for and being responsible for women and children has also rested on Irish men – this was a responsibility that men themselves accepted for themselves and women expected them to shoulder – not hoped that they would but EXPECTED them to.

While this little trip down memory lane has been relatively brief, what it has shown is that albeit there was some grumbling about the marriage bar – there was a reluctance to “push it” because of the dire economic circumstances that prevailed, the cultural and societal norms that existed at that time – a society of families – a predominately rural culture – with the only guaranteed jobs being State jobs – everyone else was on their own.

Fast forward 80 some years – and the gloves are off – once again we are up shit creek without a paddle – and Jackie Jones believes that women are ENTITLED to a payment of €1,200 per month – a sum that is €344.00 MORE than a single unemployed person – the vast majority of whom are men – is granted to live on – paid by Irish taxpayers – so that women can pursue the “careers” they “have a right to”

You know – I can actually see the point of that marriage bar – and am quite impressed that some of the women’s groups at the time could see and acknowledge the big picture – the economic and cultural realities – and yeah – the attitude to women was patronising and condescending and would probably get on my nerves as well – but – as the Report says in its title.


That was then, this is now.



[1] Tourette Syndrome Fact Sheet
[2] Women, Citizenship and Catholicism in the Irish Free State, 1922-1948; CAITRIONA BEAUMONT; University of Glasgow, United Kingdom pp – 535
[3] That was then, This is now; Change in Ireland, 1949-1999 – Changing Population Structure; Aidan Punch, Catherine Finneran pp 14 – 15
[4] Second Opinion: Inequality, abuse and the cost of childcare preserve the marriage bar – Jacky Jones –
[5] From: Women and Men in Ireland – 2011 – pp 11
[6] angryharry
[7] Irish Medical Journal Press Release
[8] From: Women and Men in Ireland – 2011 – pp 10
[9] Second Opinion: Inequality, abuse and the cost of childcare preserve the marriage bar – Jacky Jones –
[10] Women and Men in Ireland – 2011 – pp 24
[12] Constitution of the Irish Free State 1922
[13] Constitution of the Republic of Ireland
[14] That was then, This is now; Change in Ireland, 1949-1999; Introduction – pp – 5
[15] Women, Citizenship and Catholicism in the Irish Free State, 1922-1948; CAITRIONA BEAUMONT; University of Glasgow, United Kingdom pp – 573
[16] That was then, This is now; Change in Ireland, 1949-1999;
Changing Population Structure; Aidan Punch, Catherine Finneran pp – 13

[17] ibid
[20] ibid
[21] JSA – Rates of Payment
[22] Women and Men in Ireland – 2011 – pp 11