Apt. 11D

Links

More responses to or riffs off of Hirshman.

ooooh. Hirshman appears in Ampersand's comments section.

And more wonderful posts that make a place for mothers at the feminist table: Shrub and Phantom Scribbler.

UPDATE: There is so much great writing in the blogosphere on this topic. More from Media Girl, Echidne, Ann Bartow.

Invisible Worlds

Me: Hey, Margie.  Did you know that you are a traitor to feminists?

Margie: I'm what?

Me: Yeah.  You have a PhD, but you aren't using it to make money.  Instead you are raising the girls on Long Island, while your husband makes the big bucks in the city.

Margie: Well, I would love to have a job, but there aren't openings in Ancient Near Eastern Inscriptions anywhere in the Northeast and I can't find a part time job.

Me: Bad feminist! Traitor!  Resource squander!  You clearly only went to school to meet up with big money bags husband.

Margie: Uh, you know how I met my husband.  And how can I be a bad feminist? I've donated money to Planned Parenthood for two decades.  Besides, my life isn't over.  I want to work sometime in the future.

Me: Too bad.  Burn in hell.

Ever since that Yale mommie article came out, I've read so many characterizations of parents.  Two dimension slams that have nothing to do with reality.  Common themes -- selfish, materialistic, slackers, conservative.  There has been no discussion of the obstacles that women face, just a lot of self righteous finger wagging.  They have no idea about the world of parents.

But then I step away from my computer and I am surrounded by hard working, struggling people.  Some work outside the home; some don't.  Some went to Harvard and some never finished high school.  And they are just trying to get by.  They have to figure out how to pay the student loans and how to keep Junior from getting left back.  Most are exhausted all the time.  They are interesting and political and funny.  (Last week, I went out with a bunch of local moms for beers; Kathy told me that her six year old wanted to know why his father has a mustache around his penis.  I nearly peed my pants.  ) 

And they have heard nothing about this hoopla.  They have no idea that Maureen Dowd is calling them alpha moms or that Linda Hirshman thinks that they really should be partner in a law firm.  No clue.  They are too busy to read the blogs. 

Twenty Minutes Until House

I just finished watching The Muppet Movie with Jonah, and it was just as minty fresh as it was back in 1979. Steve Martin is so amazingly cool.

Anyhow, I've got twenty minutes to finish off a more polished rebuttal to Hirshman, send it somewhere, and then I have to grab a beer and watch House. I think that there are some chocolate donuts somewhere. It's an odd life, but it's all mine.

Other strong, feminist, ticked off women.

We Hate Mommies

(Again with the mommies? Yes, those fuckers won't shut up about it, so I have to keep writing posts to tell them to go to hell. Not good for the blood pressure.)

In American Prospect Online, Linda Hirshman writes that "half the wealthiest, most-privileged, best-educated females in the country stay home with their babies rather than work in the market economy." Although questionable sources (the Times and Maureen Dowd) have made this point, more reputable researchers have also found this.

50%? Where does she get 50%? She mentions the Myra Hart survey that found only 38% of female Harvard MBAs from the classes of 1981, 1986, and 1991 were working full time. A 2004 survey by the Center for Work-Life Policy of 2,443 women with a graduate degree or very prestigious bachelors degree revealed that 43 percent of those women with children had taken a time out, primarily for family reasons. Of course, this research doesn't tell you anything about women who reenter later in life or earn money in some nontraditional way at home.

Then she does her own research by interviewing 35 women who had their announcements in the Sunday Styles section. Eyes rolling. 35 people tell you nothing. And women who put their names in the Sunday Styles section may be well connected and educated (a sample that she was most interested in), but they are also VERY traditional. I could have been listed in the Sunday Styles; I had ins with the editor. But that would have been too square for me. So, already her data is very skewed and her information suspect.

All right, I have no problem with her first point. A lot of well educated women are staying at home with her kids. I don't know about the 50%, and I don't know if their at-home status is permanent. But I am quite certain that there are a lot of well educated women staying at home. Next point.

She says even if you put aside those fuzzy numbers about employment and just look at the representation of women in elite positions, there is by no means gender equity.

Law schools have been graduating classes around 40-percent female for decades -- decades during which both schools and firms experienced enormous growth. And, although the legal population will not be 40-percent female until 2010, in 2003, the major law firms had only 16-percent female partners, according to the American Bar Association. It’s important to note that elite workplaces like law firms grew in size during the very years that the percentage of female graduates was growing, leading you to expect a higher female employment than the pure graduation rate would indicate. The Harvard Business School has produced classes around 30-percent female. Yet only 10.6 percent of Wall Street’s corporate officers are women, and a mere nine are Fortune 500 CEOs.

What's with those nasty numbers? Sexist and anti-family workplace? Inadequate daycare? No. The Times Brides never planned on working in the first place, says Hirshman, social scientist extraordinaire. Hirshman has managed to isolate the most conservative group of elite women and, boy, does she hate them.

None of the stay-at-home brides I interviewed saw the second shift as unjust; they agree that the household is women’s work. As one lawyer-bride put it in explaining her decision to quit practicing law after four years, “I had a wedding to plan.” Another, an Ivy Leaguer with a master’s degree, described it in management terms: “He’s the CEO and I’m the CFO. He sees to it that the money rolls in and I decide how to spend it.” It’s their work, and they must do it perfectly. “We’re all in here making fresh apple pie,” said one, explaining her reluctance to leave her daughters in order to be interviewed. The family CFO described her activities at home: “I take my [3-year-old] daughter to all the major museums. We go to little movement classes.”

So, women just want to be little domestic honey-bunnies? No barriers other those in their own heads and in the minds of their Neanderthal husbands? They just want to spend their time cleaning and see no benefits for their children by staying at home? Please. These women are not representative of elite women and, even if they are, so what? Why do you care? Here's why Linda cares:

Here’s the feminist moral analysis that choice avoided: The family -- with its repetitious, socially invisible, physical tasks -- is a necessary part of life, but it allows fewer opportunities for full human flourishing than public spheres like the market or the government. This less-flourishing sphere is not the natural or moral responsibility only of women. Therefore, assigning it to women is unjust. Women assigning it to themselves is equally unjust. To paraphrase, as Mark Twain said, “A man who chooses not to read is just as ignorant as a man who cannot read.”

Since when did feminism become the handmaiden for capitalism? The workplace is a place where the little flowers flourish? Hasn't anybody read some Marx? The workplace is a great place for some people who have managed to find work that completely fulfills them. It is extremely elitist to assume that everyone is made happy by their jobs. The barista at Starbucks today wasn't moved to great joy by pouring me a grande regular.

There are many positive reasons for women who don't need the income to pay the rent to have a job. Security is major. It's insurance against the cheating husband. Being in a marriage is a perfect prisoners dilemma. You have to work, because you don't know if your husband is going to bail, which leads to an imperfect situation where both work. (thanks navigator)

And being at home can be very isolating. Community life in America is in decline. Arlie Hochchild found that many people preferred work to home, because their home life was flawed. (Note to Hirshman -- The Second Shift refers not to stay at home moms who do the cleaning, but to working women who must do the home stuff after putting in a full day.)

So, work can be a good thing. No doubt. I would love to work more than I am. But to glorify the workplace into a spiritual mecca is just bizarro.

Hirshman doesn't mince words. She says feminism has gone all soft by not coming down harder on women who choose to stay at home. Homelife is bad, bad, bad. Women must be given rules to extricate themselves from the claws of domestic life.

The New Rules -- Don't get a liberal arts education. Don't be idealistic about your job. (Only morons do not-for-profit work.)  Get a job that makes a lot of money. (The goals of feminism will be complete when all women are corporate robots.)  Marry guys with lesser jobs and voted for Nader -- a bleeding heart type. (Home life is bad for women, but good for men.)  Only have one baby; two kids are much, much more work and then you'll have to move to the suburbs. (If you absolutely must procreate, please only squeeze out one.)

Lastly, Hirshman says that we should care that these very happy women aren't at work, because they are letting down the revolution. The world would be better with more women at the helm. Also, happy stay at home mothers make the working women feel bad.

I'm sorry, but I'm really busy. The kids have a half day today, the roofer needs to be summoned, and the leaf guys need to get their asses over here and suck up our leaves. In between that, I have spell check a book chapter. I don't have time to care about the revolution.

I'm really glad that Hirshman wrote this article. My best friend thinks I'm crazy for ranting on about the feminist attacks on mothers, and, look, here it is for the world to see. Nice.

(I could go on at greater length, but I want your feedback.)

Update: Oh, dear. Lots of people here. Let's sum up things quickly:

1. This article comes at the heels of a lot of mommy bashing stirred up by the Yale mommy article and the Dowd book.

2. A lot of women with kids are dropping out of the workforce.

3. There aren't enough women in top positions of power in the country. All agree that this is a problem.

4. Why are women dropping out?

      a. Problems lay in society and in the workplace. (i.e. long hours, lack of family support, lack of childcare, no materity leave)

      b. Problems lay with women who are wimps, resource drainers, conservative, like being oppressed. (Hirshman)

     c. Everyone really hates the workplace. And women and men who poke fun at the women who drop out are just jealous.

5. Solution.

       a. If women don't want to work and have the financial resources to stop, then you shouldn't care. We should convince more men to drop out as well and joining the happy ranks of satisfied domestic goddesses. We should make it easier for women who care more about power than kids to get to the top of industry. We should make it easier for women who want to combine home and work.

      b. Force women to become corporate drones. They must be taught to lust after power and money. It's all about money, baby. All home life sucks and anyone who stays at home is insane. There is no allowance for different preferences. Make no changes in the workplace.  Demand no changes from men.  (Hirshman)

Tomorrow's Rant

Tomorrow's Rant

Mediocre

Saturday morning, cold and grey. Jonah and I pushed five boxes containing files from my dissertation to the far corner of the attic. The boxes were crowding out the windowseat. Someday I'll have the guts to chuck those boxes out the window down three flights to splat on the driveway, but I'm not there yet.

I vacuumed up the dead flies from the windowseat and brought my easel up from the basement. I opened up my shopping bag of new oil paints from Pearl Paint and arranged them neatly in a row. Titanium White to Crimson.

Jonah very excitedly asked that his drawing table be brought upstairs to the attic, as well, along with his little drawers of crayons and markers. He understands the importance of a good studio.

Cleaning and Clicking

When it comes to the house, I'm motivated by a mixture of snobbery and sloth. I'm really picky about decor, but too lazy (and poor) to do much about it, so our place looks like we just moved in. The same goes for cleaning. I hate cleaning my house, but I like a clean house.

To amuse myself as I'm cleaning, I am taking pictures of the house.

Spreadin' Love

Disability Politics Camera Abscura tells us about National Inclusion Week. Michael Berube was in the Times on Sunday discussing disability politics.

I see Christine C., formerly Ms. Musings, is blogging at PopPolitics.

Humanity Critic will never, never run for president. (Thanks, Toni)

Yes, you may have heard this before, but just in case you forgot, listen to Dean Dad and don't go to grad school. (Thanks, Dave S)

Your "Go Girl" Quote of the Day

Women in advertising aren't moving up the corporate ladder for the same reasons as other fields -- sexism and kids.  To get away from the long hours and golf culture that were holding them back, they started their own companies.

When Ms. Cantor got into the industry in the 1980's, she said, there were few women able to juggle motherhood and their careers successfully. "The women who were role models for me were generally unmarried and childless," she said. "I thought to myself, 'I want to have a family and I want to have a career.' And I was hopeful as I ascended through the business that I would find people and family and employers who were accepting of that."

Some women, frustrated by their experiences in traditional firms, have defected to start their own shops. When Ms. Kaplan Thaler's contract at Wells Rich Greene BDDP in New York expired in 1997, she left to found her own agency.

Now the chief executive and chief creative officer of the Kaplan Thaler Group, Ms. Kaplan Thaler said she was fed up with the long hours needed for advancement at Wells and J. Walter Thompson, where she also had worked for years.

"I started my own shop because I wanted to rewrite my own rules about how business was run," Ms. Kaplan Thaler said. "The policy of 'you need to work till 12 o'clock at night or you're not doing your job' is going by the wayside. We get to work early, we work through lunch, we work collaboratively and we shrink the clock. Women are very well poised to do it because we want to go home and take care of our families."

Bookending Disaster

There are two great conversations about the war in Iraq going on right now.  One revolves around the beginning and the other revolves around the end.

How the hell did we end up in this mess?  Henry correctly sums up the debate.

The issue, as the Economist’s journalists know bloody well, isn’t whether the Bush administration believed at one point that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. It’s whether or not the Bush administration mendaciously manipulated intelligence to make the public case for their beliefs.

My guess is that Bush pushed and pulled the evidence, as Henry said, to make a stronger case.  He didn't intentionally lie, but like Dan Rather, he approached the truth with ideological blinders.  He had no doubt that WMD* were there. Somewhere.  He wanted to get into this war so badly that he rushed things along and spun the meager evidence. 

Are ideological blinders a punishable offense worthy of impeachment?  I don't know.  There is so much blame to go around.  We can't deny that a whole lot of Democrats went along with this.  And Tony Blair.  And that guy from Poland. 

I'm not ready to go down that road yet, because we still have guys in Iraq.  I would rather figure out how and when to get out, and then start nailing the administration to the wall. 

Do we just withdraw tomorrow leaving the country to swallow itself up and ditching our allies within Iraq?  I don't feel right about that.  I'm with Andrew Sullivan on this one.

It's not intellectually easy to continue supporting a war when you've lost faith in the honesty and competence of the president who's leading it, but what choice do we have? There are other good people struggling to make this work: Casey, Rice, Khalilzad, McCain; and the thousands of troops who are risking their lives in this project. They key is to grasp how little we know, how badly we've screwed up, but also not to throw in the towel when, in fact, there is still a chance for leveraging the current situation to our and to Iraqis' advantage. One thing I wish were more insisted upon. It's not just that we have no interest in seeing Iraq degenerate into a brutal civil and possibly regional war. By removing Saddam, we created this vacuum. We own it. We have a moral responsibility to see this through.

Seeing through a disaster that originated in hubris.  It really sucks.

* I always thought that WMD would make a great name for an 80s-style heavy metal band.