![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Just when I thought there had been a cease fire in the mommy wars, the whole damn thing -- courtesy of Steve Gilliard's rant about women profiled in the New York Times who choose to stay home after going to places like Harvard and Yale -- blew wide open in my face. Steve, who of course has many years under his belt as a stay-at-home-mother, wades into the fray, claiming that young women who think that having a Ivy-League degree doesn't necessarily mean one has to automatically foreclose life options enjoyed by women at lesser institutions are living in a fantasy land.
Oh, joy.
This is a subject of more than passing interest to me, since I am one of those women who are the object of Gilliard's scorn, having both B.A. (cum laude) from Wellesley and a J.D. (with distinction) from Stanford. I am, in his eyes, living in a "childish fantasy", parasitically taking up resources that could have been oh so better used by someone else, self-indulgently choosing to be a primary care giver to my children -- hell, too stupid to know that I'm not supposed to be bored senseless. While I did not set out on my educational path intending to be a stay at home mother (SAHM, as it says on my business cards), and while there are a whole host of issues which would affect my potential return to employment, many of his arguments apply to me. To which I say...
Grow up, child. And stop presuming you know about other people's lives. And show some damn respect for other people's choices for a change.
Look, just because you happen to find dealing with children mind-numbingly dull doesn't mean everyone has to. It beats hell out of reading SEC regs or the tax code and buddy, I've done both. And there are people who actually enjoy doing those things and old Stevie wouldn't presume to make snarky comments about them, I suppose. (Most kids are actually rather interesting, if you don't assume going in that they are going to be boring.)
And isolating? Yeah, it can be. So can working in a cubicle, depending upon the office. You can change that.
And it's interesting... people keep saying "nobody can afford to live a middle class lifestyle on just one income anymore." That may just depend upon how you define middle class: I see an awful lot of women doing just that. Do they drive BMWs? No. Do they go to Switzerland on vacation? Generally not. But they do get by without a second job in the family ? Yes -- it can be hard, but it can be done.
As far as the self-indulgent angle... I guess all the stay at home mothers (and fathers)out there who spend at least part of their time volunteering in their schools and in their communities, doing things as diverse as being room mothers to being school board trustees, really don't matter.
As far as the women who got screwed when they stayed home and ended up divorced -- yes, that's a problem. No doubt. Women need to protect themselves. There were also a lot of people who got totally screwed in the dot-com bust. Does that mean that no one should ever go to work for a start-up?
Life happens. It's hard.
And hey, don't you love the sexism of that "your man will resent you if you don't bring home a paycheck" argument? Men, of course, are too stupid to understand larger issues and the subtle economics of non-monetary contributions so they will of course act like petulant children when their wife doesn't "earn her keep."
There are a lot of women for whom not working is well and truly NOT an option for economic reasons. There are other women who are happier or for whom working outside the home just makes more sense. I would not in a million years second-guess those decisions. Each woman -- each family -- makes whatever decision is right for them in the circumstances in which they find themselves.
Unlike what Gilliard says, one size does NOT fit all.
But what infuriates me most is the utter contempt Gilliard has underneath for these women: how dare they presume to want to be educated! Unlike all those French Lit majors who need that degree to go to work at an ad agency, they don't need to be educated, they're going to be mothers!
I've got news for you, buddy.
Anything that makes you a better person, makes you a better mother. Anything that makes you a wiser person, makes you a better mother. Anything that gives you more resources -- emotional, spiritual, or mental -- makes you a better mother. Anything that makes you a better citizen, makes you a better mother. And when you refuse opportunities to women, or make fun of them, because they choose to exercise options that will make them better mothers, you not only shortchange them and their children, you shortchange the rest of us as well, by denying them the opportunity to be the best that they can.
Oh, joy.
This is a subject of more than passing interest to me, since I am one of those women who are the object of Gilliard's scorn, having both B.A. (cum laude) from Wellesley and a J.D. (with distinction) from Stanford. I am, in his eyes, living in a "childish fantasy", parasitically taking up resources that could have been oh so better used by someone else, self-indulgently choosing to be a primary care giver to my children -- hell, too stupid to know that I'm not supposed to be bored senseless. While I did not set out on my educational path intending to be a stay at home mother (SAHM, as it says on my business cards), and while there are a whole host of issues which would affect my potential return to employment, many of his arguments apply to me. To which I say...
Grow up, child. And stop presuming you know about other people's lives. And show some damn respect for other people's choices for a change.
Look, just because you happen to find dealing with children mind-numbingly dull doesn't mean everyone has to. It beats hell out of reading SEC regs or the tax code and buddy, I've done both. And there are people who actually enjoy doing those things and old Stevie wouldn't presume to make snarky comments about them, I suppose. (Most kids are actually rather interesting, if you don't assume going in that they are going to be boring.)
And isolating? Yeah, it can be. So can working in a cubicle, depending upon the office. You can change that.
And it's interesting... people keep saying "nobody can afford to live a middle class lifestyle on just one income anymore." That may just depend upon how you define middle class: I see an awful lot of women doing just that. Do they drive BMWs? No. Do they go to Switzerland on vacation? Generally not. But they do get by without a second job in the family ? Yes -- it can be hard, but it can be done.
As far as the self-indulgent angle... I guess all the stay at home mothers (and fathers)out there who spend at least part of their time volunteering in their schools and in their communities, doing things as diverse as being room mothers to being school board trustees, really don't matter.
As far as the women who got screwed when they stayed home and ended up divorced -- yes, that's a problem. No doubt. Women need to protect themselves. There were also a lot of people who got totally screwed in the dot-com bust. Does that mean that no one should ever go to work for a start-up?
Life happens. It's hard.
And hey, don't you love the sexism of that "your man will resent you if you don't bring home a paycheck" argument? Men, of course, are too stupid to understand larger issues and the subtle economics of non-monetary contributions so they will of course act like petulant children when their wife doesn't "earn her keep."
There are a lot of women for whom not working is well and truly NOT an option for economic reasons. There are other women who are happier or for whom working outside the home just makes more sense. I would not in a million years second-guess those decisions. Each woman -- each family -- makes whatever decision is right for them in the circumstances in which they find themselves.
Unlike what Gilliard says, one size does NOT fit all.
But what infuriates me most is the utter contempt Gilliard has underneath for these women: how dare they presume to want to be educated! Unlike all those French Lit majors who need that degree to go to work at an ad agency, they don't need to be educated, they're going to be mothers!
I've got news for you, buddy.
Anything that makes you a better person, makes you a better mother. Anything that makes you a wiser person, makes you a better mother. Anything that gives you more resources -- emotional, spiritual, or mental -- makes you a better mother. Anything that makes you a better citizen, makes you a better mother. And when you refuse opportunities to women, or make fun of them, because they choose to exercise options that will make them better mothers, you not only shortchange them and their children, you shortchange the rest of us as well, by denying them the opportunity to be the best that they can.