Part I - My Take on Part I

The article in American Prospect is entitled “Homeward Bound” which unfortunately evokes that quiet Simon and Garfunkel song, which is a bit at odds with the content of the article (and lyrics like “I wish I was, homeward bound” seem to be the opposite of what we’re supposed to feel). The article is divided into four parts, and Part I is The Truth About Elite Women. Apparently Ms. Hirshman was researching a book on marriage after feminism and was inspired by an episode of Sex and the City to interview the brides listed in the New York Times wedding announcements, announcements full of “brilliantly educated and accomplished brides.” Ms. Hirshman was surprised to find that after ten years, of the thirty brides with babies, only 10 were working full-time, 5 were working part-time, and the rest were not working at all. I was surprised by this because unlike me, most of the women I know went back to work after having children. None of them went to Ivy League schools, and none of them had their wedding announcements printed in the New York Times, but each was well-respected in a professional career.

Ms. Hirshman’s explanation for this situation states that “while the public world has changed, albeit imperfectly, to accommodate women among the elite, private lives have hardly budged. The real glass ceiling is at home,” and that “the belief that women are responsible for child-rearing and homemaking was largely untouched by decades of workplace feminism.” I agree. Does that mean I think child-rearing and homemaking is unimportant or that people who do them (like me) are losers? No, I do think these jobs are important and I do think there is honor in doing them, but I also think that although the modern husband changes diapers and cooks dinner, he has never been challenged to change what he thinks about the division of labor once the kiddies arrive.

I think that the average man (not every man) expects that even if his wife is working, when the kiddies are sick or the plumbing is broken, the wife will be the one to stay home. This is not because the average man is a jackass, but because that’s what happened when the average man was little, his mom took care of him and his mom took care of the house. In addition, the average man has probably experienced a feverish whiny toddler pushing him away and moaning for mama. Given those experiences and the fact that the average man wants his kiddies to be happy, it probably seems logical to leave the kiddies with the parent they are asking for. Ideally, the parent who stays home should be the one with the more flexible workplace, but usually it’s the mom. (Let me state here that the phrase “average man” does not include the HP. Whether or not the HP can stay home or come home early is usually dependent upon how well his boss gets along with his own wife. If there is trouble, the colonel keeps him in the office till all hours. If things are happy, the colonel is flexible about when he comes and goes. Also, the HP does not have any sick leave).

I don’t think the root of the controversy over the “Homeward Bound” article came from this section describing the lackadaisical brides from the New York Times. Some people may consider these women the best and the brightest, but how much can you really learn about a person from their wedding announcement? Are wedding announcements normally considered to be entirely truthful and without embellisment? It is unlikely that women who quit work before they had children or who “never want to work again” were ever seriously considering a groundbreaking career. Chances are many of these women are from a privileged level of society where power and money are already held by the family or the husband’s family, so any additional contribution by any of the younger generation is unnecessary. This is a hard obstacle to overcome. A harsh article on feminism is not going to shock them back into the office. You cannot shame a woman into ambition; you can only hope to find ways to aid the women who have it.