Unleashing the Wrath of Stay-at-Home Moms

As I stated in an earlier post, the Washington Post ran an editorial on June 18 entitled “Unleashing the Wrath of Stay-at-Home Moms”. In this article Linda Hershman defends her earlier article “Homeward Bound” in The American Prospect. I gave my reactions to “Homeward Bound” in Tuesday’s post Upward or Homeward?.

After reading the original article, this follow up opinion piece leaves little of interest to be dissected, but I have additional thoughts to add to this.

Ms. Hirshman starts the article by stating:

… I said that the tasks of housekeeping and child rearing were not worthy of the full time and talents of intelligent and educated human beings. They do not require a great intellect, they are not honored and they do not involve risks and the rewards that risk brings.

I argued yesterday that not being invlolved in a paid career does not mean that one dedicates her (we are mostly discussing women here) full time and talents to housekeeping and child rearing. The fact that I have time to read and think about what I’ve read illustrates that I do have interests that require me to use my “talents of intellect”. This assumption that “staying home” does not allow us to continue to be thoughful people can arguably be one reason why it is difficult for women to re-enter a career after having “opted-out” at an earlier point in her life.

Specifically, I did not know that you can say almost anything about how great it is for a woman to give up her job; standing up for staying at work is the big taboo.

I’ll admit that for many women, the benefits of working are greater. But the statement “That working women have the better life,” is simply not true. You see, “wokring women have the better life” is not equivalent to “standing up for staying at work.” One is combative, the other is supportive.

Hirshman goes on to discuss what the mommy bloggers said about her American Prospect article. Did she quote one single well-thought out blog post? No, she only quoted the snippets that were the knee-jerk reactions. I then have to wonder if there is any point to her rebuttal except to advertise her new book.

These so-called liberals and feminists, who were once in the forefront of making social change, declared that people could no longer suggest that women should change their lives.

Okay, then let’s hear more about why you disagree with them? If you don’t give me any reasons, then how can I consider what you have to say?

I guess working women are too busy at work to blog about their lives… They’re doing what beleaguered, overworked people do. They’re publishing a manifesto. Using the samizdat of the modern world — e-mail.

Why is it that working women e-mailing the article to one other is better than bloggers discussing and debating the finer points of the article? Why should I join the “elite workforce” if it means that I will be beleaguered and overworked? I’d rather be among those who are working to understand the issues of our lives and delve deeper into the forces behind them. Moreover, she says that women at home cannot flourish intellectually, but then goes on to make fun of the mommy bloggers who are doing just that!

From reading more on various place on the internet, it appears that Ms. Hirshman claims to be supporting working women, but she does it in a way that reduces the stay-at-home mother to “someone who has wasted their life”. She argues that no, we can’t all agree to get along to fight for better options for women since we all want different things. She compares asking that these two “competing” forces to get along is akin to asking liberals and conservatives to get along.

I think what she is missing is that mothers and even fathers, in general, want some form of balanced lives. Many of us don’t want to dedicate ourselves to our careers, but we need creative intellectual outlets. Unlike “left versus right”, many of us want the ability to move back and forth from each “side” at various times in our lives. I see work, then staying at home (or working part-time) when the kids are young, then going back to full time career work as a very common sequence for parents. There may be times when a “worker” has to cut back at work due to family needs as well. It is not as simple as “sides”. I am sure there are just as many working moms who wish for more choices as there are stay-at-home moms who wish for more choices. And I suspect that dads would also appreciate more flexibility.

I have read many intersting blog articles regarding Linda Hirshman’s opinion piece. These different posts are more eloquent and insightful than anything I could write, so I’m not going to reiterate the points made in them. I encourage you to read at least the first one in the list.