New at Reason

Cathy Young files another report from the front-line trenches of the Mommy Wars.

Comments

Bee | July 16, 2007, 5:18pm | #

I have no children, and I would prefer to stay home instead of working full-time. Actually, I'd prefer to travel the globe, become a respected amateur wine, chocolate and spa evaluator, and always have a puppy.

All while enjoying the cultural support of my peers.

Brad | July 16, 2007, 5:22pm | #

I agree ... I don't really understand how a poll like this can avoid that obvious taint. Wouldn't almost anyone in any stage of their life prefer to work part-time or not at all? My "ideal" situation would certainly not include a full-time job ... that's just a necessary evil for me to have enough money to do the things I want to do.

Warren | July 16, 2007, 5:51pm | #

Didn't I read this last year?

NAL | July 16, 2007, 7:28pm | #

I'm a father of two boys (ages 5 and 3) and I can tell you that dealing with kids is one of the most difficult jobs there is. My heart goes out to all the women who choose to be full-time moms. My God, you've chosen a difficult job!

An additional problem it leaves women open to is that the working husbands can rationalize "I have my job, the kids are hers." Even if they guy is working 12 hour shifts, 7 days per week, it's still easier than the full-time-Mom's job, especially if she also gets saddled with the majority of the housework. For any father out there who disagrees with me, I challenge you to do the full-time-Dad thing for one week.

Serafina | July 16, 2007, 7:38pm | #

The full question was "Considering everything, what would be the ideal situation for you--working full-time, part-time, or not at all outside the home."

Considering that most people struggle to afford the lifestyle they want even when working full time, I think it's telling that so many women would prefer part-time work. I think part of the reason might be that demands in the workplace have increased since the 1990s. With leaner staffs, employees are finding that it's getting harder to get all their work done in 40 hours.

Brad | July 16, 2007, 8:18pm | #

And I still can't figure out why anyone would answer "working full-time" under any circumstances.

"Considering everything," my "ideal situation" would involve as little work as possible.

Isn't this kind of like asking somebody, "Considering everything, how much do you want to pay in taxes? A lot, less than a lot, or none at all?"

I just don't understand how any reasonable trends can be pulled from that kind of question given that it is apparently interpreted so vastly differently by different people (as if people interpreted it the way I read, 100% of the people would respond with "not working".)

Taktix® | July 16, 2007, 8:32pm | #

I would answer "Working Full Time" if the work was, say, playing in a superstar band or something.

Some people do genuinely enjoy work, and I imagine those folks have better things to do than answer some meaningless poll...

Karen | July 16, 2007, 10:22pm | #

Finally!!! I have always thought that anyone who interpreted a question asking for a fantasy as expressing a genuine immediate desire was an idiot. My ideal situation certainly wouldn't include my boring office job, but then it would also include owning houses in Park Cities, New York, and on the British Columbia coast -- that last one would have a 50 foot sailboat as well. And also someone to do the laundry, clean the house, do the lawn work, and make sure there was floor space in my son's closet.

If they really wanted to know something interesting, ask women what they'd give up to stay at home. Specifically, ask 'em about whether they would live in a trailer park if necessary. I'd be serious money the answer would be very much different.

madpad | July 16, 2007, 11:06pm | #

Two points...

First the obvious. Consider this quote from Cathy's piece:

for the subgroups of stay-at-home mothers and working mothers, the margin of error was 11 percentage points.

From a sample of 2,000, an 11% margin of error is so large that it calls into question the entire study. In a word...that's a fucking HUGE margin of error for a sample that large. Anything reliable should be less than half that.

Second, it's one thing to button hole a bunch of women who wish they could spend more time with their kids. It's another thing to ask them the same question 5, 10 or 15 years down the road when the kids are in high school, daddy's in midlife and mommy is wishing she had a real career to find some self worth in.

Here's the deal. EVERYONE wishes they could stay home with the kids. SFW.

Xenophun | July 17, 2007, 7:44am | #

Who is Linda Hirschman to tell women what they should and should not do? I thought the feminist movement was about freeing women from the tyranny of patriarchy. What good is overturning one tyranny if it is replaced by another. The fact is women now have choices. Is it so bad that some of them choose to be mothers and housewives?

sure | July 17, 2007, 10:20am | #

"wishing she had a real career to find some self worth in."

I think what has happened is that women worked for a while and found out it's not all it's cracked up to be. Sure there are a few who brag about the places they travel to or that big proposal they worked on, but for 95% of the world, working is just being someone else's bitch. Finding self worth in being someone else's overworked bitch is pathetic. Wow, I spent 80 hours on that contract/configuring that router/placing those orders/conducting those meetings....I am somebody!!!! Those same chicks hire nannies or have the grandparents over on the weekend to look after the kids cause dealing with the kids drives them bonkers. wusses.

Mike | July 17, 2007, 12:28pm | #

Who is Linda Hirschman to tell women what they should and should not do?

She's not telling women what to do. She's making the case that one choice might be better than another. Some people may not agree, but it's a reasonable argument to make.

Liberty4All | July 17, 2007, 1:20pm | #

This situation will work itself out organically. It is difficult to tell how trends in technology and economics will change how and where people work.The industrial model of work was preceded by an agrarian model of work. Reactionaries on both the left and right are working with an outdated paradigm. There was never a golden age, nor will we ever live in utopia.