Here We Go Again
I've written far too many posts about the "mommy wars" (or, more accurately, the "stupid mommy wars"), but it looks like I'm destined to write far too many more. There is the coming Caitlin Flanagan book, which is sure to re-open old wounds. And today I find out about a coming collections of essays with the migraine-inducing title "Mommy Wars: 26 stay-at-home and career moms face off on their choices, their lives, and their families". (Thanks to the BusinessWeek working parents blog for flagging this.)
The book isn't out yet, but I'm also tensing myself for disaster. Newsweek excerpted part of one essay, in which the writer, Sandy Hingston, comes to the not-entirely-subtle conclusion that her decision to embrace career contributed to a general meltdown in the behavior of her children. The take-home message: working moms shortchange their kids. And it shows. Perhaps the rest of the book will be more balanced, and maybe the overall thesis is that parenthood requires a set of compromises -- compromises that will differ for every parent, every family. But given Hingston's excerpt and the book's title, I won't hold my breath.
Of course, they lost me at "Mommy Wars." The mommy wars story is a complete fiction for three main reasons, and "mommy wars" is a term that no thoughtful writer should ever use without scorn. It assumes:
1. There are two warring factions. This is, of course, complete bunk. Just about every at-home parent will do a stint working outside the home. And in an era of increasingly flexible work arrangements (especially for, say, book contributing writers), there's a growing gray area between "working" and "at-home."
2. This is a war someone can win. No single arrangement is going to work for everyone. As much as I've enjoyed the various work-family permutations in my household, I don't preach them as gospel to the couple next door. The most options, the better. Being at home isn't the best option for everyone. Neither is working 60 hours a week. We don't need a take-no-prisoners crusade for either one.
3. The discussion only involves women: Thank goodness for the Time piece from earlier this week calling for a daddy war. We don't really need a daddy war, of course, but fathers need to be a part of the conversation about work-family balance. In a two-parent family, decisions about working and staying home are not made in a vacuum.
There is a bright side. As much as this whole thing pains me, at least I'm not Miriam Peskowitz, who wrote The Truth Behind the Mommy Wars, a brilliant piece of writing that should have ended the whole moronic debate once and for all. This sort of stupidity must *really* get to her.
The book isn't out yet, but I'm also tensing myself for disaster. Newsweek excerpted part of one essay, in which the writer, Sandy Hingston, comes to the not-entirely-subtle conclusion that her decision to embrace career contributed to a general meltdown in the behavior of her children. The take-home message: working moms shortchange their kids. And it shows. Perhaps the rest of the book will be more balanced, and maybe the overall thesis is that parenthood requires a set of compromises -- compromises that will differ for every parent, every family. But given Hingston's excerpt and the book's title, I won't hold my breath.
Of course, they lost me at "Mommy Wars." The mommy wars story is a complete fiction for three main reasons, and "mommy wars" is a term that no thoughtful writer should ever use without scorn. It assumes:
1. There are two warring factions. This is, of course, complete bunk. Just about every at-home parent will do a stint working outside the home. And in an era of increasingly flexible work arrangements (especially for, say, book contributing writers), there's a growing gray area between "working" and "at-home."
2. This is a war someone can win. No single arrangement is going to work for everyone. As much as I've enjoyed the various work-family permutations in my household, I don't preach them as gospel to the couple next door. The most options, the better. Being at home isn't the best option for everyone. Neither is working 60 hours a week. We don't need a take-no-prisoners crusade for either one.
3. The discussion only involves women: Thank goodness for the Time piece from earlier this week calling for a daddy war. We don't really need a daddy war, of course, but fathers need to be a part of the conversation about work-family balance. In a two-parent family, decisions about working and staying home are not made in a vacuum.
There is a bright side. As much as this whole thing pains me, at least I'm not Miriam Peskowitz, who wrote The Truth Behind the Mommy Wars, a brilliant piece of writing that should have ended the whole moronic debate once and for all. This sort of stupidity must *really* get to her.
posted by Rebel Dad at
7:05 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home