" I Choose My Choice! "

I read this article several weeks ago and knew I wanted to write about it, but didn't quite know when it would fit in. After today's class, I can include it because it raises some very interesting points about "women's work" and how they "count."

Essentially, the author of the article is laying out several different arguments and positions made by women from all types of perspectives. Alluding to the work of Betty Friedan, writer of the groundbreaking "Feminine Mystique," who illuminated the dissatisfaction that many "housewives" felt with their lives, not knowing particularly why-- the author of this article offers some theories from others on what this "housewife" mentality can mean.

One of the most interesting ones was made by Linda Hirshman who "considers all stay-at-home mothers fish in her barrel...[she] even tears mercilessly into the sleep-deprived new mothers who’ve made the unfortunate decision to share their rambling thoughts on something called Bloggingbaby.com... But in fact, Hirshman insists, the problem starts well before mother­hood. It begins when young women enter college and violate Hirshman’s No. 1 rule of female emancipation: “Don’t study art.”"

Hirshman gets particularly critical at mothers who have left their Harvard M.B.A degrees and high-powered jobs to"live in the perfect land of a Walgreens’ ad." She gripes at the fact that these women are choosing the "lesser" existence of child-rearing and taking care of the home instead of pursuing "more important" goals. ("Lawyer, along with doctor and judge, is the kind of high-degree, socially relevant job she approves of.")

In contrast, Neil Gilbert makes a very astute observation of Hirshman's argument by saying:

"Linda Hirshman claims that “the family—with its repetitious, socially invisible, physical tasks—is a necessary part of life, but allows fewer opportunities for full human flourishing than public spheres like the market or the government.” Many people would no doubt find unpaid household chores less interesting than Professor Hirshman’s job … But walking up and down the super­market aisle selecting food for a family dinner is a job that has more variety and autonomy than the paid work being done by the supermarket employees who stack the same shelves with the same food day after day, and those who stand in a narrow corner at the checkout counter all day tallying up the costs of purchases, and the workers next to them who pack the purchases into paper or plastic bags. That space in the market is a bit cramped for human flourishing."

I am a little more inclined to see it from Gilbert's point of view, simply because it is more all-encompassing of the various roles that many workers in many sectors must have-- because they have no choice.

The article continues on to describe the way in which women's "work"--whether at home or in the office has become criticized, analyzed and debated. Some point to the "women-at-home-is-oppressive" mentality, arguing that "women at work" is contributing more significantly to the economy, to society, and to the world (to be...general). However, are these situations really the "oppressive" scenarios that some feminists might describe? One paragraph in the article articulates that in reality, men probably don't have the time or energy to "continually oppress their wives."

Is the choice for a woman to "stay home" one that is backhanding all the important work of Betty Friedan and other feminists of her time? Is choosing this path setting women's movements back by not showing how "equal" women can be to men in the workplace?

What about the simple fact that it is a very PARTICULAR type of woman who actually HAS the choice to make? This type of critique cannot even be applied to well, a majority of women in the world who are forced to work in order to survive. "Staying at home" is not an option for them, so how can they be included in this type of analysis of "achieving the feminist dream"?

The article moves between many points, and the author herself indicates that she has the luxury of staying at home as a writer at times, spending time with her children, etc. How might her particular perspective influence her writer and the people she chooses to portray?

From a "big picture" standpoint, who really has the appropriate "position" from which to judge any of these women and the types of women that are not portrayed? Do we really know what goes on FULLY in a "mom's world"? Perhaps it is those women who have more time to participate meaningfully in the community and be activists for social change.... are the "working moms" doing this kind of work? It's hard to know. Regardless, this article shows many sides of the discussion...and even if it is a long read, it's definitely worth it.