The notion that women want to be with their kids is crucial to the logic of de Marneffe’s argument. With it, she inverts the whole Friedanian case against domesticity. In de Marneffe’s view, it is a mistake to equate staying at home with forgoing an adult identity, because it is precisely in caring for children that an adult identity is forged. (As I write this, my five-year-old twins are marching around the house, naked, singing, “Ants! Ants! Ants wear underpants!”) She realizes that this notion may strike some as hopelessly regressive; however, she assures us, it is not. —Elizabeth Kolbert —Mother Courage: Kids, Career and Culture (The New Yorker)
Note the hilarious parenthetical aside.
The final paragraph of this review highlights classist assumptions that, according to the author, define the modern women’s movement, which seems to include arrangements by which women who want careers outside of the home purchase the services of women to replace them as caregivers and housekeepers. Presumably, these working-class women work, not out of a personal desire, but out of financial necessity.
View Comments
Amazing things you discover in photos. HA have a good day!
Starting when I was in junior high school, my mother worked the night shift (11 to 7, same as you), because my father had to take an early retirement on disability. My mother was home (but asleep) during most days, and my dad was home all day long. Up to that point, their division of labor had been fairly traditional, and it remained so in other ways.
This is a little off topic, but heck, this is a weblog, so I shouldnt worry. Once when I was a teen, I came across an old photo of my father on the floor playing with my older brother when he was a baby, and I was transfixed -- I didn't think of my father as the "play on the floor" type.
While my two children were young, and not yet in school, I had the option of staying home with them. It was something my husband and I discussed on many different occasions before we had children.The choice was not an either , or. It was all planned out, to the very last detail. I removed myself from the daily grind to be with my children until they began school. However, during the hours of 11pm until 7am,( while they slept) my spouse was the caretaker while I worked nights. This not only brought funds into the home, it also gave me a chance to speak and hear adult conversation. When my children turned school age I began my positon that I gave up during their pre-school age. The nice thing about having a master's degree in both Mathematics, and Government is teaching spots are easily found. I see my children every day, because I teach where they go to school. I have also kept my job that is during the night, not because of finacial reasons, but because it is something I enjoy. I have been offered the chance to continue my education into pre-med, but have not truly accepted that offer. It's still in the planning stages. It's not wrong, nor does it make you dependent if a woman chooses to stay home with her children. I've seen both sides of today's society if you're asked where you work, and answer you don't.I strongly believe that parents have to make the commitment to stand strong and be an active part of their children's lives. I've heard many times people say it's not the quantity of time you spend with your child,it's the quality. I disagree, children need both parents involved in their lives always. Daycares should not be the primary adult supervision in a child's life. Parents should be,and it is manageable if you accept the responsibilty.