More Commentary on Anne-Marie Slaughter's Lament and What About a Woman President?

First published June 28, 2012 at http://www.hercircleezine.com/2012/06/28/more-commentary-on-anne-marie-slaughters-lament-and-what-about-a-woman-president/

The hot button issue of the day is Anne-Marie Slaughter’s article in THE ATLANTIC entitled “Women Still Can’t Have It All.” From the NEW YORK TIMES to two different NPR programs (On Point and the Diane Rehm Show), to countless blog posts, comments on the articles and radio shows online, what Slaughter wrote is being discussed. I believe this was her point, despite the criticism she’s taken personally as fall-out from her article. The article addresses mommy guilt along with women’s identity after childbearing, two topics INCONTEXT covered over the past few weeks.

Slaughter claims we need to change our culture and society where women, work and family are concerned. The author states this kind of change would not only benefit women, but also men and children. I hope to contribute to the national discussion on “having it all.” Some of what I write may seem combative, and my last point might seem downright ugly or anti-woman. I don’t take issue with Slaughter’s experience or her article so much as hope to expand it, and widen the experiences represented in the challenge all families, women, children and men face. I want to ask difficult questions, not to plant seeds of doubt, but rather to expand the discourse.

For a great majority of women, myself included, Slaughter’s stance that women feel compelled to be there for their own children is accurate. Whether this is partly biological and partly socio-cultural, it exists and is palpable for many women who must make sacrifices and difficult choices. When Slaughter writes about “having it all,” she means a high-powered career and also a family, for whom she is available as needed. This idea of “having it all” is a women’s issue, on the one hand, because women invented it. It is not the issue of men, as men have never “had it all.” They are either successful in high profile and/or high power positions and largely absent from their families, or even if available at times, they do not perform the greatest portion of household tasks or childrearing duties in addition to their high-powered paying job. Certainly, in today’s world, where women represent almost half the households in the country as main breadwinners or contribute at least half of a family’s total income, and men who stay home are as marginalized as women who do not work outside the home, the issue has expanded to include men, who have taken up the other half of the banner along with women. On the other hand, more men do want to be active, involved parents, and thus have spoken up about wanting and needing more flexibility in the workplace themselves.

In our global, capitalist, twenty-four hour, technological world, I don’t think work/life balance and the flexibility a family requires are even remote possibilities. The news cycle, business, politics, foreign policy, and caregiving never sleep. For some positions, ultimately those in power, one simply cannot be available for family and also be in charge. (More on this later.)

Slaughter admits her own privilege in her article, and knows that her situation is very different from the majority of the population wherein her work has had greater flexibility than most people can afford or find with employers—men or women. There are also plenty of women who don’t have the option of leaving a post after two years when their junior high school children struggle with school. I refer to our women in uniform, specifically. When a military mom is deployed, she can Skype her child who might live with grandma or an aunt, yet she definitely has no choice to leave her post and rush home to fix the homework problem. Women who are single heads of household who work three jobs to meet the rent also do not have the option to quit their jobs to be available for algebra assignments. And, no amount of change in the corporate or governmental structure is likely to change this for men or women in particular positions.

We’re horrified by women who choose careers over full-time motherhood. I wrote about Rahna Reiko Rizzuto (inContext, July 21, 2011) who left her children for work. Another example of such a woman is Dorothea Lange, who (along with her husband) essentially abandoned her children to the 1930s equivalent of foster care when her dream photography job came along. What interests me most about Ms. Lange is that her husband chose to accompany her as her assistant. Their own children, the Lange offspring, do not harbor negative feelings toward their father for leaving, yet they do blame their mother and question her motives. Technically speaking, it was her job, and their father might have easily remained home as the primary caregiver, a role that I know was virtually unheard of at the time. And yet, it is Ms. Lange who suffered the criticism, not her husband.

So, while Lange and Rizzuto are two examples of women who do not share Ms. Slaughter’s and my propensity toward being as present as possible for our children, even at the sacrifice of our strongly desired careers, as I stated earlier, I believe most women find themselves equally pulled toward parenting no matter how much they value their work. If we focus on women in positions of power, which Slaughter and other women of her ilk say may be the answer to the conundrum, let’s take the presidency as an example. Our president must be infinitely available to handle all major national and international crises, no matter what is going on at home. While he might, on occasion, read over an essay or assist with word problems, I do not believe President Obama allows these concerns to enter his mind when he’s in the situation room at the White House. If we believe Ms. Slaughter, then we have to wonder whether we want a woman as president, or at least a woman who has children still at home. We can’t elect a woman who will decide the job is too much as her teenagers begin high school or junior high. She can’t really quit after a two-year stint, either.

This discussion is important because as we continue to wonder about a woman as president in the United States, we need to explore what it is we ask of women, what we will accept from women and even from men. Presidents are “family” men historically. We like to think of our presidents as at least a little “like us” and understanding of the challenges families face. We recognize that some women will choose to forego public service careers to be more present mothers than such career choices might allow. When we find women like Lange or Rizzuto, we need to avoid rushing to judgment and vilify them. What is wrong with a woman choosing her career goals over her role as mother? “Plenty!” is the answer I hear from women and men. Yet, we never, ever question a man doing this very same thing. In fact, we commend him for his sacrifice.

As a voting public, we must decide what it is we ask of women, at all job positions and all levels of income. We need to re-examine what we desire in a presidential candidate, male or female. Whether you agree with her politics or not, Sarah Palin faced sharp criticism and questioning as a female vice presidential candidate with a very young child on the campaign trail. She also faced severe criticism for embracing policies about abstinence as sex education, when her own daughter obviously did not choose abstinence. Pundits were quick to ask whether Ms. Palin should have been home a bit more than in a governmental office so as to have prevented such circumstances.

If I take a moment to propose a male candidate with a young baby and pregnant teen daughter, I have to say that I can’t imagine the media wondering about his ability to lead or his dedication to his family. In that instance, it would be the daughter who was blamed for “marring” her father’s candidacy, and the mother would be questioned about her mothering skills. Overall, these issues would never come to bear on the male candidate’s ability to do his job.

I don’t have an answer to this difficult, challenging and volatile question of how we both honor women’s desires to be present when needed by their families and also in positions of power and prestige with rewarding careers. I applaud Slaughter for opening the floor for discussion of an issue so many women only whisper to one another about, and for speaking from the heart about her personal struggles with being drawn to work that requires so much from her, and which also asks too much of her when she feels that parenting is the primary task at which she must excel at a particular moment of her life and career. This issue is one that men, women and families definitely need to address, at all ends of the socio-economic spectrum. The challenge is to keep Slaughter’s comments from promoting a dismissal of women as contenders in powerful positions.

"Georgie's Big Break" by Monica Drake - Review and Reflection

First published June 14, 2012 at http://www.hercircleezine.com/2012/06/14/georgies-big-break-by-monica-drake/

Last week, I tackled “mommy guilt,” and this week, we’ll look at female identity after childbirth through the lens of the short story, GEORGIE’S BIG BREAK, by Monica Drake. The story has been made into a short film, for which I could not find a release date. The original short story was published in 2009 in THE SUN magazine, the full text of which you can read here.

Georgie is a new mother on maternity leave from a college faculty position. She reads about the local upcoming literary expedition, knows her department chair serves on the board of the festival, and thinks that it would not only be a day out for her, a day to be “Georgie,” versus “Georgie the mom,” but also a chance for her to score points that might help her gain tenure when she goes back to teaching. She volunteers to help, hoping her contribution will be noticed.

What ensues is maddening for the injustice Georgie suffers, hilarious for how ridiculous we know it’s going to be and poignant as we possibly recognize ourselves in what we read. We can “laugh now” as we look back at our newly-minted mother selves, yet at the time, we were likely holding back tears of humiliation as well as a dose of healthy rage. Georgie is assigned “Mr. Clifford,” who she assumes is a particular author. [Interestingly, Drake is unkind to the adolescent girl Georgie hires to assist her on this (seemingly) simple day trip. The girl from the neighborhood is described in less-than-admirable terms.] While Georgie is excited to attend the literary event, she can’t stand the thought of leaving her young baby in the care of another, so she determines that the sitter will accompany her and Elana to the festival. Yes, I know, anyone who tried to do this with her own child will cringe as she reads this. The anxiety we feel leading up to and during this kind of outing is palpable, even when only in text and not our own immediate experience.

Of course, there’s the standard “comedy routine” of the cliché, but also all-too-true, things like Elana spitting up on Georgie after they leave the house, so that she cannot change her shirt. There’s the baby who will not be comforted by anyone but mom, (of course) so that the presence of the sitter is almost laughable. There is the running into an old lover, who was once her professor, and his much-younger, current girlfriend. Yes, all cringe-inducing, and so typical that we’re not sure whether to call it cliché or be maddened by how true the “cliché” really is.

Spoiler Alert: Georgie meets “Mr. Clifford” who is none other than, (you might have guessed if you have kids yourself…more on this “assumption of knowledge” later), Clifford the Big Red Dog. He’s a guest of the children’s literature portion of the festival.

Then, the ultimate insult comes when the department head, who Georgie hoped she’d impress with her presence, is the person who set Georgie up with the Clifford the Dog gig. Georgie is affronted, her mind whirls wondering why motherhood has suddenly steered her in the direction of cartoon characters in the eyes of her boss. As readers, we’re just as appalled that giving birth has somehow suddenly made a woman with a PhD in literature an honorary and instantaneous expert in (and avid fan of) children’s literature. On the one hand, it’s a compliment that someone might think that the act of birthing conveys wisdom in areas outside of birth itself. On the other hand, just because a woman has given birth, does not mean she is or wants to be an expert in children’s literature. No man returning to a faculty position in a literature department at any college was likely assigned a children’s book costumed character at his first literary expedition after the birth of his child!

As Georgie’s mind attempts to process everything that has just happened to her in the fifteen minutes that have passed since she arrived at the venue, her body whirls around quickly to escape the department head in an effort to find space to think. She trips and falls to the floor. A famous actor and his entourage were right where Georgie spun around to walk away, and while he attempts to reach out a hand to help her up, she feels her body lifted from behind. Clifford has come to the rescue. “He” stands Georgie up, dusts her off and takes charge of the diaper bag as well as Elana, who stops crying as soon as she’s removed from the sitter’s arms. Georgie then decides she knows who the person is inside the giant red costume. She knows it must be a mother. We end the story with Georgie wondering whether “Clifford” has “her” own master’s degree, is an aspiring writer herself, and has dreams beyond being assigned to a red, furry costume as a volunteer at a literary festival. Drake ends the story bringing us back to consider women’s identity, especially after childbirth when she says that Georgie feels as though Clifford is “how we dress a mom” and that the costume represents what we all see, yet that the role of mother hides “another person deep inside.”

While not every woman necessarily feels a reluctance to leave her newborn, many women do feel this way after giving birth. Maybe it is biology, and our hormones strongly bond us because at one point before society developed, our species could not survive with an apathetic mother. Because of this likelihood of attachment to our babies, women struggle with identity after giving birth. Even if we are fortunate enough to not have to worry about the financial aspect of childcare and can choose to remain home with our babies, we still feel “lost” where our former selves are concerned. If we return to work, we’d be horrified if no one asked about our child, yet we don’t want to be solely seen as “new mother” in the eyes of our colleagues. As usual, the patriarchal (as I will refer to it for lack of a better term, actually) rule is that motherhood and work are separate realms. There is no easy way (really) in most jobs to allow for simultaneous work and mothering. And, while I know there are those “working mother” magazine articles that try to make us all feel bad because they show singular women and their unique jobs and circumstances where a seemingly seamless meshing of both worlds occurs, those are not the norm, or the reality, for the majority of families. What I always shout at those articles (in my mind, since I’m always reading them in a doctor’s office waiting room) is this: “But what about her assistant? Does her assistant get to bring her baby to the office? Does the assistant get to leave for every appointment, recital and school event?” I bet she doesn’t. So, those articles that show how “one woman combines motherhood and a career” are just that, howONE, SINGLE WOMAN can do that. For the majority, it’s just not possible.

Not only that, most of us don’t want to combine mothering and work. It’s exhausting if you’ve tried it. And, no man has ever had to do such a thing, either! There is no male CEO who has an in-office nanny. He gets to leave for work and be Mr. CEO, only. So, not only are those “having it all” articles a falsehood for the general population, but they are also not necessarily what anyone wants. I’ve taken my children to work—lucky me, right? Just read about Georgie and see how “seamless” it is outside of a magazine article!

PHOTO CREDIT: SOPHIE LEBLANC

My own metaphor for motherhood is not a person in a costume, but rather the famous depiction of motherhood offered in the matroyshka or Russian nesting doll. There are multiple selves in a woman. Especially when one is a new mother. There is the young self, who still wants to sleep in on the weekends and have tea and toast in bed while reading until she decides to toss on shorts and hiking boots to take a spontaneous hike. There is the little girl who is not sure how she exactly got this baby in place of a doll, who could be put down anywhere with never a complaint. There is the woman who is a sister, daughter, cousin, friend, spouse, bus driver or account executive. Now that we’ve gotten rid of the mommy guilt from last week, it’s now time to embrace all of the “selves” in our own nesting doll of roles, and not demand that we let any one role overpower the others. That’s a tall order, and yes, I’ll get back to you once I’ve managed to balance all those roles in my own life.

"Mommy Guilt"

First published June 7, 2012 at http://www.hercircleezine.com/2012/06/07/incontext-considers-mommy-guilt/

In a recent issue of MARTHA STEWART MAGAZINE, Alana Chernila wrote about “mommy guilt.” Chernila shared a story about running for public office and the toll it exacted on her family. An outing in a park ended with Chernila’s daughter, Sadie, disgruntled when she was not allowed to accompany a friend on a last-minute invitation for a canoeing session. In the car, Sadie declared, “I hate elections!” Chernila said her daughter’s words “hit me deep in my gut.”

Later that night, Chernila tried to make it up to Sadie by making homemade breakfast pastries, so that she could greet her children with delicious treats in the morning. Chernila’s “mommy guilt” was assuaged as her children reacted as she hoped, “marveling at the breakfast their mama had made for them.” So, mom attempts to make a difference and be a living example of an engaged citizen, and must feel badly because she has to deny her child a single canoe outing. As a result, she stays up later than the rest of the family, and gets up earlier than everyone else in the morning, so she can bake her way back into her children’s hearts.

What is this “mommy guilt” thing anyway? Why do women feel badly for having lives beyond that of their role as mothers? I ask myself these questions all the time. I wonder what it is in our society that makes moms feel guilty when we have to say “no,” or we can’t say “yes.” In my own life, I consider that my son will undergo surgery in a few weeks. There is no question that I will be at the hospital, and will accompany him every step of the way. My husband will not be there with us. Partly this is because his line of work doesn’t provide personal or sick days, and a back injury required him to use his vacation to heal earlier this year. Yet, my husband feels no “guilt.” He knows I’m capable of handling the situation with aplomb. In fact, I’ve done it a few times in our children’s lives. However, I know that if I was working as the main breadwinner, I don’t know that I’d be able to work if my child was having surgery. I would judge myself and demand my presence. My own mind admonishes, “What kind of mother doesn’t take off work when her child needs surgery?” No one, including me, judges my husband for not being there. He’s the dad. He’s out earning the money that pays the insurance premiums that help subsidize the operation and all the attendant costs and fees. Even when a mother is in that role, she is still supposed to be at the bedside.

It is this double demand of women, by women (of ourselves), that is what is known as “mommy guilt.” Why should Chernila feel so terrible for having a campaign event super-cede the whims of her daughter? Why should she stay up into the night and rise early to try to “fix” what was never really broken? Why did she feel it in her “gut” when her child lashed out in a selfish, childish manner when she couldn’t have her way? Why do women punish themselves for being human beings, even when we’re attempting to be positive role models through the actions and activities that might take us away from our families? It is only by answering these questions for ourselves, and catching ourselves before we allow guilt to settle into our hearts and stomachs that we might rid ourselves of this guilt.

Women are deemed selfish when we put our needs or desires before those of our families, especially our children. Whether it is an operation where both parents are not present, or an election and a campaign that takes a woman away from home, we need to stop feeling guilty and start realizing we are not and cannot be everything for everyone in our families all the time. That is the unhealthy role model and the bahaivior we should feel guilty perpetuating. When a father is on the campaign trail, no one questions his absence. Mom, back home, when the couple’s children declare that they “hate elections,” merely extols the virtues of the campaigning father. She tells the children how proud they should be of their dad, how they should be “extra good” so that it is easier on the father when he calls home. They should realize he is serving their community and see him as a role model of citizenship. They should see him as a man of conviction, who identifies things that need changing, and goes about putting himself in a position to make change. For his part, while the campaigning dad might want to be there for the Brownie Girl Scout ceremony or the spelling bee, he doesn’t ever express that as “daddy guilt.” And, when my husband can’t be at the hospital for our son’s surgery, he doesn’t feel guilty, either. Rather, he feels like he is doing something that is supportive, in fact, by working! The only way we can rid ourselves (and the world) of mommy guilt is to stop reprimanding ourselves for being autonomous humans once our children leave our physical bodies. We need to value what it is we do and who we are in the world. This might help us rear daughters who will not suffer mommy guilt themselves!