The future for American women looks even brighter. Telecommuting and innovative new work arrangements, such as job sharing and flextime, promise to replace the once stark choice between working and parenting with the ability [to do] both....
(1) There is no such thing as generic "parenting". Fathers and mothers contribute to their children's rearing in distinct ways, as God designed. Pretending otherwise is just an excuse for one or both parents to neglect their children for their careers (This project is really crucial and, besides, my spouse or the nanny or the day care center can contribute sufficient "parental" unit inputs...)
Another negative consequence of the "generic" parenting idea is that it removes any possibility for objection to children being raised by two same-sex "parents".
(2) Raising children is work; it's not the alternative to work. Good mothers have always worked hard to raise their children. Furthermore, before the modern industrial era split up the family household-centered economic unit by providing jobs in factories and other locations far from home, wives also contributed to the family's income by assisting their husbands in their work.
Still, this is not 1950. Women today enjoy choice and opportunity, both in and out of the home.
This snide aside is likewise misplaced in implying that women had neither choice nor opportunity in or outside the home in the 1950s. Why is the author giving up so much ground to the feminists by buying into their caricature of the 1950s?
Are you saying that women had the same educational and career opportunities as men in the 1950's?
As a woman and homemaker, I agree that a woman's highest priority should be as caregiver for the children and wife in the traditional role. I've put a serious dent in my career by staying home with my children. I did so joyfully and humbly and don't regret it even a tiny bit. I am pleased, though, that when they are grown and I am back working full-time that I won't have to fight tooth and nail to work as other than a nurse, teacher or secretary.
Additionally... not ALL women are mothers or mothers yet. It is not "feminist" to acknowledge and be satisfied with the fact that those women who are facing higher education and the workplace DO have expanded opportunities.
This author destroys much of the traditional myth that supports the current womens lib agenda... I think she is an asset to conservatism and am happy to see her addressing this issue :-)