Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Full Time Motherhood?, How Selfish
Hartford Courant ^ | 11/05/05 | Julie Shiller

Posted on 11/05/2005 7:45:30 AM PST by kalee

Full-Time Motherhood? How Selfish November 5, 2005 BY JULIE SHILLER

Across the nation, privileged young women are seeking to be competitive candidates to gain admittance to prestigious universities. Impressive SAT scores, awards, grades and extracurricular activities are of the utmost importance for college-bound high school students and their families.

The priorities of many of today's elite young women, however, are surprisingly conventional, according to one survey. The most fortunate and educated women say they will conform to traditional gender roles after completing their Ivy League degrees. They are choosing careers as full-time mothers and expect to be supported financially by their successful spouses. Such expectations are utterly selfish and a dishonor to the struggles that the Second Wave feminists (those who came of age in the '60s and '70s) endured for my generation.

ADVERTISEMENT Today, many white women who were fortunate enough to be born into wealthy families are taking their limitless opportunities for granted. In a recent article in The New York Times, "Many Women at Elite Colleges Set Career Path to Motherhood," Louise Story examines this issue. More than 60 percent of Yale women surveyed concluded that when they become mothers, they plan on working only part time or not at all. Although feminism promotes the right for these elite women to choose, they are unappreciative of their economic privilege. Story claims that they "are likely to marry men who will make enough money to give them a real choice about whether to be full-time mothers."

As a Third Wave feminist, I am embarrassed that Story could make such an assertion. Do these women feel a sense of entitlement to be entirely supported by their husbands? Although all women should be permitted to be full-time mothers, most do not have the freedom to stop working outside the home. It is not an equal choice when less wealthy and marginalized women are not granted the option. Women who were born into an unearned advantaged position are relinquishing their power and independence to patriarchy.

Females in the Victorian era were silenced and forced into restrictive feminine roles. Hartford's Charlotte Perkins Gilman wrote "The Yellow Wallpaper" in 1892 during a time when even well-off women were forced into domestic roles that did not challenge their intellectual abilities. The protagonist, a privileged white woman, was labeled a "hysteric" by a male-dominated scientific community that desperately sought a way to repress her for questioning her forced submission. In reality, she was merely responding to being suppressed by her husband and the controlling patriarchy. Now young women are choosing to return to the silence.

Today's liberated, Ivy-League-educated women are willing to sacrifice their privilege and their opportunities to become independent leaders of the 21st century. They are eschewing the opportunities that Gilman's protagonist and other oppressed women of the time yearned for. Ivy League women are not taking advantage of the ability they have to make incredible strides in the fight for gender equality that would benefit women from all backgrounds. Instead, they are choosing to use their power for their own selfish desires.

In the Victorian era, women were forced by men to adhere to submissive, weak and emotional roles as a way for males to maintain ultimate control and status. Now young, dominant women are in a commanding position to enhance the civil liberties granted to disadvantaged women and other minority groups. Unfortunately, the future of our nation has been placed in the hands of elite young women who have chosen to thoughtlessly improve their own lives while jeopardizing the future of those that they had the power to assist.

Julie Shiller, 20, of West Orange, N.J., is a junior majoring in sociology at the University of Hartford.


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: feminism; fullofmush; generationy; ittakesavillage; lefty; lesbian; motherhood; nutjob; pinko; radicalfeminists; sociology; stayathomemoms; villageidiot; women; youngskulls
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-136 next last
To: luckystarmom
Also, another great option is to have a dad at home.

My husband stays at home, except for a handful of hours he works evenings a week. He is in the restaurant business and if we had to rely on his salary and benefits, we'd have to live in a box on the street. Our youngest (our only child together) is a very well adjusted happy child.

101 posted on 11/05/2005 10:14:32 AM PST by conservative cat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase
"Sociology and Gender Studies have to be two of the most worthless Bachelor of Arts programs in today's universities"


And we made fun of an imaginary "basket weaving" B.A. Julie sure can weave that toilet paper.
102 posted on 11/05/2005 10:14:55 AM PST by Seizure
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: LWalk18
I think many young women who work would stay at home with their children, but they fear that if the marriage dissolves they will be economically devestated.

I totally agree. I knew with my first husband that there was a divorce in the future (due to his mental issues and addictive behavior, including sex addiction) and so always made sure I was looking for ways to further my career (with balance- I have always tried to work smarter instead of more hours- and I was always home before my then husband). I am not wealthy but when the inevitable split came (when there was an in-my-face affair), I was able to keep supporting my family at a full-time job I had flexibility with (I pick the hours so I can be home with my older children after school- and I can do some telecommuting, also.) I did not want to end up a suddenly single mom who has to work 80 hours a week at low paying jobs just to pay rent. The good thing in our family was that my mother took care of my two children while I worked, so they have always been with a grandparent when not with a parent.

103 posted on 11/05/2005 10:23:04 AM PST by conservative cat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: kalee
Back in the late '80s I taught the introductory course in Management to college juniors. Towards the end of the semester there was one class session on managing your own career. I used to ask the women in the class how many expected to combine marriage and a career. Without exception, every semester, the response was 100%. I then asked the men how many expected their wives to combine marriage and a career. Again, the response was 100% every semester.

Evidently there has been a generational shift, with many of today's college women wanting an education but planning to be full-time wives and mothers.

I'm glad to see them wanting an education before becoming full-time mothers. Their children will be the better for it. So will their husbands. After all, what man wants an ignorant wife?

104 posted on 11/05/2005 11:21:56 AM PST by JoeFromSidney (My book is out. Read excerpts at www.thejusticecooperative.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kalee
It has been a long time since I read something so vain. I don't know where to start dismantling this garbage. She seems to believe the fate of the whole world or at least the fate of all women rests in the anointed hands of Ivy league women. She also believes these women can only be useful to society during their child bearing years. How are the children of Ivy league women supposed to maintain the tradition of educational excellence if they are being raised by people who not highly educated? Maybe that is the point. I bet Ms. Shiller would toast mash mellows if the children of Ivy leaguers ended up on welfare because they could not compete with the children of stay at home moms. She is right all women who love and want the best for their kids are selfish. The women who don't want the best for their kids are child abusers. Ms. Shiller has expressed contempt for all women and all children. Ms. Shiller is probably not unselfish herself.
105 posted on 11/05/2005 11:29:35 AM PST by after dark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kalee

Hey Julie sweetie. Having money makes your life better deal with it. And having a man in a household goes a long way toward having money.

Now sit down and shutup you hairy a$$ed feminist broad. And for God's sake get a bra them things are saggin.........


106 posted on 11/05/2005 1:28:24 PM PST by festus (The constitution may be flawed but its a whole lot better than what we have now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Northern Yankee; kstewskis
They are choosing careers as full-time mothers and expect to be supported financially by their successful spouses. Such expectations are utterly selfish and a dishonor to the struggles that the Second Wave feminists (those who came of age in the '60s and '70s) endured for my generation.

I had to laugh at this ridiculous statement.

The whole article is deprived of sense and logic. It reeks of envy and jealousy against women who decide to stay home and take care of her children. Not every stay-home mom is rich or as her ad puts it: Today, many white women who were fortunate enough to be born into wealthy families are taking their limitless opportunities for granted. I guess black women or non-white women aren't fortunate enough to be considered here.

There are lots of women who sacrifice their career and income to raise their children. They didn't marry men for their money, and those women are making a real sacrifice to educate their children and give them love and moral support, and they instill values a day-care worker can't provide. These mothers are the unselfish ones.

I know a few FR mothers who are doing just that.

Ivy League women are not taking advantage of the ability they have to make incredible strides in the fight for gender equality that would benefit women from all backgrounds. Instead, they are choosing to use their power for their own selfish desires.

If my own selfish desires require not to become as stupid and blind as this individual, then, I'm happy not to take advantage of whatever ability I have to make strides in the fight for gender equality.

107 posted on 11/05/2005 2:21:43 PM PST by Victoria Delsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ninenot

heh, heh...maureen dowdy. Perfect example.


108 posted on 11/05/2005 3:23:33 PM PST by cubreporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Nea Wood

Thank you very much.


109 posted on 11/05/2005 3:29:17 PM PST by cubreporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: WV Mountain Mama
I knew there was something about you I always liked, we are birds of a feather! ;)

Ditto! Birds of a feather, not birds in hand! ;) You always hear stories about mothers-in-laws asking "Can she cook?" At least I know what the answer is: YES!

110 posted on 11/05/2005 8:07:54 PM PST by cgk (Card-Carrying, Dues-Paying Member of the VCBC {Vast Conservative Base Conspiracy})
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Bernard
Wait a minute - my daughter graduated with a Bachelor degree in sociology in May 2004 and is not like this person. Of course, she went to a small liberal arts college in western Illinois where Bush 41 was the commencement speaker the spring before she started there. So, there may be something in the choice of schools after all.

My congratulations to your daughter. Some of my best friends have studied sociology

111 posted on 11/05/2005 8:13:09 PM PST by jimfree (Freep and Ye shall find.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Crawdad
Sociology= The painstaking pursuit of the obvious.

An RA at my Fullerton State dorm in 1970 told the story of taking his first (and maybe only) sociology course. On the first day of class the students were administered the "final exam" and told that anyone who scored an A on the exam would be excused from the remainder of the classes and receive the A grade for the course. Mr. TA told us that the exam was common sense and he got an A. One of asked if that meant that sociologists or sociology majors don't have any common sense. Mr. TA went on to say that at the end of the semester he received an F. Consulting with the instructor and reminding same of the first day promise, TA was told that they had later changed the rules and included an attendance component in the grade.

112 posted on 11/05/2005 8:32:48 PM PST by jimfree (Freep and Ye shall find.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

Can't be by the hatellary census, but just go to court seeking a divorce where minor children (to age 21 if still in school) are involved!


113 posted on 11/06/2005 12:51:52 AM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote life support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: jimfree
All ways of grading show your point. (Giving an exam before giving the class, A on exam at first of class means no subsequent attendance needed, AND thinking they could change things in the middle of the class AFTER giving the exam and without notifying the whole class)

They ALL show the teaching assistant, and professor, and the rest of the entire class - have no common sense.
114 posted on 11/06/2005 7:36:38 AM PST by Robert A Cook PE (-I contribute to FR monthly, but ABBCNNBCBS supports Hillary's Secular Sexual Socialism every day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: kalee
It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks, Julie dear.

115 posted on 11/06/2005 7:45:47 AM PST by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TR Jeffersonian

Read post 112


116 posted on 11/06/2005 8:04:43 AM PST by kalee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: kalee

I think we should keep this article and send it to any unfortunate male who considers marrying this wench.


117 posted on 11/06/2005 8:14:54 AM PST by Politicalmom (Must I use a sarcasm tag?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kalee
The opinion writer completely overlooks (and doesn't understand) the fact that these women will have a HUGE impact on their families and communities and the Nation by being SAHMs. Women who are on the career path overlook women who remain home ... this writer talks of being part of the third wave of feminism --- then she should recognize that ALL women contribute and have a vital role in our society. Women who are at home are often discounted for their contributions. They will be involved in schools, civic groups, politics, fund-raising, etc. that will directly impact all the citizens (even working women). It takes a whole bunch of us to make this big ol machine (USA) work.

One more note ... who do you think all the working moms in the neighborhood put down as the emergency number at their kids' school when their kids get sick or have an 'accident' ... yep, the stay at home neighbor.

118 posted on 11/06/2005 8:19:32 AM PST by zeaal (SPREAD TRUTH!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Victoria Delsoul; kstewskis
I thought the whole article was breathless in ignorance, and the author had no absolute clue as to what the world is all about.

I showed the article to my college age daughter and she kept asking if it was satire.

It sure does read like it, doesn't it?

Did I mention I was in AZ last week? I loved it, and had a great phone conversation with Karen.

Someday we all gotta meet!

119 posted on 11/06/2005 4:50:10 PM PST by Northern Yankee (Freedom Needs A Soldier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Northern Yankee

Kids are exactly what true feminists do not wish to address; and all their supposed solutions--abortion, day care--address only their own needs.

I have a phD in engineering and two kids. Never, at any time did my husband and I consider day care--we simply didn't want someone else raising our kids. Sure, it was hard, and even now, I sometimes regret the career I set aside (especially when I find my "superiors" to be paragons of cluelessness like this author). But my husband, whom I love dearly, credits my staying home with how wonderfully our kids have turned out. One is in law school, the other in grad school. And me? I started a new career in teaching, and am delighted day by day to work with high school kids. Rest assured, the future is in good hands; there are many, many kids with their heads straight--many kids who love their parents and appreciate their parents, especially their moms.


120 posted on 11/06/2005 5:23:55 PM PST by nymomx2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-136 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson