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.
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.
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.
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?
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.........
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.
heh, heh...maureen dowdy. Perfect example.
Thank you very much.
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!
My congratulations to your daughter. Some of my best friends have studied sociology
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.
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!
Read post 112
I think we should keep this article and send it to any unfortunate male who considers marrying this wench.
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.
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!
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.
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.