America's model housewife turns feminist as husband abandons her

It is 25 years since Terry Hekker hailed the housewife, now in a landmark decision the acclaimed author has rejected her past saying she was wrong

Terry Hekker wrote a book in 1980 that made her famous. Ever Since Adam & Eve was a passionate defence of her decision to eschew a career and spend her life as a wife and a mother.

Coming at the end of the Seventies, when feminism was enjoying a renaissance and the career woman was emerging from behind the cooker, Hekker became a celebrated poster child for more old-fashioned values. She wanted her job choice of 'homemaker' to be considered as valid as those of up-and-coming women bankers, bosses and company directors.

Today, Hekker told The Observer, she is planning a follow-up book. Its working, albeit jokey, title is bluntly honest: Disregard First Book. For her life did not turn out as she planned, and she now believes her decision to become a housewife and homemaker should serve as a warning for young American women. 'My anachronistic book was written while I was in a successful marriage that I expected would go on forever. Sadly, it now has little relevance for modern women, except perhaps as a cautionary tale,' Hekker wrote last week as she announced her U-turn.

In a display of spectacular bad taste, Hekker's husband presented her with divorce papers on their 40th wedding anniversary and left her for a younger woman. The divorce left her facing an uncertain financial future, bereft of income and - after spending her adult life bringing up five children - lacking skills to make her attractive in the job market. Despite that, the judge in her divorce case suggested that - at 67 - she go for job training.

Forgetting the general "war between the sexes" talk and the important issue of how many men betray innocent and loving wives, let us imagine that, in this case, which we know from the left-wing Guardian article that we don't know the full story on...

The article says she is a liberal. It doesn't say whether the ex is conservative or whether the new wife is conservative. Especially on FR, this is relevant to the compatibility issue (but not to the financial compensation issue).

Maybe, after 9-11, her becoming politically liberal and possibly completely disagreeing and disrepecting her husband's views on protecting the country, supporting the troops, her identifying with Cindy Sheehan's treason, etc...was, in this case, an insurmountable incompatibility and a reason for finding someone who hadn't been around to be "Clintonized"...making the older Clintonite, who possibly didn't "grow" with her husband after 911, an inappropriate example for those who specifically support her on a conservative website like FR.

In the New York area, a lot of women between 30 and 45 are Clintonites...they were Clintonized. And maybe a lot of men are, since 9-11, finding out to their horror that they are married to someone who remained Clintonized and just didn't "get it" on 9-11. Now this isn't necessarily a reason to divorce and certainly not hurt any kids...but it must be quite a disappointment. The wonderful Reaganite women are generally over 45 now but this woman clearly wasn't one of them (or was she? We don't know). The Guardian article says that this woman is now the liberal mayor of Nyack, New York (Rockland County). How many anti-Iraqi-freedom demonstrations has this particular woman organized? Again, we don't know.

I am not saying that this is the scenario, just that on a site like FR...this is the way the thread could have gone.

I met an old girlfriend from New York City last year who had voted for John Kerry...and we remarked how, had we gotten married when I was a twentysomething male who didn't really know the world, the John Kerry-George Bush battle in 2004 would have been like an atomic bomb to our marriage.

A lot of young women marry young guys who don't know what the difference between liberal and conservative is. If the guy later turns conservative (a big change in a man's life) and she doesn't...then she better hope there isn't a new generation coming in where younger women are enjoying Fox News, challenging liberal professors and listening to Ann Coulter. We might want to forget the insecure rants against the "younger" part of the person he now gets along with better and ask when and how often the problem is that the man goes conservative while the wife stays liberal in general life philosophy.

Again, I am not necessarily stating that political differences are always or even often serious enough for divorce.

Edith Wharton wrote "Ethan Fromme" on the general topic of failed marriages.

Also, how often have we heard about a conservative man dying with a fortune like the one Theresa Heinz received...and the woman, after her husband's death, turns out to stand for everything that he did not stand for? What was up with that? I met a woman in Los Angeles 2 years ago who bragged about how, after her father died, her mother could finally breathe easy and become a Democrat! What is that all about? Did the men have an idea that would happen?

We don't know.

Women may hand men the divorce papers, but what is the reason for the divorce. Did the women hand the divorce papers to the husband because he was cheating on her???

Actually, women are no more likely to cite adultery in divorce proceedings than men are. The excess of female-initiated divorces appears to largely be the result of generalized "unhappiness" whose source cannot be identified (hint: that's just the way life is, deal with it).

The hapless innocent husband is frequently blamed for "not making her happy" and she naively beleives that she can do better... which is usually NOT the case, as she is no longer the hot 21 year old surrounded with admirers that she remembers herself to have been back in her single days.

Gee, is it your sensitive verbiage that keeps me coming back to the hook?

I'm not particularly interested in being sensitive about a woman who contributes actively to the breakup of someone else's marriage. There are a number of words that can be used to describe such a person, and "slut" is probably the least coarse of them.

If you keep the interests of the children in mind first, you will stay married. Period. No matter what. But no-fault divorce has made divorce an appealing, even tempting, option for millions of men AND women - and it is the children who have suffered the most....

There I am in total agreement with you. Unfortunately, when one partner in a marriage decides that he or she wants to leave and refuses to put the interests of the children first, the other spouse can do nothing to prevent a divorce, no matter how devoted a parent he or she is. So it's too simplistic to say "If you keep the interests of the children in mind first, you will stay married. Period. No matter what." You may not have a choice. You may be involuntarily divorced by your spouse.

And by the way, I am not, so far as I know, your sister.

Few people of either sex cite adultery as a reason for divorce anymore. It is no longer necessary in most states to give a reason for a divorce. Some people do not cite a reason because this is a matter of public record, and therefore public humiliation.

In my state, a plaintiff in a divorce action is required to have a witness who can testify to the ground, be it adultery, cruelty, or voluntary separation (no fault). The offending spouse cannot be the witness- it has to be someone else. So you have to find someone who is a witness to the adultery, often easier said than done, since most people do not flaunt their affairs. It is easier to wait a year if both parties agree and get the divorce, with a witness only needing to state that you and your spouse have lived apart for a year by mutual agreement and have no hope of reconciliation.

No fault divorce is just one of a myriad of factors contributing to the breakdown of the family in our society.

As a female of Generation X vintage, I can say:

We were raised to believe we could do and be anything. Nobody aspired to be a "housewife". "Get an education so you can support yourself if necessary" was the message from all quarters.

Most of us are highly educated and could do quite well in the private sector.

Now, if we do choose to leave the work force after having a child, we lose valuable work skills and time in grade, if you will. If something, God forbid, should happen to our marriage, we will be forced into the workplace, regardless of the age of our children, unless our husbands are incredibly well off. Even alimony is normally available only to people married for a long time and in these cases, the children are pretty much gone. Child support only goes so far.

It's a horrible situation. Society makes it all too easy and convenient to leave a spouse and lots of time, the woman has lost skills and employability. Even if she hasn't, it is difficult to be forced into the workforce with young children. There is a reason she left the workplace in the first place--to raise children.

I'm not sure what the solution is. But many of us are simply afraid of depending too much on a man, regardless of how much we love him or how strong we think our marriages are.

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.