Tuesday, April 2, 2013

"This veneration of motherhood"

1950s mom, complete with the gloriously ubiquitous chocolate layer cake...

Funny. And yet not. Feminists write long, long, long articles acknowledging (yet bemoaning) the fact that even intelligent, educated, lib-lefty, self-described feminists want to stay home full time with their kids, and (gasp) find homemaking fulfilling. "The Retro Wife" at New York magazine.

h/t American Spectator's Nicole Russell, who writes in "The New Feminism":
An Atlantic piece on the New York magazine story said it this way: “In this context, domesticity is reinvisioned [sic] as a valid, creative, politically powerful, even feminist choice. After all, we’re not talking June Cleaver vacuuming in pearls here…”

Vacuuming in pearls? They say that like it's a bad thing. It is totally my dream to be able to dress like Harriet Nelson whilst I do my housework. I just need the 25-inch waist first.

Last word goes to Nicole Russell (though I might argue that there was no such thing as a "pure root" to post-suffragette feminism):
The true, pure root of feminism wasn’t about schlepping your child to daycare at 6 a.m., working at an insurance company for $35,000 a year, heading home in time to throw dinner on the table, rush through homework and tuck them into bed. It was about choice. In my grandmother’s day, few women had the choice and some — the Melissa Mayers’ ancestors no doubt — yearned for it. Now many do. Some women choose to be at home; others choose to go to work — both reap the consequences. Can’t we let them do that without analyzing and arguing and bemoaning the so-called failure of a movement that rallied for just that?

Well put.

No comments:

Post a Comment