Logistical Problem with Feminism
Feminism has long suffered from one major logistical problem.
The “build a career years” and the “raise the baby years” are the same years.
Women on the career path are leaving the workforce in droves because of this logistical conflict.
Both deserve our full attention so women either feel they have to choose or live with perpetual guilt for dividing their attentions.
Enter Barbara Walters with a 150 year solution.
According to the Barbara Walter’s Special my children could very likely live between 100 and 150 years.
The difference is science and our ability through stem-cell research and other advancements to cure disease. Eradicate disease and our lives are lengthened.
They examined the possible impacts of living for so dang long. We’ll need to save mucho, mega bucks for retirement. Cures and medicines ain’t cheap.
Also we know from Centurions, those currently living past 100 years old, that we’ll have to learn to cope with change, deal with loss of loved ones, including our own children and spouses.
Some experts predict monogamy will die and serial monogamy will take it’s place. We might have a starter marriage, a kids marriage, A retirement marriage and an assisted-living marriage. Not so much because people will be worse at marriage but their spouses are more likely to die off. (I thought it was hilarious that they predict a high geriatric lesbian rate because men will still die sooner and old women still need companions.) They talked about people having more than one career.
This is exactly what feminism and motherhood has long needed!
We’ll have plenty of time. This is how that time might’ve looked for me. * College Years 18-22
* Pay Career Dues Years 23-28
* Mommy Years 29-37
* Career Growth/Hard-Core Saving Years 37-65
* Investment in Grandchildren Years/Second Career Years 65-85
* Active Vacationing/Retirement Years 86-100
* Mellow Beach House Meditation and Yoga Years 100-150
Would you feel less consequence about your choice to stay home or be a working mom if you were given 150 years?
Oh and the men? This applies to them too. On the same show, I saw how research labs are growing body parts and organs. Taking a small cell and manufacturing a bladder. It’s not unlikely they’ll manufacture a uterus and some men will begin choosing the Mommy Years themselves.
Technorati Tags:
barbara walter, feminism, mommy years, career years, mommy track, stem cell research, living 150 years, serial monogamy, geriatric lesbianism, mommy wars, logistical problem with feminism. , c
Related Stories
POSTED IN: Fabulous Mothering, Fabulous Politics, Fabulous Susie Homemaker, Fabulous Work Life Balance
30 opinions for Logistical Problem with Feminism
Violet
Apr 21, 2008 at 2:44 pm
Brave new world, huh? I just want to say that it’s so unfair that the next generation gets assisted living marriages and geriatric lesbian partners! Also, new body parts.
Tracee
Apr 21, 2008 at 2:54 pm
I could be a geriatric lesbian. I can see just wanting to spend my time hanging out with another old lady who gets me.
Ashley
Apr 22, 2008 at 8:02 am
I don’t like the thought of serial monogamy… It sounds like a sugar - coated version of ‘repeated divorce’. Both of my parents have been married 3 times. There’s nothing healthy about that even (and especially) if the divorces are decades apart. Each time it tears down the dynamics of the family and the security of all involved. Each time it’s like abruptly changing the course of a ship and having half of the crew fall overboard.
Family should be solid and secure. Ideally, shouldn’t it be our constant?
Tracee
Apr 22, 2008 at 8:21 am
When interviewing people who lived to 100 none of them were still married because their spouses had died. But, they didn’t necessarily embrace celibate and alone either.
People already have a”starter marriage and then “another one” - statistically speaking it’s very common. Careful - I have a “starter marriage” and do not see the end of it as a failure of a family - I see it as actively saving my self from a terrible mistake. It was also full of terrible insecurity - which is why I got the hell out.
If you live to 150 they figure you will likely watch more than one spouse die.
People who live to 100 embrace change, including death (and divorce is also a form of change that can be very good - it sure as hell was for me) apparently.
Ashley
Apr 22, 2008 at 8:47 am
Okay - I’m not saying that divorce is universally bad (one of my mom’s husbands was an abusive alcoholic and we couldn’t say good riddens fast enough). And a widow/widower remarrying is not what I’m talking about here.
I’m refering to this Oprah Winfrey, “your life’s too long and complicated for one partner” theory of marriage which seems to be permeating our society. It seems like everyone’s okay with the thought of a starter marriage. A kids marriage. A retirement marriage…I’m not. If that is someone’s intentions - why even get married? Why is this acceptable.? You know as well as I do that when a man leaves his wife of 25 years for a younger version to spend his retirement with - we all shake our heads. We don’t think “oh how nice, he’s moving on to his retirement marriage.”
What is the point of marriage and having a family if the INTENTIONS are temporary? We wouldn’t let a couple adopt a child on a ‘temporary’ basis would we? What about starter children?
No matter how old the parents or children, divorce hurts pure and simple. Looking at marriage as a temporary is part of WHY we have so many divorces. Rather than work on fixing marriages most Americans would rather just dump this one and move on to the next. And now we’ve come up with a good way to rationalize this action. It’s not healthy for the family unit, and it’s not healthy for our country. I reflects our need for instant gratification and our preference for a quick fix.
Tracee
Apr 22, 2008 at 9:28 am
Why get married at all if your chances of divorce are one in two? What’s do “inherently great” about marriage?
The idea was not pro-divorce it was embrace change.
I wouldn’t agree with that assessment of Oprah Winfry’s view on marriage. Oprah never married so obviously the “marriage ideal” of family was not something she wanted to pursue. She never had children either, but obviously that’s not because hates children.
Oprah’s desire, I would say, is to empower women. And the idea is that if you’re in a shitty marriage, that’s sucking out all your energy, then it’s not empowering. If you’re taking abuse you don’t have power. Period.
Being married itself doesn’t supply security or happiness. Everyone who has been married over two years should know this. I think Oprah is in favor of us letting go of this fiction that marriage is going to “save us” from anything or provide security or happiness. Cause the reality is - it won’t.
She’s also not pro-divorce. Did you see the divorce episodes earlier this season where she took parents to task for being so laise faire about getting a divorce and the permanent heart-breaking effect divorce had on children. I’ve seen her refer to those episodes as the ones she is most proud of this season. When I watched them I felt she was very critical of divorce and very critical of people who think they can just walk away from marriage without permanent consequences.
I was thinking I might like to get a divorce and call a stop to the whole damn mess in my marriage when I saw them and it motivated me to look for a better solution. Because of Oprah Winfrey I saw that I could never escape dealing with the father of my children so I had better figure out a way to get along and work it out with him.
I would say it’s more about Dr. Phil’s idea that children would rather be FROM a broken home and IN a broken home.
All children are temporary (adopted and biological) - they grow up.
Ashley
Apr 22, 2008 at 9:50 am
I’ve heard Oprah play with the theory (more than once) that our lives aren’t meant to be spent with one person. That each stage in our lives might be better served with different partners. She’s discussed it with guests and explored the theory on her show.
That wasn’t a stab at Oprah - although I don’t agree with that theory. She WAS the first person I’ve heard endorse, or explore rather, that theory.. But I don’t think Oprah is anti-family. I think she’s got an open mind and speaks her mind and the rest of the world follows suit..which is sometimes good and sometimes bad. And sometimes she contradicts herself which leaves us arguing on a blog ;)
I guess what I’m most disturbed with is the concept becoming accepted and normal in theory. (unfortunately it’s already becoming normal in practice) If we accept it and rationalize it and take all the personal responsibility out of it - the divorce rate will stay the same..
And no, I don’t believe our children are temporary. Yes they change and grow and sometimes move off.. But we certainly don’t divorce them. Their title will always be ‘my son’ or ‘my daughter’ and they will always be welcome at holidays, meals, plays, weddings,etc. I see what you’re saying, but I don’t think it’s comparable to the permanent split and the disownment (sp?) that accompanies divorce.
Violet
Apr 22, 2008 at 10:09 am
I think far too much effort is spent keeping marriages together (that will never satisfy either partner) just for the sake of staying together.
Not saying a person shouldn’t work on it, but divorce is not always failure, sometimes it’s the best solution. Right now, I see myself staying in my marriage for a long time, but if things go bad, hell yes, I’m getting divorced. I learned that from my first marriage. I can walk away if I am unhappy, and I will be FINE. So glad I left my “starter marriage.” We’ve both gone on to have happier second marriages.
Divorce is difficult on children, but it can be made less so responsible behavior on behalf of adults. My husband is the product of a divorce where the parents kept fighting and dragging the children into it years after their divorce was final. He is still scarred by this.
I have other friends who kept it friendly for the sake of their kids. One divorced couple I know even gets together on Christmas day and other holidays (with both parents bringing their new spouses) so that their children can be with both parents on those days. Privately, my friend will complain a little about him, but she doesn’t involve her children. It can be worked out.
I’ll never forget how happy a friend was in high school when her parents finally got divorced after years of staying together for the kids. She said it was a huge relief not to have to live in the middle of their cold war any longer.
Ashley
Apr 22, 2008 at 11:32 am
Violet and Tracee
As I said above SOMETIMES marriage is the only solution. But if we all (society) would look at marriage as an unbreakable, family bond we would have far fewer divorces and children of divorce. Right now most of us view it as temporary. We think “if I’m not happy, I’ll leave”. I realize that “not happy” is very broad, but there are many unhappy situations that can be fixed instead of abandoned. I’m trying to look at my marriage vows as REAL. When tackling problems, I’m trying not to consider divorce. I have to look at him as my family.
I’m sure at some time, in the distant (rapidly approaching) future when my boys are teenagers there will be periods of unhappiness on both of our parts - and I can assure you “getting out” won’t be one of the options I consider. They are my childen no matter what they do. Why can’t we have that attitude with our spouses? And if we did - don’t you think there might be a little haste and a little more consideration before getting married in the first place?
All I’m saying is that marriage isn’t supposed to ‘make you happy’ or fulfill you or fix all the things wrong with you. It isn’t a dress to try on for a while.. I believe that its true purpose is a lifelong commitment that takes work and diligence and effort. I’m just saying if we took it more seriously, as a society, we (parents and children) would be much happier.
Ashley
Apr 22, 2008 at 11:33 am
” a little LESS haste..”
Tracee
Apr 22, 2008 at 12:11 pm
I don’t think it’s promoting a theory.
I think it’s facing a reality.
The divorce rate is high. Oprah didn’t make it so. Gays didn’t make it so. Married people made it so.
Just because you examine something doesn’t mean you’re pro-divorce or anti-marriage.
It means you stop buying into the usual “marriage is best for all people” theory of Judeo Christian values.
Marriage doesn’t make people happy. It’s a solid truth.
Married people know that. Happily married people are happy whether they are married or not. They don’t expect happiness to come from their mate.
If married people would face that reality and stop expecting marriage to make them happy they would likely stay married longer. THIS has been the point of every Oprah episode I’ve ever seen on marriage.
Rebecca
Apr 22, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Of course a child is your child no matter what they do. but legally speaking a marriage is world’s away from a parent-child relationship. And it should be.
My husband is certainly not my husband “no matter what he does.”
My personal opinion is that marriage is not an “unbreakable vow”. In my experience looking at it that way leads to misery and people feeling like they’re going to hell if they even consider divorce, and putting up with years of sheer misery. On the other hand, if children were involved, I would do everything possible to try to save a marriage, with the hope that I could eventually achieve some happiness. But this is assuming my husband also was willing to stay married and also willing to work on whatever issues had caused said unhappines.
Ashley
Apr 22, 2008 at 12:45 pm
Couldn’t agree with you more about the happiness issue.. I’m pretty sure I said that. I also said I don’t think Oprah’s anti family. I DO however think that she’s human and sometimes contradicts herself. Even though I think she’s helped tons of people (including me) with good advice and helpful info, I don’t believe Oprah is perfect or has every answer… I had no idea mentioning something she’s talked about (with that twinkle in her eye, by the way) would be so offensive. I’m sorry.
As for the “marriage is best for all people” I definately did not say that. If anything - that’s the opposite of what I was saying.
What is so wrong with marriage being taken seriously? What’s wrong with it being a commitment and something you stick out until it gets better? What’s wrong with kids getting to grow up in an intact family unit? I’m not pushing some oppressive “Stand by your man” approach here…I’m pushing the ‘don’t get married until you’re ready to make a real commitment’ here.
Violet
Apr 22, 2008 at 12:45 pm
I don’t know many people who cavalierly decided to get divorced or think of marriage as temporary. I think most people do go into their marriages with the idea that it will be a life-long partnership, but that doesn’t always work out.
I worked my ASS off in my first marriage. We went to counseling on multiple occasions. We talked, we tried different things. But I couldn’t change his alcoholism, cheating and other issues. My upbringing told me to make it work. Well, I couldn’t do that and hold on to what I needed as an individual. It was heartbreaking to walk away, but I chose myself over the relationship. I don’t regret that.
I remember I finally walked out when I decided I either had to put a bullet in my head (yeah, I’m a drama queen) or get divorced. That’s how miserable I was and how beaten down I felt trying to make this work.
I am glad you are able to stick it out with your guy –good for you! I love that my parents are still married and I hope my current marriage will be life-long. But not everyone has something that is good enough to stick it out for. I’m so glad I got divorced because now I am happily married to someone else. So’s my ex who was able to solve many of his personal problems on his own with me out of the picture.
What would have been served by us banging our head against the marriage wall for another 50 years?
Ashley
Apr 22, 2008 at 12:48 pm
I have a question too -
How would you feel if you were on your kids marriage and your husband was on his starter marriage? Would everyone be okay with that?
Tracee
Apr 22, 2008 at 12:55 pm
This is my husband’s first marriage - his “starter marriage” and his kids marriage.
Everyone has to be okay, or get okay, with that because it’s reality. I’m all for facing reality.
I would say we - all of us in this conversation and Oprah - believe the same things about marriage.
I wish everything wonderful and pleasant for my ex-husband, but I am thrilled to death that I am not his wife.
Rebecca
Apr 22, 2008 at 1:03 pm
hee. my marriage to my husband is his “starter marriage” too! I gotta laugh when I look back at myself getting married the first time. I was such a moron.
And tracee i feel the exact same way about my exhusband! Who, by the way, was not an abuser or an alcoholic but a very nice guy.
Another one of my opinions is that people should avoid getting married in their early 20’s or god forbid, late teens.
Tracee
Apr 22, 2008 at 1:08 pm
When Oprah talks about marriage in a less 100% positive marriage I feel like it’s meant to move marriage forward not abandon it. Tell young people - and bewildered wives - what a reasonable expectation is.
Like Rebecca said young people shouldn’t be doing it because they have unrealistic expectations that happiness will result from it.
I’m not going to sacrifice my “self” for the “good of the family” or the “good of society”. I learned that sacrificing myself will cause the demise of both.
Ashley
Apr 22, 2008 at 1:10 pm
I feel completely misunderstood.
Nevermind.
Violet
Apr 22, 2008 at 1:11 pm
I will agree with you about one thing Ashley. Oprah does say many conflicting things! One show will be about letting go of the need for stuff. The next will feature $2,000 cashmere robes.
I love her, but she is just a person and has blind spots like everyone else.
Violet
Apr 22, 2008 at 1:13 pm
I’m sorry Ashley. I like talking about the issues, but I probably am not seeing your POV. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
Tracee
Apr 22, 2008 at 1:16 pm
I don’t know what a POV is.
Tracee
Apr 22, 2008 at 1:24 pm
I understand you Ashley.
There is obviously great value in trying to work it out once you are in a marriage, especially if you have children. People should make sure they try every method of staying together and working it out and finding happiness within the marriage. Once kids are involved it’s not reality to think you can pick up your toys and go home. You are tied to the person indefinitely.
I’ll defend Oprah to the death though. She’s my SHERO.
Violet
Apr 22, 2008 at 1:26 pm
POV = Point of View
Violet
Apr 22, 2008 at 1:28 pm
That cracks me up. My husband jokingly forbids me to use any Oprah lingo. Shero and Vajayjay are two terms he take issue with. Of course, i use them all the time to mess with him!
Ashley
Apr 22, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Even sheros have flaws..that doesn’t mean I don’t respect her and listen to her most of the time though.
One last thing on the marriage/kids/work it out issue. My parents married because my mom was pregnant. They tried to stay together even though they were a bad fit. They divorced when I was four. I have vivid memories of fights and yelling and also of my parents being in the same house, under the same roof, sitting at the same table. My WHOLE childhood was consumed with wishing they were back together - I felt like something tangible had been lost forever (which is dramatic I know because I was only four right? shouldn’t I have had enough time to adjust?). Even as a teenager and young adult that sensation of feeling secure and then having it ripped away from me was so strong. I know that if your parents are thankfully still married there’s no relating - but divorce is a heartbreaking thing for kids. There’s really not a ‘happy’ divorce. Try to imagine if your children decided they wanted to live in different houses (bear with me here) and you had to decide which one to live with..from now on there’s no holidays - family time-vacations-activities that you will do all together.
Now, I DO NOT think my parents should have stuck it out. I think they should have never married and tried to make a go of it. They thought - it’s what you do, we’ll make it honest, we’ll see how it goes.. I think it has to be taken more serious than that or don’t bother.
Violet
Apr 22, 2008 at 1:52 pm
Ashley,
That makes sense. My parents are still married, but my husband’s parents divorced when he was 5 and he is still pretty traumatized by the experience.
He has admitted to secretly wishing his parents had stayed together too. It must be really painful in a way I don’t quite get.
Also, my first marriage had no children. It’s hard to say, but my choices might have been different if there had been some.
Ashley
Apr 22, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Tracee - what’s with the HUGE comment font? :)
I feel like I’m shouting it out!!!
Tracee
Apr 22, 2008 at 1:56 pm
maybe you were wishing for something else.
Maybe you were wishing for the “ideal family.”
Maybe your mother knew that wasn’t possible with him.
But, again, the Oprah’s episodes on divorce accurately illustrated what you are saying - there is no such thing as a happy divorce if you have children.
(I had no children with my first husband so I think my divorce was a defining positive moment in my life. We also took vacations together after the divorce and after the court proceeding we went to dinner together. )
i use the word “the universe” to refer to God, jsut cause it’s funny to watch the look on my husbands’ face.
Violet
Apr 22, 2008 at 1:59 pm
There is something wrong with your fonts, dear. It is a bit distracting to read and write comments.
Have an opinion? Leave a comment: