Wednesday, February 18, 2004
More
I should probably stop. I didn't get around to neatening up the last post. I'm getting pissed off, and that's not a good thing. But I just read the ongoing letters in Slate by Barbara Ehrenreich, Mosle, and Flanagan, and I'm annoyed.
Ehreneich says that, "when my daughter got home from work, she picked up the Atlantic, ... commenced an icy diatribe against stay-at-home moms who have nothing better to do than bash their hardworking sisters." She corrects Flanagan for missing the point of her book and says that we need is "a campaign for safe and loving childcare options for all of our children," and that the upper middle class employment of nannies removes them from this campaign.
Stay-at-home moms are not hardworking? They have nothing better to do? Screw you, Barbara.
Good childcare for everyone would be nice. But I am not sure what it would look like. I've never seen it myself. My kids have been in okay situations that have not harmed them in any way, but they've only been there part time. Even if childcare was free for all, I don't think I would use it full time, but that's just me.
I would like a little more childcare, more opportunities to work part time, a chance to return a full time career in a couple years, and more respect from feminists like Ehrenreich for my work at home.
Frankly, I'm surprised that Ehrenreich had that reaction to the Flanagan article. In fact, I thought of her when Flanagan wrote that her nanny cleaned up the sheets of her twin boys after a stomach virus. I thought that Ehrenreich would say that people should clean up their own messes.
I am disgusted by these women in Slate. I am grossed out by their entitlement, their rationalizations, their surity of the importance of their work, and their unwillingness to take on even a part of the boring, messy business of watching kids.
I should probably stop. I didn't get around to neatening up the last post. I'm getting pissed off, and that's not a good thing. But I just read the ongoing letters in Slate by Barbara Ehrenreich, Mosle, and Flanagan, and I'm annoyed.
Ehreneich says that, "when my daughter got home from work, she picked up the Atlantic, ... commenced an icy diatribe against stay-at-home moms who have nothing better to do than bash their hardworking sisters." She corrects Flanagan for missing the point of her book and says that we need is "a campaign for safe and loving childcare options for all of our children," and that the upper middle class employment of nannies removes them from this campaign.
Stay-at-home moms are not hardworking? They have nothing better to do? Screw you, Barbara.
Good childcare for everyone would be nice. But I am not sure what it would look like. I've never seen it myself. My kids have been in okay situations that have not harmed them in any way, but they've only been there part time. Even if childcare was free for all, I don't think I would use it full time, but that's just me.
I would like a little more childcare, more opportunities to work part time, a chance to return a full time career in a couple years, and more respect from feminists like Ehrenreich for my work at home.
Frankly, I'm surprised that Ehrenreich had that reaction to the Flanagan article. In fact, I thought of her when Flanagan wrote that her nanny cleaned up the sheets of her twin boys after a stomach virus. I thought that Ehrenreich would say that people should clean up their own messes.
I am disgusted by these women in Slate. I am grossed out by their entitlement, their rationalizations, their surity of the importance of their work, and their unwillingness to take on even a part of the boring, messy business of watching kids.
