SAGE McLAUGHLIN writes:

In keeping with your repeatedly-stated theme that feminism brings “glitter and drama” to a fortunate few, but only personal and material impoverishment to most women, here is interesting commentary by James Taranto, copied in full.

He wrote:

Marriage and male responsibility for families were once the norm at all levels of American society. Feminism was supposed to liberate women from dependency on men. Instead it has helped to create a two-tiered culture in which the norm is for women to be “chained to a desk,” but those who hit the jackpot in the mating game can realistically aspire to escape that status. Nice going, ladies. Happy International Women’s Day.

— Comments —

Robin writes:

Oh, how true! Those “women” who paved the way for modern-day feminism can keep their “International Women’s Day”; I’d like a day called “International Housewives Day” in honor of the traditional woman.

I did not “marry rich” when I married again after years of single motherhood. My first marriage ended as a result of unrepentant infidelity on the part of my young son’s father. I was a full-time wife and mother, and I will admit, a poor one, as I had no idea yet what that meant. At the time, the only thing I knew was that deep in my spirit, it is all I ever wanted.

However, my precious gift – my husband now – works seven days a week, often ten to twelve hours a day – exhausting himself to put a roof over our heads as he strives to own his own business and be in “control” of earning a decent wage for our family. He does this in order that I do not have to place our two young children in daycare and be “chained to a desk” selling insurance as I did full-time prior to my deliverance from the feminist mindset. He does this knowing that I will likely home school our children and I will need to be free from the bondage of the marketplace in order to do this in a few years.

Oh, how he has spoken time and again how he would love to “win the lottery” somehow by way of his profession, or even literally – so that I am no longer required to even work part-time (I take our children with me to my part-time job as a domestic/child care giver.) We have already made most every possible sacrifice in our lifestyle (our housing choice, single automobile, cash lifestyle, etc.), and yet he still feels inadequate in his ability to be the sole breadwinner for us, and it makes my heart hurt, because it is not his fault that he finds himself in this position.

The one and only time that I have been in the company of his business mentor and employees, “that question” kept popping up when I introduced myself: “…and what do YOU do?” I found myself fumbling around apologizing and gingerly whispering that I am a wife and take care of our children and other people’s children. I could not even keep it solely to being a wife and keeping my own children – for fear that it wasn’t a valid purpose unless I was paid somehow to do something additional! They looked upon me as though they felt sorry for my husband that I “make” him carry this horrid burden by himself, but it was acceptable, because at least I do SOMETHING in addition to caring for my own husband and my own children!

Still, I feel rich beyond measure. I feel blessed beyond all imagination. I feel loved. Isn’t this what women want?

I wish they would stop selling this lie that independence satisfies them.

Jesse Powell writes:

Taranto mentions these statistics in the article:

“It shows that between 1993 and 2006, there was a decline in the workforce of 0.1 percent a year on average in the number of college-educated women, with similarly educated spouses.

That contrasts with growth of 2.4 percent a year between 1976 and 1992.”

In general, the proportion of women who are in the work force has stayed flat since 1995. As far as I know the particular statistics above are simply a part of this overall pattern. The measure being cited is a bit funny; the quantities being compared are “college-educated women with similarly educated spouses.” I’m supposing what this means more precisely is the number of women in the workforce with a Bachelor’s Degree or higher who were married to men with a Bachelor’s Degree of higher. The number of such women might drop because of college educated women marrying men who are not college educated due to the relatively small number of college educated men. The number might drop because of college educated women marrying later and therefore not being in the pool of “married women”. The number could even drop because of the birth cohort being smaller due to low fertility.

Before drawing too many conclusions I would want to see statistics more geared to the phenomenon I’m trying to see. The proportion of women who are married to men making more than $50,000 a year who are in the labor force themselves would be a good measure for trying to see if the phenomenon being speculated about is actually happening.

The proportion of women in the workforce grew continuously from 1870 to 1995 (the 1870 Census being the first year such statistics were available). It is quite interesting that since 1995 this very long standing trend has stopped. Women’s earnings compared to men has continued to increase since 1995. Women’s educational attainment compared to men has continued to increase since 1995. Still, Labor Force Participation Rates have not increased since 1995 in contrast to what happened in the prior 125 years.

Please follow and like us: