A RECENT Pew Research Survey titled “Breadwinner Moms,” discussed here, would have been more accurately titled, “Breadwinner Dads.” For the fact is the vast majority of mothers are financially dependent on men, either directly on the earnings of men who are the father of their children or indirectly in the form of public assistance. A third of the so-called “breadwinner moms” are not even working. That’s some kind of bread.

Not only are many of the “breadwinner moms” on government assistance, almost 70 percent of surveyed women with children under 18 would rather not be working full-time. I realize this is common sense, but it is common sense that is not very common. Since it is hard to support a family on part-time work, essentially these women are saying they would like a male breadwinner around or some other source of funding. If it is true that most mothers would prefer not to depend on their own resources, shouldn’t the thrust of public policy be to employ men first, rather than to pursue so-called equality?

—- Comments —-

Josh F. writes:

Not only is the stated article deceptive, but single motherhood, i.e., mothers who actually take care of their children with “singular” effort, is virtually nonexistent. The mantra of “single motherhood” has us believe that mothers actually raise their children with “singular” effort when the reality is that the mantra just signifies a mother who apparently has no father in the picture (this isn’t even entirely true all the time). But make no mistake, along with BigGov are grandmas and grandpas, sisters and brothers, friends and new lovers and a whole host of individuals willingly or unwillingly picking up slack for the “single mother.”

 Laura writes:

True, although it’s still a difficult job.

Terry Morris writes:

See the short exchange from a few days ago between feminist commenter, Tiffany, and me over the issue of rewarding single mothers with “meaningful, full-time work.” (Tiffany abandoned the conversation quicker than I anticipated, so I didn’t get the chance to get to the real meat of the subject. It was a strategic error on my part, but I hope she or some other radical, man-hating feminist libertarian will come back and raise the issue again under another entry at the site.)

Karl D. writes:

Without going into too much detail of my personal life, I would like to tell you that I was raised by a single mother. My mother was a housewife (and happily so) for twelve years until my father, (who without as much as a warning), walked out the door when I was ten years old. She was then thrust back into the workforce through no choice of her own. From that point on my mother worked two jobs (waiting tables for a number of years) as well as whatever money I could contribute from my after school or summer jobs. My father paid the princely sum of $300 a month child support (which was often late or missing altogether) until I was eighteen, and she chose not to sue for alimony. We had to move four times in ten years due to rent increases and one eviction Co-op situation. She would proudly and rightly tell you that not once did we ever have to go on food stamps or any other kind of government assistance.

But that was a different time and different place. She was and is a Conservative and a traditionalist who was raised poor Irish in New York City’s Chelsea neighborhood. I just can’t see too many single mothers in their 20s and 30s today doing the same thing. They weren’t raised that way, and many were probably never married in the first place. When I briefly lived in San Francisco I can’t tell you how many single mothers chose to be strippers or sex workers rather than waitress or something else. They almost always used their children as an excuse for their choice of “career.” Claiming they wanted the best for their kids and would have to go on food stamps if they didn’t sell their bodies. As for absentee fathers? I would hope there is a special place in Hell for them.

Pan Dora writes:

“Since it is hard to support a family on part-time work, essentially these women are saying they would like a male breadwinner around or some other source of funding. If it is true that most mothers would prefer not to depend on their own resources, shouldn’t the thrust of public policy be to employ men first, rather than pursue so-called equality?”

No, it should not. No one, be it a man desiring to be a sole breadwinner or “Tiffany” who wants to see single mothers rewarded with “full-time, meaningful work” is owed a living. If you want a job paying enough to be a sole supporter or you want “full-time, meaningful work” it is up to the individual to go out and learn the skills necessary to get that job, or to start their own business.

Laura writes:

I never once mentioned guaranteed employment. The best way government can help men is by removing the outrageous and unjust system of affirmative action, which it now mandates and which discriminates against men.

Buck writes:

Pan Dora’s penchant for drive-by rock throwing continues to startle, but no longer surprises. She’s a brilliant literary device, a la Socrates or Laura Wood…wait…let me think about this.

Laura writes:

Ha! Ha!

How clever of you to notice.

Please follow and like us: