I have recently owned up to the reality that, as a woman in her mid-20s, I am of that typical childbearing age. For instance, it wouldn't be the worst tragedy if I became pregnant; I'm in a committed relationship and society actually considers me an adult so I wouldn't get my own TV show to exploit the issue.
Now I am not trying to become pregnant (chill out family members), but I have several friends who have chosen with their partners to head down that path toward reproduction. My friends and their spouses both have careers which they both intend to maintain while popping out babies. Based on some of the conversations I've had with these couples, it is a given that mother and father will play equal roles when it comes to raising that baby. None of us question that it will be difficult for both parents to maintain their careers while raising Junior.
However, according to a report recently produced by The Families and Work Institute, "men now experience more work-family conflict than women". The report discusses how difficult it has been for men in recent decades to adapt to the blending of gender roles when it comes to child rearing and work-family balance. It found that men are under some serious pressure to have it all, meaning living up to changing societal expectations of providing for the family while also spending time with their children. In short, fathers today have it rough and this is stressing them out.
There are several things that bothered me about this report after I read through it. First, they purposefully identify this phenomenon as the "new male mystique" to conjure up references to another societal mystique about which Betty Friedan wrote a very boring book in the early 1960s. Friedan's "feminine mystique" as she named it was flawed in that it only applied to middle to upper class white women in the suburbs leaving out a huge chunk of the population. Referencing the "feminine mystique" in the year 2011 is just a crappy analogy. Can we please value the second wave of feminism for what it was worth and move forward realizing that we can no longer keep polarizing men's and women's gender roles. The report applies Friedan's logic (their words, not mine) which is a seriously antiquated way to analyze gender roles. So riddle me this: why is a report put out in 2011 referring to outdated, inherently flawed, and classist analyses of gender roles?
This "new male mystique's" flaw is that it is nothing new. Just like it's not new that women also struggle with finding an ideal work family balance, both sexes have been dealing with this issue for decades. For example, while upper class white women in the '50s and '60s were feeling dissatisfied with their assumed role in the home, minority and lower class women and men were still working and making efforts to find a balance between raising children and providing for their families. Some of those women even had to do it by themselves.(Gasp!) Having one primary financier for a family was a very socio-economic specific concept. So for the rest of the population then and now, this was never a realistic option and many mothers and fathers have both been working to support their families for awhile now.
It shouldn't shock us that parents today struggle to simultaneously maintain their careers and raise children. Our culture has not set us up for success when it comes to balancing these two fundamental things that many people want in life. Gender roles have surprisingly adapted faster than some procedures, policies and practices. Working women still experience discrimination when they become pregnant. Maternity leave in this country ultimately fails in comparison to our European counterparts and paternity leave is a luxury that only a few companies enjoy. Finding affordable (safe and trustworthy) childcare seems more like a punchline to a bad joke than a reality. In companies that offer insurance options, employees with families are at a greater risk of losing their jobs because they are often more expensive to a company's insurance plans. And let's be honest, most of our employers, if we even are employed, exploit our salaried positions by indirectly requiring us to put in more than forty hours each week (maybe I've just been working for the nonprofit industry for too long). But seriously, it is still a customary practice for Americans to be overworked, super competitive and have to pick between career or family regardless of what leaps and bounds we've made for women in the workplace over the years.
The report ultimately fails to acknowledge how extensively our roller coaster economy has impacted families the past few decades. My close friends and Econ professors know I'm no economist but it doesn't take one to understand that the uncertain economy has contributed to strained work-family relations. Finances alone in a solid economy majorly impact family dynamics. As a result of the shotty economy, both sexes are doing whatever they can to keep their family financially secure because most parents do inherently want to provide for their kids. Parents might feel inclined to sacrifice time spent with their kids now in order to secure a future for them later. Many families have been adapting to this pressure. The economy is kind of kicking everyone's ass right now and it's foolish to not recognize the severity of its impact.
The one thing I found comical yet productive about the report is that it suggests some great changes that need to be made for fathers in the workplace; improvements in paternity leave, flexible hours, working as a team to decrease the workload on the individual, opening up discussions with employers to make jobs more family friendly and several other things that feminists have been arguing for years when it comes to working and raising children. Why they felt this was an issue worthy of writing a whole entire report about, we shall never know. Why they thought Betty Friedan could help analyze the issue clearly says they haven't followed up on their feminist literature in the last three decades. The only thing we might be able to take away from this report is that we obviously aren't doing enough to help men and women find a fair balance between their careers and raising children. So we still have much more work to do for both sexes.
Now I am not trying to become pregnant (chill out family members), but I have several friends who have chosen with their partners to head down that path toward reproduction. My friends and their spouses both have careers which they both intend to maintain while popping out babies. Based on some of the conversations I've had with these couples, it is a given that mother and father will play equal roles when it comes to raising that baby. None of us question that it will be difficult for both parents to maintain their careers while raising Junior.
However, according to a report recently produced by The Families and Work Institute, "men now experience more work-family conflict than women". The report discusses how difficult it has been for men in recent decades to adapt to the blending of gender roles when it comes to child rearing and work-family balance. It found that men are under some serious pressure to have it all, meaning living up to changing societal expectations of providing for the family while also spending time with their children. In short, fathers today have it rough and this is stressing them out.
There are several things that bothered me about this report after I read through it. First, they purposefully identify this phenomenon as the "new male mystique" to conjure up references to another societal mystique about which Betty Friedan wrote a very boring book in the early 1960s. Friedan's "feminine mystique" as she named it was flawed in that it only applied to middle to upper class white women in the suburbs leaving out a huge chunk of the population. Referencing the "feminine mystique" in the year 2011 is just a crappy analogy. Can we please value the second wave of feminism for what it was worth and move forward realizing that we can no longer keep polarizing men's and women's gender roles. The report applies Friedan's logic (their words, not mine) which is a seriously antiquated way to analyze gender roles. So riddle me this: why is a report put out in 2011 referring to outdated, inherently flawed, and classist analyses of gender roles?
It shouldn't shock us that parents today struggle to simultaneously maintain their careers and raise children. Our culture has not set us up for success when it comes to balancing these two fundamental things that many people want in life. Gender roles have surprisingly adapted faster than some procedures, policies and practices. Working women still experience discrimination when they become pregnant. Maternity leave in this country ultimately fails in comparison to our European counterparts and paternity leave is a luxury that only a few companies enjoy. Finding affordable (safe and trustworthy) childcare seems more like a punchline to a bad joke than a reality. In companies that offer insurance options, employees with families are at a greater risk of losing their jobs because they are often more expensive to a company's insurance plans. And let's be honest, most of our employers, if we even are employed, exploit our salaried positions by indirectly requiring us to put in more than forty hours each week (maybe I've just been working for the nonprofit industry for too long). But seriously, it is still a customary practice for Americans to be overworked, super competitive and have to pick between career or family regardless of what leaps and bounds we've made for women in the workplace over the years.
The report ultimately fails to acknowledge how extensively our roller coaster economy has impacted families the past few decades. My close friends and Econ professors know I'm no economist but it doesn't take one to understand that the uncertain economy has contributed to strained work-family relations. Finances alone in a solid economy majorly impact family dynamics. As a result of the shotty economy, both sexes are doing whatever they can to keep their family financially secure because most parents do inherently want to provide for their kids. Parents might feel inclined to sacrifice time spent with their kids now in order to secure a future for them later. Many families have been adapting to this pressure. The economy is kind of kicking everyone's ass right now and it's foolish to not recognize the severity of its impact.
The one thing I found comical yet productive about the report is that it suggests some great changes that need to be made for fathers in the workplace; improvements in paternity leave, flexible hours, working as a team to decrease the workload on the individual, opening up discussions with employers to make jobs more family friendly and several other things that feminists have been arguing for years when it comes to working and raising children. Why they felt this was an issue worthy of writing a whole entire report about, we shall never know. Why they thought Betty Friedan could help analyze the issue clearly says they haven't followed up on their feminist literature in the last three decades. The only thing we might be able to take away from this report is that we obviously aren't doing enough to help men and women find a fair balance between their careers and raising children. So we still have much more work to do for both sexes.
