- Local every day in
The Worthington Post - Is There No Way to Win?
I would love to get Anne-Marie Slaughter and Marissa Mayer in a room together. They could commiserate about how their personal life choices are the subject of such public scrutiny and criticism. They could play a drinking game wherein every time someone cheers for them to succeed they take a shot. Every time someone insists they'll fail (or has already failed) they take two shots. Before you know it, they'd be sitting back-to-back on the floor, totally blitzed and eating pizza and giggling at crazy cat videos on YouTube.
Need me to back up for a sec? Okay. I am talking about two women who have caused quite a stir in the last month or so: Anne-Marie Slaughter, for leaving an extremely high-powered job in Washington, D.C., to be more present for her teen-aged sons and to return to her (merely) extremely demanding job as a full-time professor at Princeton; Marissa Mayer for taking an extremely high-powered job as Yahoo!'s CEO at the same time she announces she is pregnant.
These women can't win for trying. Anne-Marie Slaughter is honest and forthright about the toll such jobs take on a parent, and realistic about what is best for her family. Marissa Mayer is brilliant and ambitious—much the way I imagine Slaughter was at the same age—and confident in her ability to manage an insane career with having a new baby (her first, by the way.) Both are being cheered and jeered—just from opposite sides.
Prof. Slaughter faces criticism and condescension from her peers and fellow feminists for asserting that women can't have it all. She is being thanked by exhausted women who sacrifice for their kids, either by staying home with them or having a job, or both at the same time.
Ms. Mayer is criticized by women who are smugly saying "You think you'll be back to work after three weeks? You've NO earthly idea what is about to hit you," and judgmentally saying "Fine, I guess if you never wanna see your baby and have him raised by strangers, go for it." She's garnering praise from the same group criticizing Slaughter—"She's the poster girl for having it all! She's the beneficiary of all we've worked for! You GO, girl!"
Let me propose an alternative response to each.
To Anne-Marie Slaughter, I'd say, "You are a brilliant, incredibly accomplished woman. You've shined a bright light on some of the real problems even successful working women face. You've politely and respectfully asked millions of women to step back and evaluate their choices and paths, without being judgmental of others who choose differently. You should be supported and applauded as you make this transition out of public service and back into private education and a closer family life. Use your considerable power for Good."
To Marissa Mayer, I'd say, "You are a brilliant, incredibly accomplished woman. You've shattered the glass ceiling in the heavily male field of technological innovation. You're about to have a baby. You should be supported and applauded as you try to forge a workable balance between career and new motherhood. Use your considerable power for Good. (And if, when the baby arrives, you decide you need more than three weeks of maternity leave, I hope you allow yourself the flexibility to take it. I hope the those on Yahoo!'s Board of Directors collectively chuckle and say, 'We thought you might need more than three weeks. Take as much as you need and your job will still be there for you.')"
To Yahoo!, I'd say, "Great job hiring the best person for the job, even though you knew she is pregnant. Now's your chance to make a high-profile and meaningful change to improve the lives of working mothers in your company, and set a real example. Like my new friend at Lizrael Update insightfully advocates, help her show the world that Corporate America thrives when its families do. You can do it. Be like this guy, who pays his employees $7,500 to take their vacation time, and use it to really get away from it all. Take care of your own. Because seriously, today's workplace culture and economic climate are not exactly cutting it.
Understandably, cries of classism permeate the discussion of both women. For Prof. Slaughter, it's "Sure—she has a CHOICE of picking the job that lets her spend more time with her kids. Must be NICE." For Ms. Mayer, it's "Sure, she can stay at her job—she's a BAZILLIONAIRE, and can have nannies out the wazoo. Must be NICE." No matter how justified the resentment, this attitude is toxic and counterproductive. I wish it would stop.
People, you want these women to meet with success in whichever path they choose. Here's why. We NEED women in high-power positions to succeed. We NEED them to run for office. We NEED them to have a seat at the table so they can advocate for a supportive workplace culture. We want them to thrive so that they can put in place innovative policies that TRULY support a work/family balance that works for BOTH genders. So they can fight for fairness in health care and family leave, and fight against discrimination in the workplace. So that every woman, every family, can have at least a few healthy and fulfilling life options to pursue. THAT would be true choice, would it not?
This post also available on my website, www.theworthingtonpost.net.
Mari
8:45 pm on Thursday, July 19, 2012
Oh, Aliza, now you've scared me because I totally agree with this column. I think I would have said I want them to succeed, rather than need them to do so, but that's just a small quibble. Every person is different and different people and families work out different lives. What works for one will not work for the other and until we acknowledge and accept that, there will be criticism of other peoples' choices.
Between us, though, don't you think she might need more than 3 weeks maternity leave (unless she sets up a nursery and nanny at the office, which is more than doable in her position)? I know I did...
Aliza Worthington
9:20 pm on Thursday, July 19, 2012
Hi, Mari - what scares you, that you agree with my column? :-D
I agree with everything you've said - And yes, of course, I think almost EVERYONE needs more than 3 weeks to heal and bond and figure out life with baby. I also, though, forgive her her naiveté, since I think it's something we all have before our first child. There is no way to predict how our lives are turned upside down until we experience it firsthand.
I've missed your comments! Thanks for giving me another read. :)
Mari
9:19 am on Friday, July 20, 2012
You know what I mean, Aliza! :)
Like you (and every other parent), I received tons of advice when I was pregnant. Some of it was really useful and the one thing I remember more than anything is "A baby doesn't fit into your life; you fit your life into the baby's." I think Ms. Mayer will learn this but again she has the financial resources and the corporate position to make some changes at Yahoo, such as setting up the nursery at the office that I mentioned.)
Aliza, you should write a blog on the best (and maybe worst) baby advice you ever received.
Aliza Worthington
10:36 am on Friday, July 20, 2012
That's a great idea, Mari - I wish I could remember any of it... :) The best advice I never took was to sleep when the baby sleeps. The best advice I did take was about the advice itself: My parents told me, "Tons of people will be giving you advice - much of it unsolicited. Listen to ALL of it. Feel free to ignore ANY of it and follow your gut." :)
Theresa Defino
11:08 am on Friday, July 20, 2012
Both of these women are doing NOTHING new, and the Eureka moment Ms. Slaughter had hit everyone else in the 60s and 70s. Quite honestly it's time for people to STOP paying attention to what people like her say. You may say criticizing them is toxic? I say listening to them is toxic!
Fifty percent of marriages end in divorce. Fourty-one percent of births are occurring outside marriage. A third of children overall are raised in single-parent homes. Seventy-two percent of them live in poverty. The single-parent number is up to 66% in black families.
Slaughter has a husband--who helps--and lots of money. She ALREADY HAS IT all.
It's time to change the conversation, to focus on helping single parents achieve success in politics and business--wherever they want to be. The people you refer to as "these women" are rapidly becoming the minority, yet their privileged status gives them the ability to whine and demand even more. They are not representative.
If you really want to advocate for women PLEASE open you eyes. "These women" aren't the ones who need help.
Aliza Worthington
9:27 pm on Saturday, July 21, 2012
Hi, Theresa,
Thank you for your comments. I think you may have missed MY points...none of which included suggesting Slaughter and/or Mayer needed help or sympathy (though I did say they couldn't win - maybe that's what you're taking issue with.) I was suggesting that whatever life decisions they make are their own business, and they shouldn't be criticized for them (Slaughter for stepping down from her DC job, Mayer for planning to take only 3 weeks maternity leave.)
I was making a case for being nonjudgmental in our discussions about the decisions of high profile women, as we need more women in positions of power - either in government, private industry, or whatever. I was also expressing hope that their positions and actions would help shape public and corporate policy to help exactly the people you're saying need help. Making childcare more available, making paid maternity leave a priority, allowing women to climb the ladder of success without having to completely sacrifice the needs of their families to do it. This can only help single parents, and other parents struggling to balance family with earning a living.
Theresa Defino
11:03 pm on Saturday, July 21, 2012
I did not miss your points. I am simply uninterested in the problems of married, wealthy women who are already in positions of power. Their situations are not deserving of all this attention. The work/life balance issue for these kinds of women isn't new, neither are any of the insights they supposedly have offered through their situations revelatory in any way. I am not judging them. I did not assess the propriety of their decisions.
We are past all this. We must face the changing demographics and growing economic disparity between people like those women and the rest of us.
As far as sympathy, I was referring to the comments directed to me by Damien, and was not referring to anything you wrote.
Aliza Worthington
11:49 pm on Saturday, July 21, 2012
(apologies in advance if these appear out of order...the site is not giving me the option to reply to your response to me, Theresa.)
I'm afraid we're talking past each other. If your displeasure is due to the fact that I'm focusing on my hope that Mayer and Slaughter can have an impact on the lives of working struggling women everywhere, and focusing on my wish that we not judge one another, then I am fine agreeing to disagree.
If your displeasure is due to the fact that not enough attention is being paid to the poverty-stricken among us, and the sad state of marriage, those are certainly subjects I'm willing to address in the future, as I have in the past. The NY Times had a wonderful article that was great food for thought by Jason DeParle focusing on the connection between marriage, single parenthood and poverty. Here's the link, if you are interested.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/us/two-classes-in-america-divided-by-i-do.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
You may not be judging Mayer and Slaughter, but others certainly are. That was my impetus behind writing the article. You're welcome to send me a direct message suggesting topics for my blog.
Theresa Defino
3:27 am on Sunday, July 22, 2012
I read the NYT story last weekend. It's horribly flawed. It describes the central figure's plight as being caused by not being married. Two incomes are better than one. CHECK. Many, many have roundly criticized it.
See:
http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/cepr-blog/family-structure-is-overrated-as-an-explanation-of-inequality
and
http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/16/is-it-i-do-or-i-plan-that-divides-us/
And no, my point is not wanting attention paid to the "sad state of marriage" or "the poverty stricken among us." It's about facing a reality that is far more common (and nuanced) than Slaughter and Mayer's situations.
My objections are stated at 7/20, 11:08 a.m.
Leslie F. Miller
11:24 am on Sunday, July 22, 2012
Amen, sister. There's a maid in a hotel where I slept the last few nights who needs some clout and power. She works harder, longer hours, and she can barely support her children because her husband's been out of work all year.
Theresa Defino
2:29 pm on Sunday, July 22, 2012
@ Leslie--thanks much. Sent you an email.
Damien Gibbons
7:41 am on Saturday, July 21, 2012
Theresa, with respect, I don't buy that. Simply because they're not destitute doesn't mean they aren't breaking new ground or aren't doing something noteworthy. We could spend a lifetime focusing on all the single mothers out there and they would deserve it (I was raised by one) but if you want to raise public awareness, nothing works like finding someone famous and focusing on them.
Both of these women are in high-profile positions in society and both are making the type of decisions that women in lower-profile positions have to make every day. Using their semi-celebrity status to affirm those decisions publicly not only celebrates their actions but affirms the decisions of women in less well-publicized positions, and that isn't a bad thing.
Also, while Anne-Marie Slaughter and Marissa Mayer might not need financial help, I'm guessing you've never been the center of a media storm and faced criticism in major newspapers because of a decision you've made. I haven't either, of course, but I can only imagine what that must feel like. Their bank account statements don't prohibit us from showing a little human sympathy.
Leslie F. Miller
11:31 am on Sunday, July 22, 2012
Theresa's view and reply represent mine as well. The women who have this kind of power do not make it easier for women to gain that kind of power; they make it harder. The faux controversy stirred up by this divides women instead of uniting them on the side of womanhood.
Slaughter went to Oxford and Harvard. Mayer, on the other hand, had humbler beginnings. Still, she could afford college, which already sets herself apart from a majority of American women.
It's tough to rise from the ashes of poverty to become a Fortune 500 powerhouse. I'm not saying it isn't possible. But I'm saying that focusing on women of privilege who have busted that glass ceiling doesn't advance the cause for the rest of us.
Theresa Defino
9:24 am on Saturday, July 21, 2012
I think you missed my points. Rather than repeat them, I will focus on one of yours. I wasn't asking for a "lifetime" of attention to the issues single women/mother face--how about ANY attention? These women couldn't be further from destitute.
Sympathy for facing a "media storm?" I doubt these women need mine, or yours...and that doesn't reflect the issues raised by this column and or my comments.
Leslie F. Miller
6:43 pm on Sunday, July 22, 2012
Aliza: it's your blog, and you get to write about whatever you want. And other people can address topics of interest to them on their own blogs. Ain't that grand, y'all?
I wrote a book about cake. It had a bunch of stuff in it, like a cake. A third of the people criticized me for writing too much memoir. Another third criticized me for writing too much folklore and history. The last third criticized me for writing too much about Good Morning America's cake contest.
Why didn't any of them just go ahead and write their own books?
But be more provocative. I know you have an opinion. I know you are as judgmental as the rest of them; I've had drinks with you. Don't worry about inciting someone's ire or wrath. If you're not pissing someone off, you're doing something wrong!
Aliza Worthington
9:41 pm on Sunday, July 22, 2012
@Leslie - yes, it is my blog. I wrote about what I wanted. It included the opinion that bashing these women for their decisions was counterproductive. It included the desire that we be a little more gentle with each other and less judgmental. It included the hope that AMS and MM might use their influence to shape policy to better the lives of the women for whom Theresa D. and you (and I, by the way) are advocating. I fail to see how we are at odds, except for the fact that I happen to be rooting for them to succeed. I am rooting for all of us to succeed.
Be more provocative? I didn't even think this was a terribly controversial blog, and look at the passion it's induced. Clearly, I have pissed people off.
Theresa Defino
11:04 pm on Sunday, July 22, 2012
Which people? Not me! I enjoy a healthy debate and I am not rooting for anyone to fail--as I've said, they don't need me either way. Leslie is right--the struggle of these two women helps (maybe) a shrinking minority.
At that risk of repeating myself, I'm just saying let's look at the bigger picture, the NEW picture, the changing one that's more difficult and challenging to address--yet more in tune with reality. It's not the 1950s.
I am not sure how you are advocating for women, but I personally have worked on several political campaigns for women with some success.
I'm also involved with Emerge Maryland. Part of Emerge America, it helps train and support female Dem candidates. You might already know about them. If not, here's the FB page https://www.facebook.com/pages/Emerge-Maryland/155413654572378
and parent site:
http://www.emergeamerica.org
MocoLoco
10:13 am on Monday, July 23, 2012
Theresa--working to support female democratic candidates does not equal "advocating for women." As you may know, the group you mentioned, Emerge America, recently lost its tax-exempt status because the IRS found that its activities were conducted primarily for the benefit of the Democratic Party rather than social welfare. And, I think your posts indicate how much you are letting the emerging class warfare obscure the fact that all women, rich or poor, educated or not, share some struggles. The blogger (bloggress?) points this out, and the prominence of her subjects has helped bring publicity to these issues. That's a good thing.
Theresa Defino
12:53 pm on Monday, July 23, 2012
@mocoloco, who said--Theresa--working to support female democratic candidates does not equal "advocating for women."
It does to me.
And I don't really care what you think of my posts. I don't follow or judge yours.
Rachel Fogel
3:00 pm on Monday, July 23, 2012
I say......i say.......i say.................................................................
let's sit down.