<![CDATA[I have always had a fierce drive for financial independence. When I was a girl child in the 1950s and 1960s, I remember reflecting on my mother’s traditional suburban life as a homemaker and being horrified by her lack of independence. Although she was living a life that met society’s expectations, she often told me stories about dreams she had abandoned to be a wife and mother. I also knew that while she and my father had rough patches in their marriage from time to time, leaving him was not an option for her. She had only a middle-school education and limited work experience. She had no financial independence. She was stuck. I vowed not to be like her. Her options were limited, and, while more types of jobs are available to women today than in her time, some of our society’s assumptions and expectations about women and work have not changed. Jill Filipovic of the New York Times writes about the ambivalence still present in the United States about women and work. She notes that while work is still acknowledged as important to men’s sense of self-worth and identity as providers, “historically women weren’t supposed to need their individual identity to be formed through work . . . women’s identities have long been relational—daughter, wife, mother—rather than individual.” In fact, this difference seems to have been a strong driver in the 2016 presidential election as white working-class women and men voted for Trump, who promised to bring back the blue-collar jobs that provided self-worth for white working-class men and paid wages that reinforced their identity as providers. Even though women surged into the workforce between 1950 and 2000 and the number of hours worked by both black and white women more than doubled, Americans still remain ambivalent about women working today. Filipovic notes that there is no robust feminist argument in favor of women working outside the home. I remember when early second-wave feminists did try to make this argument in the 1970s and 1980s, and the backlash was so swift and fierce that they had to back down. Remember when Hillary Clinton had to bake cookies in the 1990s when her husband ran for president to prove that she was an acceptable woman even though she had a successful law career? Filipovic writes, “That feminists are so often unable or unwilling to make a vigorous moral argument in favor of women working . . . is perhaps one reason we have not yet seen the political groundswell necessary to pass the workplace policies we so desperately need.” Research shows, however, that it is good for everyone when women work:
- Women are better off when we work outside of the home: our mental and physical health are better and our levels of happiness are higher.
- Daughters of working mothers tend to be higher achievers.
- Men raised by working mothers do more housework and child care as adults.
- Men who have working wives tend to be more supportive of, and give more promotions to, female coworkers.
- Women who are financially independent are less likely to get stuck in abusive or unhappy relationships.
1 thought on “Why Work Is Good for Women”
This is such a clear and telling statement about where we are as women in the US in 2017. It is very helpful to read it – and my heart sank. I just don’t know what it is going to take. I will go out on a limb and suggest that the US is still in its adolescence, and the male ego at that age (and the collective one at our country’s stage) is so pugilistic that on many levels working women are seen as threats.
Men DO feel embattled – but in my opinion they are causing this feeling themselves. I am mainly thinking of white men when I say that. Men of color really ARE embattled in much the same way women are….
In the age of tRump I am worried that we are fighting to not lose too much ground – making progress just feels out of the question for now. >sigh<