Archive for the ‘Mommy Wars’ Category

Mothering performance anxiety

Thursday, January 16th, 2014

cover

 

The Good Mother Myth: Redefining Motherhood to Fit Reality is NOW AVAILABLE.  I am simultaneously thrilled and terrified by this.

Thrilled because the talent in the book is staggering, including feminist writers both famous (Jennifer Baumgardner, Jessica Valenti) and really-should-be-famous (the blogging brains behind blue milk, Black Girl in Maine, The Feminist Breeder, and Raising My Boychick to name a few).

Terrified because my essay in the book contains some of the most vulnerable writing I’ve ever shared in public, and I fear that when you read it, you will judge me a BAD MOTHER.

I’m not kidding.

 

44896362

 

Oh Philosoraptor!  DON’T GO THERE.

Luckily I have a dear friend who is also a mother-writer, and she thought the essay was good.  Another dear friend, a mother who is more the mathy-sciencey type, thought the essay was good too.  But as Paul Westerberg once sang, “the ones who love us least are the ones we’ll die to please.”  It’s not enough for my FRIENDS to like it: I want EVERYONE to like it.

I want everyone to like me.  To tell me that what I unloaded in the essay doesn’t make me a freak, or gawd forbid, a bad mother.

All of this anxiety from something I wrote in a book that breaks down the myth of the good mother??

Dammit!

Help a mom out, won’t you?  Pick up a copy of the book and tell me what you think.  Great reviews of it are in Literary Mama, Brain Child, Parents magazine and elsewhere: click on this link to read more.

Look at me trying to convince you that the book is actually good.  DAMMIT!  When will I ever learn?!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Manuscript Monday: “Are you doing the right thing?”

Monday, September 9th, 2013

 

 

Hey y’all!  Remember that I’m writing a book?  (I think even I forgot for a while.) This excerpt is from Chapter 8, “Welcome to the Mommy Wars.”

 

mommy-wars

 

Like most cultural debates, the “Mommy Wars” are a wholly-media manufactured phenomenon, a solution in search of a problem.  Sure, there are moms who were jealous of other moms’ ability to stay home, their ability to keep working, their ability to dress their babies in Baby Phat by Kimora Lee Simmons, but hey, this is AMERICA, a nation built on jealousy.  The cult of manifest destiny rested upon the notion that indigenous tribes were hogging all the good stuff for themselves.  Why the Trail of Tears?  Andrew Jackson saw some tasty, arable land and felt deeply envious of the Seminoles and Cherokees living there.  In our century, the Lancome cosmetics company puts Julia Roberts in its advertising to inspire envy, not amiability.  You want to buy the product to steal a little bit of her beauty for yourself.

 

images (7)

 

The way the Mommy Wars work their magic is to demand the following of mothers: are you doing the right thing?  What if your baby loses out?  What if you lose out?  Will my children hate me?  What if this has all been a terrible mistake?  Then you’re so incredibly confused that the tragedy of child hunger in America feels not nearly as important as whether Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Cambridge is nursing the heir to the British crown.

The Mommy Wars, as they stand today, serve as an effective check on the ambitions of the American mother.  The phenomenon keeps women in a perpetual state of guilt, shame, and inadequacy–and does so without involving anyone but wealthy white women!  Behind the punditry, the blog posts, the endless shaming of individuals who are making individual choices is a quiet but urgent message: I care about me. The rest of you can go fuck yourselves. 

 

tumblr_lzv2leFYUT1qlvwnco1_500

 

I asked this back in chapter one: when is a choice not a choice?  When you understand that many of your “decisions” are based on circumstances set in motion before you got out of diapers yourself, let alone changed one on a baby of your own.  Do working class women of color have the choices that Linda Hirshman and I do?  No.  It’s very unlikely that a garbageman’s daughter will become CEO of a Fortune 500 company.  Hell, it’s unlikely that an upper class woman of color will do that!  The playing field remains uneven to a disorienting degree.

Carping about what women “should” do avoids serious debate about the consequences of entrenched economic inequality.  Women of all races earn less than men, but they receive no proportional discount on food, rent, clothing, utility bills, health care, child care, or college tuition.

Just IMAGINE what we could accomplish if we redirected all that Mommy Wars energy…..!

 

image

 

Wow.

 

 

Manuscript Monday: “A whole world of moms needing to connect with one another”

Monday, April 8th, 2013

This week’s excerpt is from Chapter Two.

I needed to snap out of my isolation and get out into the world again, this time with a stroller in tow.

My liberal arts background prepared me to tackle each and every problem in one place: the library.  Deep in the stacks, past the What to Expect When You’re Expecting volumes and The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding, I spied a book called The Hip Mama Survival Guide.  This was it: a book that acknowledged the dirty truth that parenthood is something to survive, like middle school, meningitis, or the Vietnam War.  I wanted to be surrounded by mamas as salty-smart as the book’s author, Ariel Gore.  Unfortunately, Ariel lived on the West Coast and had given birth as a naïve teenager; much of her mothering spunk derived from the fact that she was still in the midst of her own bratty youth.

We had a teenage mom on our own block, Matt and I discovered.  The homeowner directly across the street from us was Clinton Avenue’s designated loonball (there’s always one), the furious type who believed that the ten feet of curb outside of her house was a valuable piece of real estate and no one, NO ONE, but her was allowed to park anywhere near it.  When Matt and I spotted her daughter clutching a bundle that looked more like a baby than a stack of algebra books, we wondered if all of that energy protecting a cement slab might have been put to better use.

This girl cornered Matt on the street one evening, offering him use of her son’s old bassinet if we needed it.  Matt said she seemed eager to bond with me about our babies, but I found this horrifying.  We were both mothers, this sixteen-year-old and I, but she was not my peer.  I wanted to shake her by her shoulders and yell, “You’re sixteen!  You should go to the mall to gorge on Cinnabons and buy earrings at Claire’s with your friends, not going to Bob the Builder at Toddler Tuesdays with your kid!”

Our friendship, though imaginary, was over before it could begin.

I clicked through some postings on the forums of HipMama.com, where I found others eager to connect, so much so that the profiles were coded as strenuously as any on eHarmony or OKCupid.  SAHM (we know what that means), BFOD (breastfeeding on demand), VBAC (vaginal birth after cesarean), AP (attachment parenting or advanced placement? Did they want to know my scores?) DS (darling son?), DH (does that mean she lives with a dickhead?), et cetera.  The acronyms tacked onto each blog post made me cross-eyed, though they were all Very Important in the virtual world, for like a pair of Louboutins in the real world, they broadcast to the world exactly Who You Are.

The listings’ very existence spoke to a whole world of moms needing to connect with one another—yet the coded language was so mysterious and ultimately alienating that I abandoned the site without completing a profile.

 

To find out what happens next, keep me motivated by telling me how much you want to read The Radical Housewife: Redefining Family Values for the 21st Century, coming sometime soon (!) from Medusa’s Muse Press

Gender essentialism and the feminist housewife

Wednesday, March 20th, 2013

 

Hi there!  My name is Shannon, and I am a feminist housewife.

 

This is me in my kitchen.  Behind my arm is –NO JOKE–a loaf of homemade gluten-free bread.  I am a housewife, and a damn good one!

Do you like my apron?  it’s from the HOTDISH Militia, a group that fundraises for abortion clinics with tasty casseroles–the acronym stands for Hand Over The Decision It Should (be) Hers.  I support affordable access to the full spectrum of women’s reproductive health services, including abortion on demand, without apology.  That’s feminist, baby!

Combine my job with my passion, et voilà: you get me, a feminist housewife!

I didn’t aspire to be a feminist housewife when I grew up.  As a child, I wanted to write books.  As a child, I assumed that writing books would magically make money appear.

Ha, ha.

Six-year-old Shannon can be blamed for her ignorance, but what excuse does Kelly Makino, a self-identified feminist, have?  From New York Magazine’s March 17, 2013 cover story “The Retro Wife”:

The maternal instinct is a real thing, Kelly argues: Girls play with dolls from childhood, so “women are raised from the get-go to raise children successfully. When we are moms, we have a better toolbox.” Women, she believes, are conditioned to be more patient with children, to be better multitaskers, to be more tolerant of the quotidian grind of playdates and temper tantrums; “women,” she says, “keep it together better than guys do.”

Oh Mrs. Makino!  You retrograde goofball, you.  In case you missed this lecture in Women’s Studies 101, let me break it down for you. Choosing your choice is feminist, sure!  But GENDER ESSENTIALISM IS NOT FEMINIST.

I can’t pick on only Kelly, though, for the author of the piece, Lisa Miller, makes some mind-boggling observations of her own:

I prepare our daughter’s lunch box every morning with ritualistic care, as if sending her off to school with a bologna sandwich made by me can work as an amulet against all the pain of my irregular, inevitable absences. I believe that I have a special gift for arranging playdates, pediatrician appointments, and piano lessons….

 

 

“The feminist revolution started in the workplace, and now it’s happening at home,” says Makino. “I feel like in today’s society, women who don’t work are bucking the convention we were raised with … Why can’t we just be girls? Why do we have to be boys and girls at the same time?”

Again, I must ask: what makes a girl a GIRL?  Is it a baby?  An apron?  A kickass banana bread recipe?  A Pinterest account?

What makes a boy a BOY?  A wife?

I made a choice to be my kids’ caregiver, but that choice wasn’t made in a vacuum.  My hubby and I had to weigh some very harsh realities.  Who made more money?  Who would probably ALWAYS make more money?  Who could count on consistent work for the next two decades?  If you guessed the BOY, you’re right!  You win a wife.*

Understanding how patriarchal capitalism works is feminist. GENDER ESSENTIALISM IS NOT FEMINIST.

For the record, I am terrible at arranging playdates.  My vag has nothing to do with it–I am not only forgetful, I hate using the telephone.  I’d rather bake you a rice-tapioca-soy flour loaf.  If you want our kids to hang out, you’d better have my e-mail–or better yet, Matt’s!

All of this is very funny in the echo chamber of the internets.  I really don’t care whether Kelly Makino, Lisa Miller, or hell, Sheryl Sandberg is a housewife or not.  I DO care when one pretty white New Yorker’s lifestyle is trotted out as “proof” that women are this or that and feminism is a failure blah blah blah, because you know that articles like these delight conservatives eager to push back on women’s rights,  especially reproductive rights.  Sen. Rand Paul, a 2016 presidential contender, has already said he’d support a fetal personhood bill that would outlaw abortion and many forms of contraception.  Without control over their fertility, women would be stuck in the kitchen making hotdish (and this is the important part) whether they want to or not.

It’s a future too horrible to contemplate.

Maybe I’ll cook a pie.  That would make me feel better.

 

*offer not valid for women

 

Repeat after me: CLASS WARS, not Mommy Wars

Thursday, April 19th, 2012

So Hilary Rosen Ann Romney blah blah blah.  You didn’t get comment from me on the matter because  last week was the buildup to the 2012 Minnesota NOW conference, which involved a great deal of work…..for which I was not paid.

At the conference I was approached by a political campaign that was interested talking with me about my writing.  ”Is this a volunteer opportunity or a job?” I asked.

You can guess the answer.

A friend of mine works more than 40 hours weekly where our daughters attend school.  She monitors the cafeteria, goes on field trips, assists with special events, and fundraises like a maniac.  I’m not exaggerating when I say that school would crumble without her.  What’s her job title, you ask?

Co-Chair of the PTA.  Yearly salary: nothing.

On Facebook, a friend posted one of the bajillion links to the Rosen/Romney feud and one of HER friends claimed that her stay-at-home-mommy work is “priceless” and she would be “offended” if the government paid her.

I said:

And I wasn’t kidding.

Jill at Feministe wrote a few thousand words on the subject before getting to the real heart of the matter, which is:

Free female labor props up our economy and saves us all tax money.  …women with children, whether they work outside the home or not, aren’t just doing the inside the home care-taking work; they’re volunteering at schools, in community centers, on sports teams. They’re filling the gaps that state and federal funding leaves, so in the short term kids get necessary classroom assistance when lawmakers cut programs. Women are much more likely to be a (again unpaid) care-taker for an aging or ill relative. As a nation, we can afford to not pay for necessary things because there are so many women who are doing those things for free.

Again, in bold and all-caps: “FREE FEMALE LABOR PROPS UP OUR ECONOMY.”

Capitalism depends on our unpaid work.  We are conditioned to do it at every turn.  My job is  so idealized by our culture that my colleagues in the business (women like the Facebook poster) feel ashamed to ask for what is their due.  Ashamed! Can you believe it?

Second Wave feminism declared that women should have opportunities outside the home, but forgot to add that men need to shoulder the burdens inside the home.  The revolution should have demanded as many stay-at-home dads as female CEOs.  But it didn’t.  The goals of the movement became allied with making money, which is one reason why feminism gets accused of being anti-family.  Family is so precious is cannot be allied with something DIRTY like MAKING MONEY!  It’s the madonna/whore binary all over again.

No matter what women do, we’re made to be either/or.  To rob us of nuance is to rob us of autonomy, and that’s just how patriarchal capitalism likes it!

If you think that all of your decisions in life are your own, that you “choose your choice,” then you fail to question the systems in place that perpetuate oppression.  Systems like capitalism, patriarchy, racism, classism, you name it.

Here’s an example.

Minneapolis Public Schools is in trouble.  Every year, the budget cuts get deeper and deeper and the achievement gap between poor and not-poor students is astonishing. Yet somehow, my daughter’s school seems to persevere, and will continue to do so as the ax drops in the future.  Why?  Because of people like that PTA co-chair I know.  One day I asked her: “Would you consider going on strike to highlight how much free work the district gets out of you?”  She looked at me like I was nuts, and I knew why–a PTA strike in our school would only hurt the children, and women are conditioned to think of the children and not themselves.  Minneapolis Public Schools counts on the free labor of middle- to upper-class women to prop up schools when their budgets are cut.  Schools without the free labor force are left to fend for themselves, and their test scores show it.  Class systems stay rigidly enforced.

If women went on strike and refused to volunteer, our school district would have to put much more, and I do mean MUCH MORE, pressure on government officials to fund them adequately.  If the women who prop up our school system went on strike, Minneapolis Mayor RT Rybak would be forced to put $150 million of city tax money towards hiring school staff, not towards a Vikings stadium–whose profits will be funneled straight into the pockets of the 1%.

Here’s a picture of our poor, old, inadequate football stadium.  I think it just needs an army of unpaid women to puff it back up again, don’t you?  Maybe we gals could install some of those fancy new corporate suites that the menfolk say they need to conduct the networking business whatchamacallit.

The Official Mommy War Narrative™ would have this PTA co-chair incredibly offended by me suggesting  such radical ideas.  We live under consumer capitalism, a system that encourages competition and discontent–if I’m right, you’re wrong.  Either/or.   If I pick a philosophical fight with Hilary Rosen, Ann Romney, the PTA moms, Linda Hirshman, Jessica Valenti, Phyllis Schlafly, The Feminist Breeder, Amanda Marcotte, the editors at Jezebel, and/or Hillary Clinton, I’ll be distracted.  In my absence, Minneapolis will build a billion dollar football stadium, and its achievement gap will remain one of the worst in the nation.

The (white, male) rich will get richer, the poor will get…..

 

 


 

Virginie Despentes on the Mommy Wars

Tuesday, February 22nd, 2011

“….motherhood has become the essential female experience, valued above all others. Giving life is where it’s at. ‘Pro-maternity’ propaganda has rarely been so extreme. They must be joking, the modern version of the double constraint: ‘have babies, it’s wonderful, you feel more fulfilled and feminine than ever,’ but do it in a society in freefall in which paid work is a condition of social survival, but is guaranteed to no one, and especially not to women…..
Without children you will never be fulfilled as a woman, but bringing up kids in decent conditions is almost impossible. It is essential that women feel like failures–that they be made to feel as if they’ve made the wrong choice. We are held responsible for a failure that is in fact collective and cross-gender.”
From King Kong Theory, translated from the French by Stephanie Benson

Radical homemakers vs. Radical housewives

Wednesday, May 12th, 2010

A note from one of the publishers at the Minnesota Women’s Press reminded me of my long-delayed intention of talking a bit about a fellow Radical Shannon out there. Namely, Shannon Hayes, she of the Radical Homemaking book and series of articles in Yes! magazine. I appreciate her ideas (for the world needs MORE radical Shannons in it, not fewer) but she and I have totally different practices and goals.

Hayes’s subtitle is “reclaiming domesticity from a consumer culture.” As a committed pinko, I like anything that questions the status quo. Capitalism exists to make us all desperately unhappy sheep. The short term consequences are increased L’Oreal and Bud Lite sales–long term consequences are entrenched classism, racism, and sexism.

Hayes’s book site states that “it is the story of pioneering men and women who are redefining feminism and the good life by adhering to simple principles of ecological sustainability, social justice, community engagement and family well-being.” Elsewhere, she writes “in essence, the great work we face requires rekindling the home fires.”

And that’s where we part ways.

It starts with the word “homemaker,” one that I have always found problematic. How does one MAKE a home? I haven’t a clue. Is it by washing the floors? Baking from scratch? Quilting? Gardening? Reading bedtime stories? Nurturing relationships? I clean my home. In the interest of sustainability, I recycle and compost like a maniac, carry my cloth bags with me, bike it up, etc. etc. But I don’t think that keeping a coop of chickens or canning the beans from my garden is the way towards a more just world.

For one thing, “rekindling the home fires” implies turning inward, reaffirming the family as the basic unit of society, just like the folks at the Christian Coalition. Now, I don’t know if Shannon Hayes is religiously motivated. But once you start turning inwards, towards a unit that looks like you, talks like you and thinks like you, you start getting out of touch with the complex systems that conspire against the people who DON’T look like you!

Feminism is about fighting oppression in all its forms. That means we must work outward, not inward. This is why I must place Radical Homemaking on the Mommy Wars spectrum, despite its fine intentions. Examples of Radical Homemakers, the author included, have only been well-off, highly educated white women. Remember “The Opt-Out Revolution,” anyone?

A discussion on the subject at Bitch led me to the blogger Vegan Burnout, who wrote: “to frame the choice between working a soulless 9-to-5 or building a backyard chicken coop and learning to can tomatoes as the only feminist options is reductive and insulting.” It’s easy to choose your choice when you have so many choices to choose from, so that when you do choose, your choice is automatically the best one! It’s the Opt-Out argument from 2003 all over again.

So why did I pick the Radical Housewife moniker, then? Because I find the word “housewife” really funny. That’s why. When I’m asked to fill in the box marked “occupation,” I say I’m a writer and an at-home parent. The damn home can make itself for all I care.

Sorry, Radical Shannon. I just don’t buy it (anti-capitalist pun intended).

Bad mommy.

Friday, June 12th, 2009

Ok, pop culture nuts. Here is the clip of Kate “Reverse Mullet” Gosselin in action that’s got the blogosphere abuzz.

I have never seen this program, but it has captured my imagination along with the rest of the country because it seems to encapsulate so much about what is wrong with America today. You know the usual suspects: fame, greed, infertility treatments, reverse mullets, the works. With this clip we can now add the age-old “is she a good mother?” obsession to the mix. The commenters on Gawker, where I first saw this clip, made a variety of excuses for how annoying whining children can be, so in their opinion Kate deserves the benefit of the doubt. I have a different take.

I am something of an expert on difficult children, never more than when summer vacation is underway. I can see myself in Kate’s shoes here, grinding my teeth with rage after a long day of being harassed by a gaggle of little brats. One strategy is to keep the jaw wired shut and ignore them, which Kate is doing here. One could also explain to Mady calmly that it’s almost time for the interview, and Mommy will get her a drink once it’s over. A truly wonderful Mom of the Year might ask the Access Hollywood staff if they could delay the interview so all eight of the kiddos could get a drink, but it could be argued that Moms of the Year do not have reality television programs that get them into these situations in the first place.

One thing you NEVER, EVER do? Get yourself a water bottle and drink it while your thirsty kid cries. Parents are constantly challenged to balance what their children need with what the parent wants. It’s a push-pull that happens to every adult with a small person in her care. This is a good example of how the parent’s want takes precedence, with disastrous results. To hear Mady Gosselin plaintively wail “you’re really really mean…you drank right in front of my face!” is to witness the effect of emotional abuse on a 8-year-old child. It’s a disgusting power trip and it makes me sick. I can only hope the backlash will lead to this show’s cancellation.

I feel terrible for all of Kate’ children, but I also feel better for my two. Summer vacation might not be so bad after all.

Patriarchy, thy name is Dr. Laura

Wednesday, May 20th, 2009

I am usually sent these salvos in the ongoing Wars of Mommydom, because I am a unique case–I’m an at-home parent who doesn’t think everyone needs to do it. But despite my penchant for cackling at Rush Limbaugh’s radio show whenever I can, I live in a pretty insulated left-wing bubble. No one I know reads the Wall Street Journal, so no one sent me this gem, published in April 2009, which is so full of baloney it should be banned by the CDC for possible swine flu contamination.

[In Praise of Stay At Home Moms]


So the article begins with a point on which Laura and I can agree–that there are middle class, two-income families who could make the drop to one income if they wanted to care for a child at home. Of course, Laura Schlessinger has not middle class when she got herself knocked up, so that’s easy for her to say. She doesn’t consider the public library to be her family’s entire entertainment budget, nor does she chauffeur her li’l pumpkins in a dented ’99 Saturn. I do.

But here’s where the conversation veers into the Hall of Fucked-Up Mirrors in Phyllis Schlaflyland.

WSJ: What do you tell women who are hesitant to leave their jobs?

Dr. Schlessinger: You know how when you try to quit smoking you chew gum? You replace one thing with another because it distracts you. What I would tell these women is that they’re spending too much time thinking about what they have to give up, and feeling angry about not being valued. Look at me — I made the transition from being a powerhouse to being at home, folding laundry. What they need to do is find value elsewhere. I tell these women to look in their children’s eyes. When your husband comes home, wrap your body around him at the door and look at his eyes. What people need to learn is that it’s not about the drudgery of housework — it’s about being at home for all of those incredible moments that make your life more valuable than the person who replaced you at work. No one can replace mom. Kids who don’t have moms suffer a lifetime. (emphasis mine)

Let me declare to all the world that my husband truly is my best friend and partner in life. I don’t tell him this often enough. But if my only joy in life were wrapping my body around his and gazing into his big brown eyes, he would likely divorce me. Surprise! He respects my intellectual pursuits, too. No reasonable adult wants to be put on a pedestal like that.

Why are women still telling each other that love is all we need?

WSJ: What questions should working mothers ask themselves when deciding whether to quit their jobs and become stay-at-home mothers?

Dr. Schlessinger: The nut questions should be: Do I feel fulfilled as a woman? Do I feel like my husband’s girlfriend? Do I feel like I have touched the soul of my kids? Those will help you decide.

My biggest beef with the Mommy Wars is that it perpetuates patriarchal systems by perpetuating women’s self-hate. Yeah, I said it: PATRIARCHY! What else is at work when we’re told that all we should be when we grow up is someone’s caretaker?

WSJ: Where do stay-at-home dads fit into the picture?

Dr. Schlessinger: I recommend that during the first three years, the mom should be at home because all of the research shows that the person whose body you come out of and whose breast you suck at, at that stage, really needs to be the mom — unless she’s incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial. After that, flip a coin.

Ha, ha. Dr. Laura said “you suck.” Back atcha, bitch.

WSJ: At what point do you advise mothers to go back to work?

Dr. Schlessinger: The answer is never.

Blah blah, there’s more about the virtues of playing board games with your kids, which is such incredibly insightful parenting advice that I’m amazed no capitalist fatcat at Parker Brothers ever thought of it.


WSJ: Do you think it’s possible for a working mother to raise a smart, successful child?

Dr. Schlessinger: I didn’t write this book about working moms. I wrote it in praise of stay-at-home moms. It’s a wonderful choice, but to be absolutely truthful, having been on both sides of this mentality, my heart hurts for what these women miss and what their children miss from them. No argument, no criticism. My heart just hurts — because when you get those pudgy arms around your neck, and being told you’re someone’s lullaby — the fact that a woman would miss that is so, so sad. (emphasis mine)

Did I neglect to mention that the most powerful weapon in the culture war is the reinforcement of self-hate? Women’s self-hate kept them from thinking they deserved the right to vote, after all. What Laura is spewing here is no different than the ideological cult of motherhood that developed after the GIs came home from WWII and wanted their damned jobs back. Your time for riveting is over, Rosie–because you wouldn’t want to miss out on a chubby pair of arms snuggling you! What kind of woman would you be then, Rosie, huh? Don’t you kinda hate yourself for missing out on that womanly experience?

Do not misunderstand–I love the feel of my babies’ skin. They sucked me for nourishment until they drained me dry. I play board games with them. I did, and still do, all of the things that Laura is advocating here. But to glamorize it in black and white terms is dangerous, to both women and to their families. No job should be so imbued with this kind of ridiculous mythology, much less a job that is thankless, dirty, and unpaid.

Speaking of pay, just how did Laura find the time to get famous enough to get a book publisher for this tripe? I thought she spent all of her time cuddling her son Deryk, who, according to Wikipedia, was born in 1985, making him nine years old when her radio show was syndicated. In the WSJ piece she claims that she made sure she did her on-air chats when he was in school, but looking at Wikipedia again, we also see that she published her first book in 1994. When did she write it? She wrote another in 1996, another in 1997, another in 1998, 1999….. that’s a lot of writing to get done while you have a teenage boy drinking from your breast. I bet he hates her fucking guts, if only for being stuck with the name “Deryk.”

But look at me, sillies! I’m pointing out the hypocrisy of another woman, and I’m not supposed to do that! I’m a nurturer! Loving others is my only role in life! I AM A MOMMY!