The average woman feels no connection with elite feminists
who analyze her life in terms of "deconstructing gender," and
politically correct feminists know it. That's why they are
now scrambling to play the "mommy card."
The "mommy card" is MOTHER, an organization being created by
three PC feminists whom
Women's
eNews describe as "top-selling political authors."
MOTHER — Mothers Ought To Have Equal Rights — plans to "rally
mothers to become the nation's most powerful lobbying group." In
other words, the feminists of MOTHER want to thoroughly
politicize the last bastion of personal life in our society:
families. They want to wrest motherhood from its traditional
right-wing associations and make it a left/liberal issue, with
"Mothers Are Victims" writ-large on its banner.
As Washington Post columnist Suzanne Fields
recently
asked, "Where does the New York Times find
these women?"
And who are the "top-selling political authors" now bravely
speaking out for the average mom?
Naomi Wolf — who recently published Misconceptions:
Truth, Lies and the Unexpected on the Journey to
Motherhood. In this self-indulgent diatribe, Wolf's
pregnancy became an indictment of hospitals, male society and
capitalism, all interwoven with public soul-searching about
whether children would destroy her identity.
Ann Crittenden — a former reporter for the New York
Times — who authored The Price of Motherhood: Why the Most
Important Job in the World Is Still the Least Valued.
Crittenden indicts not feminism, but capitalism, and argues for
government to "economically recognize" motherhood so that women
will not be dependent upon husbands.
Barbara Seaman — who stated in her book Free and Female:
The Sex Life of the Contemporary Woman: "Some of the women
I know are so pathetic. They run around looking for a man, any
man, just because they don't know how to masturbate."
These "pro-family" women wish to "harness" what Wolf calls the
"pissed-offedness" of
mothers in order to play "hardball politics." This motivation
explains their abrupt announcement that full-time motherhood is
a choice that deserves left/liberal support.
For decades, PC feminists have led a full-frontal attack on
the traditional family. They have rejected stay-at-home
motherhood as unliberating and celebrated career women instead.
This rejection has come back to haunt them because motherhood,
in all its forms, has become politically chic. For example, the
"babies versus career" debate has been rekindled by Sylvia Ann
Hewlett's new
book, Creating a Life: Professional Women and the Quest
for Children. The recent resignation of White House
counselor Karen Hughes, who wants to spend more time with her
family, is also a sign of the times.
PC feminists are now jumping in front of the motherhood
parade to lead the way. Clutching a baton and gesturing wildly
to the tuba, they rush to proclaim what other women already
know: You can't have it all. Mothers who leave the workforce
incur financial losses, these feminists solemnly declare.
Mothers do not receive sufficient respect from society, they
explain (as if feminism weren't largely to blame).
Where have these three women been for the last few decades?
Most of the women I know are not shocked to hear that life has
trade-offs. They work hard, in offices or at home. Most of them
work nights as well — being mothers, wives and caregivers. They
cook, clean, nurse elderly parents and sick infants, and race
the clock to make sure everyone is on schedule and fed. Very few
have the privileges of Wolf, who earned $15,000-a-month as a
paid consultant to the Gore 2000 campaign.
When Crittenden speaks of the "mommy tax," she explains that
mothers usually can't work overtime or travel on business, which
excludes them from higher-paying jobs. Thus, it has "been
estimated that if you have one child and you're a college
graduate, your lifetime earnings will be about a million dollars
lower than a woman who does not have a child. That is what I
call a mommy tax." (Oddly, the admission that motherhood is a
large factor in pay differentials is absent from most feminist
discussions of the "wage gap.")
Crittenden and MOTHER have a solution for the "the mommy
tax." More government. In The Price of Motherhood,
Crittenden suggests a year's paid leave for women after the
birth of each child, access to part-time work with full
benefits, Social Security credit for the time women devote to
the family, free preschool for children three years of age and
older, and either a government salary for full-time parenting or
a subsidy for child care.
In short, Crittenden wishes to solve motherhood by
establishing a welfare state, by instituting government control
of "the family." Because that is what accepting tax money and
legal privilege means: government control over your life.
Motherhood was on safer ground when the left and liberals
viewed it with suspicion.