In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

The New Wife

Perhaps The Today Show needs a little help from Oxford Old English — they seem to be a bit confused about the definition of the word “new“:

It was the first report in the Today Show’s week-long series, “The Changing Marriage” — a look at “how kids, lack of time together, previous marriages, and taking your vows when you’re young affects your relationship.”

The question today was, “Who is the New Wife?” Who, indeed?

The report was built around the work of Susan Shapiro Barash, a gender studies professor at Marymount Manhattan College, and her 2004 book, The New Wife. Barash’s theory — and it’s hardly a new one; see, for instance, Lisa Belkin’s 2003 New York Times Magazine cover story — is that professional women today, unsatisfied by the demands and the stress of trying to “have it all,” are no longer trying. Rather, they are turning their attention to becoming the best head-of-household they can be.

Of course, these theories often work from the assumptions that a) women, ultimately, can never find complete satisfaction with a role in the public sphere; they are always yearning for a return to the domestic b) that all women’s families have the economic means to make the stay-at-home choice possible and c) men are either naturally unable to be equal caretakers of their children or that women would never want to relinquish part of that responsibility.

Read the whole thing at Ms. Musings. And thanks to Natalie for the heads up!


3 thoughts on The New Wife

  1. Yes, the assumptions are definitely upper middle-class ones. I can’t count how many times I’ve had someone tell me that if “these people” just lived within their means they could survive on one income just fine…but they want their “brand new SUVs and go out to eat every night,” yada, yada, yada.

    Look, I grew up in a working class household. My dad filled vending machines for a living. He loved it because he hated being stuck in an office all day, but that’s neither here nor there. My mother was (and still is) a secretary. Could they pay their bills and raise two kids on one salary? No! And we weren’t living beyond our means. Hell, we never even went on any vacations unless you count the time we DROVE out to West Virginia to visit family in a tiny Honda Accord. We never had a car that was less than ten years old. Actually, just look at “Roseanne” to see the type of life we had–there was a lot of love and support in that house and I credit my parents for instilling a strong work ethic, but we were definitely scrimping for cash at all times.

    And I also would point to the books of Arlie Hochschild, author of “The Way We Never Were” (which disputes the “good old days” stereotypes we still hold about family life in the 1950’s) and “The Second Shift” (a great book about women who work full time and come home at the end of the work day only to face their second “full time job” as wife and mother), who posited in her third book, “The Time Bind,” that women actually go to work to escape the stress of maintaining a household and kids!

  2. What fucking economy is she living in? I’m single with no kids, and I have a college education, but here in Denver I can’t even support myself without working 2 jobs, let alone support a family. Unless most men make DOUBLE what I make, if I was married with kids I couldn’t stay home with them even if I wanted to.

    Also, the bit about parenting is insulting to the many men I know who make wonderful dads, and could do it on their own in a heartbeat.

  3. This crap cycles around regularly–every so often the media starts a circle jerk about how women reeaaallly just want to be home birthin’ babies and baking cookies, and we don’t want any of that nasty old career world, except for money.

Comments are currently closed.