TIME: Examining Women's Issues

TIME magazine just published a special report, "The State of the American Woman." The Rockefeller Foundation, in collaboration with TIME, conducted a landmark survey of gender issues to assess how individual Americans are reacting. What they wanted to know was whether the battle of the sexes was really over, and if so, did anyone win? I guess it depends on how you define winning, because one of the more challenging aspects of this report is what was said about women's happiness:

Among the most confounding changes of all is the evidence, tracked by numerous surveys, that as women have gained more freedom, more education and more economic power, they have become less happy. No tidy theory explains the trend, notes University of Pennsylvania economist Justin Wolfers, a co-author of The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness. "We looked across all sectors — young vs. old, kids or no kids, married or not married, education, no education, working or not working — and it stayed the same," he says of the data.

This has also been reported elsewhere. For example, Maureen Dowd of The New York Times wrote an op/ed piece in September about the same trend, titled "Blue is the New Black." These media reports have in common the Wharton study released in May titled, "The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness." In my opinion, the Wharton study uncovered one important reason for declining female happiness in an age that upended what feminist Betty Friedan saw as the problem back in 1963: the trapped housewife syndrome. Now that women are no longer bound by what Friedan saw as the primary problem of women, you'd think we'd all be happier. But the Wharton study noted the emotional ties to home still affect women:

Arlie Hochschild’s and Anne Machung’s The Second Shift (1989) argued that women’s movement into the paid labor force was not accompanied by a shift away from household production and they were thus now working a “second shift”. However, time use surveys do not bear this out. Aguiar and Hurst (2007) document relatively equal declines in total work hours since 1965 for both men and women, with the increase in hours of market work by women offset by large declines in their non-market work. Similarly, men are now working fewer hours in the market and more hours in home production. Blau (1998) points to the increased time spent by married men on housework and the decreased total hours worked (in the market and in the home) by married women relative to married men as evidence of women’s improved bargaining position in the home. However, it should be noted that the argument went beyond counting hours in The Second Shift. Women, they argued, have maintained the emotional responsibility for home and family: a point that is perhaps best exemplified by the familiar refrains of a man “helping” around the house or being a good dad when “babysitting” the kids. Thus even if men are putting in more hours, it is difficult to know just how much of the overall burden of home production has shifted, as measuring the emotional, as well as physical, work of making a home is a much more difficult task.

Though the goal of second-wave feminism was to severely diminish the importance of home--the private sphere of our important relationships--it is clear that this isn't possible because the feminine capacity for nurturing and bearing life still courses through us. That's not to say we don't enjoy other tasks and goals outside of the home. It means that the simplistic approach to modeling women's life structures after men's is ridiculously stressful. The home does matter and the relationships nurtured there do carry a priority.

In fact, you can see this is the results of the Rockefeller/TIME poll. The theme of relationships courses throughout the poll and dominates the issue of priorities:

• Being married is very important to 58% of men vs. 53% of women. 
• Men and women largely agree on the importance of most life goals.  The biggest difference in life goals? Fifty-eight percent of men describe religious faith as very important vs. 68% of women. 
• There's a definition perception gap at work: TIME reports that 69% of women think men resent women who have more power than they do; only 49% of men agree. But only 29% of men say that female bosses are harder to work for than male bosses, compared with 45% of women. 
• More than a third of men over age 65 say that with the rise of women in society and the workplace, men no longer know their role vs. 25% of men ages 18 to 29. 

But most interesting of all was this snapshot from TIME: 

• In the 1970s, a majority of children grew up with a stay-at-home parent; now that figure is less than a third. A large majority — 70% of men, 61% of women — believe this has had a negative effect on society. Fifty-seven percent of men and 51% of women agree that it is better for a family if the father works outside the home and the mother takes care of the children. Asked to rank what they value most for their own daughters, 63% of men and 56% of women put a happy marriage with children first; 17% of men and 23% of women said an interesting career; and 15% of men and 20% of women said financial success.  

If a happy marriage and children is the highest priority for more than half of those surveyed, then I believe we need to be more intentional about helping our culture achieve those goals. The timeless truth of the Bible still speaks to us today and we who know the Word should not shrink back from leading others to learn it.

Comments

[Cyndi]

This doesn't surprise me at all. I am old enough to remember the housewife era. When I was a child, a working mother was looked at as being odd and irresponsible and was generally ostracized from the "mom click". Moms met during the day for coffee and dessert, or to process produce, or to shop together. Evenings were given fully to marriage and family. There was a support network within each neighborhood so if there was a death or illness, the neighbors filled in the gaps. Our Sunday afternoons were spent playing softball against other neighborhoods in friendly fun. Neighbors were a second set of eyes for the safety of the kids because everyone knew everyone else and children felt safe, yet knew they couldn't get away with mischief.

Then as a young mother, I was forced to work, and I saw women in the work place trying to replace what my mother had with the neighbor women with relationships within the workforce. This doesn't work because when things go wrong at work, that means they go wrong in your emotional support system as well, which pretty much means all aspects of your life are upset.

Then I worked in campus ministry on a large university campus in the early 90's and the next generation of women's rights advocates were the meanest, most unhappy, most bitter people I had ever met! It made me think of what the Bible says happens when people are "unrestrained!" I decided that there was anything "feminine" about this movement anymore. They just plain out wanted to be men!

Thank God, Christian women know that the "restraints" of God's Word and calling are placed there out of perfect love so that we can have perfect happiness in what He created us to do, for everything that He created both in us and for us is perfection as well and is what brings us true happiness! I've learned that if God designed it to work a certain way, it won't work any other way. Bucking His design is like trying to bake cookies on a typewriter. You won't end up with cookies and you'll ruin your typewriter in the process. But baking cookies the right way is delicious and pleasureable, especially the result--as long as you don't eat too many :-), and typing within the typwriter designed will produce desired results!

I do see, among younger women today on the college campus, an interest and a desire to "recapture" being "feminine". They see enough to realize that things are not right. May God help us to minister to this generation and bring "revival" of all that is good about being a woman!

[Julia]

Sadly, I sensed the findings before I read them. I've always wondered about the appeal of "having it all." Our society has changed so much that the idea of being "trapped" at home has become almost incomprehensible. We (women) are free to choose and, if family and home is our priority, then why aren't we choosing it? Myself included. My husband and I have been trying to figure out a way to live on one income (his). But we continue to hesitate because even though we both agree that we want one of us caring for home full-time, to give up a good job seems...irresponsible.

Please pardon the rambling; I've been struggling with this issue for a long time.

[Homemaker, MD]

Hmmm...seems like the Time didn't notice their own answer to their own question:

"Among the most confounding changes of all is the evidence, tracked by numerous surveys, that as women have gained more freedom, more education and more economic power, they have become less happy." and then noting what women wanted for their own daughters: a happy marriage and children--both of which have nothing to do with the pursuit of freedom, education, and economic power.

Seems like the pursuit of one has lead to the detriment of the other. Interesting given the new trend of more professional women "opting out" for the Mommy Track.

I agree, we need to be more intention in helping women in our culture reach these goals of strong families, and this can best be done by viewing our identies as women in light of Scripture.

[Mom of 2, NM]

My husband and I made the decision before our first son was born that I would stay home with our children (actually, we discussed this on our 2nd date). Our desire was that we would put God first and raise our children to love God and our family. Our family is a huge priority for us and one that is not worth sacrificing. We all make choices everyday and we must live with those choices whether they are what clothes to wear or what we are going to eat or do we give up the extra income to nurture our children and make an investment in our society later. My husband teaches at a public high school in the Southwest (so you can imagine that we aren't rolling in the dough) and we are doing just fine on one income. Actually, we have done better than most in light of the current economic downturn because we were already accustomed to living far below what others do. There are times when I wish I had a big house like some of our friends, or to be able to go on a vacation, but the reality is I get to enjoy everyday with my boys. I do not regret our choice for me to be at home. We as parents only get one chance to raise our sons or daughters and that time goes by so quickly. Is it really worth giving that time up just for a paycheck? For me, it isn't.

I would encourage others to really decide what is important. There are many things that we as Americans think we "must" have or couldn't live without. If staying at home with your children is most important to you, you can make it happen. I know, because I am living it.

[lori flores]

so sad for the kids involved.

[Warren Farrell]

Nice i got good information