I couldn't have put it better myself.

I'm sorry Rebecca Walker had an unhappy childhood but that is a personal matter between her and her mother. Dragging feminism in as the scapegoat is, in my opinion, a means of avoiding the issue of confronting her mother's personal shortcomings.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm sorry Rebecca Walker, who has been a very articulate voice among feminists, has taken off in this direction, but like the author I'm not too surprised. A few things to keep in mind:

"Mommie Dearest" isn't exactly a new story -- and if your mommie is famous, it sells pretty well.

I have this hunch that bashing feminism opens more editorial doors than supporting and expanding it.

Most of us spend at least some time trying to differentiate ourselves from one or both parents. It's part of figuring out who we are. If our parents are brainwashed apparatchiks, money-grubbing materialists, or screaming fundamentalists, hey, we look politically virtuous. If our parents are left-leaning political icons, what is our rebellion going to look like? How many red-diaper babies ended up Republicans?

So Rebecca Walker is distancing herself from her mother by telling a feminist-bashing "Mommie Dearest" story. No, I'm not too surprised. I do wonder where Rebecca Walker will be, politically and otherwise, ten years from now. And even more, I wonder how Alice Walker -- who has always been able to turn difficult personal subjects into eloquent, politically and spiritually significant prose and poetry -- will respond.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

From slavery to the present Black women have had to be the head of household. The writer's view of feminism, in my opinion is idyllic. I rattled my brain to think of any of my married friends of any color, who have this wonderful partnership as described by this writer. And I could come up with 1. And that is a work in progress. I know fathers who are involved with the lives of their children and who contribute something in terms of household chores. But I don't know any who are 50/50 partners. I also know men who work, then come home and do the lion's share of the cooking and household chores, because their wives aren't motivated to contribute much. Or the wives are carrying around some long standing grudge, but aren't woman enough to stand alone.

My sister is a teacher, student, and now a single parent. I am proud and amazed by her strength and commitment. Each of her children are driven to excel, due to her drive. Feminism isn't what makes any of these women successes or failures as parents. It is their internal fortitude. My sister and I were raised by a woman who stood tall at 4'11. But I can honestly say, my younger sister is 10x the parent I was. We both believe the same things, but our personal makeup determined the difference in approach not feminism. Feminism isn't a one size fits all thing, neither is race, religion, or political persuasion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Right now I know four women in their early forties who waited to have children. One is undergoing repeated and so far unsuccessful fertility treatments. Another never speaks of her efforts although I know they are ongoing. The third got pregnant while awaiting an appointment with a famous fertility expert. And the fourth just started a blog about the little girl she adopted from China.

The important point is that I've never heard ANY of them blame feminism for their predicament. Life is complicated, and we must make many choices.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How many women from the feminist nation are now without babies and the security they bring and sit on the edge of the abyss staring into a lonely future with only their work (WORK: I hated 25 years of it. I'm glad I've been forced to retire and enjoy the rest of my life and my son) to comfort them.

EVERY SINGLE ONE

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The material wealth that we now consider "necessary" would have seemed way over the top to our 1965 selves. Instead of seeking "balance," many of us are just seeking "more."
Both my brothers and I have married women who seem to value "stuff" more than we do, and are willing to varying degrees to work at unpleasant and stressful jobs to have it. There is also a limit to how many PHDs are needed out there,and how much money they can make. Somebody has to do manual labor, and then there's the massive problem of obesity with everyone.
In the end, isn't "empowerment" the ability to be satisfied with the life we have, or the power to adjust it till we are? Some of those positions of "power" that top men have held are not really anything to seek after. The saying ", be careful what you wish for," is equally valuable for men and for women.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Saw this coming- the subversion of the Womans Movement.Of course it has been happening on the other side - Corps loving Women to be drafted into their Legion of theEnslaved.But now they realize their short sightedness has them with far few Workers for their Future Ventures.So they are Now going to roll out the - "you were Done Wrong" campaign.See the effort you made to fufill your own dreams as a betrayal of your innate Feminity.
Working both sides of the street now. Next it will be "Prochoice is taking away your right to have children'.
I'm 45 have no biological children (1 Step daughter)and although it crosses my mind- I know I can Always adopt.Must I drop a 'fruit of my loins' to be a whole person?To Prove I have exercised All My god given Rights to express my self. No honestly I was in no financial situation, Nor state of mind to have a child just to satisfy my Ego.I have instead focused this feminine Tendency towards care giving in other arenas- being a far more credit to the community than merely 'popping one out'. I have worked with Developmentally disable, Children ,and the elderly in Health related fields and education. I then focused my energy on Horses- namely Brood mares and Foals. I have been told by my mother I have allowed her to live a differnet life vicariously- she had her first child at 22 and wishes she could have waited and seen where life would have taken Her. I, nor my sisters, hold any ill will for her Dreams of the past. She was an average woman of her times and subject to it's whims and demands.
Watch out ladies they are going to be Working this Sexism card from all angles- just like their subversive attack on the Faith -creating a NEW religious Doctrine which All are expected to buy into - if they consider,or want,themselves to be included.This is why we MUST move away from the Term 'Feminist ' immediately- it is too binding, easily manipulated and Self Absorbed .We must move to the Rhetoric which promotes Liberation- to do as each person choose with out influence or restraints to the contrary. This is why I Hate when ever I hear the 'Sexism' card being Pulled- it is a double edged sword and defeats the goal of true Equality and Self Determination.
Let's not let Our efforts fall victim to this subversive game tha thas been played against so many Human ideals.I have no Regrets, no guilt..Over the last 45 yrs I have always done it MY WAY,Because it is Mine to do with as I wish!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I think it's too bad that feminist women have been clumped together under one banner (again). Earlier, it was excluding women of different socio-economic, ethnic/racial or sexual preferences from the feminist story. Not all feminists are childless, and feminism doesn't cause childlessness either.

I could be considered one of these feminists who "missed out on" having children, but while I am sad I lost the one child I might have had, I don't regret in general being childless.

It's possible to be a feminist and 1) be content with no children or 2) have children. The author seems to imply that feminists don't have children and are sorry they did later. That's an over-generalization, and feminism doesn't cause childlessness. It's possible that some brands of feminism demean focusing on having children, but that's not a central tenet of feminism.

I think that there should be room for different stories and perspectives in the feminist movement, including choices of family life and professional calling. I resent lumping me into one category or another and overlooking different perspectives.

I'm sure that there are some feminists my age (late 40s) who are sorry they didn't have children when they were younger. But there are likewise mothers who might regret having children now for one reason or another. I'm not going to discredit their feelings, and I don't want to demean them either.

I may or may not personally agree with their choices (such as marrying an abusive spouse or getting pregnant under what I think are unwise conditions), but they're not my choices.

And besides, I don't think I should throw the first stone (cp. Jesus' parable of the loose woman caught in the act). It's not as if I've never done (or not done) anything I later regretted.

The other thing is that the fact that some feminist women regret not having children earlier (at least in part) because of their feminist views, doesn't mean that feminism is any less valid or important.

For one thing, feminism means different things to different people, but also, I think blaming feminism is just looking for a scapegoat. There are lots of feminists who did/do have children when they were younger (and they may or may not be glad now that they did). So blaming feminism for earlier not having children to me smells a bit of looking for a scapegoat.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I am a young woman who also desires to have children and a family, who wants to fulfill myself in terms of a career, in terms of giving to my community, and also be a mother.

I would never, ever blame feminism for the difficulties in being able to do both. Feminism has done so much for us that we young women today often take for granted. Even to have the CHOICE to work or have families! or the CHOICE when to have families!

But our work is not finished. The author is right - feminism's next project is to figure out how we can shape our society to meet our needs - parenting AND fulfilling careers/life passions. without going crazy, giving up our dreams, neglecting our children or having to be supernaturally talented. And let's get the men involved. Why is 50/50 too much to ask for? Sounds fair to me.

What about the idea of "half-time" jobs with full benefits for parents, men and women? "Half-time" jobs in various fields, that still allow people to pursue their passions and build new skills/build their resume? And an economy that doesn't require two full-time incomes to support a family but one (or two half-timers)?

This could be a project to re-energize feminism/women's lib, not take it down. And it would enrich the lives of men as well.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We lost out on motherhood? Oh please...Millions of us CHOSE not to breed and are very happy with that decision.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm sorry Ms. Walker had it rough growing up, many others had it rougher, and her mother's choices in raising her probably had less to do with feminism than her own childhood trauma. I think many of our mothers raised us amidst their own issues, childhood traumas, etc., but also because they may not have been allowed to make certain choices before feminism opened doors. My own mom raised me to be independent, strong, and to think for myself, and while I thank her I also realized that she had many of her own demons that she didn't want to recognize. When I had kids there were things that I chose not to pass on to my kids, because I choose to remember the pain that I didn't want to pass on. I say this to say to Ms. Walker and others that you can choose. Feminism allows women to choose what they want to do with their lives, because there was a time when they couldn't. If you choose to have kids, then choose to be present with them always; if you choose not to have children, that option is also is yours to make, and if because of other choices that you made you have waited till it is too late- then you can choose to adopt and love that child simply because you can - or not.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Contrary to the author, Dr. King did not preach love and commitment. He was not a "life style" evangelical.

He preached civil rights, justice, equality and non-violence.

Sleeping with his church secretary was not hypocrisy.

If he had slept with a Klanswoman, that would be different.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

America has become the land of barking dogs. It doesn't matter the topic.

" Oh would some god the giftie gie us, to see oorselves as others see us". Robbie Burns, a Scottish poet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So why the big freak-out whenever a critique of feminism pops-up?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Before feminism, it was only men who were blamed for spending more time on work than on the family. I look forward to hearing from career women who may now have a modified perspective as they try to "do it all."

Yes, you can do it all, but if you have kids, you will never be able to do everything. Kids are a commitment to perpetual inadequacy. So the issue becomes, can you live with never being able to do it all but only doing enough?

Doing "enough" has male/female dimensions but it has a lot more in common that crosses gender divides. Push it just a little bit and you will find yourself in dialogue with our most ancient religious resources. "Enough" is a fickle *god,* especially for those of us who believe this is our one chance to get it right.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Say you want to have children and raise a family. Well, that's okay, as long as you understand that your children will be trained to be cogs in the state corporate machine - they must be obedient, above all. That is the duty of the child-bearing women - producing more meat for the ranks. Raise your child to be a good little soldier, in other words.

If you choose not to have children, then you become the bride of the state - a corporate pawn on the the ladder to the stars. Power suits are all the rage here. What you have to do (as a woman or as a man) is move beyond "feminine-masculine" concepts and understand that the corporate state is more important than any human being.

So, those are your choices - breeder or tool. At least, that's how it works in communo-fascist state societies, which is what the U.S. is slowly turning into, with hardly a whimper of protest from the public.

If you don't want to be part of this screwed up system, just do whatever you want to do - but, please, remember that if you decide to be an independent person, not a slave of the state, than you, not the state, are the responsible one.

The fact is that a lot of our fellow citizens enjoy being cogs in the machine - they are eager followers, full of pride at their "responsibilities" - and conveniently, they are then able to abdicate their personal moral responsibility by saying "I'm just doing my job".

Are you sure you wouldn't rather be a corporate slave? A Good German? A Loyal, Patriotic American? A Member of the Team? You can be a feminist corporate slave just as easily as you can be a masculinist corporate slave, after all.

What happens when you are put to the test? Do you even know which side you'd choose?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dear Ms. Martin,

I truly admire your work. I found your book Perfect Girls, Starving Daughters helpful in my journey to understand my body dysmorphia.

With that said, I am extremely disappointed that in this review you seem to accept Rebecca Walker's dramatic verbal assassination of her mother as fact without any recognition or exploration of Alice Walker's understanding of the issues both mother and daughter shared (and this problem is most pronounced on page 2 of the review).

Even in this memoir, Rebecca Walker fails to search within her own self without blaming others for answers to her own behavior, her own rebellious nature, poor decisions, and irresponsibilities as a young woman.

As you nicely point out, Rebecca Walker mistakenly blames Feminisms (there is no one feminism) for her maternal woes. However, Rebecca Walker also mistakenly blames her mother in a public way that is so unseemly, self-serving, rageful, and under-examined as to negate the credibility of her stance.

I am most saddened that book reviewers have failed, on the whole, to scrutinize the bearer of the tale's bias or to consider the missing voice of Rebecca Walker's mother.

Unless the interaction between family members is criminal (documented, prosecuted or prosecutable physical, sexual, or verbal abuse), then who are we to take sides and accept one person's account over all others?

This failure of reason and the examination of the bearer of evidence is most sad because anti-bias ways of knowing--feminist, anti-racist, and anti-homophobia approaches among others--ought to teach us to be more vigilant in considering the sources, effects, aims, and influences of what is told to us.

Thanks for listening and I wish you goodwill.

Jonathan David Jackson

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

R Walker's critique recognizes that second-wave one-size-fits-all feminism was a fraud. The upper-middle-class white women's brand of feminism does not apply to everyone and I regret deeply that I too let its childless 'independent' ideal govern my thinking when I was younger. No more; I'm free now to think for myself, thank you very much.

Second-wave feminists have become tyrannical in their refusal to even listen to the perspectives of their younger sisters--or daughters in the case of Alice and Rebecca Walker. Younger women watched their mothers be lonely, miserable, and angry and they don't want to be those things. As a university teacher, I see this feminist generation gap enacted every day. The powerful second-wave academic feminists actually tell younger women what they are allowed to think and say and write. THAT is anti-feminist in the extreme and it has to stop.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It is always deeply narcissistic for personalities to conflate their family's or their own shortcomings with some ideological position. What if it wasn't due to feminism but the fact that Alice was not attentive enough as a mother or that Rebecca as a grown woman is too needy? Why does everything have to be some big ideological pivot when families are diverse enough to account for all these outcomes without dragging feminism into it?

We have free will, and sure, status, expectations, and desires play a part in our upbringing, but it might be time we took responsibility for our own lives and stop blaming someone else's ideal.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Her brand of Feminism is only one. The other two are Momism and Iconic literary personality.

Her daughter Rebecca was pregnant at thirteen and aborted a baby. Left to figure out life on her own and with whosoever would way too early. By her account of her childhood She was, like many children, the victim of parental negligence.

Protecting the good name of feminism by victimizing a child victim runs the risk of Feminism being viewed as a cultic sacred cow by some and cause the rest to say F**K Feminism.

What is the take away? Alice Walker was and is a terrific writer and sorry mom. Period. Lets hope that she can learn as much from her daughter as she has taught her Feminist devotees.

Great Writer, Alice is. OK?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I grew up expecting to marry, have a child or children and stay home to raise them. Unfortunately my marriage failed shortly after my daughter was born and I had to become a career mother. I think I was fairly successful as a mother but it would have been nice if I could have made more money in my jobs and could have given my daughter more advantages. This is the reason for feminism. To give women the choice. A bad mother is a bad mother and caused more by personality than by whether she works or stays home. I have known bad mothers who never worked and did not want to. I have known very good mothers who worked. It is the person who makes the difference.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm thinking billgee is a man, masquerading as a woman poster for the purpose of setting everyone off.

Anyway, what abyss?? All I see is freedom! The days when you need children to care for you in you dotage are over, for you have your own means!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Susan Faludi is very very smart. I picked up BACKLASH in response to reading her essay about Hillary Clinton in the NYT's a few weeks ago. I recommend BACKLASH to anyone who is trying to understand this issue. Faludi explains this kind of argument very well and backs it up with good research.

Our society is still very structured against women having a wide range of experiences. When women collectively make progress to expand the range of experiences available to women, society follows historical patterns and retracts those advances. We have been in such a phase for 20 years now. One way that this works is to blame the word Feminism for problems in women's lives, which takes politics and discriminatory policies off the hook. Another way it works is for women do to their own work of unraveling the rights of women for themselves and others.

I wonder if Rebecca Walker read this book? She's very smart; I guess that she would have read it, perhaps 15 years ago when it was first published. Maybe she should refresh herself with the facts. Women who "delay" childbearing into their 40's most likely have done so in deference to personal finances. Women who spend their 20's & 30's obtaining advanced degrees and working in academia most likely support themselves on shoestrings budgets and carry heavy burdens of student debt. In addition, this country does not provide adequate family leave policies or reliable healthcare. Those conditions are not favorable for starting a family.

Unless R Walker can be more specific about the circumstances of those smart women she meets in their 40's who are so bereft about learning the facts of life so late in their reproductive lives, her observations are only anecdotal. Unless she backs up those statements with statistical validity, she is passing on stereotypes about women in their 40's who are not mothers. Just because she is the daughter of a prominent feminist and is achieving her own fame by denouncing the feminism of her mother, that does not make her statements a rigorous fact of social-science.

It's very stressful to participate in a social movement. I have no doubt that Alice Walker's family took hits in that struggle and that experience was very painful. But during that time, rights were won and I am grateful for those feminists who worked in the movement. My hope is that Rebecca Walker's work will truly contribute to a "3rd" wave that continues the struggle but makes it easier for families to participate in the necessary work of expanding the rights of women. But I'm uncertain how her words will achieve this.

Rebecca Walker is very interesting and a good writer. But her fame and success is because of and at the expense of her mother who actually broke ground as a writer about the lives of women, particularly women of color. Right now there is a market for women who denounce feminism and that must be great for Rebecca Walker's book sales--but Alice Walker is a historic figure who has done the real work. It's unfortunate that these women have such a difficult personal relationship but that difficulty does not make RW any more of an authority on women's experiences than anyone else who has difficult relationships with their mothers. It's very interesting. It's sad. It raises issues to think about.

In the meantime, there are more great women writers out there who have a lot more interesting things to say about women's experiences. It is worth expanding the horizons of readership to better understand the real, rather than imagined, challenges that women still face today.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Needless to say, many of us have had less-than-perfect childhoods. Now this should not stop us from being better parents ourselves or serve as a life-long excuse for bad behaviour! when you reach the age of majority, you are responsible for YOURSELF. Life is (in part) about overcoming adversity, so get used to it.

That being said, I have taken personal delight in busting all the stereotypes. More often than not, metamorphosis is catalyzed by the unexpected twist of fate, such as discovering I was pregnant (!) ... again (!)... at 41 (!) but from my perspective, we are formed not so much from the events of our lives but our reactions to them. I chose to embrace life, despite the obvious death-knell to my "non-traditional" profession.

And the fact we still have "non-traditional" professions (and a wage gap) is WHY we still need free-thinking people willing to go outside society's box. In this supposedly rational age, I am seeing lemming mentality run amok ... It's not a popularity contest, people!

So now feminism has become a "trend" while millions of the world's poorest women and children still bear the brunt of our inhumanity and indifference to other human beings.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Where is it said a woman must have a child to be happy.
Where is it said she must have a career to be happy.
Feminism is about a woman discovering what will make her happy and then set out to fulfill that and having the right the freedom to do just that.
A servay recently posted here on alternet said that 75% of the people in America who have children are not happy and realize that having children was not the utopia they had hoped for.
And yes many women in there 40's wanting children are unable.
Women will find there personal happiness and full fillment when they get honest with there self and ask the really hard question of what brings them persoanl happiness ... NOT what there parents want, not what society and the media tell them what will make them happy,only when the are full women on there own, with there own ideas and understanding will they then find what they really are looking for ... Personal Truth to Happiness

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

While Rebecca Walker may have had an unhappy child, her point is right-on. So many "feminists" believe that acting like a man is what feminism means.

I think this reflect the white-woman dominance of the feminist movement. Competing and winning against men in the work place means women are equal.

What does "equal" mean when we are completely different than men? Why should we have to pretend that we are not in pain or suffering during our periods, suck it up, and act like a man at work? We should have the right to BE women, in all that it means.

If it means that we need to take some time off to care for children, then that should be HONORED. The goal shouldn't be that woman are now "allowed" to work 60-80 hours a week, so they can compete with men!

Let's remember, we are the givers of life. We have a unique understanding of what that means. We should use our feminine strength for bringing compassion and love into the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

tell the story of feminism. Feminism is about choice, period. Not making judgments about the choices others make. And I agree with you, this form of feminism, is the equivalent of a European soccer riot. It doesn't help the team, it's just chaotic.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The train left the station. It's too late. And we left shame behind, and we also are no longer willing to be shamed simply because you'd enjoy it and feel powerful if it happened. This change happened and there is no going back. You're too late. All those like you can do is gripe (except if your own daughters are discriminated against.) There's no more influence to be had by your thinking and preaching. We're beyond it, have been for decades.

Good riddance!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Feminism has never been about telling women NOT to have children - it's about telling women they have a choice. Of course when you have a choice you can end up regretting having chosen badly but I think most of us would still rather make the choice ourselves and take that risk. No?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I suppose this is the real challenge of realist feminism: how to reconcile equality with the fact that Men and Women are just not the same. There are some very fundamental differences.

Of course, a woman should be whatever she wants to be, and if that be a CEO, fine, if that be a stay-at-home mum, okay, fine. But the is one better than the other? Should women feel pressured into a more traditionally masculine role? The mistake is in thinking that equality will erase gender differences, or even that it should.

Nature didn't have feminism in mind when it molded our bodies and minds: it cares not for equality, it only cares for survival. So how do we reconcile instinct with morality? Some non-feminist traits are so much a part of us...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I tackled this problem for myself more than twenty years ago, when I was in college and deeply into women's spirituality (feminist spirituality). It seemed to me then, as it does now, that early (or "old") feminism had as its goal gaining power in a man's world. Old Feminism did not question the fundamental social systems that were set in place by -- dare I say it? -- the patriarchy. The entire movement was directed toward helping individual women achieve positions of power in a structure designed by men. To do this, they often had to become more "male-like," either in their appearance, speech and thinking or in foregoing traditional female activities such as having and raising children.

The New Feminism seeks to transform social systems so that becoming empowered does not entail becoming "male-like" in any way. This is a deeper, more profound, feminism ... one that seeks to make room for strong, powerful mothers and empowered women who choose to appear feminine. The New Feminism does not equate "feminine" with "weak" and advocates not only more shared parenting responsibilities but also 30 hour work weeks and more time for families. The New Feminism values professions that are based on nurturing and caring (nursing, teaching, e.g.) and seeks to increase the impact of the feminine in all areas of life.

Maleness is great, but we have been overpowered with too much masculinity for the past two thousand years and the world is out of balance. We need a dose of extra-strength feminism, one that will make room for all dimensions of womanhood and help both men and women connect more deeply with their femininity.

P.S. I have a Ph.D. and two children -- I chose to sacrifice a high powered academic career for my family, but have managed to keep working throughout. I am pretty sure that I would be much more successful if I had not gotten married and had kids, but it was a trade-off I was willing to make and I don't regret it. I do wish, however, that academia did not make it so difficult for women with kids and that my husband was more enlightened, more feminist, more supportive.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

At least the original Christian ideal was to have a certain number of people unencumbered by families, that they could live and die for their faith if necessary.

Some of us, in a nuclear age, watching the polar bears starve, surrounded by cancer in our friends and families, ruled by mass murdering thieves who lie about God, can equally make the choice that we shall live and die for our beliefs, and that this is more important than producing the ashes of our children. Others of us, possibly imbued with more hope than brains, shall decide to produce kids who will do better in the next generation, or at least we'll take a bit of risk every Saturday night in the vain pursuit of personal enjoyment. Some people try to walk all paths, and many of these discover that there may not be enough of themselves to go all the way around. Something has to give.

I can't tell you which is a better path -- it depends on the person. Good luck, and bless you on your path.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My feminism, the feminism of my mother and the daughters and mothers I know, is one where women get to be whole human beings and committed mothers (if they choose to have children).

I can not express the many ways the above statement offends me! You imply that because I am a committed mother and devoted wife I am NOT a "whole human being". I am a homemaker. And you imply that my life is lacking? How dare you! The hardest part of my job is dealing with other woman. Woman like you. Who do not understand that I can be a liberal and a homemaker. Feminism is the choice to do with your life what you want. I want to be a committed mother. You have no problem demeaning a whole segment of female population. Is that not what feminism is all about? Equality? No, not anymore. Now woman like me have to put up with opinions like yours. Why do "feminist" go on the offensive when confronted with woman like me? I have a theory. It's not the woman who put off childhood but the ones that send their children to be raised by strangers for 40 to 60 hours a week in a day care who do not like that I represent a choice. A choice they are not proud of making. I choose to care more about who my children spend their time with and care less about material possessions. But I guess that still does not qualify me for "whole human being" status, does it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

One must be reminded of Thomas Huxley when he said, "The great tragedy of Science - the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis (ism) by an ugly fact."

When history writes to explain the decline of the U.S., militant feminism will be its prime suspect. The ravages of this particular hysteria are everywhere evident even now, even with the furious, frantic efforts being waged to camouflage them. It has proved to be that all men AREN'T rapists, that children reared by women in "single parent" families become almost without variance societal misfits, that little schoolboys under a relentless assault by feminists and their minimalist doctrine are today in serious psychological trouble, that a nation influenced largely by females swiftly devolves into eternal dithering, to psychological emasculation of its males, and to processes legal, economic, and societal as irrational as has this one has, and literally scores of examples more.

Of course sociology and sociologists - that science now effectively outlawed by female-inpired (and demanded) political correctness - won't be able to say anything to history until the national decline has proved fatal. Feminism won't let them.

Nevertheless, that the nation is in steep, probably fatal, decline can no longer be rationally debated. History will say with J.S. Mill: "A State which dwarfs its men, in order that they may be more docile instruments in its hands even for beneficial purposes -- will find that with small men no great thing can really be accomplished; and that the perfection of machinery to which it has sacrificed everything, will in the end avail it nothing, for want of the vital power which, in order that the machine might work more smoothly, it has preferred to banish."

The author isn't the first of the feverish feminists to come to realization. I know dozens more personally (got most my point of view on the matter from them, matter of fact.
Too bad - "we grow too soon old, and too late smart."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The messed up double standards of our our moralistic behavioral standards is to blame. How many men here can state in all honesty that they believe woman to be their definitive equal? Not one. As boys we are still taught girls first; that it is (more) wrong to hit a girl.

Then (after this sexist bullshit.) when we are older we get taught more about integrating ourselves with other people. Namely that there is an amendment in our Constitution women are to be the equals of men. So then what's with this double standard of women are our equals but are taught by society that they require more emotional support than men.

Though yes there are some exceptions to this rule and I have met some seriously emotional men (so what if you're that comfortable with yourself to that extent?), and butch/tom boy (straight) women (again same as above). Yet I've seen such people shunned by both genders. Not to the point of perpetual unhappiness but finding that special someone who isn't put off or intimidated by such behavior is more difficult that those who follow the cookie cutter norm.

Basically, how can we seriously believe in equality between genders, when right form the start certain "traditions" of conduct are forced upon us that teach us otherwise beforehand?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A lot of times what look like debates are just people talking past each other, and the sense I get is that this is one of those cases. My guess would be that a response from Ms. Walker would amount to 'the author has accepted the truth of my criticism while redefining what feminism is' and the reasonable response would be that 'feminism never meant what you thought it did Ms. Walker.' Debates like this are almost always a waste of time.

The point should be that a philosophy which says that having a family is necessarily an encumbrance is deeply confused and the product of a shallow mind. The debate about whether the word 'feminism' attaches to such a view is boring. On the whole I am inclined to side with the author, and against Ms. Walker, because feminism is the self-adopted name of a (loose) movement on the part of the less socially powerful against the more socially powerful, and I am suspicious of construals of 'feminism' which make it a silly thing (and so by unspoken implication, the movement).

Also, it strikes me that if one were really concerned about people not seeking families and so losing out then men should be the real worry, and the consumerist popular culture (and the corporate interests which foster such a culture) is to blame. I have met some women who don't want children. I have met far more men for whom being a good father is so far from being a priority that they don't feel the need to state it. And I doubt very much that the main reason people pick jobs over family is feminism. I would suspect that the reason people usually pick jobs over family is money. 'Advertisements have us working jobs we hate, so that we can buy shit that we don't need.'

And why does her mom being famous make her fit to have an op-ed? Does she have comparable accomplishments that I am not aware of?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

who said "...if you get your brain scrambled by pregnancy you are out..." [of his lab] I could not get a child without abandoning my PhD. Now that I have a PhD, I work for a company that has maternal leave listed as a sub-category of "short term disability"... Choosing to be single, and having no close relatives my choices are:
1) don't have a child
2) abandon the child to daycare within 8 weeks of birth
3) move to europe
4) find a set of older people who would like to be adopted as grandparents and then have a child...
Sorry for rambling -- all this is to say --
What we need is more feminists and a BETTER FEMINIST MOVEMENT!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Courtney, I couldn't agree more with everything you said in your amazing essay. Feminism has evolved over the decades, and as we've seen, each woman's wants and needs are unique. As the culture around us (slowly) shifts, there truly is a 'middle path' - we really can have a happy family life and fulfilling work. For many of us, one can't happen without the other.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Maybe Alice Walker can write a new version of Daughter Dearest. A child of privilege Rebecca sounds like Michelle Obama complaining how hard it is to raise children on $500,000 a year. She can't understand how it could cost $10,000 a month to raise two little girls. I ruefully wondered if she was bragging or complaining. Would Rebecca been able to become such a quickly published author if her mother had been Suzie Nobody?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'd bet all the progressives and liberals who
lurk at this website would be beating a path to
her door. Dollars to doughnuts, no one here would
be blaming Mommy Phyllis alone for just being a
"bad mom", but freely bashing all that conservatives
stand for.
In that case, both shoes fit for Mom Alice OR any
counterpart who acts one way in public, and another
in private. If you can't practice what you preach
at home, you have no business compelling millions
of others to heed your advice or supposed wisdom
to the masses. Here, the chickens come home to
roost, and Alice doesn't get to abdicate her role
as a mother just because she possesses a God-given
gift. She gets no quarter from those who consider
feminism AND good parenting non-mutually exclusive.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Feminism was about being able to make the same choices as men, not have special privileges.

If they wanted to start a family so badly, they should have found a husband willing to be a stay at home dad. If they made they conscious choice to focus on a career then tough cookie.

Just for the record, in order for men to get kids they need find a partner as well, it's just the way nature works.

And besides, the last thing this world needs, is more Americans breeding like vermin they are.

Please stop praising parenthood like it's some kind of virtue cause it's not.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm part of the generation that really does feel betrayed by what we were told by feminists. The mantra was always, "There will always be time for a family."
"Get your degree first. Make sure you have money."

Guess what? It is a lie.

Biologically, women are best able to have children in their early to mid 20s. Interestingly, when RESOLVE, the national advocacy group for fertility education tried to make young men and women aware of this, lawsuits were brought by FEMINIST organizations.

So, yes, old school feminists are just nasty liars. Oh, and this lie has caused many a man to pressure his wife into waiting - or thinking it was ok to just play around with women who are in their late 20s and early 30s. When asked, they really don't realize that delaying marriage and childbearing into their wife's late thirties or early 40s may be condemning them to unplanned childlessness.

Oh, and to you who would say "Just Adopt." I suggest you get an education on exactly what it takes to first adopt. And, secondly, deal with adoption - whichever form it takes. It is not a cure for infertility.

The concept of men and women being equal without recognizing that there are very real biological differences is ludicrous. There are basic biological differences that need to be recognized. And men are just as much victims of this as women!

I'm sorry, but I find the original feminist movements to be very offensive. They spoke as if no women worked. Working class women ALWAYS worked. The eldest child who could not yet enter the workforce took care of the children in these families - whether male or female. Everyone worked. There is a complete lack of understanding as to what the real issues have always been for the majority of women - not just the select upper middle / lower upper class denizens of the women's movement.

Myself? I know noone who was not very wealthy who did not work until their first child was born from earlier generations - let alone my own. So, really, I have never seen how these ladies who lunch and got bored related to the reality of real people's lives.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's not easy being a mother. We try our darndest to get it right, but often leave our kids feeling resentful, even though we've done the best we can.

But today, modern moms are trying to be everything to everyone, and it’s not doing anyone any good.

The battle is no longer working mothers vs. stay-at-home moms, feminists vs. traditionalists, or alpha moms vs. beta moms... the battle is inside us.

We are among the first generation of women brought up fully believing we could become recognized leaders in all areas of life: business, politics and personal. We have incredibly high expectations of ourselves. We micro-manage our families, multi-task non stop, ignore our partners, our friends and ourselves, and are stretched to the limits.

The results? Stressed-out moms with major health problems like high blood pressure, jaw pain and chronic fatigue. Skyrocketing divorce rates. Harried working women who are convinced they shortchange everyone.

But I really believe it doesn’t have to be this way. We don't have to be either Alice OR Rebecca, we can be a bit of both.

I wrote Mothers Need Time-Outs, Too: It’s Good to Be a Little Selfish, It Actually Makes You a Better Mother (McGraw Hill) after interviewing over 500 women across America and abroad, and concluded that today's mothers often need to be more selfish, not less!

I thank the feminists for blazing the trail for us, even though I think they were often extremists and as a result there are many injured little souls out there who felt unloved or insignificant. But today we've gone overboard in the other direction--what we need to find is genuine balance so we can be women AND mothers, and be filled with love and energy not resentment.

Katrin
Co-author Mothers Need Time Outs, Too
www.momstimeout.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Rebecca Walker is a sickening opportunist. If she doesn't want to compete with "mother" then get off her butt writing books in her bunny slippers with her "partner" and become an oral surgeon or something.

She wants to capitalize on her mother's name all the while destroying her mother's reputation. I understand her mother was obviously a crappy parent, but what is Rebecca W's purpose with this? Can we help her with her issues? No, she and her mother need to get to a therapist and work on their problems.

But oh yeah, there's that. Actually working to improve her relationship with her mother would leave her without a juicy, highly marketable book deal.

Also, she has no shame, in using her trashy story, to insult feminists. She uses crappy logic (that Yale, LOL) in casting the majority of feminists in the same category as her mother, who if her essay is true, was a pretty radical feminist. Does Rebecca realise that most people are not rich, trust-fund, (ex-trust fund, LOL) kids; and if they align with feminist issues, it's not under a crazy deny-your-children brand of feminism but basically economic feminism like improving pay for women and respect for women in traditionally female professions (like nursing, K-12 teaching, office/secretarial, etc.) I realize that she probably has never worked an actual job so this probably is not within her realm of experience. Also, most of the women who can actually get access to abortions are not rich, well-connected, glass ceiling crashers like those in her inner circle; but women who are making tough economic decisions or decisions based on safety issues.

Anyway, I can say this on her behalf. Obviously, Alice Walker was a lousy parent, having raised someone this self-involved. Both of Rebecca Walker's books are about Rebecca, Rebecca, Rebecca.

Many of Alice Walker's essays are also quite self-involved and(for lack of a better word) elitist and reflective of someone living in a very rarefied world of dilettantes. To that I say, like mother, like daughter.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]