Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Demystifying the Power of Moolah

By Sheerly Avni, AlterNet. Posted January 24, 2006.


In her new book, 'Money: A Memoir,' Liz Perle argues that when it comes to their wallets, women still have a long way to go.
30602_2
She Ain't Sayin' You're a Gold Digger

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

More stories by Sheerly Avni

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

"Women, emotions and cash." This is the subtitle Liz Perle chose for her new book, Money: A Memoir, a brutally honest look at how women's conflicted relationship to money holds them back in love and life. We know more about our friends' sex lives, she says, than we do about their pocketbooks, and women are still caught in a push-pull of desire for cash and shame over that desire. Perle doesn't offer any easy answers, but she forces us to ask hard questions about one of our deepest taboos. And asking the questions is the first step.

AlterNet met with Perle in her San Francisco office and asked her all about sex, love, divorce court, double-ovens, and how to decide who should pick up the check.

In this book, you argue that money is always a fraught symbol.

Yes, it always carries the weight of something else. Money for men is power, it translates into sexual power. And for women, it's an aphrodisiac, because for centuries, women could only survive by attaching themselves to people who had money.

So I'm reducing here, but it seems that in the first half of the book you say that for men, money means power, and for women, money means love and security. But then at the end, you reinterpret that formula and say actually that for women too, money means power, which is why our relationship to it is so problematic. But when you say "power," what exactly do you mean?

Power: independence, freedom, the ability to make your own decisions.

Why wouldn't we want that? Why would women have a hard time embracing it? Isn't that exactly what women have been fighting for?

OK, you've got to look at how fast this has all happened. This is where the women's movement to me, is alive and well.

Move back a few generations: My grandmother's relationship to money was indirect. She didn't work. My mother, she went to college and she worked, but then she met my father and stopped working. Now, she died, so I don't know what would have happened, she might have gone back to work. That was a shift, but the money was still expected to come from the husband. The image of nirvana that was being broadcast was still the idea that the husband brought home the money.

Remember that the media creates norms. The Cleavers never existed, but how many people do we describe as Eddie Haskell? The media images are archetypes for us, so my mother felt perfectly secure depending on my father.

Now, today society will judge me on two different scales when they weigh my worth: 1) the amount of money I make and the prestige of my position, and 2) my ability to attain the womanly arts: to marry, to reproduce, to keep a nice home.

What about attractiveness?

Oh, that's part of the womanly arts. Implicit in that is that you've got to look good enough to get there in the first place -- and then keep yourself there.

So here I am: I have both those values systems inside me, I'd have to be the girl in the bubble not to. Each of those value systems contains a specific relationship to money. ... One is direct, the other is indirect. And I've spent my life ping-ponging back and forth between the two.

So you are in this constant state of turmoil between two ideals, two archetypes, and when you have two ideals that are discordant, it makes for a lot of conflict and ambivalence. It's these two different value systems that operate in our society, whether or not we accept them, and they pull us apart.

In your book, you say that the younger generation is different from your generation. What's the difference? Are the conflicts resolved? You found the younger women to be less conflicted.

Yes, I think younger women are more comfortable with their material sides And I'm not sure that's all to the good. The person who reflected the healthiest relationship to money was this one woman, Anna. She knows that cash is just cash. I admire her, because she's got a very clear sense of what cash can and can't do. What they don't have is a sense of fiscal responsibility, they've been raised in a society of credit card debt. That will be their challenge.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

Sheerly Avni is a San Francisco-based writer.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Race, anyone?
Posted by: geming on Jan 24, 2006 6:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This provides some insight I can identify with, as a woman who is struggling with social justice work, at the bottom end of the vast middle class, and quieting the consumerist vein under my skin. However, I think it's really important to identify some key points in the money and gender discussion. How women of color are commodified on even more targted markets, the exploitation of hip hop culture and the spending it encourages (Baby Phat, all commercial rap music), how we make a lot less on the playing field (Latinas may make 46% of what white men make in the same field), and how white women in the middle-upper class have bolstered their "independence" and economic roles by utilizing cheap third world labor in domestic and child-care labor. Just some food for thought.

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

The lady's got balls
Posted by: Sojourner on Jan 24, 2006 5:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I appreciate Perle's honesty, since that is how I explain that, when I reached the end of the interview, my response was Say what? Yeah, money focuses our problems.

Took me a while to recognize that the USA was built on the principle of getting as much as you can of whatever you can while you can. Freedom is defined as being able to buy what you want. That sorta worked on an undeveloped continent.

It doesn't work now, because we have reached the limits of our resources. Unending expansion is now a cancer, and ambition a symptom of the disease. After centuries of being told "Go West, young man" (and the many variations on that theme) how can we possibly understand that now we have too much ambition?

Our heads will stay messed up for a long time. If only it were a matter of keeping up with and being ahead of the Joneses, as Perle suggests (pecking order? looking good? humbug!)

We consume five times as much as the other people with whom we share the planet. We deserve to be doomed. And we know it. So we live with denial of truth rather than deny our greed.

I admire Perle for trying. I wouldn't touch that topic with a ten-foot pole. No one is winning. Not even the rich.

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