women should be allowed and encouraged to stay in the workplace. However, I believe that once they have that child, they should be at home with it for at least a little while, because a bond needs to form between mother and child, which is, in my opinion, the mother of all nurturing. Employers should not descriminate, and neither should society...Women are in a real sense our future, and should be given the respect and dignity accordingly. Without this, our society is bound to have serious problems...

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

In an earlier article on alternet regarding feminism and the workplace, one commentor attempted to argue that women opt out of work because staying home, raising the family, and being supported by a man is easier, explicitly stating that women lacked the same drive to succeed that men are wired with. I say BULLSHIT. This article aptly explains the real underlying reasons that women are staying home in higher numbers:working mothers are an unwanted demographic in the workforce. Bravo.

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

The article was good in that it picked up on the stereotype of a white, professional woman who gives up her $100k career to be with her kids and survive on her husband's $200k income.

The reality is difficult, because there are women who make $20k. Maybe her husband left her, or got hit by a Mack Truck, or whatever...Her ability to earn a living needs to be protected, right?

But how do you explain that to Sally Spinster: "Would you mind working late again tonight so Mrs. Soccer Mom can drive her kids to soccer practice?"

Or how do you explain it to Mr. Small Businessguy: "I have to leave work early every day to pick up my kids, and bring them to work with me during spring break...But you have to hire me and pay me the same as the person who doesn't have all that." Does he have the luxury of a large workforce with lots of coverage?

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

This male is mad at male employers for being so callous about hiring and firing women and paying them inadequate salaries. It is true that some men act really creepy in their relationships with women both on and off the job. Maybe it's because many men are taught by society to be real pricks.

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

It's scarey how the workplace has changed over the last decade, and I'm not surprised women bear the brunt of it. To be more "productive" we've driven out all the workers who cannot focus on a job 24/7. This means that the employed are continually exhausted, while other work goes begging. Talk to most people in corporate jobs and you'll find that support services are almost non-existent and that they are seriously overextended. There is plenty of work to go around, but it needs to be redistributed. That would mean recognizing the worth of the work that non-executives perform and maybe slicing off some of the perks that have enticed people to take on extra duties. Then everyone would have time for family, vacations, and other pursuits that make for a rich life. If employees want to pass on that, okay, but let's not make it the norm.

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

"Though Vargas said publicly that it was a mutual decision, the nature of her come-back segment fuels my impression that her reassignment was a demotion and a negative signal to working mothers.

Vargas began her report with references to news articles about her being "dropped" from "World News Tonight" with shots of Vargas cuddling her new baby . . ."

I am curious about something. Vargas was upset with what she believed was a demotion, but what if she had been demoted as a result of direct competition with another woman who opted not to have children in order to advance her career? How does it change things when this kind of treatment is not seen entirely as men behaving badly but rather a in terms of a woman's decision to forego what still remains a choice in order to be more competetive? What if Vargas' boss was in fact a woman who replaced Vargas with another woman who would not be taking a 6-month leave - ever?

A "young twenty-something" woman made an important point in another thread a few days ago. She did not have children of her own but admitted that she was rather tired of watching working moms field numerous phone calls from their kids while on the job, be excused from showing up on saturday in order to watch little league and even missing days of work to care for sick children, etc. when presumably she was working more yet receiving equal pay. We have to take such posts with a grain of salt, but assuming what she says is true, doesn't she have a point? Is this issue so cut and dry when weighed in this context?

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

My mum used to laugh when professional moms on high salaries and maids at home used to claim they were in a common fight with other women. There is nothing in common.

Somebody like Nancy Pelosi - a typical high achiever - will have an army of staff to help her get things done. Class is the big dividing line. You either can afford to get somebody else to do all your womanly duties, or you can't. How many yuppie women are progressive liberals in public, but have Juanita slaving away in the house to keep the whole show on the road?

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

I work for a big state university and in my quest to find a job here I have been on about 20-30 interviews over a period of a year and in four of them I have been flat out asked if I have children. I do and only one of those 3 interviews led to an offer.

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

I was briefly battered in a recent posting for being 'sexist' in my excoriation of Men. Typical of most responses, however, was a complete lack of attention to the issue that I was raising. This article does the same. This is an important social issue, but where is the mention of the role and responsibility of men, the spouses, partners, of these women?

The fact is, as numerous studies have shown, is that men simply are not responsible to do their FAIR share in the family unit to insure equal and proportionate development, professional or otherwise. The bottom line is that the vast majority of men are shirkers. From CEOs down to the janitor, each of them has probably stunted or continues to inhibit the growth of his partner's development because of patriarchal myths of 'breadwinner', etc. Now the pseudo-scientific pundits come in with genetics to justify this lack of responsibility.

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

Nigel Mound:

"For the majority of home owners, they are now “lobster potted” for the rest of their lives in the 21st Century’s version of the Victorian treadmill. Welcome to modern debt controlled serfdom, where if you lose your job, either through retrenchment or illness, you lose your home. It has become a veritable “Sword of Damocles”, or a stick with which to beat recalcitrant labor into a bloody pulp, should they ever prove restless or disobedient. The ruthless and faceless plutocrats who benefit vastly from this incredible and dreadful scheme must be laughing on their return to a status of demagogic power which is the modern equivalent of the Roman or the Medieval European Aristocracy at its exploitative worst. The difference between the rich and poor widens, by the day, into a gaping crevasse in all societies around the world, and, incredibly, no one appears to understand or really care about the overall social and political implications. The “I’m all right jack” mentality is more applicable to today’s world than ever before. Greed has become the credo of 21st Century society and money its surrogate and false God.

The mortgage weapon forms an integral part of the armory of the so called New World Order (NWO) as it seeks to accumulate wealth and power to control people by stealth. Other tools include the explosion of credit card debt where people have been encouraged to spend to the limit of their cards. If they can manage this limit, then the credit envelope is just expanded to encourage them to spend to the absolute limit of their debt servicing capacity incurring “loan sharking” interest rates in doing so. The fact that Governments turn a blind eye to this evil is proof positive of their own complicity, corruption and total lack of moral fortitude."

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

I have to admit not realizing the problem had gotten worse as this article describes-- being a guy who chose not to have kids in the hopes of helping friends with their kids instead, I am much more familiar with the personal side of the "why are families still struggling with work/life balance issues" equation, as opposed to the employer side. There is a personal side: I still know of too many men who think having kids is a neat idea until they are actually born, and then retreat into the den; and as far as having friends help you with your kids, most families are very much uninterested in this concept, it seems to be not part of their idea of what family is. But, that having been said, even though I am neither a woman nor a parent I can think of increasing numbers of rather-odd personal examples of what is described above in the employer realm.

I worked for an anti-domestic-violence agency (which included a women's shelter) for eight years and they offered fundamentally no family health benefits-- parents had to pay the entire difference between the single and family premium (and the assumption that female workers' husbands' benefits would cover them was pretty clear, although not actually stated). Like many social-service nonprofts these days, they were understaffed and so long hours were common; they had some 4-day positions, but invariably the 4-day people would end up working full time or more, or the work would get shifted to someone else who stayed late. And this is at an organization with a woman CEO, mostly female managers, and its origins in feminism!

I shouldn't be surprised to hear about people illegally asking about kids in the interview either; but I guess that is where the follow-up article comes in. Where are the lawsuits? Yes, lawsuits may be beyond employees' means, but it would still be good to follow up to find out what organizations are providing pro-bono legal work for test cases, or, if not, if there is anyone trying to start such a program to whom readers could donate. I suppose currently employers are getting away with the "everybody here works 50 hours a week and you have to too" excuse; is anybody trying to make a case that this is the gender equivalent of the poll tax, e.g. ostensibly not about family status, but might as well be? Or to pass laws at the local or state level strengthening the working-hours laws? (Increasing numbers of employees are getting classed as "exempt," denying them overtime for more than 40 hours, and unlike other countries we don't have a maximum workweek that it is illegal to go beyond at any price.)

I wonder if there is a cultural reason why generic wage & hour law reform is not higher on the progressive agenda in the U.S. Recently I chose to take time off from working entirely, to volunteer, etc., and I totally understand when I mention this to friends who are parents and they say "I couldn't do that now" etc. That is true. But I get the same "huh? what?" look when I mention it to other single 30-somethings who have no kids, similar progressive values and income to me. So many people I know fill their lives with school and second jobs and so forth, even if they don't need to support families, that perhaps the notion of going home at 5:00 has disappeared from their minds, and with it the notion of working hours reforms. Many are aware of how European governments maintain buy-in for social programs by providing them to everyone even if they aren't the most "needy"; perhaps the same is true of time away from work, that until we start framing it and really pushing it as a generic across the board expectation (enforcing and expanding overtime laws, mandating a maximum workweek, and mandating paid vacation, in ADDITION to specifically parenting-related benefits) it will just give employers a chance to play off the resentments of parents and non-parents against each other and nothing will change.

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

No woman should ever vote Republican or be a Catholic. The Repub party follows the corporate male point of view regarding the value of women. The male dominated Catholic Church,my church, has for two thousand years kept women in a subsurvient role and pushed that ideology on male Catholics, but not this male catholic. The Churchs excuse for their treatment of women is that 'women should be at home having babies and caring for them'. But as usual the Church is out of touch with reality because it is dominated by males who do not have to support a family with children and at low wages. The males of the Catholic Church are in a very real sense nothing more than 'kept men' supported as they are by the congregation who struggle everyday with endless despair and depression of trying to figure out how to provide for their children. While the Catholic Church has been totally aligned with the Repub party since Reagan became prez. So there are two popes to blame for what is happening in America and the world regarding not only the third class status of women but the expendability of women and men, all humans and all God's children. Pope John Paul II aligned the Church with the Rethug part and Pope Benedict XVI maintains that same tight alignment with the Rethug part despite their endless destruction of the middle class in America and the endless deaths and maimings of our troops and their families and Iraqi and Afghani families. The Catholic Church has this terrible obsession with a subject called Pro-Life. The church is really not Pro-Life at all, it is truly only Pro-Birth and via the Rethug party and it's endless dedication to war and destruction of the middle class in America means that the Catholic Church is also totally guilty of Pro-Death, the death of the middle class and it's ability to earn a wage sufficient to provide for their families and raise their children. The Pope, the Catholic Church, and the Rethug party and the MSM have all rendered themselves IRRELEVANT to the lives of everyday ,ordinary American citizens and their families. The Catholic Church has aligned itself with the Corporatocracy and the Neocons who are strangling American citizens for endless greed. If the Pope and the Vaticn and the USCCB and the clergy of the Catholic Church were truly Pro-Life they would never support the Repub part nor any political party in America or anywhere in the world. It would standup for the dignity and rights of ALL human beings, ALL God's children including the peoples of the Middle East and their families and children, that is the only way to win hearts and minds; ands more important than 'winning'... the Church would follow the laws of God and the teachings of Jesus. The church would and must stand up for issues such as the sanctity of All human beings including women who are most discrimanted against and along with children the most helpless as they have the least power in America and in the world. The church must not do this by simply attacking Islam. The Catholic Church must stand up to ALL governments especially those in North, Central and South America where the lives and well being of women and children are the most precarious due entirely to the wealthy few, 15-19 families in Mexico(an almost totally Catholic country) and in the U.S. where 8100 families control 90% of the wealth of America. The church should be putting enormous pressure on the Mexican and american gov'ts to immediately use it's tax dollars to benefit the TAXPAYER and not subsidize a few dozen Big corporations like Microsoft which is the biggest recipient of Small (yes Small) Business Administration tax dollars. That is mind boggling, since when in the name of all that is holy is Microsoft a Small Business and deserving of SBA dollars. And that is what is so wrong with America and so wrong and corrupt with America, the Rethug party and most of all a religion Called the CATHOLIC CHURCH.

PRAY FOR PEACE

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

Personally, I don't live in a world where I have a choice of whether or not I work. Either I work, or my kids and I go hungry. While I agree that the plight of upper-middle class professional women who lose their jobs (or are demoted) because of a planned pregnancy or because they leave too early during soccer season, is a serious one. The fact that they have a CHOICE to leave the workplace and stay home and "BOND" with their future consumers, is disgusting. I have to work. I have to take whatever job I can get. In fact I am going to school full-time during the day and waiting tables at night, so I can make a better life for my kids (and maybe someday afford a minivan and soccer gear for my kids so I can be one of these poor-underrepresented suburban moms who had to quit their cushy office job because their bosses didn't understand them. Boo-hoo.

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

Oh lord, who the FUCK is funding these motherfuckers in the "liberal" blogosphere ?!?!? Keep this up and the real Democrats who are trying to actually fight for the working class will get wiped out again ! I guess Alternet and the rest of the "liberal" blogosphere would much rather imitate the "right" and be stuck with a Democratic Party consisting of latte "liberals" from the coastal and urban areas talking down the working class !!

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

...because how else can one justify using her example as the convenient lead-in to an article about how women always are and always must be victims, with a capital V. Same old, same old BS.

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

"In 2004, Jody Heymann, a professor at the Harvard School of Public Health, studied maternity policies in more than 160 countries. All of them provided some sort of parental leave, paid for by the government -- except Papua New Guinea, Swaziland, Lesotho and . . . the good ol' U.S. of A."

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

All Workers- Female and Male:

check out these web sites:

www.givemeliberty.org

www.devvy.com

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

You can't have a bad boss if you don't have a boss. I don't see society changing any time soon, anti-female discrimination is not going to go away. At least if you work for yourself you have some control over your lifestyle and earnings.

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

Sexism is just one example of the whole problem.

Women SHOULD stay home with their babies. All babies that can possibly be- should be breast-fed. That is a JOB. Did you know breast-fed babies have higher IQ's? Maybe that is why 'our bosses' do not support breastfeeding!
Keep us all stupid- and hard working.

This whole idea that everyone must have a 'job' needs to be re-thought. Among other things it is environmentally destructive.

Have you ever watched the morning news on TV -Thousands of cars going both ways on the freeway-why don't they just all stay where they are?

We all should have small family businesss...not be slaves to corporations. And a woman should 'earn' enough to take care of her children..if she is married or not.
End of unwed-single mother problem.

We live in a society that is set up for the benifit of the rich who rule us. Instead of fighting among ourselves-WHEN will we wake up and revolt?

"People should be living in houses they built themselves and eating food they grew themselves'-The Grapes of Wrath

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

I'm still wondering where the working men are in this equation. To be sure, issues like maternity leave are specifically a women's issue since it is us women who are pregnant, give birth and breastfeed our children... But kids do have fathers as well, haven't they? So what happens after, say, the first year after the child has been born? Is raising kids and keeping the household running only a woman's job? Why do I only hear about working WOMEN having to balance their job with their domestic ("womanly"?) duties and hardly ever about working MEN having to do this? Btw, this is not only an American issue... Here in the "old" Europe the same half-blindness is rife.

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

In my experience our culture is a society of blame and lack of personal responsibility after making bad choices. We cannot blame one gender or make generalizations.

Avoid blame, expect personal responsibility. When an individual has children before they are financially prepared and available to take the time to care for those children, they do harm to self, child, and society. Individuals are responsible for their decisions and are expected to accept the logical and predictable consequences leading to the lack in some area of their lives albeit time, money, etc. The law of cause and effect is indiscriminate and equally applicable to each gender.

My job description does not describe , nor would I accept a job describing so, picking up the slack of a co worker with children because they have and event to attend with their child...that co worker should have thought about those kind of logistics before having the child. The co worker should have been more considerate about how they were going to care for the child and and take care of work responsibiities without using me, I didnt make the decision for that co worker to have children. I have the right to enjoy the fruits of my good planning and personal responsibility without being berated or harrassed about the shortcomings of logistics on the part of my co worker.

I worked in an office of all male employees (excluding myself) in a male dominated industry. I can attest, that the reason men work more than 40 hours a week is because during the duration of that week they spend 20+ hours NOT working toward the bottom line of their job description! They are "lunching" with "clients". Golfing with "clients". "Relations managment" with "clients" that are not necessary or described in their job description.

I do agree that the way things are running in this country are really outmoded and could use rennovation. Our Constitution provides the means for a healthful society. That includes the quality of life. Our healthcare, housing, and family situations are in critical need of rennovation.

Progress can be accomplished by preparing individuals for life events that can impact their quality of life. College, marriage, children, retirement, etc...Communities need to educate from the beginning of life about the financial burdens and personal consequences of those events and what can be done to PREPARE BEFORE those events arise! And that would be a good career for mothers and contribute to that objective.

Second, end career politics. Politicians need to have no compensation but the good feeling of making a positive difference in others lives and upholding justice and insuring the welfare of their communities. If that isn't how they feel then they need to hold a different career.

Fourth, if a business has actively humiliated, harassed, or discriminated against an individual then the individual needs to seek the advice of an attorney. Otherwise, a person needs to focus on being a parent, be proud of their role, do the best job they can raising their children with the best resources accessable, and insure they are voting for public servants whom care about the family, cultural, and environmental structure and whom actively pursue the knowledge and technology to make the quality of those structures the best they can be.

In summary: 1.) Take personal responsibility 2.) Prepare for lifes major events. 3.) Accept the consquences of personal choices 4.) Lead a politically active life for positive change for everybody.

One last note, men out there, if you are not using your time wisely, I agree with what is said about you being a victim by proxy. Wasting time at work does not benefit the company, you , or the rest of society and victimizes you by proxy.

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

I have seen so many women walk out of their marriages (including me) after years of trying to get their husbands to do their fair share of the household chores and childcare. My ex would NOT do anything without a fight, no matter how I approached the topic. (And I earned more, as did several other women who left their husbands).

I don't like Laoma's generalizations and stereotypes but damn it, there's some real truth there. I think sons are being raised differently, hopefully it will be a more equitable partnership for our children and grandchildren.

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

Until 50/50% Presumptive Custody is enacted forget it! I'm talking to you militant feminists from Hell and will eventually go back there!

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