1
   

Good News & Bad News About Stay-at-Home Moms

 
 
Reply Thu 22 Apr, 2004 01:29 pm
Edit: Moderator: Moved from "General" to "General News".

Good News & Bad News About Stay-at-Home Moms
by Phyllis Schlafly, Apr. 21, 2004

When Time Magazine runs a cover story called "The Case for Staying Home," and Reuters reports that housework is good for women because it can help prevent ovarian cancer, you know the feminists are on the run. Stay-at-home moms are coming back in style.

Time reports that there has been a dramatic "drop-off" in workplace participation by married mothers with infants less than a year old. The figure fell from 59 percent in 1997 to 53 percent in 2000, and the drop was mostly among well-educated women over age 30.

How about that word "drop-off"? The big news is the increase in the numbers of mothers dropping off of the corporate or professional ladder and the decrease in the number of babies dropped off at daycare.

According to a new Australian-Chinese study published in the International Journal of Cancer, moderate exercise such as housework decreases the risk of ovarian cancer in women. The more and the harder the housework the housewife does, the more she benefits.

The same week, attendees at a meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research in Orlando were told that a study at Women's Hospital in Boston showed that modest amounts of exercise can substantially improve women's chances of surviving breast cancer and help them to live longer. The doctor who presented the findings recommended the exercise of walking (but neglected to suggest walking behind a vacuum cleaner).

Why you won't read optimistic news like this in the major women's magazines is entertainingly explained in a new book by Myrna Blyth, who was editor-in-chief of Ladies' Home Journal for two decades. Her book is called "Spin Sisters: How the Women of the Media Sell Unhappiness and Liberalism to the Women of America."

The Spin Sisters are the high-profile women in the media, both those who control the profitable women's magazines and the anorexic female hosts on television. They are all busy selling American women the ideology of victimhood, the attitude that women's lives are full of misery and threats, and that they suffer from a constant state of stress that keeps them unable to cope with life's ordinary irritations.

The whole premise of female victimhood is false. American women today live longer, healthier lives than ever, filled with a multitude of opportunities for education, travel and employment.

The feminist movement flowered in the 1970s, powered by Betty Friedan's invitation for fulltime homemakers to be liberated from an oppressive patriarchal society and the home she described as a "comfortable concentration camp." The purveyors of such radical rhetoric have grown old and tiresome, but their thesis has been eagerly espoused by the Spin Sisters, who have learned how to market victimhood for rich profits and their own luxurious lifestyle.

Women's magazines of the 1950s and 1960s were helpful and hopeful; we didn't need Zoloft or Prozac. Ms. Blyth's magazine, Ladies' Home Journal, built its original circulation on the positive slogan "Never underestimate the power of a woman."

Today's Spin Sisters tell women that they are living in a treacherous stress-filled world, confronted by threats from everything from abusive husbands to contaminated foods in their refrigerator.

Women's worry list of fears and woes includes everything from the weight of the world's problems to the weight of extra fat on themselves. A very typical article in a woman's magazine is "The Health Hazard in Your Handbag."

Ms. Blyth describes how the Spin Sisters on the different networks (Barbara, Katie, Diane, Connie, etc.) are not really rivals but are a Girls' Club with a mission. Abortion is their bonding factor; the Spin Sisters will never allow any challenge to it to emerge on their television screens or their magazine pages.

The Girls' Club orchestrated a media campaign to promote their favorites Rosie O'Donnell, Hillary Clinton, and Jane Fonda, and used the same skills to vilify Katherine Harris. Liberalism is also a large part of what women's magazines are selling, and now the Spin Sisters are now ganging up to defeat President Bush.

Bernard Goldberg lifted the curtain on the how the media peddle the feminist promotion of daycare in his best-selling book "Bias." He wrote that "the most important story you never saw on TV" is "the terrible things that are happening to America's children" because "mothers have opted for work outside of the house over taking care of their children at home."

If you want to know why it's daycare babies (rather than their employed mothers) who are subjected to real stress and misery, and why fulltime motherhood is coming back in vogue, you can read Suzanne Venker's new book "7 Myths of Working Mothers: Why Children and (Most) Careers Just Don't Mix." (Spence Publishing) It's no surprise that the Spin Sisters at Glamour magazine are advising women NOT to read this helpful book.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 874 • Replies: 12
No top replies

 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Apr, 2004 04:17 pm
Lots of thoughts . . .

I stayed home for a long time and feel that now I am being punished by society for having done so.

I have looked diligently for work for the last seven years while working two jobs. My mean gross earnings have been $7,478 per year.

I also hate Phyllis Schlaffly who is a liar to the core. Heard her in a debate about 20 or so years ago. the woman ought to be stoned for lying.

Just read Catherine MacKinnon's old book on feminism and she explains how lliberalism is a trap for women.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Apr, 2004 04:19 pm
Women's magazines of the 1950s and 1960s were helpful and hopeful; we didn't need Zoloft or Prozac.

No, they were not. Those magazines were full of stories about women being closet drinkers and men suffering from heart attacks due to the strain of supporting a family. The left came up with a good compromise during the late 60s and early 70s: have both hubbie and wifey work part-time at professional jobs and share in childrearing and housework. Too bad that never came to fruition.

However, the monster I was married to would have found some way to never lift a finger, no matter how much Iwould have made.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Apr, 2004 04:25 pm
Speaking of spin sisters . . .

A couple of decades ago, the diaper service industry tried to combat the threat from disposables by awarding the egregious Joan London a working mother of the year award. Her network prevented her from accepting as cloth diapers weren't part of the image they were promoting.
0 Replies
 
suzy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Apr, 2004 06:32 pm
Phyllis Shaffly? Rolling Eyes
Let me read her words of unwisdom and get back to you.
0 Replies
 
shepaints
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Apr, 2004 07:24 pm
Well...I work (for the most part) at home. When summer rolls around there are kids (old enough to be at home, but too young for summer jobs) who have parents who both work outside the home.
These parents do not make summer plans for their kids...like camps for example. Their kids get bored and end up playing at my home with my kids! Stay-at-home mums take up a lot of slack!
0 Replies
 
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Apr, 2004 08:00 pm
fascinating.
0 Replies
 
suzy
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Apr, 2004 10:58 pm
Good God, the woman is a jackass!
Easy for her to say.
I stayed home with my kids most of their lives and I loved it, but I didn't have a choice, which is just how old Phyllis likes it.
I suppose the economy would be better if we women stayed at home, though. Let's all retire and let some guy take care of us! That will help Bush as well! Jobs will be plentiful! C'mon ladies, quit being so selfish.
Wrecking the economy, ruining our kids, letting little girls think they have rights and choices!
What is this world coming to?
While we're at it, let's get rid of all the unseemly minorities and put gays back in the closet. It's a white man's world, y'all. Go Phyllis.
Straight back to Hades where ya sprung from.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Apr, 2004 11:44 am
Ah, yes, sweet Phyllis. When I heard her radio debate, it was before she went to law school. She was citing a case that didn't exist!!! A female law prof called her on it. Phyllis' defense was that her husband did the research and he's a lawyer. The pair of them are liars!
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Apr, 2004 11:51 am
I've said this before, but feminism to me is about having the CHOICE to stay at home or work. Feminism is not all women must work all the time. Feminism encompasses the value of being a stay-at-home mom. (The form of feminism I agree with, anyway.)

In the current climate, feminism is about, among other things, making the workplace as friendly for moms as possible, including easing the transition back to work.

All of this doesn't mean that "feminists are on the run", at all.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Apr, 2004 12:08 pm
sozobe,
Your feminism is my feminism. I feel sorry for my own daughter who will not be able to stay home with any children she might have.

I was just reminded of a couple I saw on Dr. Phil. They had quadruplets naturally (without medical intervention). The woman's employer demanded she return to work BEFORE her maternity leave was up. How inhumane! I don't care if this woman is a genius who is the only person to do the job! They could have sent a computer to her home and a nanny and worked out a part-time agreement.

The couple did the math: if she stayed home or went to work and hired one caretaker, the results, financially, were the same. But the couple felt four babies meant two caretakers,which they couldn't afford. (The Dr. Phil show found a highly regarded day care center and paid for it.)

However, since the babies had to stay inthe hospital, the couple felt they did not have enough time to know their children.

But what about her body after giving birth to four? Obviously, this company didn't think of her as a mother and human and an organism: just as a clog in their wheel.
0 Replies
 
shepaints
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Apr, 2004 05:02 pm
Maybe we need to define "choice"...for
some there is absolutely no choice but an
absolute need to get food on the table....
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Apr, 2004 05:10 pm
Oh, of course.

Two points:

1.) For a long time, working outside the home was not really an option for women -- I applaud the efforts of feminists to make that choice viable.

2.) As part of that viability, I think part of feminism is making things less desperate for the woman you describe, to give her more choices. Whether by bringing women's salaries in line with men's, or making laws tougher to force deadbeat dads to pay up, or making the workplace friendlier for parents. (I don't want to limit that to moms -- there are more and more stay-at-home dads, which I think is a fantastic development.)
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Good News & Bad News About Stay-at-Home Moms
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 09/28/2024 at 06:15:45