Thursday, September 27, 2007
How Mothers Let Linda Hirshman Down
I first heard of Linda Hirshman's and her stance that being a stay-at-home mom was to settle for being less than an adult human being on CNN. She has a quiet, studied voice, with a steady cheerful delivery that would make Dolores Umbridge proud. Hirshman asserts that "the tasks of housekeeping and child rearing were not worthy of the full time and talents of intelligent and educated human beings. They do not require a great intellect, they are not honored and they do not involve risks and the rewards that risk brings." She also goes on to say:
Here's the feminist moral analysis that choice avoided: The family -- with its repetitious, socially invisible, physical tasks -- is a necessary part of life, but it allows fewer opportunities for full human flourishing than public spheres like the market or the government."
So, in a few sentences, Hirshman has made it abundantly clear that the raising of a child does not require a competent adult. If her argument in meant to galvanize mothers into rejoining the workforce, it also establishes that those that will be given the responsibility of the children while they do so - be they stay-at-home dads, nannies, day care operators, teachers - are people who are neither intelligent or well educated.
And I'm not sure what 'public sphere' Dr. Hirshman resides in, but my experience in the market and government spheres is chock full of 'repetitious, socially invisible, physical tasks'. Veronica Mitchell does a great job of breaking this down in her analysis of Hirshman and her work.
After making her viewpoints known, Dr. Hirshman then follows the tried-and-true tact of all media pundits today: undermine the opposing view by belittling and discrediting the detractors. In an article in Washington the Washington Post, Dr. Hirshman attributes most of the complaints against her work to religious zealots and bloggers who revel in the mundane drudgery of their lives. While talking to Diane Sawyer on Good Morning America, she elaborated:
One of the things I've done working on my book is to read a lot of the diaries online. And their description of their lives does not sound particularly interesting or fulfilling for a...complicated person, for a complicated, educated person. It's physical, but it's repetitious.
Her supporters, she surmises, are too occupied to talk about their support of her viewpoint:
"I guess working women are too busy at work to blog about their lives and are already on their way to their jobs when "Good Morning America" puts me on at 8 a.m.
I'm astonished by Dr. Hirshman's real lack of knowledge about how people live their lives today. Dr. Hirshman, working people blog. Sometimes at work. They also post pictures to Flickr, Dropshots, and dozens of other sites - and participate in chat rooms, etc. You'd be surprised at how many people do. I'd be more inclined to believe that working women who support your stance are not likely to come out and support it because the corporate culture they are in already has your viewpoint ingrained in their philosophy, and so there is no point in coming out and affirming what they feel is obvious.
At least CNN anchor Rick Sanchez took her to task in his interview. He told Linda that he knows exactly what his job is: a TV anchor. And that it's completely unimportant next to his kids. And he'd quit it in an instant if he needed to to be at home. Well done, Rick. It makes up for the whole taser thing.
Labels: Kira, Parker, Punditz, The Great Divide
------------------------------------------------