Posted on 11/26/2006 5:02:22 AM PST by shrinkermd
....More American women than ever are putting motherhood before matrimony. New data released by the Centers for Disease Control show that nearly four in 10 U.S. babies were born outside of marriage in 2005—a new high. These unwed moms aren't all teens—last year teen pregnancies fell to their lowest levels in 65 years. Some—like 44-year-old Mary Lee MacKichan, who used a gay friend as a sperm donor—are professional, older women who want to have babies before their biological clocks run out, but most are low-income twentysomethings. (Unwed births among 30- to 44-year-olds are up 17 percent since 1991; among those 25 to 29, they're up 30 percent.) And some 40 percent of those moms aren't going it alone—they're cohabiting, at least for a while. That's creating a major shift in what a generation of children are coming to call a family. "Marriage is still alive and well, but it has a lot of competition," says Wellesley College sociologist Rosanna Hertz, author of "Single by Chance, Mothers by Choice."
Ironically, sociologists say, marriage may be on the decline precisely because it has become so idealized. People expect more from marriage than they did a century ago, when it was mainly a practical arrangement to provide financial stability for women and a place to raise children. "Now it's not only love and romance but also self-fulfillment and personal growth," says Pamela Smock, professor of sociology at the University of Michigan. Since there's no longer much of a stigma attached to getting pregnant outside of marriage, many couples have replaced "shotgun weddings" with "shotgun cohabitations
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
Google, whatever its advantages, cannot make one an expert in the history and sociology of the 1950s. The picture you have painted of life during that period is a caricature, one cliche after another, most of it drawn from the fevered imaginations of the feminist movement.
For instance, there were definitely no laws protecting women from discrimination in the workplace. These were part of the Civil Rights Act which was enacted in 1965.
Have you considered that there were no federal laws "protecting women from discrimination in the workplace" before 1965 because there was no need for them? Indeed, one could question the need (and the constitutionality) of such laws even today.
The 1950s represented a major step back for women who had made strides in the three decades before (i.e. winning the right to vote, working outside the home during the Depression and WWII).
A step backwards? Why—because you say so? It seems more than a little arrogant of you to denigrate the choices freely made by women who lived during a time you little understand.
Maybe they just enjoy being MILFs.
Oh, ferchristsakes....
At least you can count on affirmative action:
Nobody at work can tell you "you're a dimwit." if you are a woman or a minority....
You'll have a Highly Successful Career.
Well, there were also no laws protecting people from discrimination based on race before the Civil Rights Act, and I'd suspect that most people would agree that those laws were needed.
It disturbs me that there's people around here who don't seem to understand that kids need both Moms and Dads, and appear to believe that they're just accessories for self-centered adults who think they need kids to complete their lives.
Even if most people would agree, it is intellectually sloppy to equate the treatment of blacks with the treatment of women. You cannot say that because laws against racial discrimination are needed, laws against sex discrimination are needed as well.
But that was not even my main point. You characterized the 1950s as a major step backwards for women because of choices those women themselves made. Why is that?
I see. So your parents, in turn, were college-educated, upper-middle-class types. I guess it's the old nature/nurture question... If you had chosen not to attend college, would their genetic purity still enable you to enjoy museums and fine wines, or would you sink down into the semi-literate knuckle-dragging football fan demographic due to your lack of "education"?
It isn't right or wrong (I'm sure that they think I'm an idiot because I don't like football)
Actually, they don't. They think you're an idiot because of the ridiculous, uncharitable and mindlessly stereotypical assumptions you make about people who merely make choices different from your own. I don't like football either, but I have yet to see evidence of some inverse correlation between, say, football fandom and GMAT scores.
I enjoy intellectual pursuits, i.e. reading, foreign films, lectures, etc.
All things that may be appreciated by a person of limited financial means, or one without a college degree.
All I know is that my grandparents survived the depression. When they died a few years ago they owned their home and they had lots of land. Part of their land is used for logging which still makes about $100,000 every few years, and my mom and her siblings still get to enjoy that.
My grandfather was a school teacher who moved up the ranks to being a principal.
My mom also worked when I started in 2nd grade. She became a very successful real estate agent, and was one of the top agents in her office. She quit after about 7 years because it took too much time.
She is in her 70s, and she is still working. She has an antigue shop. My dad helps her. My dad hasn't worked for quite a few years.
I think it is nice that women stayed at home when their kids were little, and then they had nice careers after their kids were in school. I think women like my mom make good role models for todays mothers.
Lies feed your judgement of others, Behold how the blind lead each other...
I think your view of what the 1950s was like is just as black and white as the situation comedies of that era. My mother, who got her B.A. in 1941, her M.A. in 1946 (after serving in the Red Cross during the war), and her Ph.D. in 1951, would chuckle at it if she were here to do so (if she had time, working full time from 1946-1979, with a few years off when I arrived). So would my grandmother (B.A. 1913), who also mixed career and home life pretty well.
Were things more repressive than they are now? Yep. Do people have a lot more choices now? You bet. I am not minimizing the progress that has been made, but your view of the '50s is kind of cartoonish. I'm beginning to suspect you weren't there to see it for yourself. ;)
If you're going to insult someone, can't you at least spell the insult correctly?
We had to start somewhere. Try not to denigrate those who paved the way for you to have the choices you have today.
I'm denigrating the repressive society that made it so.
"That statement certainly proves that we've never met. ;-D"
I agree, there are exceptions to every rule!
"If I worked, I would never have time to relax or do things with my husband."
I have a sincere belief that this is precisely a key element in strong marriages. One of the partners taking care of the work at home, frees them both up to enjoy their time together. If not, then they are both to busy taking care of their home responsibilities to dedicate time to each other and the kids....
"Women aren't the same as men, and that doesn't make them better or worse. Just different. That is a good thing."
I agree, and will add that those differences deserve to be celebrated, not reviled. Our society has tried so hard to change equal into "the same as" that as a society we are no longer celebrating the differences, instead we are very close to reviling them....
"The MBA gets you a foot in the door; it doesn't get you promoted to the top in five years. MBA grads have to prove their worth like everyone else by meeting their goals and excelling in their job."
Not so. Especially when they jump ship every 3 years, like you have stated you plan to do.
"P.S. Why exactly am I an elitist snob?"
Re-read this thread, my post to you and your response. If it isn't clear to you, at that point it would be useless for me to have any further communication with you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.