#WarOnWomen: Self-loathing “feminists” continue war on stay at home moms

Posted by: ST on June 15, 2012 at 7:40 pm

Ah, yes – another “authentic feminist” (author Elizabeth Wurtzel) preaching to stay at home moms, especially those so-called “1% moms”, what “REAL feminism” is (bolded emphasis added by me):

Failing as a feminist is a unique problem of the wealthy, but consequences impact women all the way down the line. It happens that most women — and men — are living feminist lives because of economic necessity, whether they mean to or not. Most families are kind of like Sarah Palin’s was before she made her pit-bull star turn: lots of kids and both mom and dad have to bring in what money they can. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 2011 nearly 71 percent of women with children under 18 worked. Most mothers have jobs because they need or want the money and fulfillment; only in rare cases are they driven by glory. To be a stay-at-home mom is a privilege, and most of the housewives I have ever met — none of whom do anything around the house — live in New York City and Los Angeles, far from Peoria. Only in these major metropolises are there the kinds of jobs in finance and entertainment that allow for a family to live luxe on a single income. In any case, having forgotten everything but the lotus position, these women are the reason their husbands think all women are dumb, and I don’t blame them. As it happens, fewer than 5 percent of the CEO’s of Fortune 500 companies, 16 percent of corporate executives, and 17 percent of law partners are female. The men, the husbands of the 1 percent, are on trading floors or in office complexes with other men all day, and to the extent that they see anyone who isn’t male it’s pretty much just secretaries and assistants. And they go home to…whatever. What are they supposed to think? They pay gargantuan American Express bills and don’t know why or what for. Then they give money to Mitt Romney.

Seriously: Did Romney actually tell his wife that her job was more important than his? So condescending. If he thought that, he’d be doing it. Being a rich mom — even with five sons, bless her heart — is not even sort of a job. Housekeepers there, servants there: it’s not just that being a wealthy wife is not work in the way that being a corporate litigator or a corporal in the Army is work, it’s that it doesn’t even involve picking up Lego pieces and putting away GI Joe dolls or much of any of the stuff that makes being a mom a job.

Hilary Rosen would not have been so quick to be so super sorry for saying that Ann Romney has never worked a day in her life if we weren’t all made more than a wee bit nervous by our own biases, which is that being a mother isn’t really work. Yes, of course, it’s something — actually, it’s something almost every woman at some time does, some brilliantly and some brutishly and most in the boring middle of making okay meals and decent kid conversation. But let’s face it: It is not a selective position. A job that anyone can have is not a job, it’s a part of life, no matter how important people insist it is (all the insisting is itself overcompensation). Even moms with full-time jobs spend 86 percent as much time with their kids as unemployed mothers, so it is apparently taking up the time of about 14 percent of a paid position. And all the cultish glorification of home and hearth still leaves us in a world where most of the people paid to chef and chauffeur in the commercial world are men. Which is to say, something becomes a job when you are paid for it — and until then, it’s just a part of life.

What this (obviously envious) witch fails to consider is that, “rich” or not, most stay at home moms are there because they WANT to be there  – not because they’re being forced to be there by “the patriarchy.”  And furthermore, most find being able to stay at home and raise your children to be the most rewarding job there is. Not only that, but if the author would get out of her seemingly “rich” environment of LA and NYC -where she no doubt has encountered many a rich liberal mother who meets her definition of “stay at home mom” (that is – leaving kids to be raised by their nannies while they themselves are out getting mani/pedis and playing tennis) – she’d see what the average life of a stay at home mom, whether they have a nanny or not, is really like.

The writer really is a ball of idiotic contradictions, though – think about it: She spills her scorn all over “1% SAHMs” for “not having a real job’ because they “hire nannies” to do their work.  And even those SAHMs who are at home, she implies, aren’t really working because it’s a lifestyle choice and nothing more. REAL feminism, she asserts, comes from economic equality – the translation, of course, being that a woman actively being out there in the working world earning a top dollar living is THE definition of feminism.  But what she doesn’t mention in her breathless rant is the fact that many of the women who are out there in the working world earning that top dollar have to hire nannies or daycare to take care of their children so they can stay out there being “real feminists”, because dad isn’t home, either – he’s also out there earning a living.

At some point, even the so-called “pampered” stay at home moms who are out getting those mani/pedis end up spending quality time with their children.  On the other hand, being out there in the working world trying to be a “real feminist” as promoted by the author makes it that much harder to do because you often come home emotionally and physically drained from work, but most working mothers are like most stay at home moms in doing the best they can at motherhood – and I am in no position (nor do I want to be) to judge the choices these moms have made to work inside or outside of the home.  Some work outside of the home because they have to.  Others, because they want to.  They made those choices, and I respect them for it – because being able to make your own choices in life when it comes to home, family, and work, and to be viewed as a valuable and EQUAL member of the community without being ridiculed by a stereotypical society that sees only one chief  “role” for women ultimately is what  first wave feminists fought for.

“Feminists” who claim to know what “real feminism” is are so amusing, aren’t they? Over the last several decades (especially since the late 60s), they’ve turned into that which they abhor: they no longer fight for simple “equality” – they fight for dominance and superiority over the “patriarchy” because “stupid men have ruined the world.”   They preach that society shouldn’t be judgmental of “women’s choices”, but that’s exactly what they themselves do (Wurtzel is a classic case in point) when a woman makes a choice they don’t like (such as keeping her baby, deciding to be a SAHM, etc).  And the ultimate flip off  to first wave feminism is to have modern “feminists” who are supposedly champions of “limitless roles” for women (in contrast to the primary role of the old days being a homemaker) do the very role limiting they claim to be against by suggesting that the only equality is “economic” equality, which translates into: get off your a**es, put away your bon bons, get out there into the workforce or else you’re not a real woman/feminist.

Never, ever let liberal “feminists” fool you into believing they are all about “freedom of choice” and “respecting women from all walks of life.”  Their “freedom of choice” is entirely subjective, which is not really freedom at all.   And as far as that “respecting women” goes? Well, Wurtzel demonstrates the deeply false nature of that claim much better than I could ever possibly explain.

Previous #WarOnWomen posts

RSS feed for comments on this post.


30 Responses to “#WarOnWomen: Self-loathing “feminists” continue war on stay at home moms”


  1. Teri Pittman says:

    They always overrate jobs. Most women in the work force do not have careers. They have jobs and there’s nothing particularly exciting about them. Yes, you can sometimes get some satisfaction at your job. You are much better served to put your time and effort into your family, who are way more likely to be there when you need them than any job ever will be.

    Unfortunately, the “feminist” movement was hijacked by upper middle class women long ago. They have no clue about most women’s lives and they have no interest in them.

  2. RightKlik says:

    This is compatible with feminism: Angry naked bitch. But mothering is not?

  3. Carlos says:

    Look up “stupid” in the dictionary – there’ll be a pic of Wurtzel there.

    And you are right on point, ST, when you note that if she’d get off her overstuffed behind and meet some real people that have money worries yet still seem to make it by staying home, maybe she’d begin to appreciate just how tough it is to be a real woman.

  4. Rich h says:

    This is a worthy effort, but Wurtzel ain’t worth the electrons. She’s lost so deep in her cocoon of a world you cannot even say she is out of touch. She’s way way way beyond out of touch.

  5. I’m here via Legal Insurrection. I think it’s interesting how Wurtzel conscripted women who, she concedes, work out of necessity into “living feminist lives”.

  6. SpideyTerry says:

    Of course this woman doesn’t consider motherhood work. Her idea of work is checking the Native American box on forms and copying others’ recipes.

    A job that anyone can have is not a job, it’s a part of life, no matter how important people insist it is

    Like, say, holding a position in government? Not like that’s some kind of exclusive club.

    Of course, there is a key difference in what is considered success. Mothers are successful if their children become good adults and pass on what they learned to the next generation. Politicians are considered successful if they don’t go to jail after their terms are up.

    Gee, I wonder which group is more of an inspiration to people. ;)

  7. I was never aware being a feminist was a question of degree but this is jealousy carried to a neurotic and dangerous extreme. She states, “A job that anyone can have is not a job. . .’. Pray tell, what special talent was required to conjure her tirade of drivel?

  8. Carlos says:

    @SpideyTerry: “Like, say, holding a position in government? Not like that’s some kind of exclusive club.”

    Not everyone can do a government job properly, Spidey. One must keep in mind that to be a proper bureaucrat one must have an absolutely obnoxious personality, must have an attitude of not only superiority but absolute superiority (when dealing with the public), and must exude the charm of a rattlesnake in mid-strike.

    Of course, not all guvmint bureaucrats are that way. Those are the ones necessarily assigned to jobs that don’t deal with the public because, Lord knows, the petty tyrants that are their bosses couldn’t have the public really served now, could they?

    Wurtzel would make an ideal bureaucrat.

  9. Brontefan says:

    I’ve been both: a stay at home full time mother & wife and a working woman with a home & family. The 8 to 5 job is easy compared to the other because you get a lunch hour, coffee breaks, and quitting time. Even though my job required me to do research and grading at home after hours–I can promise you that being a full time mother with four small children and a husband meant my job was ongoing 24/7. Depending on the ages of your children, both are respectable.. but after my husband died, I would be introduced to people as a widow with four small children and you cannot imagine how many people would then ask me, “Do you work?” I fond it offensive for people to discount my job because it was not outside the home. And since… I have discovered women who desperately wanted to be a mother, stay at home for about six months and escape back to the office! They quickly found out how difficult being a full time MOM can be. It’s always easier to let some daycare facility raise your child. I refused to do that and raised mine myself–all are conservative and know our US Constitution because I homeschooled at various times when I thought the public schools were off-target.

  10. Comanche Voter says:

    This witchy lady couldn’t carry my wife’s jockstrap (to coin a phrase) when she says wives don’t work around the house. Being a mother and homemaker is a full time job–at least out in the suburban world.

  11. She sounds like she is trolling. I don’t think she is saying that stay at home moms are being forced to by the patriarchy. On the contrary, I think she is saying that women who stay at home are privileged, because most women have to work to support their families.

  12. gaz says:

    I don’t know – I don’t like much about modern feminism, and I didn’t see a lot wrong with what she said. Sure, we can poke at her personally, but that’s true whenever anyone says something controversial.
    We all know that motherhood is hard work, but it’s hard to equate what you see on Teen Mom with what the author has had to do to get to where she is (and pay high taxes for the privilege).

  13. Let us be realistic: feminism is the religion of the supremacy of women. Sadly, the only biological reason for females to exist is to produce and raise offspring (to be fair, the only biological reason for males is to provide the genetic material for the females to reproduce). The fact that children do better with a stay-at-home mother is anathema to the feminist religion. The fact that children do better with a normal, heterosexual couple raising them is irrelevant to them. In other words, they are opposed to giving their offspring the greatest chances of survival.

    The obvious conclusion is that feminism is an evolutionary dead-end.

  14. Wurtzel is quite revealing when she posits that Mitt was condescending towards Anne with his “her job is more important” … easily demonstrates her attitude towards SAHM.

    Civilizing youngsters into good people is difficult work. It really takes both mother AND father (because they give different things to their children). If it wasn’t there’d be much less need of juvenile halls and state prisons.

  15. jeremy abrams says:

    My wife and I each work about 30 hours – she does night shifts as a nurse; I do technical writing at home. We have two young boys, five and three, and have never used a babysitter.

    Being a mother, or stay-at-home working father, is full-time work, that we split between us. It’s intensely rewarding, highly physical, highly mental, and exhausting.

    When the kids fall asleep, and I can go relax at the computer preparing text for publication in professional journals, I feel like I’m relaxing in a warm bath, at least in comparison to the events of the day. And my wife has it harder, with the physical job of nursing.

    This lady is demented.

  16. Jake says:

    I’m not much of a theory guy. I prefer to see how things would out in real life practice. I’m afraid this kind of feminism fails big time on that score. The result is brittle, complaining, narrow-minded, judgmental, vulgar, self-centered women who make themselves dysfunctional outside of their own little and shrinking circle. They are simply miserable human beings and best avoided at all costs. And I think most men and reasonable women do just that.

  17. Kyle Kiernan says:

    A job that anyone can have is not a job

    This fails from both ends:

    A- not everyone can be a mom and even of those who can, not all are successful or even that good at it, but even if they are lousy at it when they get done they are Moms in full.

    B – There sure are a lot of jobs out there that have a lot of women working at them. Past a certain largish number then, “anyone” can work at that job. Does that mean those aren’t real jobs? I’ll even go so far as to say that the jobs of the undenounceable golden angels of our culture (schoolteachers) could be done by a very large number of women if not for the credential gatekeeping walling them out and therefore those jobs aren’t all that real.

  18. Ms. Wurtzel will be receiving the LL1885 smackdown as soon as I stop yelling “privilege???”.

  19. DamnCat says:

    …most of the housewives I have ever met — none of whom do anything around the house — live in New York City and Los Angeles, far from Peoria.

    Wurtzel grew up in NYC, went to Harvard, moved back to NYC, went to Yale, and moved back to NYC. Has she ever met anyone from Peoria?

    Wurtzel should be awarded the Pauline Kael Journalism Prize for Cocooned Cluelessness.

  20. Suzanne says:

    Interesting – At the end of this month, I leave my position in the corporate world – fortune 400 company, 6 figure salary…..to stay at home and raise my son…..I have pondered this for over 2 years.

    I’ve come to the conclusion that the greatest thing I ever do in life will be to raise an independent thinker, benevolent and productive member of society. My job at 50 to 70 hours per week inhibit my ability to be effective at this otherwise. Too many kids are raising themselves, glued to TV’s and video games.

    I am privileged to be able to make this choice, not everyone can. But I have CHOSEN and I intend to put more energy into this “job” than anything I’ve ever done.

    As human beings, we could spend a lot less time worrying about what someone else chooses to do and focus on our own personal growth and development. We’re not a one size fits all society. Thank God!

    And lastly, a woman that will ridicule another woman for how she chooses to spend her life… should take a good look at themselves. I agree, this article sounds like it was written by the green eyed monster :).

  21. Dave72 says:


  22. Ruby Lennox says:

    She ought to be embarrassed for how provincial and ignorant she is, and how utterly unqualified to write this piece.

    “…most of the housewives I have ever met — none of whom do anything around the house — live in New York City and Los Angeles…”

    Can someone tell me how it meets basic standards of publishable journalism for a person to write a poorly researched screed based on their extremely limited personal anecdotal experience?

    I mean, I could write a nasty essay about what jerks all German nationals are based on the fact that one time at the Atlanta airport I saw someone speaking German spit on the sidewalk–but it wouldn’t be worth anyone’s time to read. So why should anyone listen to her, and why was this garbage published in the first place?

  23. Carlos says:

    It was published, Ruby, because it met some unwanted and struggling publisher’s standards of excellence(!!??). Typical liberal and feminist theology, and boring as all get out to anyone with more than two active brain cells (more than Wurtzel has!).

  24. WatcherOne says:

    Back to this are they? I had to live through this kind of ridicule and condescension in the early 80’s (thanks Phil Donahue). I chose to be a stay at home mother. I have never regretted my choice. Isn’t it odd that people who call themselves “pro choice” always come down on you when you choose something they didn’t…

  25. I read her bio and it confirms my suspicions. If my life were in such a state of disarray, I would wear snowshoes and dribble a basketball through a mine field.

  26. ant says:

    Wurtzel writes no better than some random sixth grader describing what they did on Summer vacation. Must be ‘a job anyone can have’.
    I always wonder about the many liberal religion’s dichotomies. This seems to be one. Capitalism is bad…money is evil…but to be a “real woman”, one must be out there pursuing the almighty dollar.

  27. Carlos says:

    What dichotomy, ant? If one has enough of the evil stuff, it’s no longer evil in one’s own hands, only in others’, and that leaves time to be the bubble-brained, nanny- and gardner-employer/social mixer that really tries to let the “small people” of the country know that the bubble-brainer knows so much more about how to run a life properly.

    If only the welfare statists that keep themselves stuck in that vicious, demeaning cycle knew what people like Wurtzel (and Obama and Pelosi and Reid and…) really thought of them, there would be bloodshed in the streets for years until every statist/liberal/leftist/jackass would be so far underground the magma would be above them!

  28. Ethel Carol says:

    Hey, how about those welfare stay at home moms? What with food stamps, free breakfast, lunch and now sometimes dinner at the school, subsidized housing, subsidized day care, just what do these women do all day?

    Funny, Wurtzel doesn’t mention this significant segment of motherhood.

  29. MissJean says:

    “Only in these major metropolises are there the kinds of jobs in finance and entertainment that allow for a family to live luxe on a single income. In any case, having forgotten everything but the lotus position, these women are the reason their husbands think all women are dumb, and I don’t blame them.”

    This is the most out-of-touch section of her rambling bit of crap. First, there are great jobs in law and medicine that allow a single-income lifestyle – and even moreso when you don’t live in an expensive metro area.

    Second, if she were any kind of feminist, she sure as hell would blame men for thinking all women were dumb based on the ditzes they married. I know I do, when I come across those sorry specimens.

    I agree that a job is something you are paid for, but it’s not always in money, and this is where she completely breaks down. I have bartered housecleaning for someone else’s skilled labor. I know many others who have, too. That includes SAHMs who watch other people’s children in exchange for lawn care and car repair.

    And then the final nonsense about motherhood:

    “But let’s face it: It is not a selective position.”

    Yes, you damn hypocrite. You “feminists” have made it exactly that, haven’t you?