1-800-I-HATE-EVERYTHING
I’m
afraid that I’m becoming one of those old ladies who
hits people with her umbrella if they are wearing odd socks
(and I’m only 26). My usual grumpiness, which is rarely
shared with anyone who doesn’t know me (or at least
read this site), has escalated into full, exhibitionist
mode. It’s all Carolina’s fault. Mainly. Working
at the Toronto Women’s Bookstore, where causes come
to do their shopping, is also contributing. The staff have
a "You go, grrrl!" attitude to fighting injustice
that is highly motivating. Bell’s appalling Sympatico
ad (now withdrawn!) was merely the first stop on a long
walk through Complaintsville. The last stop will be closer
to home, but I’m revving for it.
Not,
I might add, in an umbrella-swinging sense. The amazing
thing about complaining (a lot) is that it makes me feel
very articulate in my complaints. I have points, and structure,
and a burning sense of righteousness (probably from drinking
too much orange juice). I walk around the city composing
letters of protest in my head, stopping only to growl at
people who walk to slowly or stop on the sidewalk to answer
their cellphones.
Yesterday
I complained to the editor of an essay collection that I
was attempting to make cooler by writing for. Fired up by
the total failure of that to achieve anything, I found myself
arguing with The Guardian. As regular readers of
this page will know, I love The Guardian. In fact,
if there were I [heart] Guardian baby t’s, I
would wear mine all the time. I think that it’s possibly
the best English-language news source (paper and online)
out there. LiP, who know about such things, cite
them all the time in their weekly Media Picks. AL Kennedy,
who is the most wonderfully depressing writer now at work
(read Paradise and your life will be so much richer
— and seem strangely less awful), writes blackly funny
critical columns about the media for them.
So
imagine my shocked and awed expression when I read their
article on a report that shows that only one in ten women
in the UK want to work full-time and put their children
in (paid) childcare. Women who have climbed the corporate
ladder want to jump off into the paddling pool of finger-painting
and "me time." http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1435119,00.html
I
couldn’t contain myself. This issue has been driving
me crazy every time it’s mentioned in The New York
Times for the last two years. Every time I sell another
Ariel Gore book I want to slam my head into the desk. I
like children, I just don’t want to have any. And I
agree with environmental activist Julia Butterfly Hill that
the world is way too fucked to be overloading it with another
human being. Plus… (and I wrote this to The Guardian
at, like, two a.m. this morning in a red rage, so points
for execution and dismount, I reckon):
This
issue has been a hot button in North America for the last
year or so. Past issues of US feminist magazines Bitch
and Bust have been full of the Mommy Myth - and, as their
target readership (mid-20s, urban, educated, feminist, pop-culture
literate, small disposable income) I say officially "WHO
CARES?" Who cares if a bunch of over-privileged white
women are suddenly stressing out thinking that wearing the
pants has made them infertile? Who cares that women who,
if they invested sensibly could have retired at 30, are
not getting pregnant through expensive private fertility
treatments? Who cares that two-income middle-class families
feel like they need more "me time"? These articles
set up a) a false picture of "women," by claiming
that they are all in the same socio-economic position, that
they all self-describe as ‘straight’, and that
they all have the option to work or not to work and b) a
false dichotomy between ‘high-paying jobs’ and
‘motherhood’ as models of satisfaction. None of
them take into consideration the proportion of women who
do not want to have children (for various reasons) and/or
do not want a high-paying job, or would rather that their
great job in the arts, social/community work, healthcare,
publishing etc. just paid them adequately.
What
they also do is ignore the fact that it is not women’s
aspirations that have changed, but a rather a failure of
government and big business policy on childcare, flexitime,
paid maternity leave, health coverage, as well as a refusal
to recognise (i.e.: with tax benefits) alternate/extended
family structures such as collectives, multi-generational
households (where grandparents might provide childcare)
and gay couples. Women have to fit their expectations to
provisions. Now that the left — remember that old socialist
bastion of women’s rights? — has been utterly
corrupted in both England and the US, where are women to
turn for support and change? When will all business
culture, not just high-paying jobs, but equally high-pressure
jobs, whether nursing/teaching, or the part-time, low paid
work that more women than men undertake, be legislated into
understanding maternity and the fact that women provide
90% of homecare during sickness for children, relatives
and friends. The Guardian’s article shows the
bankruptness of the left on women’s issues — instead
of asking a former fashion editor [who wrote half of the
article], ask a woman of colour working two part-time factory
jobs or ask a lesbian couple working in arts and social
work (if you must have your stereotypes).
The
depoliticisation of straight white middle-class women is
never more evident than in this ethically vacuous debate.
If a woman can raise a child in a refugee camp, a woman
can raise a child while working as a lawyer. Or the latter
can choose not to have a child, or a man. These are only
surface issues — the real question is where are the
thinkers interpreting this report to castigate the government
for failing, yet again, to provide the alternatives it has
promised?
Ahh.
I feel so much better. Bring on the next target and circle
his heart in red.
he