| | |
|
InterestingRead 10 - 30 Jun 2012 - Main.LizzieGomez
|
| | I'm sure that some of you have already heard about or read this article - "Why Women Still Can't Have it All", written by Anne-Marie Slaughter and published in the July/August edition of The Atlantic - but I thought I'd share it for those who haven't, as it provides some thought-provoking commentary on issues that both women and men face in striving to attain fulfillment at work and at home.
Slaughter specifically highlights the legal industry, built on the foundation of the billable hour, and discusses the unique challenges that this model presents for a law firm associate seeking to establish a work/life balance with which he or she is satisfied. | | | Overall, I really did appreciate Slaughter’s piece because it moves us away from dichotomizing the issue, which is Wurtzel’s ultimate stumbling block in the article linked above. We are (hopefully!) far from the days of the Mommy Wars, and it shouldn't be considered an act of bravery for a professional women to admit that the "have it all" ideal is fundamentally flawed. Perhaps this will prove a stepping stone for those of us who have some semblance of a choice, to think carefully about the kinds of careers and personal lives that we want, as well as take the time to think about what our general employment culture can do to assist those who have less of a choice in how they juggle the too often conflicting demands of home and work.
-- RumbidzaiMaweni - 29 Jun 2012 | |
>
> | Great perspectives and responses, everyone. It was good to hear from some of the Slaughter skeptics on this thread, but like Rumbi, I also felt that Slaughter has contributed a lot to this "having it all" debate because we're moving toward a more honest discussion about work/family balance. And I think this is beneficial for all us coming from a younger generation. What I found honest about Slaughter's piece is her openness to talk about her family problems (reference her discussion about her teenage son) and not being the constant nurturer she wanted to be. Yes, we can frame this as being a "Life 101" problem and not necessarily a women's only issue, but how often do we hear women in the workforce talk candidly about this? Not just having kids (if at all) or getting married, but the similar struggles that Rumbi pointed out -- bigger and more complicated family obligations. And we can say oh sure this is life, and we'll be better off the sooner we realize how complicated and hard our lives will become as we move higher in the totem pole, but why should we settle so easily? One of Slaughter's most interesting points for me was how the school system still functions based on that archaic norm of the stay at home mom. The suggestion Slaughter's assistant raised was matching school schedules with work schedules, and I seriously thought that was brilliant. I mean, why the heck not? For some this can be one of those impossible or transformative changes that seems hard to imagine, but we've made far more drastic changes in our society.
Workplaces too can do more in offering more flexible working arrangements. For example, a lot of law firms still follow this ridiculous norm of face time. The more face time (i.e., sitting at your desk hoping some partner sees you seemingly hard at work), the better. Of course, there should be the minimum expectation being visible during normal working hours and the rhythm of the work/business may make it necessary to stay in long hours anyway, but why make it an unspoken rule that associates should be seen just for the sake of being seen? I was impressed to learn from some attorneys not at law firms about the flexibility they had in scheduling more conference calls from home or using instant messenger to connect with other coworkers from home or making presentations to coworkers from home. When family obligations call, these options should be more widely available.
In my view, we can only hope to get more workplace flexibility the more we demand it, and we'll only demand more flexibility when we start becoming more open about our obligations at home and in life. I don't mean we should start talking about our personal struggles to our boss or coworkers down the hall, but more in terms of supporting and adding to the conversation that Slaughter presented and that to a large extent Sheryl Sandberg of Facebook started. Because I don't mind seeing this as a women's issue, I'll just add that I also loved how Slaughter said women "have to stop accepting male behavior and male choices as the default and the ideal." I don't really want to get into how she stereotypes male behavior and male choices, but I think a lot of us women who have any work experience, be it before coming to law school or an internship, have felt the pressure of needing to be on par with the guys -- on an emotional level, on table talk discussions, whatever. That sentence, for me, was my takeaway because I have done and continue to do this. Her pointing this out has empowered me to change that.
-- LizzieGomez- 29 Jun 2012 |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |