Readings 405

Are Modern Women Miserable?
By Vicki Haddock, San Francisco Chronicle Magazine. Posted March 13, 2008.

Women can dream bigger than ever before. But social progress has plateaued short of true gender equity, keeping many of those dreams out of reach.

Exactly what does it take to make a woman happy?
One of the first to record her answer to that conundrum was the Marquise du Chatelet, whom history has recollected as the jilted mistress of Voltaire. That is short shrift: The brilliant marquise was a mother, a shopaholic, a passionate lover -- and most significantly, a revolutionary scientist and mathematician who suspended wooden spheres from the rafters of her country estate to test Newton's theories, and who scribbled her insights until the candles burned to nothingness, plunging her hands into ice water to jolt herself awake. Her intellectual feverishness prompted the philosopher Immanuel Kant to sneer that such a woman "might as well have a beard," and Voltaire himself, having received solo title-page credit for a book he privately admitted she practically dictated to him, declared that the marquise was a great man whose only shortcoming was having been born female.
Thus duly boxed in by the gender conventions of 18th century France -- and by an unplanned pregnancy at age 43 that she presciently regarded as a death sentence -- the Marquise du Chatelet brought a unique perspective to a treatise she titled "Discourse on Happiness."
To be truly happy, she ruefully concluded, "one must be susceptible to illusions, for it is to illusions that we owe the majority of our pleasures. Unhappy is the one who has lost them."
So where are we nearly three centuries later? Recalibrate for feminism, which aimed to liberate women from the constricting corsets of sexist roles. Factor in an unprecedented level of education, greater earning power, more economic independence, more reproductive control and access to virtually any career, from CEO to soldier to leader of the free world. In theory, at least, a woman's prospects for happiness have never looked brighter.
Yet the paradox: Two recent studies reveal that a majority of American women are finding the holy grail of happiness more elusive. Researchers were startled to find that women now report less happiness than in the early 1970s; and where they once indicated greater levels of happiness and life satisfaction than men, that's now reversed.
"Aha!" opposing sides in the culture wars declared, glomming onto the findings to bolster their own takes on gender conflict. But this newly identified "happiness gap" is hardly a prima facie indictment of feminism for having worsened the lot of women, given that most women adamantly oppose to a return to rigid gender roles. Nor could it be attributable mainly to the notion that men are slacking while women work a second shift -- full time in the workforce and a second full-time job at home. The results show that women are spending the same number of hours working now, on average, as in the 1970s, although a greater percentage is outside work. As for housework, men have picked up a greater, though still minority, share. Much of the cooking and cleaning is "hired out" or simply goes undone (Americans now spend $26 billion more each year on restaurants than grocery stores.)
Even so, men today report spending less time on activities they regard as stressful and unpleasant than a few decades ago. Women still spend about 23 hours a week in the unpleasant-activity zone -- which was about 40 minutes more than men four decades ago, and now amounts to 90 minutes more than men.
And feeling guiltier in the process.
On a recent morning, one such woman is Lisa Boucher.
A 46-year-old Brisbane resident, she dashes around the kitchen serving breakfast to her 2 1/2-year-old daughter with the phone tucked into her ear as she resolves an urgent snafu on her job as a project manager for a high-end residential construction company. There isn't a minute to spare: She must whisk her daughter to preschool, make a meeting in San Francisco, use her lunch hour to retrieve her daughter and a nanny and deposit them at home, then return to work until almost dark, whipsaw back home, throw together a quick dinner, hang out to play with her daughter, tuck her into bed, then crash -- and, with luck, get sufficient sleep to do it all over again when her alarm rings the next morning.
She feels guilty that it's the nanny who gets to spend so much fun time with her daughter. She feels guilty that she no longer has time for writing or any other artistic expression. She feels guilty when her mother, who she says uses the words "you should" a lot, suggests they are too social, even though they usually take their daughter with them when they go out. She feels guilty about how infrequently the house gets vacuumed, telling her husband, "Yes, the yard looks great, but we live on the inside -- the raccoons live on the outside." Truth be told, she even feels guilty about not spending more "quality time" with the primary catalyst for all that vacuuming: her husband's shedding golden retriever.
"I want to preface this by saying that you're catching me on a really crazed week. I know I'm lucky to have a beautiful, happy kid; a great job; a great husband who pitches in," she acknowledges. "But here's where I am right at this moment: Last night I just turned to him and said, 'You know what, I'm not happy in my life.
" 'I've lost my joy.' "
Having watched her own parents divorce when she was 13, forcing her homemaker mother to get a job, Boucher vowed that she would never be felled by a similar fate. "I swore that I would never depend on any man, that I would establish my own successful career, that I wouldn't let anybody into my life that much," she says. "But now I have somebody to share my life with, and what I really want most is to be able to stay home and spend time with my daughter.
"So we women broke out of the little boxes that defined us, and now it seems like everybody's trying to get back in there. I'm trying to get back in."
Boucher isn't advocating an abdication of the women's movement. What she craves is a simpler life and more time at home, even if that means selling their house and moving somewhere cheaper. But the real estate market is slipping, and she and her husband must pay down debt incurred from the purchase of his company a few years ago.
"I know I don't really want to go back into a box. I just want the time to enjoy the moments, you know? Choice is a wonderful thing, but it's such a double-edged sword. The good news is we have all these choices ... but the bad news is we've got all these choices."
Measuring human happiness is tricky science: There is no "happy thermometer" to tuck under one's tongue. So while happiness research is booming, researchers wrestle with how to measure it, and account for data dependent on self-reporting of debatable reliability (although scientists find that people who describe themselves as happier also show outward signs validating that description -- for example, they smile more). In recent years, they have puzzled over why 45 percent of Republicans say they're "very happy" when only 30 percent of Democrats do, or why married people report more happiness than singles, or why an index claimed the "happiest Zip code" belongs to Branson, Mo.
But a gender-based "happiness gap" is particularly complicated, given that men tend to see "Are you happy?" as a yes-or-no proposition. For women, it's an essay question.
In one recent study, two economists at the University of Pennsylvania analyzed 35 years of data from the widely regarded General Social Survey and other assessments, including the Virginia Slims American Women's Poll and the Monitoring the Future survey of teenagers.
Since 1972, women's self-described levels of happiness have fallen a few percentage points and now rest below that of men, on average, in every age category. It is particularly pronounced in those ages 30 to 44 -- not coincidentally, women dealing with child rearing and aging parents, while reaching a critical point in their careers.
This drop in female happiness is pervasive -- it also holds true regardless of marital status, education and employment. The only exception researchers were able to tease out was among African Americans. No one's certain why African American women report higher levels of happinness than they did in the '70s, but it's an intriguing aberration that merits follow-up.
While the gap is not huge, research co-author Betsey Stevenson said it was stunning given that by objective measures, the status of women's lives has improved in recent decades. "We would have expected their happiness to shoot up, not fall," she said.
Meanwhile, at Princeton University, another economist and a team of psychologists simultaneously stumbled across a gender "happiness gap" while analyzing dour decades worth of data on what Americans do with their time and how they feel when they're doing it.
Working-age women, for example, increasingly spend more time on paid work, caring for adults and watching TV -- and less time cooking, ironing, dusting, entertaining and reading -- than in the 1960s. But the data also reveals that men are spending less time on paid work and relaxing more -- including watching more TV. In essence, men have gotten the knack of spending less time doing things they consider unpleasant.
Women, on the other hand, spend more time with family and friends but find it more stressful than men do. (Of course, such time often involves child or elder care, or hostessing, and could rightfully be categorized as work as well.)
Lead author Alan Krueger can only speculate on why, for example, men enjoy being with their parents while women find it more unpleasant than laundry. He told the New York Times that women typically spend time helping helping parents pay bills or plan a holiday, while "for men, it tends to be sitting on the sofa and watching football with their dad."
Both research papers raised more questions than they answered about the emotional well-being of men and, especially, of women.
Perhaps the most persuasive explanation for the happiness gap echoes Lisa Boucher's observation: Having choices means that women actually must choose. Or, as Bob Seger would put it, what to leave in, what to leave out. Acknowledge the axiom of the time-space continuum: A woman can only be in one place at a time, and any given day cannot contain more than 24 hours.
"My grandmother used to say too many choices make you sick," said Mary Nolan, taking in the view from her Financial District office. "I get this from my business bent, but I do believe we're too afraid to be wrong. We're afraid that if we make a wrong choice, we can't turn around and change it. Which is really unfortunate, because courage often comes from recognizing the wrong choice and reversing direction."
In her 30s and 40s, Nolan focused on building a successful career in insurance underwriting. "I liked my life the way it was, and I was not ready to commit to someone else and consider their needs on a 24-7 basis," she says. "When it got to the point where I couldn't have children, I no longer felt a need to be married. But then I started to really miss having a partner in my life." She found one on eHarmony.com, adding, "Waiting until I was 50 gave me a better understanding of what it means to be married."
Still, some choices are irreversible. "If I had it to do over again, I would have [had] kids," she says. "That's the only real regret I have in my whole life." But Nolan also is determined not to let "what ifs" corrode her happiness. To the contrary, she says she's the happiest she's ever been.
Sipping her morning java at a Petaluma coffee shop, Shannon Stearns says her secret to happiness also depends on making peace with what to let go of -- particularly given what she calls the "totally crazed state" of her life. It's a skill she still struggles to master at age 36, as a marketing professional for CamelBak and the mother to sons Wally, 5, and Murphy, 2 1/2.
"In 1972, women were expected to contribute to the PTA bake sale and keep a clean house," she says. "Today I'm expected to help run the school auction, sell wrapping paper, catch up on all my work e-mails for two hours after my kids are in bed -- the list goes on and on and on. And the scale is bigger.
"The only way I survive with a tiny fraction of sanity is that I'm getting better about saying no.
"I don't have time for friends, fitness or fashion. I'll go two weeks without checking my voice mail at work because it's a time-suck. I've given up several career opportunities because, dammit, I won't work on Fridays, and yes, three out of four of those Fridays are haircuts and doctors appointments -- but the fourth Friday is taking Wally and Murphy to the park and playing safari with them. And I won't give that up for anything."
Nonetheless, Stearns admits she sometimes is haunted by remorse over what she must neglect. "My college roommate called me for my birthday in March, and I still haven't called her back. I need to at least say, 'I'm not the horrible friend that you think I am...' "
Of course, choice is relative: The spectrum narrows for poor women living paycheck to paycheck. But for the first time in history, women confront a wider array of life alternatives than men, who rarely contemplate, for example, putting their careers on hold to care for children or aging parents. We're still adjusting to this shift in the cultural paradigm.
When researchers ask teenage girls what is important to them -- finding a successful job, staying close to their friends, having a family, looking good and so on -- they discovered that their answer was "everything." They ranked nothing as less important than it had been in the past.
The unquestioned modern mantra is that freedom comes through maximizing choice. Swarthmore psychology Professor Barry Schwartz says that's why supermarkets stock 75 salad dressings, why a single electronics store's product line allows buyers to construct more than 6 million stereo systems. And it's why someone, somewhere is busy creating a combo MP3 player/nose hair trimmer/crème brulee torch.
"More choices are better, but more and more choices are not. Too much choice produces not liberation but paralysis," says Schwartz, the author of "The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less." He cites studies demonstrating that consumers are less likely to buy products -- from jams to mutual funds -- if they are given too many options.
The same principle applies to women's life choices.
"Even if you overcome paralysis and make a choice, you end up less satisfied than if you had fewer options," Schwartz contends. "Whatever salad dressing you choose, it won't be perfect, and you end up thinking about the ones you didn't buy. And the imagined alternative induces you to regret the decision you made. Not only that, but when you have no choice and things aren't perfect, you can blame the world.
"But when you have all these choices and you still feel regretful and unsatisfied, you end up blaming yourself. Hence, guilt."
The alchemy of female content may be to make bold decisions and then refuse to be tormented by the seductive lure of the untaken path.
"The reason things seemed better back when they were worse," Schwartz says, "is because people with few choices and lowered expectations could expect to be pleasantly surprised." That also might explain why the World Values Survey of 65 countries found the happiest people in Nigeria, a country lacerated with instability and poverty, while the United States lagged in 16th place.
The dark underbelly of lofty expectations is very real, says Stearns' mother, Sharon Morgan. An educational consultant and reformed former "stress cadet" who worked three jobs while raising her family -- her daughter distinctly remembers going to sleep to the staccato of her mom's typewriter -- she has scaled back on work to spend more time with her grandsons.
"As the ERA woke women up, I remember that initial thrill of empowerment sweeping over us," she said. "But Shannon's generation has had to face all the implications we didn't fully anticipate, and I see how incredibly hard it can be. I don't know anybody who would want to go back to the way it was, but I think those high expectations are taking a toll on women's happiness."
For one thing, progress plateaued short of true gender equity: Women still earn 77 cents for every dollar men earn. A study this spring by the American Association of University Women found that a year after college graduation, women earn 20 percent less than their male counterparts -- an inequity that within a decade will stretch to 31 percent. Even after adjusting for parenthood, choice of field, hours worked and the like, a quarter of the gap remained. That's unlikely to enhance women's feelings of well-being.
Many women also set stratospheric expectations for themselves, and for each other -- reinforced by the cult of Martha Stewart, a slew of self-improvement books, the prevalence of plastic surgery. We've come to regard our work lives, our home lives and our private lives as projects to be endlessly tweaked in pursuit of perfection.
Even those conscious of the trap still fall for it. Stevenson, one of the University of Pennsylvania researchers, cops to recently loading the dishwasher because the plumber was coming. Her life partner and fellow researcher, Justin Wolfers, said, "What do you care, it's just the plumber. Do you think he'll be telling people what a dirty house we have?"
"Women need to learn not to be motivated so much by what people expect or say or think of us," she acknowledges. "The key is picking what it is we want to do well -- and then not hearing the judgment of other people about the other domains."
Another factor behind the happiness differential may be that women are more prone to take their emotional temperature.
"I think a lot of women are just naturally more reflective, that they check in with themselves more than men," said Christina Whittenburg, 30, a first-grade teacher from Oakland. "Women are feelers. Men tend to be thinkers, more tied to the practical. It takes more of a shock or jolt to make them look inward. We're more likely to ask ourselves if we're happy."
And that could create its own problems, contends Darrin McMahon, a history professor at Florida State and author of the book "Happiness: A History."
For millennia, humans didn't expect to be happy in this life -- that was what awaited them in the hereafter. Not until the Enlightenment did people believe they had the right to pursue happiness -- today further interpreted as the right to be happy. But as John Stuart Mill cautioned, "Ask yourself whether you are happy, and you cease to be so. ... Those only are happy who have their minds fixed on some object other than their own happiness."
McMahon, whose critique is not gender specific, argues that we live in a society where we feel pressure to be happy. "When we're not, we feel like failures," he says. "What we get is the unhappiness of not being happy."
And women aren't just more self-aware -- they also tend to feel more responsible for everyone else.
"Women still bear the brunt of the emotional work within the family because men just are not as alert to all the emotional cues," says Cornelia Busse, a psychotherapist in Sonoma. "They're not mining experiences with kids and relatives and friends the way women do, or worrying about them or feeling as responsible for everybody else. This is our territory, but frankly it places a huge burden on us. I think it leads us to be less happy."
While wishing men would take on more "emotional work," Busse also encourages women to stop being helicopter parents and obsessing over every personal conflict. "Ask yourself, 'What happens if I let it go and stop taking the emotional temperature of everyone in the room?' The answer probably is 'not much.' "
If nothing else, the declaration of a happiness gender gap is generating provocative conversation. The researchers themselves note that because men traditionally were less happy, perhaps women's happiness has diminished as they've entered into their world and are now bedeviled by the same woes that have long depressed men.
Or maybe the happiness gap isn't actually new at all. "Freakonomics" author and economist Steven Levitt suggests "there was enormous social pressure on women in the old days to pretend they were happy even if they weren't."
Like the Marquise du Chatelet, perhaps now we're abandoning our illusions and simply being more honest.
See more stories tagged with: feminism, women, happiness, gender equality, gender equity
Vicki Haddock is a Bay Area freelance journalist and former Chronicle reporter who has written for the Magazine on the legacy of divorce, the science of criminal profiling and the mysterious death of newspaper heiress Margaret Lesher. E-mail comments to magazine@ sfchronicle.com.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide
Give us feedback »Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated. View: Women getting a taste...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Smartcookie on Mar 13, 2008 12:28 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... of what it's like to be a man years ago.

The truth is women have no clue what they did to the family structure by demanding equality. Equalities downside is corporate greed and governments upside: More profits, more people totax: More workers, less wages, as more competition drives wages downs.

My parents lived at work while I grew up, no vacation time, all they could do was buy things. You end up living in a family of strangers who have very little connection to one another and are increasingly alienated.

Welcome to the true version of our obsession with money, power and wealth: You're so busy maintaining your lifestyle and supporting your kids you have no time for anything else.

That's real capitalism for you. I'm sure men of years ago had the same guilty feelings about not spending enough time with their kids, now both men and women are in the same boat together.

Societies ethos and it's obsession with more and more has to change, for every bit of wealth you want you add another weight and more hours of work around your neck.

Funny thing is these people are doing it to themselves and convincing themselves they are more well off then not. They are trying to do the impossible, and I feel sorry for them.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
RE: Women getting a taste...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: jegnj on Mar 13, 2008 5:49 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Uh some of us actually have had to work, for money, healthcare and food. This was no choice.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Women getting a taste... Posted by: Smartcookie
» RE: Women getting a taste... Posted by: holojojo
» Good points. And why is the article only about women? Posted by: Moonray
» yes, you too, are a victim Posted by: KaptainSpiffy
» RE: yes, you too, are a victim Posted by: leta
» Outstanding post Posted by: joeunix
» RE: The truth is women have no clue what they did to the family structure by demanding equality. Posted by: bitsfick
» RE: The truth is women have no clue what they did to the family structure by demanding equality. Posted by: joeunix
» If you join a club, you agree to its rules... Posted by: Cathyc
» every family is different Posted by: undrgrndgirl
» RE: Women getting a taste... Posted by: TheLimit
» Wow! Another outstanding comment Posted by: joeunix
» RE: Women getting a taste... Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Women getting a taste... Posted by: ankhet
» RE: Women getting a taste... Posted by: TheLimit
» RE: Women getting a taste... Posted by: luzyrea
Nice bay view
[Report this comment]
Posted by: maxfactor on Mar 13, 2008 1:02 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Very kosmopolitan starter. The reality looks grim.
Genderbased rolemodeling where women convey ideas to other women usually ends up with things like footbinding, mutilation and psychological torture.
This tight weave of support through suppression makes patriarchical structures feel positively cozy...
The reality of women is such that many prefer to live a parasitic live - If it were a symbiotic relationship the host would get some benefit...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» You mean like. . . Posted by: Prairie Waif
» RE: You mean like. . . Posted by: TheLimit
» RE: You mean like. . . Posted by: rickiey
ABSOLUTELY -- good article
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Democratic Socialist on Mar 13, 2008 1:15 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes modern American/Western women seem, on the whole, quite miserable, and that's why I've largely given up on dating, marrying, and even having sex with them since just being around them makes me miserable as well. About the only women I can put up with nowadays are non-American, non-Western women, seeing that they aren't as (on the whole) materialistic, mean, superficial, rude, unhealthy/overweight, bitter, discontented, snide, etc.

Of course you could apply many of those same adjectives to American/Western men, as the "American disease" is not gender specific and definitely afflicts both sexes. Still though, it seems that women have a more difficult time dealing with all the pressures of the modern world described by this article and react by becoming more (openly) miserable and unhealthy in a twisted "misery loves company" scenario. Again, American/Western men are afflicted just the same, it's just that they seem better at hiding and/or ignoring it through the cultural conditioning they have been bombarded by since birth.

On a related note (and I'd like some input on this from anyone here), I recently came to the conclusion that in any given society women are good barometers of economic problems or impending economic problems, i.e. a generalized ill-mood or widespread discontent among a society's women causes recessions, depressions, and other economic problems. Do you all think this theory has any validity? I noticed this beginning a few months ago when all of the current economic turmoil began -- I realized that American women have been even more 'down and out' in the last few months than usual, and I think this has a lot to do with America's horrible economy at the moment. I'm certainly not 'blaming women' for economic problems (since men still run the banks and other financial institutions in all countries around the world), only saying that widespread discontent amongst the women in a society seems to be strongly correlated with economic downturns. Anybody notice this as well?

"A people is not defeated until the hearts of its women are on the ground." - Cheyenne saying
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: ABSOLUTELY -- good article Posted by: Smartcookie
» On the money - shot Posted by: Bobsays
» RE: On the money - shot **BOB"S JOB SOUNDS FUUUUUN** Posted by: maribelle
» RE: On the money - shot **BOB"S JOB SOUNDS FUUUUUN** Posted by: Prairie Waif
» As always, Bob.... Posted by: morticia
» RE: On the money - shot Posted by: mjabele
» 21 year old? Posted by: Beck
» RE: ABSOLUTELY -- good article Posted by: Lauren
» In ANY Macho Culture, women tend to get sucked in... Posted by: Cathyc
» RE: ABSOLUTELY -- good article Posted by: ankhet
Cleaning up the mess
[Report this comment]
Posted by: EJW on Mar 13, 2008 1:46 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm not sure how to say this. The problem is not women, but men. They lie, cheat and steal (taught by our wonderful educational system) .... it's okay as long as you don't get caught. Men run out when it's tough and leave the clean up to women. Women are always putting things back together. The only way a woman can succeed in this society is to play like a man --- that stinks.

Why, Why are men so afraid of women?

In my personal life, I don't pick up after men and if they don't bag their own waste I get rid of them.

I realize that not all men are this way, I know some, but taken as a whole men are just cry babies.

Look at the mess 'men' have gotten us into in the world. Boys playing games.....it's a sad fact.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Cleaning up the mess Posted by: data23
» RE: Cleaning up the mess Posted by: mjglow
» RE: Cleaning up the mess Posted by: data23
» RE: Cleaning up the mess Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: um are you a moron? Posted by: notthatsimple
» RE: um are you a moron? Posted by: EJW
» what do you expect? Posted by: notthatsimple
» RE: Cleaning up the mess Posted by: Badger1492
» RE: Cleaning up the mess Posted by: EJW
» RE: Cleaning up the mess Posted by: Logic's Edge
» RE: Cleaning up the mess Posted by: Logic's Edge
» RE: Cleaning up the mess Posted by: 605dave
» RE: Cleaning up the mess Posted by: TheLimit
» Who's afraid of the big bad wife? Posted by: zeofredo
» RE: Cleaning up the mess Posted by: buzzsaw
» RE: Cleaning up the mess Posted by: EJW
» RE: Cleaning up the mess Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Cleaning up the mess Posted by: EJW
» RE: Cleaning up the mess Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Cleaning up the mess Posted by: luzyrea
» RE: Cleaning up the mess Posted by: Fade
» RE: Cleaning up the mess Posted by: luzyrea
» RE: Cleaning up the mess Posted by: Logic's Edge
» RE: Cleaning up the mess Posted by: data23
» Bag their own waste? Posted by: messedup
This is why exported my daughters to the US
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Swedish liberal on Mar 13, 2008 2:02 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In Sweden it is virtually impossible to combine a career and to have a family life if you are a successful woman. The highest rate of suicide in Sweden is among female physicians, I think it says it all.

The wages in Sweden are in an international comparison extremely low. It means that there are very, very few Higher Educations that pay of in the long term. Further because of the low wages for career women very high taxes it is impossible to purchase help within the household.

So I exported my daughters to the US even though I had paid exorbitant taxes to get "free" higher education. This I now have to pay in the US. As well as having to abandon my own career since my law degree does not cut it in the US. It is a small price to pay for my daughters happiness. They will be able to get very well paid jobs as well as being able to afford help within their households. However one concern I have how thy are going to find partners that are willing to accept women that are smarter and earn more than they. I never did so myself.

When it comes to income equality the situation between women and men in Sweden is even worse than in the US. Women earn 70 % of what mean do however when the statistics has been matched that you compare the same jobs with the same education the inequality shrinks to 3 % i.e women have 97 % of men's wages. I believe this to be true even for the US.

And when it comes to happiness issue, we are measuring relative happiness, not an absolute. Happiness in the 70's is not comparable to happiness in the 00's. The more advanced and richer a society is, the more time its inhabitants have to think about other things than caring for their children, getting food on teh table and roof over the head. It is a question of the Maslowian Hierarchy. In the US a lot of people have time to only care about the highest level self fulfilment. And this is a very tough issue indeed since you will always feel unsatisfied. The solution when a very little elite could reach this level was as Buddha to become a monk, extremely religious.

I find fulfillment in the thought that I have cared for my daughters and hopefully will be able to help then in any way they need, be i babysitting or financial help.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: This is why exported my daughters to the US Posted by: daniel347x
» I believe in meritocracy, not socialism Posted by: Swedish liberal
» RE: I believe in meritocracy, not socialism Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: I think... Posted by: Pirate1
» RE: I think... Posted by: bornxeyed
» Swedish female doctors has the highest suicide rate Posted by: Swedish liberal
» RE: Swedish female doctors has the highest suicide rate Posted by: bornxeyed
» If you are ambitious and educated you are not unemployed in the US Posted by: Swedish liberal
» Sweden is better than the US for high educated women Posted by: Swedish liberal
» RE: Sweden is better than the US for high educated women Posted by: bornxeyed
» You get insurance after 180 days Posted by: Swedish liberal
» RE: You get insurance after 180 days Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Sweden is better than the US for high educated women Posted by: bornxeyed
» Limousine liberals disgust me Posted by: Swedish liberal
» RE: Limousine liberals disgust me Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Limousine liberals disgust me Posted by: Swedish liberal
» RE: Limousine liberals disgust me Posted by: bornxeyed
» Bush war on Iraq and huge government spending but the US in red not tax cuts Posted by: Swedish liberal
» RE: Sweden is better than the US for high educated women Posted by: TheLimit
» ACTUALLY, SWEDEN IS BEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD FOR WOMEN!! Posted by: sofla100
» RE: ACTUALLY, SWEDEN IS NO BEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD FOR WOMEN IN REALIY Posted by: Swedish liberal
» Um, ACTUALLY, That would be CANADA Posted by: Prairie Waif
» "Advanced and Richer" are not necessarily synonymous Posted by: Cathyc
» In America, It's Only About Advancing the Interests of A Tiny Elite Posted by: sofla100
pfft! what is 'happiness'?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: KaptainSpiffy on Mar 13, 2008 2:50 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that moment before we yearn for the next thing.

that time when we realize we really already have everything we need.

it's when you realize things are as they are, neither good nor bad but as they should be and always have been.

those rarified moments before we are seduced by the hopes in a stolen apple, grasping for the next thing, we eat of it, and offer it to our fellows.

the next thing. the next judgement we offer our fellows, good or bad.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
As women go, so goes all of us
[Report this comment]
Posted by: talkville on Mar 13, 2008 2:57 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As in all cultural affairs, concepts such as "happiness" and "misery" are best understood as 'blobs': they have no clear lines of demarcation and they are fundamentally relational (in this article related to gender). "All" propositions (as in "All Women") are not very useful in this regard. Plainly, in our society, SOME women are incredibly and indescribably 'happy'-- in just what this 'happiness' consists is difficult to pin down, but one is more likely to find these women in those of the 'upper echelons' of society; but not exclusively so: I've known some women of extremely modest means who are living fulfilling and rewarding lives. It all depends upon each individual's standards and definitions.

But 'happiness' and 'misery' don't sit side-by-side: each implies the other. As actual states of be-ing these are dynamic feelings and thus transitory. And they rest on conditions of existence. And the conditions of existence, especially but not exclusively, with regard to women in this particular society are on balance inimical and definitely not in favor of any kind of 'happiness' for a woman (nor a minority, nor a worker)-- the most likely condition of persons is this 'misery' which is the other face of happiness.

So, as with gender also race and also class. On the ground are the conditions of existence for each: equity, justice, dignity; indeed, better ways of living. I wonder exactly what CLASS of interests are working most against these?

And just as with 'happiness' and 'misery', race, gender and class do not sit 'beside each other' as conceptions: they imply each other. And once again, they depend on conditions of existence. Just what CLASS interests work against these?

Some decisions are strictly personal and subjective; others depend on what is outside of us and these require organization and collaboration in this 'highly competitive society' of ours. Fact is, large number of women are in the economic realm because of two things: necessity, and the fact that it is cheaper labor for the capitalist and thus conducive to more profit. Perhaps women could address taking a little 'virtuousness' out of Necessity? Labor rates must be made transparent and persons paid for the labor they perform - man or woman. A capitalist has no concern if one is a woman or a man; accepting work for less is their one and only criterion. As for more privileged relations (rather than those of rights) such as 'connections', 'family', etc. well, that's a whole other story!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: As women go, so goes all of us Posted by: penobscotdziekuje@yahoo.com
» RE: As women go, so goes all of us Posted by: EJW
» RE: As women go, so goes all of us Posted by: bornxeyed
» As minorities go, so go all of us Posted by: daniel347x
» let's keep it simple: humans are animals Posted by: KaptainSpiffy
Addicted to busyness and complaining.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Mar 13, 2008 3:40 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think a lot of women thrive on this stuff. They're happy being unhappy.

They love telling each other how busy they are, how the world needs them so much, and demands so much of their time. They love telling everyone how lazy and stupid their husbands are, and how they need to do everything themselves if they want it done right...how there is just not enough of them to go around.

It's the thing to do. If your life isn't overscheduled and out-of-control, or if you can't make a good case that it is, then you have less to bring to the water cooler and the chatter-lunch.

It's symptomatic of our culture in general. If you're not constantly busy, then you're nobody. But I think women tend to embrace this mentality more than men these days.

This article gives some lip-service to these subjective factors, but doesn't fully account for them.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» ah, the rise of the cell phone citizen Posted by: KaptainSpiffy
An Evolutionary Hypothesis
[Report this comment]
Posted by: socialpsych on Mar 13, 2008 4:23 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It may be that, because human females invest more in offspring than males, they evolved a tendency to communicate unhappiness to others in order to receive help. The targets of this communication are often--but not always--males because males historically (or, more accurately, prehistorically) have been willing to give a great deal of help, especially if there was a chance that they'd get a little sex in return. It's not accidental that one of the most rewarding things in all of the universe for males is the beautiful smile of a grateful and approving female.

Note that I am not saying that women ARE unhappy. I am saying that women express unhappiness as a tactical communicative act.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: An Evolutionary Hypothesis Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: An Evolutionary Hypothesis Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: An Evolutionary Hypothesis - Try This Posted by: MartianBachelor
» Women invest more in offspring than men Posted by: socialpsych
» RE: An Evolutionary Hypothesis Posted by: Fade
» RE: An Evolutionary Hypothesis Posted by: TheLimit
» Think "system" Posted by: socialpsych
Looking For Happiness In All The Wrong Places
[Report this comment]
Posted by: rigpa44 on Mar 13, 2008 6:13 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well, from the perspective of seeking for real happiness in the ephemeral world, and its swirling impermanence, folks have gotten desperate and are being driven to look for happiness in all the wrong places. Happiness is something that comes from inside not outside. As Ramakrishna adroitly points out, "We are like a musk deer looking for a scent that's coming from ourselves."

Unrealistic or unfulfilled expectations of what the world is supposed to give us is a major source of upset and unhappiness. People say, "I want it all". Even having it "all", cars, mansions, perfect spouses and children, isn't going to make the real happiness grade. Happiness is based on something totally different. Ironically real happiness shines forth from the heart and soul of who we are when it's not shut off by obsessing and greedily grasping for external happiness. Even if you have everything, and you don't know the happiness inside of one's self, you'll still be asking "and then what?"

If you don't realize that Totality is always already complete in its identity with the Infinity of its own nature, then the clinging and grasping will continue like a monkey jumping from branch to branch. The realization that the internal Self, the core-Heart of who you are is the author of one's actions and life, and the source, course and goal of happiness, rather than the obsessively seeking, always hungry and never satisfied little "me", is to live a life of transformative joy.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Looking For Happiness In All The Wrong Places Posted by: holojojo
Less is more, more or less
[Report this comment]
Posted by: zeofredo on Mar 13, 2008 6:16 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In an ideal world, men and women would trade off roles frequently within a cycle (of years or months), and the experiences of work and raising a family would be evenly shared.

In actuality, this is not about to happen. The way I see it, having been blessed with a mother who chose to stay home with her kids (she was older when she got married and seemed satisfied that her youthful liberties were lived out), perception of roles must be changed first. Women who do the job of raising children (and also working part-time) should be celebrated and praised in a genuine, uplfiting manner, not in the sentimental denigrating way that has been the fashion for so long.

I also suspect, as do some other bloggers, that personal expectations have been raised to impossible heights by advertising and [even more precisely] the careers and lives of our peers... there are always one or two friends that seem to have an ideal existence in comparison to our own. Women seem to be more prone to comparative measurement than men (men just have to buy the right toys to be satisfied!).

In contrast to women elsewhere in the world, it's hard to sympathize with anyone from a successful middle-class background here... we are all spoiled by our comforts and luxuries, and a lifetime of such immersion is particularly degrading to our sense of proportion in terms of satisfaction and happiness. EVERYONE always seems to want more, all the time.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Less is more, more or less Posted by: Fade
Further clarification - the Happiness/Unhappiness Quotient
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Shenonymous on Mar 13, 2008 6:32 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What you say, talkville, is wholly perceptive. The notions of happiness and misery, as the set of opposites when attempting to define either one or the other, in order to gain some insight into the state of one, here in this case, a happiness quotient for women, are individually fuzzy ideas since they are abstractions in the first place. However, as the quest proceeds in the comparison of these two “abstract” states of mind, clarity emerges for both and definition materializes. Yes, they are relational but are two sides of the same human coin of consciousness. One is measured by the degree of the other in an inverse ratio. One can only discover of “what this ‘happiness’ consists” in a general sense, by investigating particular examples rather than lump all together under the concept of “some.” After collecting specific reasons, then a new generalization may be suggested. The range of economic conditions for the indescribably happy, or for that matter, indescribably unhappy, women is as broad as the whole existent microcosm between complete happiness and complete unhappiness. This has to be postulated since no survey of every woman has been nor can be made.

I agree that the conditions of happiness and misery are with respect to each other an implication that exists between them. They are imaginary measures and as such are naturally mutable. You suggest that the society in which we live is most unfriendly, that is, ‘inimical,’ toward women, hence the level of unhappiness is higher than its opposite, happiness. You also interrogate what CLASS of interests work most against the conditions of equity, justice, dignity. The degree of dignity would be a result of the degree of equity and justice women concretely receive, and hence dignity is a direct proportion of equity and justice. Rather than muse about it, let’s do see what class of interests work as countermeasures to these circumstances. What possible classes can we speak of? What other class than men and their psychology can qualify? And while race and class (whatever that latter might be in this society, possibly poor, middle, and upper), may have some congruence, they are completely different issues than gender and would have unlike substrate causes. So their appearance here in this argument is moot and deflective and would be the topic of a much needed but separate discussion.

I think your relegation of why women are in the economic ballgame to begin with is decisively perceptive. Not sure what is meant, however, in your statement that women might consider extracting “’virtuousness’ out of Necessity,” as that implies there is some relationship between the two: That there is virtue in necessity or the reverse. And that must mean some moral or ethical aspect. They do not seem coincidental with each other. But if they are, why stop at a “little” why not take it “all” out and completely objectify it? All that notwithstanding, it is an imperative that equal pay for equal work would go a long way toward “equalizing” the disparity between women and men and raise exponentially the caliber of happiness for women, and by extension, the happiness for men as well. But furthermore, the level of amount of work needs to be equalized as well and women would not then be run into the ground by the weight of labor.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
And women still want children because!?!?!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: veggiegrrrl on Mar 13, 2008 6:51 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And women still want children because!?!?! Not much "happiness" for those future children living on a planet about to choke us out of existence.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: And women still want children because!?!?! Posted by: NoKidding
» RE: And women still want children because!?!?! Posted by: freshlemon
» RE: And women still want children because!?!?! Posted by: TheLimit
» RE: And women still want children because!?!?! We do need new humans, you know. Posted by: holojojo
My 2 Cents...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: craigandrew on Mar 13, 2008 7:11 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Equality is the killer. I'm not talking about legal equality, because everyone deserves that. But, from my perspective, women are trying to be perfect, except the standard they are measuring themselves against is a male one.

Women have succumbed to the male biological clock for example; they wait until after college and they are already into their careers before having children ... which is a perfect strategy for men, but is completely disruptive to women(and many women find it to be too late). Being a man I cannot say what is right for women, but if i had a daughter I would be sure she had an understanding of unorthodox options; marrying an older man and having children before going to college, then going to college when the kids got into grade school and rolling forward from there.

The upshot is that women are trying to have it all and it is killing them - we cannot have true love, a perfect family, and a successful career at the same time. Even men cannot have these things together.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Or... Posted by: craigandrew
» RE: My 2 Cents... Posted by: TheLimit
Happy Single Woman not living in the good old days
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mcubed on Mar 13, 2008 7:53 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hey-
I always think it's interesting when people start making generalizations that many women of today are choosing to wait to have children, and this is a problem.

I'm turning 4o next week, and am still single because the right guy has not come along yet. I don't regret not having a child so far in my life, because I haven't been in a relationship with a man who both respected me and wanted to stay with me. I have several friends who have raised great kids on their own, and I admire them. I also know it was very hard work, and not a path they set out on intentionally.

I feel very grateful to live in this time, and in a social position where I am able to work and go back to school to pursue a degree in a field I'm interested in.

I would love to have kids, but also know that I am truly blessed not to be trapped in an unhappy marriage, stifled by a lack of opportunity in the outside world, as some previous generations of women in my family were.

Michele
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Happy Single Woman not living in the good old days Posted by: NoKidding
Capitalist Culture Forces Intelligent Women To Work
[Report this comment]
Posted by: opmoc on Mar 13, 2008 8:06 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Its what is expected of them and most conform - but to run both a full time demanding job at the same time as performing all the tasks of a Mother - requires such an inordinate amount of energy - that most women simply aren't up to it. In most such situations its the children rather than the job that gets neglected.

Intelligent women realise this position and often simply put off having children - until its too late.

Whilst this is good for reducing population levels - it is not good at maintaining levels of intelligence.

Less intelligent women now have far more children - often as single mothers. The structure of Western societies positively encourages this - particularly in the UK.

The end result is that not only are women less happy - but so are men - and through neglect - so are children. Society as a whole becomes less intelligent as we are selecting the less intelligent to reproduce more.

Its not simply a case of education being dumbed down - but children overall have less inate capability.

It was formally normal for intelligence levels in children to measurably rise. They are now measurably falling.

The only counterbalance to declining intelligence is immigration. People who move from their country of origin are likely to be much more highly motivated and intelligent than the norm.

Until we replace the god of money with a more accurate measure of quality of life then society's slide into despair will continue.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Idiocracy Posted by: Laplandi
» RE: Capitalist Culture Forces Intelligent Women To Work Posted by: TheLimit
Happiness Rests With You
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Southern Gal on Mar 13, 2008 8:33 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
At some point in your life you have to allow yourself to be happy. I think that we have so many expectations about how life should be that we overlook how it actually is. We are all surrounded by unhappy people, in our families, our work, our neighborhoods, etc. I've finally reached the point that I look for something of beauty each day, enjoy that moment of looking at it and experiencing it, and then look forward to what I see the next time. It's our expectations of life that make us unhappy. There is enough going on now to make us all concerned for the future. but we do have to understand that our happiness lies within each of us. We can't make other people happy. That's a huge burden to bear. Everyone must learn to experience their own happiness.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Happiness Rests With You Posted by: opmoc
» I'm with you, opmoc.... Posted by: morticia
Materialism
[Report this comment]
Posted by: BST on Mar 13, 2008 8:44 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What was omitted from this equation is the heightened focus on materialism, on acquisition, on competition, on pretending that the Paris Hilton/George Clooney looks should be our looks, that our true friends reside on reality shows and talk shows.

No, they don't. They've never heard of us.

With these imperatives and misconceptions and distractions as focus, men and women are harnessed to jobs that burn them out, disappointed by what they see in the mirror and too weary and agitated to take time out to say: "What do I really want to do and be?"

I think it's not about feminism, but about "mall haul" and emphasis on the exterior patina of the package. And perhaps the slow death of what I call supermarket spirituality -- a sense of shared compassion and interbeing with people we meet every moment of our day.

It's not surprising that men will be happier now that women are also bearing the burdens of bread-winning (seven grain only, please) and women feel bleaker because they have taken on more responsibilities to support this chimera of a McMansion lifestyle. Plus, good grief, a wrinkle has appeared, a bubble of cellulite. Could we all be any more self-centered?

The Rx is so simple, yet who will listen? Turn off the TV and cellphone. Tune into the people you love. Dine together at home. Cook. Take walks. Say "I love you" at times when you're not also racing to the commuter rail. Invite neighbors over for potluck. Volunteer to help people who really need support. Play croquet. Garden instead of paying a landscaper. Dump the second job and get rid of those material goods that weigh you down. Trust me on this.

Your life will improve.

Yeah, I can guess what you might be saying. Ain't gonna happen. I say: Remember, your life's precious moments are limited.

I can understand why Nigerians -- many in poverty, depending on family and community for everything -- would find life more sublime.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Excellent comment. Posted by: CrystalD
lindaj823
[Report this comment]
Posted by: lindaj823 on Mar 13, 2008 8:55 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are a few circumstances that might help elucidate what is happening to women:
- Women have more choices these days but have we assessed the quality of those choices? Are these the choices women would prefer to have or choices among not so great options? Many women "choose" to stay home with their children because they don't make enough money to pay for the necessary child care, transportation, business clothing, or the tax bite when combined with her partner's income will eat away most of her salary. Some women "choose" to work but are forced to work full-time and often overtime when they'd prefer to work part-time. But part-time work usually brings with it a loss of all benefits and smaller likelihood of promotion. What if good, well-paid part-time jobs with proportionate pay, benefits & advancement were available? What if full-time work included more flexibility for other life responsibilities? What if parents had paid family leave to be home for a time with their newborns? (Parents in 134 countries worldwide have some form of paid family leave.) Wouldn't those "choices" make women happier? (To see what's being done about some of this go to Nat'l Assoc of Mothers' Centers & MOTHERS)
- There is a world of difference between parenting in 2008 and parenting in earlier generations. We have to deal with post-9/11 security anxiety, fear of letting our children be children and play out of doors unsupervised by an adult, internet predators that can reach our children in their bedrooms via their computer, escalating expectations of getting our children involved in enriching activities at earlier and earlier ages fueled by an intense competition for more & more limited slots in good pre-schools & colleges. My parents, though strict, didn't hover over me and my siblings the way we orchestrate and supervise our chldren's lives today.
- Regarding eldercare, when men provide eldercare they tend to purchase the necessary services and women are more likely to provide those services themselves. That would explain the difference in "happiness" in that area of life.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Regarding part-time work Posted by: CrystalD
» RE: egarding part-time work Posted by: 23skidoo
It Isn't Just Women
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Bab5nutz on Mar 13, 2008 8:58 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think that people in general are unhappier. And people are encouraged to be unhappy - there are whole industries feeding off unhappiness. Look at all the 'self-help' and 'self-improvement' book around. What these books are really saying is "you're not okay as you are." Everywhere you go, there are books and people telling you that if you're happy with your life, then there is something wrong with you.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
adt in nj
[Report this comment]
Posted by: athurlow on Mar 13, 2008 9:06 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a mother of 2 boys (14 & 12), I'm aware of the growing disparity between boys' & girls' "success" in school. The opportunities now exist for girls, as long as they are docile, obedient, and compliant with all traditional "feminine" virtues. If the gender ratio in honors classes, special workshops, etc. were reversed, we'd all be outraged - girls do what they're told -neatly, politely, unquestioningly, and are rewarded within the educational system. They then face a world that doesn't grade according to a "rubric." They are taught to aspire to getting "the best," and to despair when someone else does better. We need to teach kids that happiness can't be tested or measured, nor can any of the things that bring true happiness. Young girls and women are being raised to "want it all," and "all" includes a husband or partner who has even more. Teach your daughters, and sons, not to be hamsters on wheels, but to get out of their cages and live!!!!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: adt in nj Posted by: 23skidoo
Does this article have a point?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: noalternative on Mar 13, 2008 9:10 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The point appears to be that we should be social conservatives and move the Branson.

I think this article is shit and it has gotten 90% responses from frickin republicans.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Does this article have a point? Posted by: stupendous man
everyone is miseralbe!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: thealltheone on Mar 13, 2008 9:42 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
who isn't? the rich who got all the breaks, Bush who can not tap dance! It is not a gender problem. Everyone is miserable! Except the right who keep trying their best to convince us that all women need to be submissive, pregnate and barefoot at home! Like the new study that came out last weekend in our Parade magazine, telling us how to live to be 100, "women who have children in their 40's will live longer"???? who writes this crap? stop blocking the over night pill, stop trying to deny us birth control, stop trying to control us all together! The most miserable are the women stuck at home with no husband, and several kids! Any woman with a decent job who might be a little unhappy that her nanny gets to see her kids more than her is going to trade that for the above!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: everyone is miseralbe! Posted by: opmoc
» RE: everyone is miseralbe! Posted by: thealltheone
inheritocracy not meritocracy
[Report this comment]
Posted by: noalternative on Mar 13, 2008 9:48 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that is what this "socalled liberal" believes in.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
You are all so weird!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: carolcarre on Mar 13, 2008 9:50 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No, the problem is not equality. The problem is not that women choose to have children. The problem is not men. The problem is our social construct: PAID labor is IMPORTANT, UNPAID labor is totally UNIMPORTANT; MOTHERS are PARENTS, DADS are WORKERS; if mothers work then they still are parents. Dads "pitch in". CHILDREN are UNIMPORTANT and can be shoved off onto paid help.
WORK can only be done in the WORKPLACE. All workers must WORK 8 HOURS A DAY.

TO change this construct (and I only outlined a tiny portion of it), we need to change our mindset as a society. Can we do it? Sure, we can. Will we do it? Not unless enough people realize that they have bought into an illusion: the way things are is the way they must be.

The virtue of being human is that we can imagine a different way and can do it. Our problem is that we are caught in our mammalian mode of thinking that we must repeat patterns, not create new ones. Hence, like our friends the animals, we repeat our life patterns and our social constructs and act as if they are immutable and instinctive.

Too bad.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Really! Have you ever heard a woman say she has to babysit her own kids? Posted by: LeeAnnG
» RE: You are all so weird! Posted by: bornxeyed
» Large load of baloney... Posted by: jparsons
» RE: You are all so weird! Posted by: TheLimit
How can any sane women be happy in a world gone mad?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: stellabloo on Mar 13, 2008 9:51 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
OK 20 years ago I gave up tobacco and alcohol and turned my life over to a Higher Power.
Not a popular message of course – I risk judgment here as a frumpy Bible-thumping housewife who wouldn’t know a good time from a hole in the ground – but if there is to be happiness gained in this generally miserable and materialistic society, then I have found more than my share.

IMHO alcohol is a depressant and the #1 date rape drug of the western world. And the other health risks are more serious for women than men.
On the flip side, my HP sent me to college (for free) and set me up with my own consulting business, a younger husband, three beautiful and intelligent children, all the weed I can smoke, and a house in a destination resort. Oh yes, and I’m going on a dream ski trip at the end of the month. For free (and without having to sleep with someone, either) ;)
So who’s crazy, society or me?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: How can any sane women be happy in a world gone mad? Posted by: opmoc
» You don't risk judgment.... Posted by: morticia
» RE: You don't risk judgment.... Posted by: bornxeyed
» Ahoy, matey! Posted by: morticia
» Tish! That's French! Posted by: bornxeyed
» I was thinking more along the lines... Posted by: morticia
» Merely trying to give credit where credit is due ... Posted by: stellabloo
» RE: Merely trying to give credit where credit is due ... Posted by: morticia
» Free Will .... unfortunately .... or is that Free Willy? Posted by: stellabloo
» RE: Free Will .... unfortunately .... or is that Free Willy? Posted by: morticia
Women shouldn't be so hard on themselves
[Report this comment]
Posted by: joeunix on Mar 13, 2008 10:41 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This may indeed be a "man's world", but this "man's world" wouldn't be worth living in without women.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» A nice song for all the wonderful women out there Posted by: joeunix
» RE: Women shouldn't be so hard on themselves Posted by: bornxeyed
» I can't take credit for those words Posted by: joeunix
» RE: I can't take credit for those words Posted by: bornxeyed
» Question Posted by: joeunix
Feeling responsible
[Report this comment]
Posted by: LeeAnnG on Mar 13, 2008 10:43 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Years ago, probably right around the start of the women's movement, I read that women feel responsible to make things work in the family and in social situations. They feel guilty if things don't go well. For example, this article went on, if a family picnic is planned and it rains, the mother feels guilty. I'm not sure why, but this seems to have at least a strong element of truth.

More recently, I read an article that put forth the notion that women seem to feel more stress about things "not getting done." They worry that the basement isn't getting cleaned up or the woodwork needs to be painted, while men seem to believe that it will get done, all in good time.

These ideas, of course, are generalities, but I've experienced this in my own life. I've often felt a responsiblity to maintain family ties with my extended family and to try to keep harmony among lots of different people.

I have a big party each summer. Once or twice it has rained and I always feel like I've somehow spoiled everyone's fun.

My husband has an inordinate ability to do whatever he feels like, to not do what he doesn't want to do, and to ignore impending tasks. We are both in our early 60s and he is ready to relax. But I feel the need to "accomplish something" most of the time. I judge my weekends by how much I got done. I lay awake nights thinking about the clutter in the attic and the accumulated junk in the basement.

When one of my grown children encounters a "normal" problem, I feel like I should be doing something to make it better. It seems like women are programmed to ensure that things run smoothly.

So that's one problem. Another is that the economy practically dictates that women work outside the home. That's an issue not addressed in this article. There are still some mothers who choose, and are able, to stay home with their children, but that's less and less true. What with $4.00 a gallon gas, nearly $5.00 a gallon milk, and who-knows-how-much for just heating our homes, it's very hard to get by with one paycheck. Yeah, yeah, yeah. We could all go back to living like the Honymooners in small, shabby apartments, and it's partly our living standards. But in fact, our living standards HAVE become the standard. A person who has no TV or cds or computer is not living as part of the US culture. It's possible to make the choice not to do so, but it really has to be a conscious choice, made with deliberation and planning. Or just be poor. That's a choice too, I suppose.

Dealing with children, jobs, home care, the elderly, and other issues is not easy. Some people can stay happy, but other people have more trouble. It's important to get our priorities straight and find ways to cope.

As an endnote, my son takes care of my elderly mother. He has a family and a full time job. He's often not happy because all this responsibility is overwhelming. Everyone else in my family, including me, lives far away, so he's stuck. Many men would not do this, but he is willing. And both he and my younger son have expressed feelings of guilt at not accomplishing enough. (This is from their excessively demanding father, and not my current husband.) So it's not just a gender issue.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Feeling responsible Posted by: luzyrea
Silly article -- was this from NY Times?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: annika on Mar 13, 2008 10:52 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Given all the well-to-do mothers featured here, i would have thought this was a NYT reprint. I am a working woman in my early 30s. I do not grant any authority to the retrograde institution of marriage and instead live with my fantastic boyfriend of 7 yrs. We struggle economically, and both find ourselves unhappy on that count. It is a political question.

Moreover, not only are working class women ignored in this piece, so is the toxic culture that is part and parcel of the economic exploitation of women in this country. The double standards for performance, excellence, appearance -- these are not self-imposed but systemic. Pieces like these ignore the reality of the situation and fundamentally depoliticize women's struggles by making them solely individual or biological concerns.

My aunt for ex is a 60 year old woman supporting her schizophrenic brother who has nowhere else to go. this is after supporting her ailing father and then mother and trying to handle a suicidal son. the woman has been a working class caregiver all her life facing very real serious problems. her health is poor. she has limited income. she herself is going insane. Maybe the author would like to talk to her to find out why women are unhappy. Do these women who are still working after age 55 not matter?

Poverty is largely female, but no one really thinks of it this way.

It would have been better to not quote people resorting to old stereotypes to explain away women's unhappiness.

Alternet just keeps declining in my opinion with this topical useless faux- liberal "analysis." I call it shit.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Silly article -- was this from NY Times? Posted by: data23
» RE: Silly article -- was this from NY Times? Posted by: TheLimit
» RE: Silly article -- was this from NY Times? Nah San Francisco Posted by: DaBear
Our own worst enemy
[Report this comment]
Posted by: CV on Mar 13, 2008 10:55 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I grew up in the 50's and knew very quickly that I would be a working woman - because whenever I was stuck in the midst of a very large extended family, once the men and a couple of strong-minded aunts had peeled off to play poker in the basement, all I heard were COMPLAINTS. My mother, her sisters, the women in my father's family - ALL of them complained constantly about something. But that was inside the family - outside was all nice "appearances." You didn't let strangers into the game. Maybe one of the problems with "today's women" is that they have nothing to compare their state of "happiness" to. Why am I happy? Because I remember "that time" and am ever so grateful for the simple, quiet, peaceful life I have forged for myself. But then I didn't load myself with expectations, either - I didn't care if I ever became "important" or "wealthy." I don't "need" much and I don't compare myself or my situation to the "Joneses" Of course, the "unhappiest" time of my life was while I was raising my children (who are terrific adults) - that is the world's toughest job and every time one of them had an "issue" I faulted myself and felt like a failure. I think that may be a great part of the unhappiness quotient for women of child-rearing age - men simply don't "blame themselves" every time a child has a problem. If a child is sick for instance, a woman feels guilty if she has to call in a sitter and go to work. Most men I know don't add that burden to themselves - they just do what they have to do and don't internalize it as a self-worth issue. In that regard, we women are our own worst enemies. Unhappiness arises also from the "if onlys" - and I have always found women more likely than men to claim that they'd be happy "if only." And then if only happens . . . .and gives rise to another "if only."
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
this article is still filled with stereotypes
[Report this comment]
Posted by: meeneecat on Mar 13, 2008 11:14 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article is mainly talking about one type of women, the married with kids 30-45 year old who feels she needs to be perfect. This is not me. I've got a mate, but I hardly do most of the housework. He does all the laundry, the dishes, the dusting, the vacuuming and on and on. You could say that I fit the role of the stereotypical male, and him, female. I don't know when people will stop replaying the same old tired stereotypes. Over and over again. Maybe that's part of the reason these women feel they have to do so much. They need to have kids (first of all not everyone needs kids for happiness), they need to have a big house with four bedrooms (not everyone needs a big house for happiness), they need to enroll their kids in every type of activity (again, what's with the = all women need to have kids to be happy). Then there's the idea that these women are doing all the chores. I say fuck the chores - if I don't feel like doing them, I don't. I don't give a damn what other people think, and I'd rather let the dishes pile up than have it interfere with my own happiness and relaxation time. So sue me. I'm not like any of these women and I don't need a bunch of expensive consumer goods that I'll need to pay of later with my credit care forcing me to work overtime and again cutting into my happiness. With, the job, I don't work any more than I have to, to survive. This means that I don't buy a lot of "stuff", but it also means no overtime and even only working part time, yay! I don't need "stuff" to make me happy. I live simply, exercise, eat heathy, and enjoy the simple things like being outside, and painting. Cut out the excess and everything else that adds stress, I don't need it. And who cares what others think or do. I don't. Maybe this sounds selfish, but hey, I'm happier than these women in this article. And there's plenty of women like me who realize that the key to happiness is NOT 2.5 kids, a two car garage house, complete with 6 different maxed out credit cards, a mortgage, a man, and maybe a dog. Fuck that. No wonder these women are miserable.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» 2.5 kids! Posted by: morticia
» RE: 2.5 kids! Posted by: cherylsass123
» RE: this article is still filled with stereotypes Posted by: babs
» RE: this article is still filled with stereotypes Posted by: meeneecat
» RE: this article is still filled with stereotypes Posted by: TheLimit
Laura I
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Laura I on Mar 13, 2008 11:54 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are unhappy because material wealth, ego filled jobs, power, and responding in the way marketers want us to so to supposedly achieve it ALL, material and otherwise, is totally BOGUS. Employers just LOVE employees who don't know when to stop. Marketers just LOVE using ploys, suggesting what we will gain by buying their junk. They smile all the way to the bank! We end up giving ourselves away for these implicit promises...what is the promise? haha! HAPPINESS and all that is suggested by the simple word. We'd be happier paying attention to the simple things around us: a smile, time with family and friends, and great sex with our partners. It's under our noses; it's right there, and all of us, not just women need to have the confidence in themselves to see the worth of making our own choices. I think its a shorter route to happiness than a lifetime of swallowing the bull.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Great comment Posted by: joeunix
» Amen/BlessedBe/Reclaiming!!!!! Posted by: Verjenie
» RE: Laura I Posted by: TheLimit
I am female, and I don't see myself anywhere in the article.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Zenobia on Mar 13, 2008 12:35 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article is so full of stereotyptes it is disgusting.

I understand that women still do more housework, but why? Why do they put up with it? If a guy won't play 50/50, tell him BYE!!!! Find a new one, or enjoy the company of your female friends, or enjoy your solitude. And do it BEFORE you choose to have kids with a lazy immature rat. If you didn't see it coming, well--raise your own sons and daughters to be more thoughtful.

Women have stronger emotional barometers? That's one hell of an essentialist statement. I know lots of extremely empathetic men, and a lot of women who are not. Each seems to turn out this way as a result of values their parents taught them. We are hesitant to teach boys empathy in this culture, though, because empathy doesn't make you a "hero" in a country that values imperial power and shark-style capitalism. As long as we expect men to be "providers" within this system, we cannot allow them to FEEEEEEEL. SO CHANGE THE DAMN SYSTEM--JUST SAY NO TO WHAT IT VALUES. FIGURE OUT WHAT YOU--MALE OR FEMALE--VALUE.

Why do Republican women report being happier? Well if the Marquise du Chatelet' treatise holds true--
"one must be susceptible to illusions, for it is to illusions that we owe the majority of our pleasures. Unhappy is the one who has lost them." Enough said. They are not swimming up stream to shatter illusions. Swimming up stream is exhausting, and you don't get immediate rewards. Martin Luther King, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Alice Paul, name any social activist--I am sure they were all exhausted. All they had to do was delude themselves to remedy that...and lucky for all of us, they chose not to.

I also don't understand all this "guilt" stuff. My mom used to have a lot of this in the 70s, this wierd idea that she was supposed to please everyone, take care of everyone, AND achieve. How is that feminism? How is that liberation? She has moved closer to liberation; she has learned to set boundaries. However, when she felt that she was doing all the housework, SHE WENT ON STRIKE. Try it, ladies. It works wonders. Everything grinds to a halt. You WILL have your demends met. YOU have to believe you have power for others to believe it. This whiny article is all water water everywhere. Try meditating on FIRE if this article describes you. FIRE! Fire in the blood! I have it coursing through my veins. I have plenty to share--here, have some!!!

"Choice" at a salad bar doesn't mean you choose EVERYTHING that is available to you as a choice, at the same meal. You PICK and choose. You can go back to the restaurant to sample other choices on another day. I don't GET this idea that it is "choice" to feel like you HAVE to choose too many things at once.

BUT, for years I have been a vocal opponent of "choice" based "feminism" because it lends itself to marketing shams and inversion of meaning too easily. I much prefer the language of "equality." Nothing described in this article speaks to me of equality. Nothing in this article speaks of partnership between or among. This article could be retitled, "Why Women Who Have Conformed to Capitalist Patriarchy But Believed They Were Freely Choosing Are Miserable."

Another shallow, faux feminist article brought to you by Alternet. It reads like a "Ladies Home Journal" piece from 1970. Gross.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Sharing Fire! (Thanx Zenobia!!!!!!) Posted by: Verjenie
» RE: I am female, and I don't see myself anywhere in the article. Posted by: ankhet
» Case in point..... Posted by: pangolin
Equality and Femininity are not mutually exclusive
[Report this comment]
Posted by: nfamous on Mar 13, 2008 2:38 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This seems to be the on point everyone is missing. Women can be feminine and still be equal. The problem is defining what is means to be a woman so that woman are not offended. It is this daunting task that is the red-headed stepchild of modern feminism. There is no one definition of womanhood for all women. Women are free to adopt whatever definition is appropriate for them and it is unfair for feminists to pressure women into corporate jobs they abhor after finding out how much sexism there is out there from males.

Do I want a deadbeat woman with no job and no aspirations? No. But I also don't want a woman that is purely career-driven that never acknowledges her feminine nature for fear of appearing weak to myself and other men. That is the weakest female of all. Someone the lesser physical strength of women in general got translated into all these other misogynistic weaknesses that simply are not true. I am one man that is ready to hear women roar but I am quite comfortable with a meow as well.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Do I want a deadbeat woman with no job and no aspirations? Posted by: TheLimit
Well, I'm a woman, and I'm not miserable...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: rclord on Mar 13, 2008 3:02 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...though I'm sure many women - and men - are.

Didn't someone say that people can be just as happy as they make up their minds to be?

On the flip side, I do know some of the types of women this article is talking about. I think one big reason they're miserable is that they've been brainwashed by TV. They've been told they can, and are supposed to "have it all," and they're now discovering that having it all is more difficult than they thought it would be. Especially with the economy being what it is.

Maybe one reason I'm not miserable that I've never been a big TV-watcher.

Just a thought...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Me too! No T.V. More original dreams! Posted by: Verjenie
Did I really just read this?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Phenix on Mar 13, 2008 3:06 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"My college roommate called me for my birthday in March, and I still haven't called her back. I need to at least say, 'I'm not the horrible friend that you think I am...' "

I had a laugh at this quote. She is a horrible friend and she needs to not sugar coat that reality. Everyone who knows me knows that I'm a floater and that I don't remember dates unless there was a war or plague. Yes I'm a history major. BUT if they call me I always give them a call back or at least send an e-mail or text explaining whats going on. It takes 5-10 minutes to keep in touch with someone.

Also the wage gap is a statistical myth. Of course like all econ myths a person can work the numbers until they give the desired results. Women earn less than men because of career choice. Its that simple. The job title comparisons with in companies can show a difference based on seniority but that is how the working world works. There are also some firms that DO discriminate but they do not account for the difference in pay.

Now the racial divides are probably related to the criminal justice system but I really don't know the answer to that. I'm including racial discrimination in the criminal justice system since well it is racially discriminatory :(
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Did I really just read this? Posted by: DaBear
Sweden: The Best Country in the World for Women?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: sofla100 on Mar 13, 2008 3:06 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Interesting article, please splice the link as otherwise I could not post it on alternet (seen as too long a word):

http://lifestyle.msn.com/mindbodyandsoul

/womenintheworld/

articlemc.aspx?cp-documentid=4951226&GT1=10215

Because in Europe, Sweden in particular, social-welfare benefits are plentiful, it is seen as a much better country for women. Year long maternity leave, universal health care, subsidized day care, paid educational expenses, etc. Of course, in the USA, taxes are a bit lower, but most of the taxes collected just go for the military, wars or USA's national security infrastructure (intelligences agencies, FBI, CIA, etc.), so we really have nothing left for the people. This especially hurts women.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Would you tell your daughter...?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Crazy H on Mar 13, 2008 3:19 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Would you tell your daughter that she has a choice? That she can go out and be POTUS if she wants to; or she prefers, she can stay home and be a traditional housewife/mommy?

Would you tell your son the same thing?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Would you tell your daughter...? Posted by: cherylsass123
Men and Women have to both be happy. You can't put one over the other first.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: maxpayne on Mar 13, 2008 3:44 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If one fails, the other will follow suit 9 out of 10 times. If my wife isn't happy, I ain't happy and vice versa. That's why we learn to take care of ourselves and each other.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
The Pleasure Principle
[Report this comment]
Posted by: penobscotdziekuje@yahoo.com on Mar 13, 2008 4:29 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article could be best summarized as "help"!
First, I'm on a woman's side: Women do a lot for us. They are the backbone of any society. In my family, she was the one who was our teacher, friend, mother while my father worked. That was then.
This is now. Yes, gender roles are a bit relaxed but I hate to see any unhappy woman. Women deserve the best. But we know not everyone will be entitled to the fruits of the world.
I don't have the answers, but I just don't like to see a woman get beated down. They should be given life's simple pleasures. It's not easy to be female, but it's not necessarily a negative. We just need to give them more. Ultimately it's up to them to find their source of happiness.
As James Brown said in a song it may be a man's world, but it's nothing without a woman or a girl.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
My problem with this article is "cheap" happiness.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Sojourner on Mar 13, 2008 4:56 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was unable to sort out the difference between happiness or unhappiness that comes from being a human being and unhappiness that comes from being a woman.

Of course they are not completely separate. But anyone who even attempts to say something lucid (and not merely anecdotal) about sexism and happiness is walking on mighty thin ice. No one I know, except Tinker Bell, dares to tread on such a fragile footing.

I am a man. So I cannot speak for women's unhappiness. But in religion there is a distinction between grace and cheap grace. Cheap grace is when you imagine yourself to have acquired grace by virtue of incidental associations--joined a church; responded to an altar call; believe what the preacher says.

Likewise there is cheap happiness, the kind that's for sale: "You must be happy because anyone who doesn't say they are happy is weird."

Happy people are strong people. Strong people are honest with themselves and with others. It ain't necessary to smile or to play or to be *devil-may-care* (although those have their place, to be sure).

Behind that photo of a smiling pop star is a smirk. Likewise the smile of the oppressor, especially the one who wants to sell you something so that you can be as happy as he/she. No matter what the price, it's cheap.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Laura I
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Laura I on Mar 13, 2008 5:07 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Our children seeing us happy and satisfied with what really matters rather than grumpy overachieving material-maniacs might mean more as far as their future choices regardless of their sex.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Women almost as miserable as men ITS NEWS !!!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: leta on Mar 13, 2008 5:22 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
you know women have it so bad they almost have it as bad as men. poor womenz
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» oh you again Posted by: goatini
» RE: oh you again Posted by: leta
its still the same patriarchal game
[Report this comment]
Posted by: unity1 on Mar 13, 2008 6:19 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
inequality exists ever where, and like some one already said what is expressed in this article its all about capitalisms - women are still being what they have been told they must be, they are told this in so many ways everyday - yet she knows little of who she really is, instead she goes along with what is 'expected' of her as daughter, sister, mother, wife

the entire working day world negates her as a woman with a menstruation cycle - it does not accommodate her - instead she has to go against the grain of who she is and how she feels on these days in order to function in what is essentially still a male world - going against the grain of oneself, constantly creates a deep and abiding emptiness that cannot be filled so much with mother hood or even marriage/relationships - the source of this emptiness is deep deeper than the ordinary conditioned human is prepared to go

women are playing in a male defined world were the values have been set by him, she is still accommodating what he says she must be - only the illusion of her free will has expanded, or should I rephrase that and say the walls of her cage have expanded

good article though
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Thanks for the honesty. Posted by: Sojourner
Are modern women miserable? No, but m.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: lwbaby on Mar 13, 2008 8:21 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
we can play them on tv.

Honestly, the media through shows and advertising is constantly telling us what defines happiness, if we would only purchase x product or live a y life.

So much of who we are is determined by the media it seems. From botox to face cream to cooking shows to colleges to board rooms to bedrooms. Face it, most of what we do in various capacities is scripted.

Many of us own our own businesses now and we owe that ability to our foremothers who fought for us to have that right.

We also owe that ability to our husbands and fathers and brothers and sons who believed in us and stood beside us and it seems many of us forget their support when wrapped up in the whole girrrrrl power trip. We blame them for holding us down yet chastise them for raising us up. They didn't ask for their male priviledge any more than we were denied opportunities simply because we were girls.

The men/boys in our lives who love us want us to succeed! Maybe we should include their advice when listening to our hearts.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Have either of the sexes thought of. . .
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Prairie Waif on Mar 13, 2008 8:34 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have spent about two hours, on and off, reading through as much of the hostility and explanations as I could. There is a great weight of life in the many posts.

As I read further and further in, I realized, "Hey! I live on less than $8,500/year, use the food bank, get my clothes from the hand-me-downs of my friend's mother and continually hope that my health will allow me to return to the job I love. But overall, I am content and basically happy."

A great deal of why I am happy has to do with who and what I let into my life.

I cleaned the "address book" of people that whined about their lot in life as they complained about their new SUV payments and the rising price of gas. I left behind men who thought women were chattle. I left behind women who would be chattle.

I believe we have the responsibility to rid ourselves of these people who we build structures around. As we build the structures, the more they are built, the more they are reinforced.

I have had some men follow me on city transit trying to learn where I live so they could "drop over for coffee" (and yes, in Canada, that is what is done, Coffee and talking for an hour or two). I have sat on the bus and gone around the entire bus route to avoid men and even women from learning where I live, as they are not the people I want in the structure of my happy and content life.

I will admit to crying shamelessly over a male lately though. He was adored and beloved to me and kept me in stitches as he came and sat next to me and chatted on the couch or complained about the lack of food for supper, or the noise I was making while on the computer when he was trying to sleep.

I am still shocked and still shed tears for my beloved Grover Boy, a chubby, blue/teal/purple Budgie who added more joy and told me how smart birds are, he has ruined me for any other.

Some males do know how to break a heart, but I have learned not to let them be humans.

If I have a relationship that ends, it ends amicably. What does anyone get from the shrill fighting? As I said to one fellow who wanted to go through a laundry list, "Se could play that all day and where would it get anyone? Once those hurtful words are spoken, they will live with you and others for the rest of their lives. You cannot undrink a glass of water.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Knowing how to survey/poll men
[Report this comment]
Posted by: DaBear on Mar 13, 2008 9:31 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But a gender-based "happiness gap" is particularly complicated, given that men tend to see "Are you happy?" as a yes-or-no proposition. For women, it's an essay question.

Um, not the men I know. The guys I know are all writing books about that kind of stuff. It's always an essay question no matter who you talk to, unless you talk to conservative types, then everything is black-white-yes-no, simplistic shit.

Basically if you are getting the male-grunt, you're not asking the question the right way. Most males I know aren't the survey types anyway, I am but that's because I'm one of the 13% of hypo-masculine guys. But do something, yeah an activity, with a guy and you'll start getting your essay question responses and you'll be shocked to find that men generally have the same take as women. It's just that no survey or research group bothers to talk to men in the way we talk, so, they get our grunts.

I was struck by how conventional this piece was in terms of gender stereotypes and the specious support to back up such conclusions. I'm pretty much sick of that kind of crap.

Class was barely eluded to and that has a hell of a lot to do with happiness in human beings. It's tough to be lower class in a ruling class domination-cult society. All of the women in the piece were middle to ruling class types. That also really bothers me. Maybe too middling-owner class men have time to watch TV. We worker class types only watch if it's part of our job description, otherwise, we're too busy cleaning up after the owner's bullshit to have time for TV.

Still it was a good read and I'm glad to read some women's stories at least. My mate says she's unhappy because our culture is a shitstorm of debt, foreclosures and owner class stupidity. For what it's worth, this male (SAHD) thinks pretty much the same thing. Being homeless for a while didn't make anything happier. Our narratives need to become more reflective of the proles rather than the bourgeoise.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
so ozzy osbourne said , " the media says it- and you live the role"
[Report this comment]
Posted by: cherylsass123 on Mar 14, 2008 12:53 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and so, magazines: real simple[ how to look your best! the best facelifts, makeup,etc.]; in style[ 500 best hairdos for you], et all. TV shows with the skinny and "pretty" little dress size 4 woman married to some idiot like "raymond" or that fat dickbrain on 'king of queens'. and yes, don't forget "WHAT NOT TO WEAR" [ why not wear this "age-inappropriate" garment??] the local news [ "coming up exlusively on channel 8 action news- the recently paroled southbury rapist." =FEAR + neighborhood outrage. ] and rachael ray bitching about being "too fat" on her cooking show while cooking fettucine alfredo!
it seems as if both the media and the ads which help pay for all this, have created a culture of the "I want it all woman" ! real simple tells the professional career mother " you can't look good without that $595 ' must have dress' seventeen teaches the young women to be helpless without a boyfriend, mall queens. THE ONLY WOMAN'S MAGAZINE THAT MAKES SENSE SEEMS TO BE MS. MAGAZINE! all the rest seem to just perpetuate the image of the " I gotta have it all woman" [ and macho, powerful man for that matter- as in 'sports illustrated'; 'cars'; ' forbes'; 'fortune 500'; or yes, 'guns and ammo'] ozzy really had a point in his song lyrics, as did marilyn manson when he said "the world spreads its legs for another mother fucking star!" [ of course they too, all got rich and became what they hated, sort of!]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
I think it comes down to those lofty expectations
[Report this comment]
Posted by: John Wilbur on Mar 14, 2008 6:44 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can relate, in some ways, to the Bay Area woman in the article as I was a single dad working as a project manager in a commercial construction company. It was exceptionally hard and I never had the money that this woman appears to have. I certainly couldn’t afford a nanny.

I was almost constantly stressed out and tired. I often felt guilty for being the last to pick up my son from daycare or having to take him into the office on the weekend or throwing something less than wholesome together for dinner.

But I wasn’t miserable or even unhappy. When I decided to fight for custody of my very young son when I divorced I knew it was going to be a tough row to hoe for many years. But I never expected anything else and, for that matter, I never expected my life as a married working person would be any different. That has always been my expectation as a male. You work very, very hard and make the best of it you can and maybe every once in a while you have some fun. I suppose I got that message from my parents and their generation and it was certainly reinforced with the culture in the construction business. Work, work, work. Yes, life can be a bitch.

I put off so many things that I like to do and am pretty good at: music, art, writing, working out, etc. I am by nature a creative person. But these things had to be put on hold until my son was much older – really until he went off to college.

I think girls and women get sold a bill a goods. I’ve got this suspicion that they have this expectation of a life like you see in t.v. commercials – constant joy and excitement and pleasure and feeling good and refreshed and feminine and pretty. I know one woman who told me that when she was a girl she really thought she would grow up to live a life like Marlo Thomas in “That Girl.” I’ve heard many women over the years say “I never thought I’d end up doing this” even when they have good jobs but in less than glamorous industries. Hey, life’s a grind and a hectic grind at that.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I think it comes down to those lofty expectations Posted by: NoKidding
Serotonin
[Report this comment]
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Mar 14, 2008 7:13 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You all left out serotonin, genetics, brain structure, etc.
Happiness is having enough serotonin.
The simplest explanation is the best, like it or not.
So go ahead and get angry at reductionism.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
CommonDreamer
[Report this comment]
Posted by: CommonDreamer on Mar 14, 2008 6:23 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sometimes I wonder exactly what it was that women were liberated "from". Staying at home should be respected also - our values are skewed against "family work" and the importance of teaching, of socialization, etc.

Now we all work for Wall Street barons who dictate our every move - from advertising expensive garbage we don't need to building overpriced and overdone housing we don't need but struggle to buy because that's the only thing out there...they have successfully enslaved Americans to debt - just what they wanted. Where is the work-life balance we should have if we were a sensible society, not a mass of brainwashed consumers and debtors.

Mostly what surprises me is, why are we still hewing to the old system of a 40 hour work week with pitifully small leave times that is a relic of the past when someone stayed home and someone went to work for the most part? Now we all go to work - and frantically spin around and around trying to get everything done. Why are we not doing the more sensible thing of working 32 hours a week - all of us - and having 8 weeks of vacation instead of being scared of using up our measly two weeks? You can hear Wall Street screaming about its profits as I write this probably...but remember, two people are now working outside of the home and that is double the output in the outside world, where once we had singular output of mostly men. So it would be fine to wind it down to something reasonable as you'd still have men and women working.

I think we still have this insane system because Wall Street became our god (especially when conservatives took over) and no one is thinking - they're just wage slaves trying to buy the overpriced American "dream".

This is a system that punishes families and family life - it doesn't support it other than monetarily, and not too well at that - the real support and flexibility is reserved for CEOs - not ordinary workers.

Women have been half shot in the foot by becoming "liberated". As someone once said, "what is it we're working for?". Are we working to make the GNP better - is that our benchmark? We need to change the focus to what's good for families and then perhaps the benefits for women might fall better into place.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Well put, now see its true for people, not just women Posted by: timemachinist
» RE: Well put, now see its true for people, not just women Posted by: CommonDreamer
Vacuum?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: ajmartin on Mar 15, 2008 7:31 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why doesn't the nanny run the vacuum if that is an issue?
Women do tend to worry too much - why not? they make most of the household decisions. We need to relinquish some of the hereditary must dos or must haves and relax a bit.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Erm...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Cruella on Mar 15, 2008 11:31 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When you say this

"So where are we nearly three centuries later? Recalibrate for feminism, which aimed to liberate women from the constricting corsets of sexist roles. Factor in an unprecedented level of education, greater earning power, more economic independence, more reproductive control and access to virtually any career, from CEO to soldier to leader of the free world. In theory, at least, a woman's prospects for happiness have never looked brighter."

You make it sound as though feminism was one of the things that made life easier for women. In fact all the other things you mention were things won for women BY the feminist movement. Credit where credit's due please. And remember no-one ever gave rights to women - we took them. And the second we stop demanding them they will take them away too.

More here.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
The milk cow saw the Ox...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: pangolin on Mar 15, 2008 6:56 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
leaving the barn every day and heading down the road. How sad she was that all she could ever see was the barn and her small pasture while the ox wandered the whole county and even went to town to see wondrous sites and eat of herbs she never yet tasted.

One day the Ox's partner died and the farmer was forced to yoke Milk Cow next to him to get the cartload of grain to town. The taxes were due and the lord was going to take it out of his hide if he was late. At first Milk Cow was entranced by the wonders of the road and the new tastes of roadside herbs that she had never seen.

But coming back from town the cart was heavily loaded, it hailed, and the yoke bit harshly into her back. It was hard getting back to the farm and her complaints were ignored by Ox and the farmer switched her when she bellowed. I will return to my pasture tomorrow and never envy the Ox again she thought.

That night she was still asked to give milk though she had pulled the whole day and the feed was dry hay and grains not pasture. The next morning she was milked again but instead of being led to her pasture Milk Cow was harnessed alongside Ox to do the spring plowing. From that day forth she was required to pull and give milk each day and she suffered from the treatment.

How bitter her life was now for she rarely spent the day in pasture and Ox no longer thought she was mysterios or lovely but merely another sweating, dusty beast like him. He only had eyes for the jerseys in the far pasture all sleek and fat on grass and clover as they plowed.

Beware what you ask for; you just might get it.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» They got it. Posted by: messedup
Can we get the hell out of the Eighties already?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: dseilhan on Mar 15, 2008 7:00 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Because this crap gets trotted out every twenty damn years--read Susan Faludi, she's documented it extensively--and I for one am sick of it.

NO, it is not a bad thing that women can now work for wages. NO, it is not a bad thing that we can vote. NO, it is not a bad thing that we can participate in politics. Why in the world are these even up for question?

Men: Get the hell off your computer and go help your wife with the housework, for God's sake. You want to know why she's miserable? Because forty years ago she would have been doing all your support work for you while you trotted off and conquered the world and now you are not returning the favor.

People are happier when they feel appreciated. Full stop. Why don't you try that for a change. I don't mean flowers and candy. I don't mean opening the damn door for me. I mean quit behaving like a child, expecting women to wipe your butt for you, and start treating the woman in your life LIKE A PARTNER. It wouldn't kill you. Promise.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Another man hater Posted by: timemachinist
» RE: Can we get the hell out of the Eighties already? Posted by: rickiey
For the sake of the economy, let's hope so
[Report this comment]
Posted by: timemachinist on Mar 16, 2008 10:49 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Are modern women miserable? For the sake of the economy, let's hope so --then they can sell more pills!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Back in the 60's
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Minervah on Mar 16, 2008 4:58 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I remember the Women's Movement of the 60's and 70's and in the beginning it was not so much about choices as it was about equality especially in the workplace.
Newspapers used to run their want-ads by listing employment opportunities as "Men's Jobs' and "Women's Jobs" instead of by job description as is done today. No one dared cross the line.
Women, if they could get into med school at all were relegated to become pediatricians or ob-gyns. They could of course become nurses but not hospital administrators.
At the office they could not be CEO's; only secretaries and receptionists. I was trained to be a health claims analyst in a small insurance company but the larger companies would only hire men for this position. Women could be teachers but never principals.
Very few women could reach the level of supervisor though they often were the trainees of the men who became their bosses.
On the other hand, one did not see male flight attendants, nurses or elementary school teachers.
Thankfully this has changed. Having it all meant women could meet their potential and men could have additional choices Jobs are no longer male and female. But what people didn't realize, especially women, that these new opportunities would also bring on other changes such as career vs motherhood or working mom vs stay-at-home-mom.
I don't believe anyone foresaw the problems that would arise from womens' progress in the workplace to their having to take on double roles as wives and mothers.
The idea was to allow men to feel free to become house-husbands but that for the most part did not happen.
The solution is not easy. If women want to be career bound they may have to give up the family they also want. Or they may have to plan their families around this expecting the fact that time off from the workplace will put them behind those who stayed on.
Men on the other hand have to take on more of their share of housekeeping and child rearing.
Women got the improvements they wanted and rightly so but there is the yin and yang to everything. There has to be more compromise between husbands and wives to ensure both are happy and neither one is carrying a larger burden the other.
For myself I chose to be single (after 10 years if marriage) and childfree. I am happy. My choice. To those who would criticize me for my choice and there have been many over the years I can only say doing what I wanted to do has made me a happy woman today.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Back in the 60's Posted by: CommonDreamer
What women need to be happy...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: georgiethetroll on Mar 16, 2008 9:15 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...is a MAN. You ladies need to stop pretending that you don't need a man to make you happy! You're too proud to admit it, but the fact is, you would all be MUCH HAPPIER if we could take those choices away from you and return you to your natural place in life. Women aren't happy because they're not doing what they were meant to do in life and it is making them miserable. Women have a built-in need to nurture. They also have a built-in need to be led by a man who is their head. Women these days need to get off their "independence streak" and just realize they were happier with th traditional ways.

Of course it's not all the fault of women and femminists. In fact I blame men more for all of this, because they need to control their women better. If men weren't such sissies these days and could better control their women by physical (not abuse, I would NEVER advocate hitting a woman, just like restraining or spanking her when she's acting up) means or psychological ones and put the girls in their place, we wouldn't be in this mess.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Yah sure they do.. Posted by: messedup
This one paragraph sums it up:
[Report this comment]
Posted by: rickiey on Mar 17, 2008 7:55 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Women, on the other hand, spend more time with family and friends but find it more stressful than men do. (Of course, such time often involves child or elder care, or hostessing, and could rightfully be categorized as work as well.)

Exactly. As a male, when I'm at home "doing child care", I consider that my reward for working my ass at work all day. Women regard it as "another chore".

I like spending time with my children, even if that time is spent cleaning their rooms as a team.

If you regard "caring for your child" as a chore, you really shouldn't HAVE any in the first place.

Too many women have children for the "status symbol of being a mother".

And before any of you women launch into your "you think that because you haven't..." vitriolic rants, you should know that other than the physical childbirth itself, yes, I have done that, and while tiresome at times, it still isn't a "chore".
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Caring for children Posted by: BlueTigress
» RE: Caring for children Posted by: rickiey
Choices & all that
[Report this comment]
Posted by: BlueTigress on Mar 18, 2008 9:32 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The salad dressing analogy kind of had me giggling because my favorite bottled salad dressing has been discontinued by Seven Seas except in the horrible reduced-calorie format, so it doesn't matter that there are 75 dressings on the shelf, the one I want to choose is not there.

With the housecleaning issue, by and large men do not do housework. They will occasionally do something, but they expect lavish praise for doing so.

The cult of Martha Stewart is total bullshit. I could do what she does if I had her budget and army of assistants.

Same thing with movie stars. Yes, I could look like ___________ if I had a stylist and a hairdresser and a makeup artist and a trainer and flattering lighting and looking good was high up on my job duties.

To a certain degree ladies, we just have to say fuck that and decide what's really important.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Choices & all that Posted by: rickiey
luzyrea
[Report this comment]
Posted by: luzyrea on Mar 18, 2008 10:25 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Try it.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Reproductive Justice? or another way of making us feel guilty?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: itsamiracle on Mar 31, 2008 5:24 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps it would be better to accept that whilst material goods and 'equality' have not made us happier - neither have they 'caused' our unhappiness. Our unhappiness comes from the same 'source' that unhappiness has always come from and is part of the 'human condition' and applies equally to both men and women as a result of a deep sense of, unnecessary but unfortunately unavoidable, guilt.

Happiness comes from realising that there really is nothing 'out there' that will make us feel truly happy - but since time began human beings have striven (?) to achieve 'happiness/contentment' by acquiring/achieving things both physical and emotional.

When we truly realise that our peace/happiness comes from within, we will no longer regard so called achievements like 'success', equality, material wealth etc as 'salvation' - that doesn't mean that our lives will change on the level of 'form' so the good news is we can still 'enjoy' the benefits of our lives, but all the while knowing that our happiness, peace/'success' comes from quite another 'source', ie from the love within. Likewise if our lives appear to 'lack' success as the world defines it, once we release our dependence on these artificial 'fixes', then we need no longer look to the 'world outside' for confirmation that we're 'successfull/happy' - we can make that choice for ourselves.

In many ways I see the discussion over whether women have ruined it for themselves for 'wanting it all' as just another 'ploy' to keep us feeling that we don't deserve 'it all' - to feed our 'guilt' - that for us to want 'it all' is just too greedy. However, we really can have it 'all' - both men and women - if we accept that 'it all' is not success as the world defines it, but a confidence that there is absolutely NOTHING 'out there' that will satisfy us in the way we have always 'striven' - but that peace that can only come from within regardless of our situation in the world.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Also in Reproductive Justice and Gender
After Layoffs, Couples Wrestle With Role Reversal
Adrienne Gibbs
Forget Pepper Spray: Indian Women Use Martial Arts to Protect Themselves
Lesley D. Biswas
Orgasmic Birth: The Natural Reality Behind the Hype
Lee Stranahan
Bristol Palin Says to Teens: Don't Get Pregnant
Jodi Jacobson
Big Booty Beauty and the New Sexual Aesthetic
Myra Mendible
Woman Asks for Rights, Gets Acid Thrown on Face
Apostolis Fotiadis

Reproduction of material from any AlterNet pages without written permission is strictly prohibited.
© 2009 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.

Readings 405