Before I get into my rant, I want to mention that the thing I find admirable about Ann Romney is the work she has done with at risk kids. People don’t realize how important it is to work with these kids, providing a good role model, just being there for them. It’s nice to be a socialite. It’s nice to shop. It’s great to be a patron of the arts, but you get big points in my book when you work with kids who truly need help.
First things first, I don’t give a rip about Ann Romney raising five perfect kids as a stay at home mom. Of my generation, I know of three stay at home moms. Two are now divorced. Their children are a mixed bag of success and problems. I have a friend who has worked the entire time her daughter was growing up, out of necessity. She has raised one of the most incredible people I know. I have another friend who has spent twenty years sacrificing for her son and daughter. The son was one of the first special ops heroes to go into Afghanistan after 9/11 (you know the guys on the horses). Her daughter is a serpent’s tooth.
Once you reach a certain point in life, whether a parent stays at home or not takes a back seat to the person their child has become. Only someone who is a total fool or a vindictive jerk would blame a “child’s” success or failure on a normal home. People are people. Some kids who are raised in the worst environment turn out to be amazing people. Some preacher’s kids with full time moms end up as the worst human beings imaginable.
My mother and I almost had a shouting match over this on Saturday evening. She looks at life one way, I look at it the other. We did both come to the came conclusion that this whole storyline is a joke. It is being used to promote and manipulate a candidate who is personality-free and incapable of bonding with the American voter. In order to try and get sympathy he is using his wife. I think that annoys me most, the way he is using his wife to make up for his inequalities.
As for stay at home moms verses working moms, I really don’t care. It’s a horrible, miserable, thankless job. I don’t see which version works the hardest. I think they both do. I also know working moms are sensitive about having to work, thinking, quite often, that stay at home moms put them down. I also know that stay at home moms are hyper sensitive, quite often, thinking working moms put them down.
It’s a chick thing. It’s smart for men, who don’t comprehend the sensitivities of women, to butt out, and let the cat fight simmer down a little. Anyone who doesn’t think it is a chick thing, doesn’t know women very well. We’re always hyper-sensitive about something. It is a never ending war that is never going to be solved. So, guys, butt out and quit trying to put male logic into it.
The only way the Mommy Wars can be won by the right is to stop pandering to Mitt Romney and realize that FOX is in the tank for him. The Pink Flamingo is currently seeing red. Roger Ailes thinks Sarah Palin is an idiot and stupid. You’d never know it the way they are bring in one expert after another, to prop up Mitt Romney and keep the “base” riled up to make Romney more sympathetic.
We have been duped and manipulated by FOX. We’ve been sold a losing candidate. Our emotions have been toyed with. We’ve been fed a steady diet of half-truths and manipulations, from the master, Roger Ailes.
The master manipulator and ego has stated that the GOP cannot produce a POTUS without his approval and his help. It’s time to pull the plug and change the channel. We can thank the new Mommy War on Ailes and his manipulations. This time, he’s over-played his hand. This time, he’s doing serious damage to the GOP>
This is NOT about women. It isn’t about working moms, stay at home moms, or the culture war. This is about trying to make the Romneys look normal, sympathetic, and likeable. You can only do so much with a potential nominee who is more like an Alien Pod Person from Outer Space, than a real flesh and blood human being. It is about tying to make the nominee designate and appear to be human. In doing so, they are insulting more women than they can possibly comprehend.
Let’s look at the stats. In doing so, we’re going to need to tip a few FOX Sacred Cows. Seems like they are hoisting themselves on their own petard. The statistical demographic they are most trying to attract, stay at home moms, are more likely to be Hispanic immigrants. Oopsie… those are just the women FOX, Roger Ailes, and those in the far right, who are now defending Ann Romney from evil liberals, most want to deport, and most want to hate.
“… A new report released by the U.S. Census Bureau finds that the 5.6 million stay-at-home mothers in 2007 were younger and more likely to be Hispanic and foreign-born than mothers who were in the labor force. Nearly one-fourth of all married-couple families in the U.S. had a stay-at-home mother.
The term “stay-at-home” is used to describe the father or mother in a family who stays home to care for the children while the other spouse is in the labor force.
“This report represents the first time the Census Bureau has done this type of analysis of stay-at-home moms,” said Rose Kreider, family demographer with the U.S. Census Bureau. “It not only provides a snapshot of today’s stay-at-home mothers, it also allows us to study trends in basic household and family composition.”
The report, America’s Families and Living Arrangements: 2007 [PDF], also shows that the number of people living alone has risen from 17 percent in 1970 to 27 percent in 2007, and the average household size has declined from 3.1 people in 1970 to 2.6.
Stay-at-home mothers were younger than other mothers — 44 percent were under age 35, compared with 38 percent of mothers in the labor force.
More than one-quarter (27 percent) of stay-at-home mothers were Hispanic, compared with 16 percent of the other mothers. Stay-at-home mothers were less likely than mothers in the labor force to be non-Hispanic white (60 percent of stay-at-home moms compared with 69 percent in the labor force) or black (4 percent compared with 9 percent).
About one third (34 percent) of stay-at-home mothers were foreign-born, while less than one-fifth (19 percent) of the other mothers were foreign-born.
A higher percentage of the stay-at-home mothers had an infant in the household — 28 percent — compared with 21 percent of other mothers. Fifty-seven percent of stay-at-home mothers had a preschool age child (under 5), compared with 43 percent of mothers in the labor force….”
What happens when you insult over half the working mothers in the country?
“...Recently, much interest has focused on married couples with children and a “stay-at-home” parent. This term typically describes a family where the father or mother stays home to care for the children while the other spouse is employed. For this report, stay-at-home mothers are those who have a husband who was in the labor force all 52 weeks last year, while she was out of the labor force during the same 52 weeks to care for the home and family. The characteristics of these women are compared with those of other mothers in married-couple family groups with children under 15. This comparison group of other mothers includes those who were in the labor force at least 1 week.
in the last year, had husbands who were out of the labor force at least 1 week last year, or did not report the primary reason they were out of the labor force as “to care for home and family.” In this report, estimates of the number of stay-at-home moth- ers and fathers caring for children under 15 are based not on the parents’ activities as child care providers but rather on the basis of their responses to the primary reason why they were not in the labor force during the previous 52 weeks. The labor-force-based measure is an item asked on the CPS ASEC and allows consistent measures of stay-at-home parent families over time.17 Census Bureau estimates are shown for married- couple family groups with own children under 15.
Journalists and academics alike have debated the existence of an “opt-out revolution,” or highly educated, high-earning mothers leaving the labor force to raise their children.18 Rather than engag ing in this debate, this section provides basic characteristics of stay-at-home mothers compared with other married mothers with children under 15. Table 4 pro- vides a snapshot of the age, race and ethnicity, educational attainment, nativity, and family income for stay-at-home and non-stay-at- home mothers. In 2007, 24 million married-couple family groups included children under 15 years old. …”
This is getting to be very old, very fast. In fact, I think I could puke with this one.
One does wonder if the usual sources who jumped to Ann Romney’s defense would be singing a different tune if they realized they were defending Hispanic immigrants? Somehow, I don’t think so, then again, this bunch has never been known for its intellectual honesty. They will simply blame the stats on Obama. That’s fine, but the information was produced in 2007. Oh, wait, GWB liked Hispanics, so that taints the study, right?
“…“He thinks things are going in a bad direction,” another Republican close to Ailes told me. “Roger is worried about the future of the country. He thinks the election of Obama is a disaster. He thinks Palin is an idiot. He thinks she’s stupid. He helped boost her up. People like Sarah Palin haven’t elevated the conservative movement.”
In the aftermath of the Tucson rampage, the national mood seemed to pivot. Ailes recognized that a Fox brand defined by Palin could be politically vulnerable. Two days after the shooting, he gave an interview to Russell Simmons and told him both sides needed to lower the temperature. “I told all of our guys, ‘Shut up, tone it down, make your argument intellectually.’ ”
I do get very angry. Case in point:
The Pink Flamingo doesn’t know where to begin with all of this mess. I’m sick of it. As a woman, I am so insulted, don’t ever expect me to watch FOX news again, or even consider voting for Mitt Romney. I’m also very much out of sorts with all the self-righteous, holier than thou mommy track women who think they are better than other women because they stay at home and have kids.
Take Bookroom review, please. I’m sorry, but this kind of thing is insulting. It isn’t the fact that she is staying at home with her kids – I agree. It’s the fact that she thinks she’ s better than other women because she has been so blessed.
“...For the last many years, I have been the single most important influence on my children. Yes, they go to school (public school, yet); and yes, they both have thriving social lives; and yes, I’ve been unable to insulate them from a Leftist pop culture that is hostile to traditional norms and to conservatives generally, but I’m still the most important person. Of all the influences in their lives, I am the one who is most present, most consistent, and most trusted. I’m sure they’ll pull away as they get older, and they may even rebel, but I’ll still be that little voice in their brain, imparting facts, values, and analyses.
I am the counterweight to the state. Therefore, I am dangerous. I am subversive simply by existing. My love for my children is a dominant force that works its way into their psyches and that trumps the state-run schools and the state complicit media world. Some mothers, of course, are entirely in sync with schools and media. They happily reinforce the statist message. But those of us who don’t are a powerful anti-statist force and we must be challenged.
The Left’s problem with Ann Romney transcends her husband’s wealth, her (and his) Republican identification, and her decision to work for her children, rather than for a paying employer. The Left’s problem with Ann Romney is that she represents the triumph of the individual. No wonder they hate her so much….”
It’s like this, sister, it’s not a left/right thing. I’m as conservative as you are, and I’m not married. I don’t have children and I don’t want them. I don’t consider myself better than you are, but I’m sick and tired of being put down by the likes of you. I’ve had it.
If you think this is about Sarah Palin or Ann Romney, you are delusional. It’s about a group of women who treat women like me as dirt. They don’t like single women. We are ostracized. There is no social life, no invitations, no going out with friends, and don’t even think about associating with couples. You’re not wanted.
Try a few of these comments:
You may think this thing is funny, but I don’t.
Or this piece of dribble from FOX.
“…What Hilary Rosen has exposed is a psychological fault line that separates those women who simply oppose unfair gender-based barriers in education or employment or elsewhere from other women who actually despise and disrespect those females who choose to be full-time wives and mothers, instead of entering the workforce.
These “anti-gender” women have it in for anyone who embraces her femininity, maternal instincts and capacity to nurture as their highest priority — postponing or passing up other laudable opportunities to work at, say, a law firm or as a marketing executive. They despise the notion that some women may indeed be drawn — instinctively and happily — toward creating special and loving environments in which to raise their children, while spending all their available time sustaining and enriching those environments and those children. …”
Dr. Keith Ablow is a fool. I know a very unfeminine bisexual woman who had six children and was a stay at home mom until her family was grown. How does he explain that one?
Matt Lewis has put it best.
Just because a woman is single, has no children, and doesn’t want them is not proof she is a liberal. I’ve been damned as such these past few days simply because of demographics. Because a woman is a stay at home mom is no proof she is conservative. Conservatives do not have a corner on material outrage and caring for children. Not all liberal women work. This fake outrage is disgusting. It is hurting the GOP.
Let’s face it, this is another fine mess the Murdoch empire has managed to get the GOP into.