Work-Life Balance as a Men's Issue, Too

[4th law of robotics]

I had dinner recently with a group of Princeton undergraduates. The student who introduced me announced that I would be prepared to talk about anything that was on their minds: the presidential debates, foreign policy, work and family. A number of students asked foreign policy questions, and then a young woman asked me about the responses I have received to my Atlantic cover story from this past summer, "Why Women Still Can't Have It All." I answered, and several other young women followed up. After ten minutes or so, I saw that the roughly 50 percent guys in the room had gone completely silent. When I commented on the suddenly one-sided nature of the conversation, one young man volunteered that he "had been raised in a strong feminist household" and considered himself to be fully supportive of male-female equality, but he was reluctant to say anything for fear he would be misunderstood. A number of the other guys around the table nodded in agreement.

That male silence is widespread, at least in public. Roughly 15 to 20 percent of the responses to my article that I have personally received have been from men. Many are from fathers who are very unhappy with the choices their daughters face. Others are from young men who want to be able to spend more time with their children and be fully equal parenting partners with their working wives but feel they don't have those options either. Indeed, a number of men have written to bemoan the strong gender stereotyping that they encounter, whereby a guy who wants to take paternity leave, flex-time, defer a promotion because the job up has too much travel, or simply needs to leave at 6 every night to pick up his kid from daycare, is regarded as insufficiently committed to his work or else just "not one of the guys." As Joan Williams and I wrote in a Labor Day op-ed for the San Francisco Chronicle, men are beginning to sue over this type of gender discrimination. Another man, a former member of the Special Forces, wrote me asking if my husband would write about his experience over the course of our marriage, to "prove that he is both a caregiver and an alpha male." I am more convinced than ever that the only way to make the kind of change we need to allow workers to build, provide, and care for strong families is to change conditions and cultural mores for men as well as women. But men have to join the conversation—publicly, candidly, and loudly.

A few men have ventured forth to have their say; their contributions have been illuminating. Just last week Ken Gordon wrote a great piece asking why he is not identified as a "working dad," even though he works from 5 a.m. until 10 p.m. juggling the responsibilities of parenthood and work in the same way his wife does. He sees the label "working mom" and he says, rightly, that working dads deserve the same recognition. I found his position fascinating because I have been mulling from a different perspective why we don't talk about "working fathers" the way we talk about "working mothers." As I see it, we need the adjective "working" when we talk about mothers because our deep assumption is still that "mothers" are in the home. If they are not in the home we need a special adjective to make that clear. Conversely, as Gordon recognizes, "fathers" are by definition in the workplace, so adding "working" would be superfluous.

This difference is just one example of the many ways our language still reinforces traditional stereotypes and sends negative messages, something I am exploring in the book I am writing. But it never occurred to me that from a working father's perspective, "working mother" now connotes being both a breadwinner and a caregiver. It's a dual status that, in Gordon's words, equals a "master of multi-tasking," a "kind of real-life superhero." Many women would question whether "working mother" is always seen as a badge of honor, but the upshot is that we can both agree that we should all start talking about "working fathers" as well as "working mothers." That shift would at one stroke take a big step toward defining work-family issues as a social and economic issue rather than a "women's issue." As Jena McGregor wrote in the Washington Post last week, 60 percent of fathers reported feeling work-family conflict in 2008, yet politicians seem to notice these issues only when they are trying to woo women voters.

http://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2012/10/work-life-balance-as-a-mens-issue-too/264273/


The "why can't women have it all" articles that are churned out daily all sit atop the same basic assumption: that men do have it all.

Men can have great careers, and the family life they want, and the free time to pursue hobbies and have friendships. A great work life and a great personal life. Ah the benefits of that Y chromosome are endless.


Why, in 2012, then can women still not enjoy those same privileges? Simply put: because it's impossible. Because men have never had those things. Men have exactly the same number of hours per day as women and significantly less time in general since we get to die younger (privilege!). We have always had to choose how to balance career and personal life with the inevitable result that one suffers to benefit the other. This is nothing new. The main difference is that we were expected to deal with it privately and shut up about our problems ("you want to spend more time with your kids? Boo hoo, suck it up or you're fired&quot

This would have been obvious if those people writing such articles and lamenting the plight of women in this regard had ever bothered to ask men about this rather than simply assuming.

[lumberjack_jeff]

1. The money quote

I have been mulling from a different perspective why we don't talk about "working fathers" the way we talk about "working mothers." As I see it, we need the adjective "working" when we talk about mothers because our deep assumption is still that "mothers" are in the home. If they are not in the home we need a special adjective to make that clear. Conversely, as Gordon recognizes, "fathers" are by definition in the workplace, so adding "working" would be superfluous.

Men can't afford the luxury of work life balance because their family is dependent on his work. Once you pile the wellbeing of those that depend on him onto the side of the scale labeled "work", the choice is plain. Men who choose wrong are selfish.

At least that is the prevailing attitude and family paradigm.

[4th law of robotics]

2. One of the many perks of being male in the patriarchy

You exist to serve others. Your feelings are always expected to come second to the interests others.

All this male privilege really is unfair. We should share it.

[Bonobo]

3. I know MANY men that are forced to work away from their families.

They have to live in separate cities where there are jobs to provide. They toil for their families with little of the daily joys that family bring. Their children grow estranged from them and they become strangers to the family.

And society tries to pretend that men don't have the same feelings as women vis a vis family -that somehow this estrangement is what they want as opposed to what they HAVE to do?

This is reflective of the subtle and not so subtle demonization or dehumanization of men that is a fabric of our society.