Mon 16 Nov 2009
Make My Man Happy
Posted by David under Mika Brzezinski '89 at 10:23 am
Don’t want to talk about Bernard Moore anymore? Fine. Let’s talk about Mika Brzezinski ‘89. (Previous discussion here.)
For years, feminists have been insisting that we women could have it all. But since diapers, bras and babies have been seen as symbols of oppression from the Old World run by the likes of Don Draper, there hasn’t been enough written about women like me who want to work like hell, rise to the top of my profession, and then rush home to be with the kids and also work to make my husband happy and build his life.
For me, having it all doesn’t mean having the corner office at work and a penthouse at home if there aren’t kids running around as I’m trying to cook my husband something special.
For those who still want to take off their bras and burn them, so be it. But I’d rather find one to wear that is pretty. And when it comes off, its not because it’s being thrown into the fireplace.
Can you imagine what the reaction would have been if I (or some other non-liberal man) had written this as advice to female Williams students?
But I am speaking to the women who DO want to have a family and consider a lifelong relationship valuable, rather than a badge of weakness or a sign that she missed the boat on the women’s rights movement.
I am not afraid to say my relationship with my man is important, even vital, to who I am as a person.
A woman shouldn’t feel the need to shy away from wanting to build a world around a man she loves and do whatever she can to make him happy and whole –as he should for her.
The Record ought to do a story on this topic and interview Williams faculty. Would a single one agree with Mika? Interviewing women in Mika’s class (like my wife, also ‘89) would be interesting as well. My comments are the same as they were before.
Brzezinski is exactly right. I have never met an Eph woman who reports that she had kids too soon. I have met Eph women who had kids at the right time. There are many Eph women who regret having waited too long. I suspect that Brzezinski’s has many female Eph friends in that category.
Needless to say, the marriage and childbearing decisions of Ephs would make for a great senior thesis. When do Ephs get married? When do they have children? What do they, decades later, say about those choices?
Does Brzezinsk believe what she is saying or has she determined that defending “traditional” female dreams is a brilliant book-promotion strategy? Both, I think.
Read the whole thing.
Print • Email| « The Houses of Williamstown: Sigma Phi … | Photos of Homecoming » |
28 Responses to “Make My Man Happy”
Leave a Reply
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post
If a comment you submitted does not show up, please email us at eph at ephblog dot com. Please note that commenters are required to use a valid email address when submitting comments.
Ronit says:
And we go from race-baiting to gender-baiting!
Ken Thomas '93 says:
Brzesinski’s particular way of framing the issue seems a bit odd and might be used as interpretive exercise in itself, as well as in language– not to mention as a exercise in American fantasy and compulsion.
We might start with the fact that “my man/woman” literally, in many languages, is used to express what “my husband” means in English.
Ken Thomas '93 says:
Also, with all respect to Ms. Brzesinski, whose commentary I’ve admired at several points, the concept embodied in “rise to the top of my profession,” male or female, also seems a point where one should think and inquire.
Nebo potrebuje Pani Brzesinki… I wonder if she saw the cover of Suddeutscher Zeitung, about Warschau, this weekend? Probably not.
rory says:
@Ronit: it’s the circle of ephblog!
From the day we arrive on ephblog
And blinking, step into the comments
There’s more to type than can ever be proven
More to argue than can ever be claimed
There’s far too much to anger in here
More to troll than can ever be trolled
But the posts rolling high
Through the interweb tubes
Keeps great and small on the endless refresh
It’s the Circle of Ephblog
And it annoys us all
Through gender and race
Through accusations and anonymity
Till we find our place
Far behind Swarthmore
In the Circle
The Circle of Ephblog
Ronit says:
@rory: Well done. Yes, gender and race, and sometimes class. Not too long ago we had a nice discussion about low-income students and their low IQs and propensity to crime. We are scheduled to return to putting down the lower classes later this week.
kthomas says:
@Ronit: What? Later this week? My schedule said that was on the evening broadcast!!!
1980 says:
Rory that’s great stuff.
David says:
Those thinking of working on Rory’s version of the EphBlog theme song — something that we desperately need! — should consider the original song and lyrics.
Exercise for our readers: Assign each character in The Lion King to an EphBlog regular.
Andy says:
David, you are again trying to create a controversy where there exists none. Brzezinski is saying that the goals of feminism do not conflict with having a family and developing a happy relationship with one’s partner. Most feminists would not disagree. Where’s the controversy in that?
Kim Daboo '88 says:
If her husband feels the same way, I can’t quibble.
Kirsten says:
What Kim said.
David says:
Odds of that? I would guess 1 in 100. What would other readers guess? Men, including husbands, think differently from women and, typically, emphasize a different set of roles and responsibilities.
The main controversial point raised by Brzezinski’s advice is that it is gender specific. She is not giving advice to young men. She is giving advice that she feels applies to young women who want families, not to young men who want families.
Why? My guess is that Brzezinski is smart enough to know that men and women face very different realities when it comes to marriage and families, and that this is all the more true when it comes to the college-educated, Huffingtonpost-reading, upper-income readers of these two columns. (And I wonder if Andy has actually read them.) She knows that a 42 year-old successful male has a variety of options when it comes to marriage/family, very different — for reasons of biology and society — then the options faced by Brzezinski’s female peers. And that dichotomy, true as it is, creates consternation among her Huffingtonpost readership.
What is also clear is that Brzezinski’s description of her marriage — her notion of her roles and responsibilities — is quite different, I’ll bet, from what her husband would say. Does Brzezinski talk about providing for her family, for protecting them? No. But I bet that such concerns are high on the list of her husband.
rory says:
hey look, another post in which david tells women what they should think about advice given by a woman for women!
jeffz says:
David right. Me hunt for meat. Me hit other men with rocks on head. Me not worry about being 65 when playing catch with first child. Me spread seed make more Zeemans.
David says:
Jeff: So, in your experience, there are no differences between men and women, on average, in how they think about sex, relationships, marriage, children and families?
What a unique circle of friends and acquaintances you must have!
PTC says:
I hereby declare that we should stop buying French Wine to save Darfur…
I mean really fellas, does that post seem all that bad after these last couple of days? We could have at least talked about France, Chad, and the Sudan… but no!
David says:
Still seems bad. You need to tie your rants into Eph-specific hooks. If you can find Eph opining on the topic, go for it. But EphBlog is not a location for any old topic you (or I!)) want to blog about.
rory says:
@David: me too busy to explain. must protect children. care not for emotional growth. want younger woman with bigger boobs. more fertile. healthy. Wine for women. me want grog.
Jay says:
This is an interesting statement:
Imagine an Eph woman did feel that way – that she had kids too soon and really regrets it. Would she report that fact, risking the condemnation that comes with such thoughts?
Most people probably wouldn’t admit that to themselves, much less to others!
Of course you always hope the people who have kids are truly glad they did, but do you really think that’s always the case?
Ken Thomas '93 says:
Hmm. Mmm. Hrrr. Mmmm. Phmmmph.
I walked down to the bathrooms on the floor below after glancing at the previous two posts (#s 12 & 13).
There is a male section to the left and a female section to the right. I am constantly reminded that whatever this means, it is not exactly what it means in the US.
I looked to the right to see an older couple, in their sixties or so, in the female section. I doubt anyone else saw this as remarkable, in any way.
After doing what I gone to that section of the building to do, I exited the section with the stalls and walked into the room with the sink. I tried not to listen too hard to their conversation– and if I don’t listen hard, I don’t catch more than a few words– essentially the man had the equivalent of overalls on.
Maybe they don’t come to the theatre much. And evidently– in such a situation, one obeys the gender signs for the washing of hands.
I hesitate to try to describe gender differentiation for anything else, as I would probably get that even more wrong.
David writes:
As a generalization, this may be true. In the United States, within some mileau, this may apply in the way David seems to mean– again, within certain mileau. (Though– there are questions of empirical measurement– try a Sunday morning’s walk, in London, Brussels, Cologne, Berlin, New York, Warsaw–)
But– well– I think I would need some pictures– of the first young man who almost ran into me in London, around a corner one morning, with his daughter– of all the young men, across this continent, traveling to work with their children in a trolley behind their bicycle, or in a pouch in front of them on the train–
and actually, I just have to look up to see a few children, (though most are on their way to bed).
I can’t really speak much about Mika’s personal life, as I don’t know much about it and she hasn’t made that much of it public– and I don’t know enough.
However, I believe I can actually speak a little for the five hundred million people of the European Union, in saying that we quite the “Old World” in the sense she seems to imply, and that the values of the United States seem increasingly backwards and bizarre and simply out of tune, to us.
Men and women, black and white, people from the northern villages and people from the southern villages– of course, we will always see things a little differently. But men, who do not see childrearing, and family, as their duty and responsibility? And this so-called war of the sexes?
This seems an American problem. We do have some problems understanding your culture. Some among us– do have questions about the appropriateness of women in the kitchen– but largely that is a locality to locality issue and matter of local custom.
But a man who is not connected to raising his children? Who cannot cook a good stew for his family, as winter’s cold arrives? Who does not love and cherish and protect his partner and family, before everything else in the world? That seems very emasculated and backwards and isolated and strange to us, indeed.
Dick Swart says:
This just in …
http://1956ephs.blogspot.com/2009/11/zeeman-rory-dudes.html
bfleming says:
I have no idea what’s going on here. Brzezinski writes this retrograde and moderately insulting article, and then follows it up with a mixed bag of alterations, pulling out bullshit stereotyped imagery (bra burning) and asinine claims (“there hasn’t been enough written about women like me”). Someone must have backed her off the assertion from the first article that being a mommy was the best thing in any woman’s life; now she’s hedging that by discussing “the very thing many women I know find most rewarding (having kids)” (emphasis added). Eventually, the second article boils down to these not-at-all trite pearls: “So if you want it all, go for it all. This 42 year old will tell you that life is too short. Get to work chasing all of your dreams.” This is unoffensive pablum; it’s also not what she was saying a week ago.
David correctly identifies this set of articles as “controversial.” He points out that people might be flipping out if a dude had told women to concentrate on being “mommies” — Ronit, who’s in a snit about the Moore stuff, calls this gender-baiting. David also wonders whether Brzezinski actually believes this stuff or just thinks it’s a good way to sell books. It’s a great question — did she compose this offensive speech for college-aged women before or after she decided to write a book targeted at the mass market? I guess it depends how cynical one wants to be. Finally, David points out — rightly again — that Brzezinski’s advice is gendered, and tries to explain why she might have done that. This prompts Jeff and Rory to break out in an inexplicable bout of caveman talk. Brzezinski is the one addressing this family planning advice only to women, as if they were solely in charge of this area. Do the caveman voice to her if you want to act out.
The least offensive part of Brzezinski’s articles is the one we mostly buy: “There is no perfect time.” That’s the minimum point of agreement. Some people also buy that elite women, as a group, wait too long to have kids; David says he knows a lot of people who agree with that sentiment. Fine, whatever. I don’t think it tracks for a bunch of reasons, or that “feminists” really have anything to do with it, but hey, I could be wrong. I happen to think Brzezinski then goes into a bunch of areas where she’s completely wrong, and I’d be happy to discuss those areas with anyone. But the conversation to this point is almost entirely unfair.
PTC says:
Ben- Well, she seems to be in some kind of transition. She does not write as if she really believes much of any of what she is writing in the passionate and rigid way in which she is expressing some of these sentiments… more like a person trying to figure something out, and speaking out loud, then adjusting as she grows and contemplates more, Strange, I agree. I doubt it is really her opinion as much as an exploration… to be honest.
rory says:
ben–this time, david focused his bullshit pop evolutionary psychology theories on men: “Odds of that? I would guess 1 in 100.” in particular. so we made fun of him.
if we weren’t having fun, we’d be crying. and that’s not manly–so jokes instead.
David says:
I agree that few people who have kids would want to admit that they should not have had kids. But, in my experience, people are willing to discuss the timings of childbirth with a fair amount of honesty and objectivity. There is no social stigma attached to something like: “I wish that we had had Johny Jr. when we were still in our twenties.”
aparent says:
(Off-topic, I realize …
PTC: Have you seen post #17 at “Speak Up!”?)
Jay says:
@David:
No, but there is a stigma to say the opposite – “I wish that we hadn’t had Johny Jr. when we were still in our twenties, because I had so much I really wanted to do with my life that I couldn’t with a child. I squandered my youth!” Most people would never admit to such a regret, so of course people will typically say they had kids at the “right” time.
kthomas says:
@Jay: Now that you put it that way– I know plenty of women who say exactly that. Most of them did not go to Williams, but that may be likely because most women who went to Williams, do not get married and have children in their 20s.