Yale Women: Don't necessarily want to stay at home
I read this article a while back in the NY Times. The usual drivel about how tons of women want to stay at home and how this is a very pragmatic stance, much more so than the notion that women could have equal careers as man that pervaded the 70s. Buried deep on the third page of the article is a metion of the structural barriers for women:
Where did all of these future stay-at-home Yalies come from? According to an intern over at FishBowl, some of those quotes may have been taken out of context. Here's an excerpt from one of the undergrads heavily quoted in the article:
"They are still thinking of this as a private issue; they're accepting it," said Laura Wexler, a professor of American studies and women's and gender studies at Yale. "Women have been given full-time working career opportunities and encouragement with no social changes to support it. "I really believed 25 years ago," Dr. Wexler added, "that this would be solved by now."
Where did all of these future stay-at-home Yalies come from? According to an intern over at FishBowl, some of those quotes may have been taken out of context. Here's an excerpt from one of the undergrads heavily quoted in the article:
It saddens me that I am portrayed as an insensitive and unambitious person in the article, and really did not know that Louise was only going to quote those of us who wanted to stay at home if/when we had kids. She in fact did interview my other suitemates who answered the survey as either not wanting to have children at all, or would continue working as a mother. I am somewhat shocked that she did not include ANY of their ideas or views in the article.
4 Comments:
I'm kind of torn about that last quote from the undergrad. Intellectually, I know that Louise Story, not the undergrad, is the real villain here, but at the same time I'm like, "What the hell are you doing saying stupid shit like that to the New York Times in the first place?"
It sounds like this woman -- whom I assume is the Angie Ku of "I heart the status quo" fame -- has gotten beat down by her peers over the last few days because of what she said. Maybe it's my own desire to scapegoat the easiest target, but I can't help being glad that people are calling Ku on her bullshit.
I'm surprised that everyone doesn't find articles that profile students at America's 'elite' schools so unbearably irritating that they can't possibly read past the first lines. The number of pieces in the new york times over the last four or five years profiling hijinks and musings of Yale and Harvard kiddies is mind-boggling. Beware MC and Miriam, actually reading these articles will lead you down a dark path of constant annoyance. (In defense of Yalies though, reading articles updating me on the current trends of ASU kids would probably irritate me too - but their friends aren't hired by the NY Times I guess).
i do have to laugh at how much shit that girl probably got. but you're right, if i was interviewed over SEVERAL MONTHS by a Times reporter, I certainly wouldn't let phrases like "status quo" slip out. Unless, of course, she was one of my Yale alumni pals.
hooray for Dr. Wexler! she was my creative writing teacher at UGA. good to hear from her once again.
cheers,
scotttt
Post a Comment
<< Home