Re: "Family values"

["Margaret M Gullette" <mgullette@xxxxxxx>]

The left is going to have to think differently about "family values"
if it turns out, as I believe, that (North American) capitalism has
little interest in doing anything on behalf of children (certainly
not providing day care or making it easier to bear and raise them).
This might be because there are too many people for the economy to
support, or because getting maximum work out of women means no
leave-taking from the workforce, let alone permitting men to make job
"sacrifices" to help raise their own children.

        Katha's data projection:  " I read somewhere than 20 percent
of women of childbearing-age are not going to have children."
        As of 1996, 83% of women up to age 45, had at least one
child.
        Many who are younger are going to have them later than in
previous cohorts, if at all.
        This is scarcely a situation of free "choice."
        Capitalism will treat the "no child" or "one child" or "fewer
children" pattern as if it were an option or a free decision. But it
will be no freer than was the decision of early 19th century American
women to have eight  point seven children.

        The argument that there should be social support for
child-rearing will become even stronger, I hope.

        Margaret

To continue, however, with the women's autonomy theme. Welfare would
have to be open to individual men as well as individual women,
wouldn't it? It would have to be a true social safety net for the
most vulnerable and everyone at vulnerable moments.


Resident Scholar, Women's Studies, Brandeis
e-mail: mgullette@xxxxxxx
617-965-2164
Home page:www.brandeis.edu/wmns/gullette.html

Declining to Decline judged "best feminist book on American popular
culture" (1998 Emily Toth Award)