Rating: 
Summary: An intriguing but badly flawed critique of feminism
Review: Danielle Crittenden insists that the traditional woman's role of wife and mother should be infinitely fulfilling. So why has she found it necessary to become an influential writer and editor herself, toiling away in a home office while her kids are at school? The simple fact is this: Children are a wonderful blessing, and should be cared for primarily by their parents (mothers AND fathers), but no rational, intelligent adult should be blamed for wanting other forms of fulfillment. I am a 40-year-old man, happily married for 10 years, the father of two delightful daughters, ages 1 and 3. My wife and I split work and child-care chores equally. We use no outside child care except for a very occasional baby-sitter. Both of us work part-time; we get by because we are very good managers and because we are both fortunate enough to have reasonably good earning potential. This arrangement has worked splendidly. I am not deprived of my masculinity because I change several dozen diapers a week; not has my wife lost her capacity for maternal love because she chooses (with my enthusiastic support) to work as a lobbyist at the state Capitol. Men and women are not interchangeable, but to suggest that women would be happier if they'd simply revert to stereotypical form is to rob couples of the opportunity to truly share in the parenting experience. Crittenden dismisses our sort of arrangement by saying sarcastically that "if it works, well, swell." It IS swell -- and there's no earthly reason why more families shouldn't try it.
Rating: 
Summary: Must reading for liberated women who don't hate men
Review: She tackles conventional feminist dogma with the zeal-- dare one say it?--Using wit (sometimes wickedly) and common sense (always judiciously) she demolishes the sort of rubbish dispensed by the Bettys and Glorias who can't seem to accept taht their day is done-- that time and events have passed them by leaving in their wake a generation of aging, frustrated acolytes to let others think for them. Crittenden's seems fearless in her convictions. A refreshing read. Larry Dignum, Ottawa
Rating:
Summary: This wise, witty book is must-reading for every woman.
Review: Every woman will recognize herself and her own struggles in Danielle Crittenden's funny and insightful account of why happiness eludes contemporary women. If you have ever wondered how Ally McBeal became so neurotic, this book explains it all. Witty and sympathetic, Crittenden asks hard questions about the tension between work and family, the needs of children, and what it is that mostly deeply satisfies a woman's yearnings. Feminism is more a part of the problem than the solution, and the Kirkus reviewer obviously is a sour old feminist who doesn't want to admit that she was wrong . If finding a suitable and caring husband in your early twenties, having children when you are still energetic and full of fun, and then launching an interesting career at age 35 is a "regressive" alternative to being a frustrated, barren spinster working in an anonymous cubicle, then by all means let us regress. Apparently, the Kirkus reviewer thinks it is more important to style oneself as "progressive" than it is to be happy.
Rating: 
Summary: Author living in stone age
Review: The camera zooms in on Donna Reed standing by the door fixing her hair just before opening it for her adoring husband. Dr. Reed enters and is greeted with a kiss by his doting wife.If Danielle Crittenden has her way, women will soon begin to revert back to the days of Donna Reed. She does not seem to understand that today's Technicolor world has little room for the stifling ideals of the black-and-white, Daddy Knows Best '50s. In What Our Mother's Didn't Tell Us, Crittenden makes good points on bad premises and her arguments crumble before she finishes them. Crittenden says women can obtain happiness in life if only they will shun the outdated concepts of feminism. She forgets, however, that many of the issues her "outdated" feminism was created to combat still exist. Crittenden rattles off statistics like an evening news sportscaster: "Women may now work in any profession and expect to be paid the same as men. They may marry or not marry, divorce or not divorce, have sex or abstain, bear children or not, postpone or abort them - all without social stigma." If only. And herein lies Crittenden's downfall. She is wrong. Women make only 75 percent as much as men. When they don't marry, they aren't celebrated for enjoying single life but suspected of being lesbians and pitied for being old maids. Women who have too much sex are sluts and those who have none are prudes. When women abort their babies, they are most often greeted at the clinic by a swarm of angry protestors condemning them to hell. But, according to Crittenden, "It's time to settle." Settling, in Crittenden's view, is getting married and having kids young, when a woman's body is able, and pursuing careers later, when a woman's life is able. It would seem that settling is interchangeable with giving up, reverting back to the 1950s that Crittenden says women recall with "wistfulness." What Our Mother's Didn't tell Us is a fairly accurate portrayal of the modern-day, heterosexual who wants to be or is married and who has or wants kids. The author's commentary, though, is elitist and out of touch with reality. She overlooks the financial situations of most women - situations that dictate their necessity for working outside the home. She condemns lesbianism and masturbation in the same breath and seems to loath alternate living situations for women that do not involve a man to protect and care for them. The question Crittenden poses, and rightly so, is a good one. "Today women like me ... take for granted the professional respect [women used to crave], but we can no longer expect marriage, stability, and children when we want them. Who is the bigger loser?" There might not be an answer; surely Crittenden does not offer a satisfying one. Today's woman might find herself pulled between the seemingly opposing forces of work versus marriage and kids with happiness out of reach, but she has choices to make. Those are choices that the woman of yesteryear, who was trapped in a loveless marriage, kids in tow as her only purpose, did not have. And, more importantly, if the woman of today is not happy, the 1950s were not the epitome of happiness either.
Rating:
Summary: The most important book a maiden should read
Review: An excellent book. Young women who want to have a family (and I would presume that virtually all women, even the intelligent ones) should read and live the advice. I am a childless 39 year old bachelor, and I completely understand where the author is coming from. I have no serious interest in women that are older the 30 - and in any case, if such a woman were attractive and still available at age 30, it almost a metaphysical certitude that she is screwed up in the head. I am most interested in women aged 18-25, and have never seriously started dating anyone older than 27.
Here is my reasoning about the proper age for a maiden to become serious about finding a husband:
First, a woman really should not have a child past the age of 35, at which point she has reduced fertility and the much increased problems of trisomy ova, etc. So assuming 2 children properly spaced out a few years, a woman should be conceiving her first child no later than 31. Now there could always be fertility issues (on either side) or improperly developing pregnancies, so the first attempt at conception should be a few years earlier, at age 28. And a couple should have a few years of bonding time before attempting conception, so a woman should be married no later than age 25. Therefore I tend start looking upon women over 25 as being a little over the hill, family-starting marriage-wise, that is. Once the 2nd digit on her odometer hits "3", I say thanks but no thanks.
And a woman must spend some time looking for the future father of her children - she cannot just hit her 25th birthday and have her fairy Godmother present her with her man. Now. assuming she has to go through one extra potential suitor before finding the right one, she should really start becoming serious a few years earlier than 25, i.e., age 22. For intelligent women, that's the standard age they graduate would college, so basically a woman needs to shift into full serious mode right out of college (of course, some women are able to snare their husband in college, which is even better.)
Women who want to "build a career" or pursue postgraduate education still need to be in serious mode during her 20's, and have the attitude that such a career must be put on hold while caring for her babies. A woman getting her PhD, MD or JD can still postpone the beginning of attempting conception until she has finished her studies, but she should really have her husband hunting all wrapped up by then.
So how does a woman insure that she has a husband by the right time? She needs to have a serious attitude in that she has no interest in socializing with the standard group of aimless men of her age. She needs to say to herself that she will not chase after the good looking, low income, irresponsible jerk, but rather the less good looking but responsible gentlemen. She may not get excited when the short nerdy guy tries to talk to her at a party, but she needs to realize that this guy will be the stable one that will be happy being with her and having her bare his children.
Also, she should keep her body in good nubile shape so that men will want her, and always present an open and inviting personality that will attract bachelors to gather up the courage to ask her out. Even better is for her to be proactive in husband hunting. I recommend searching Amazon for "how to find a husband", etc. It is far beter for a woman to read these kind of books at age 22 then to wait until she is 30+.
Rating:
Summary: Super Insight from a Superwoman!
Review: Are you a woman who has been searching and searching for a book that would get you extremely ticked off? Well, look no further, my friend, for your search is over. Why DOES happiness elude the modern woman? Well, I don't think Ms. Crittenden really offers any definitive answers, except that she seems to lay all the blame squarely on the shoulders of Germaine Greer, Betty Friedan, and other leaders of the second-wave movement of feminism. Some of her advice includes marrying early and having a baby prior to having a career--after all, grad school can wait until your children are in school. The question I would love to ask her is how she thinks two twenty-year-olds can afford to have and support a child when neither has graduated from college and has a career that pays enough. Oh, that's right...the man can keep going to college and get a degree and pay. The woman can put hers off until her children are in school. I am also impressed by the fact that she thinks that, when her children go to school around the age of six or so, a woman would have enough time to work on her degree, especially something as time-consuming as a thesis or dissertation. After all, the child will come home around three and someone has to make sure the child is looked after and fed. Since the man will be working to bring the money in, obviously, the woman will need to provide this care. This makes it seem that it would not be feasible to devote sufficient time to an education, undergrad or otherwise, until the child is at least twelve to thirteen years old. She also states that a woman is selfish if she prefers to have a career AND have a child, since that child will not be properly cared for if a woman desires to continue working after the child's birth. For those who argue that they need two incomes to get by, Ms. Crittenden cries foul. After all, families in the fifties got by on one income (although maybe just barely) and maybe these modern parents need to just forego some of their luxuries so that one parent can stay home. She doesn't seem to realize that sometimes it's NOT really feasible to get by on one income, and that if a family would try it, they just may find themselves below the poverty line. She does make some interesting points here and there--such as women used to say they didn't want to be dependent on a man and, therefore, are now dependent on state institutions such as welfare and other things when they are rendered single mothers for whatever reason--but overall, this book is simply infuriating. She states that divorce is now "acceptable" when a man simply wants to leave his aging wife for a much younger woman, something I find hard to believe. I would be willing to bet that most people would find a man who did that utterly despicable. Divorce, in fact, should be acceptable--not for those men who want to run off and have an affair, but simply so that women can leave husbands who are abusive or leave those men who are having the affairs without social consequence. Ms. Crittenden's reasons for "why happiness eludes the modern woman" definitely seem flimsy at best. I most definitely wish that I had spent the money on one of the many other books that I want to read that surely are more worthwhile. But, like I said, if you want to read all about what a selfish *&#^$ you are for wanting to have a career AND children (how dare you), have at it.
Rating:
Summary: commonsense makes a terrific read
Review: Applause to Ms Crittenden for getting feminists to read this book and agree with the points she makes. I think this will be a seminal book in pointing our society forward in improving the lives of all of us equally. One passage in the book says it all: that our achievement of independence from our husbands has resulted in a new dependence on employers and state, who in turn do not offer us love, companionship and laughs like a husband does. She hits on the truth: we all want happy homes and families. We care about our children more than ourselves. Who can say they don't?
Rating:
Summary: Much needed reality check
Review: I do not pretend to be an expert, or to have all the answers, but this book provides some much needed perspective on a seriously dysfunctional social trend. As a male, I was very happy to particiapte in the sexual revloution of the 70's in college and after college. As a brother, I have four sisters - sexually promiscuous in college and post college, all reasonably successful career women - all now in their 40's and 50's - and all but one childless (and that one twice divorced) and all miserable about their life situation - and all with low self esteem in this area. Further, their circle of professional peers tends towards the same description. The only good news about this is that they can't do enough for their neices and nephews - which is little compensation for the angst and despair that is a daily part of their lives - for the rest of their lives. Crittenden captures very neatly the fact that there is really nothing as scary to a man then to take a 30-something/40-something women out to dinner and find her eying him and his life more hungrily than the food. Crittenden says that feminism doesn't provide answers for the questions that distress young women, such as, "Is work really more important and fulfilling than raising my children?" and "Why does my boyfriend not want to get married as much as I do?" I think that modern women do not think this through nearly carefully enough. Eastern Europe, thanks to socialism, had "equality" in 1920. after 80 years of sex without guilt and responsibility, eastern european women seek western males in droves. Her argument that feminist fervor has failed modern women has merit, and her suggestions for how women can recapture meaning, fulfillment and happiness are worth discussing. Because of the realities of biology - a women's choices are overwhelmingly important to her future and it is a disservce to pretend that it isn't.
|
