Judith Warner at The New York Times writes about Congress' new report, "Equality in Job Loss: Women are Increasingly Vulnerable to Layoffs During Recessions," and says,

Women left the workforce when the cost of child care ate up their entire after-tax salaries, or when family-unfriendly workplaces pushed them out. Or when, like women without children or men with and without children, they were laid off in a bad economy.

But these naysaying voices have been largely shouting in the wind. No one has really wanted to hear that the much-vaunted new "choices" weren't really choices at all. No one's been scouring obscure academic journals for the real skinny on women's progress. No one's been too eager to embrace grim facts over more-glorious fictions.

Make sure to check it out...

2 Comments

Reminds me of a passage on economic inequality from Kate Millet's "Sexual Politics":

"In modern capitalist countries women also function as a reserve labor force, enlisted in times of war and expansion and discharged in times of peace and recession."

The "time of peace" part doesn't exactly apply to today's situation, but the fact that women are experiencing the same old-same old (or worse, seeing as women's employment hadn't even recovered from the 2001 recession) during this recession makes me question exactly how much has changed since 1969.

Posted by Indigirka | July 29, 2008 4:04 PM

*1968

Posted by Indigirka | July 29, 2008 4:09 PM

Leave a comment

Name

Email Address

URL

Remember personal info?

Comments (You may use HTML tags for style)