This is what Barbara Ehrenreich titles her recent opinion piece, addressing the recent study that's given many folks the opportunity to declare that feminism has made women miserable:
This, anyway, seems to be the most popular take-away from "The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness," a recent study by Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers that purports to show that women have become steadily unhappier since 1972. Maureen Dowd and Ariana Huffington greeted the news with somber perplexity, but the more common response has been a triumphant "I told you so!"On Slate's Double X website, a columnist concluded from the study that "the feminist movement of the 1960s and 1970s gave us a steady stream of women's complaints disguised as manifestos ... and a brand of female sexual power so promiscuous that it celebrates everything from prostitution to nipple piercing as a feminist act -- in other words, whine, womyn, and thongs." Or as Phyllis Schlafly put it: "The feminist movement taught women to see themselves as victims of an oppressive patriarchy. ... Self-imposed victimhood is not a recipe for happiness."
But it's a little too soon to blame Gloria Steinem for our dependence on antidepressants. Three things need to be pointed out about the Stevenson and Wolfers study: (1) that there are some issues with happiness studies in general; (2) that there are some reasons to doubt this study in particular; and (3) that even if you take this study at face value, it has nothing at all to say about the impact of feminism on anyone's mood.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: "Are women unhappier? Don't make me laugh" .
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/16620
They name feminism in the study, but you can make the same generalization about intellectualism at large. The more intelligent you are, the more you realize and understand what is wrong with the world around you, and this can contribute, very generally speaking, to a feeling of unhappiness.
I think Lisa Simpson says it best: "As Intelligence goes up, Happiness goes down. See, I made a graph. I make a lot of graphs."
They just want another "scientific" reason to shout "AHA!" at their apparent feminist rivals. It's sad, really :-P
Someone needs to teach journalists about the difference between "statistical significance" and "effect size".
When you have a very large sample, it is possible to identify very very small effects. Statistically speaking, the effect is not due to chance. But the effect may be extremely small.
You don't need any fancy effect size statistics in this case - You can just look at the graph and see that the difference between the 1970 and present is tiny.
Plus their measure of "happiness" wasn't very extensive.
Lots of bluster politically motivated bluster over what should be a rather unimportant study.
To paraphrase everything here- "Intelligent girls are more depressed, because they know what the world is like".
(By Emilie Autumn, feminist and singer)
And the neverending question- would you rather be intelligent and unhappy or stupid and glad?
I think I'd prefer to be nr 1...
I guess they forgot to account for the increase in the study of mental illness... in an age where there is medication for thin eyelashes everything is turned into a disease. We are much more aware of our states of being on a collective level, but what this study has to say about the actual happiness/unhappiness of Individuals is precarious. Placing blame on anything based on shaky statistical data is rediculous. The most they can possibly conclude is "we think alot of women are depressed".
I would also suggest reading the study author's rebuttal to Ehrenreich's opinion piece: Nickeled and Dimed by Barbara Ehrenreich.
no
thx
After seeing Barbara Ehrenreich on the Daily Show last week, I can't take anything that woman says seriously. I mean, wow, that woman is crazy!!! She complained about cancer patients who "think positively"!!! WTF??? Craaa-zeeee!!!
No, cattrack2, she's not, and if that's all you took away from it then you seriously missed the point. She was diagnosed with breast cancer and soon got fed up with people telling her that her cancer was a "gift" and would "change her for the better". She wanted the freedom to grieve at her own pace, but was surrounded by so-called support groups and well-meaners who continuously informed her that she was not allowed to feel sad.
As for me, I also can't wait to read Bright-Sided. I am sick of the nonsense "Secret" drive positive thinking movement. Right now we need much more pragmatism and realism, and much less bullshit.
Are you kidding me? This wasn't just a personal take, this was her societal view. What gives her the right to critique other people's coping strategies? Thank God I've never had cancer, but from those I've known with it, the parents of children who've had it, and their immediate family members, thinking positively is one of the few things that gives them a reason to wake up every morning, to deal with the immense toll of chemo-therapy, and to invest themselves in life.
The alternative? You have a 20% chance of living, so go ahead, give up, and die. WTH, what kind of bed side manner is that? Seeing breast cancer survivors run the NYC marathon was one of the most powerful visuals in my life. THAT's the power of positive thinking.
She wasn't talking about "other people's coping strategies". She was talking about the constant drumbeat from other people telling cancer patients that They Must Think Positive. They Must Be Upbeat. There is no room in there for allowing cancer patients to grieve or get frustrated. It's not a self-imposed coping strategy she's talking about at all, but a socially-imposed refusal to acknowledge pain.
Barbara clearly has an ax to grind if you read the link provided above by A Female Marine. And last week on the Daily Show she came off like a misanthrope. Seriously, that grumpy mindset she diplayed could make a lot of people unhappy.
I was a little put-off by her Daily Show appearance as well. Yes, it's fine that she copes differently than other people, but she called the positive-thinkers DELUSIONAL! (if I remember correctly)
That's not what you say when you think everyone copes differently. That's what you say when you think your way is the only right way and that other ways are stupid.
That definitely does put the piece in a different light. It looks like one impartial study has been interpreted through the viewpoints of the political and marketing interests of other parties. The whole title to the article posted here is misleading. It looks like the studies show that women are less often "very happy", not unhappy.
It's very tempting to come to simplistic conclusions as to why this might be, but we'd only be looking through the viewpoints that affect our own lives the most, which very well might be different than those that affect others. For example, I could say that it might simply be an effect of more sophisticated advertising and marketing over those years. Advertisers do sell more products when you can be convinced that their product will complete your life and add fulfillment. If you're already very happy, then how can you be expected to try to buy products to make you happy. That could all be true, but I'm sure that it's totally unrelated to the study. In fact it's likely a variety of factors moving in concert that have reduced the number of very happy women.
Of course the conservatives are going to blame it on feminism. They blame everything on feminism and gay people, the economy, global warming, balding, bird flu, disrespectful youngsters, etc... Of course, they still get lots of news coverage because who can resist that brand of wackiness.
On a side note. While women may not be so very happy, it looks like suicidal despair is down too. Interpret that one how you like, but I like it.
Agreed. It's also possible that feminism has permitted more women - traditionally taught to shut up, serve, and smile - that it's OK to say you're pissed off when you are, and OK to not say "Oh, no, everything's fine" when everything isn't. Whenever a "study" is asking people what they think or feel, it's not a study, it's a survey, and it's subject to all the vagaries of mood and upbringing and the desire to present one's self in a particular light, whether it's the light of truth or not, that are intrinsic to the human condition.
I LOVE IT! I've been waiting for "Bright-Sided" for years!!!! I cannot wait to read that book!
I used to be ambivalent about Barbara, especially when I bought "Nickel and Dimed" started to read it and thought it was a waste of time since I LIVE nickel and dimed. Also I read a piece on maid service for a gender study course where it seemed like she knew far too much about hiring maid services...
I can never understand why there is such a push for being happy all the time in this society. It is as if you can only be a true success if you're happy or at least it is the main goal in life--to be happy. LOL HAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHA!!! Whoopee!! I live in fantasy world! LMFAO!
Barb, if you're reading this, you have a convert. I am happy about this article.
If I were to select one health problem that would indicate a decrease in happiness overall I would think that the rate of depression is more likely a good start.
According to every major studies on the matter depression among women is way up there among health problems and it seems there a lot of factors related to this condition such as gender based roles, stressors and negative life experiences and events.
Here's an good article from World health org.
This info could help explain why women possibly would answer more negatively on a survey about happiness and each of you can draw your own conclusion if feminism contributed to factors assigned to depression=unhappiness.
Have a nice day ladies.
Heres the article very interesting
http://www.who.int/mental_health/prevention/genderwomen/en/
Have a nice day ladies.
You have got to be kidding me.
Please explain your comment
My guess is that Nepenthe was irritated because "Have a nice day ladies" came off condescending and belittling toward feminists.
As a male reader of this blog, I have to say, I don't disagree with that reading.
Even if that wasn't your intention, its still probably not wise to assume gender homogeneity exists among this blog's readership.
It strikes me that 1 reason for the decline in woman happiness both absolutely & relative to men is the paradox of rising expectations. The feminist movement has been very successful at removing barriers for women in a variety of spheres, and yet simply removing legal barriers--or even cultural ones--doesn't necessarily remove the barriers that impede happiness in one's own life.
Sure you can work outside the home, but what if your husband expects you to do all the house work too? Sure you can get a no fault divorce, but what if you want to stay married for the children? Sure you can be CEO but what if you miss seeing your kids? The list goes on and on...
Isn't that the same list of paradoxes men have always faced? It's just that women face them more often then before. But fundamentally these issues have always been in play so there is nothing new there.
The rising expecations I'm referring to here are those that resulted from the feminist movement, so this would above & beyond the expectations effect on men.
Well, except that our culture inculcates men with the idea that they aren't SUPPOSED to be around their kids, or be as connected to them as women - that they're supposed to devote time to their jobs and themselves. Our culture supports men separating themselves from their families for the sake of money and power. Women have been actively discouraged and shamed (still done today, of course, but it's just less open).
Nope, I've got to object to that one. Maybe your culture discourages men from being around their children, but the United States isn't a monoculture anymore. I wasn't raised in a culture where fathers aren't involved with their kids. Being some sort of distant male patriarch who isn't involved with his kids sounds like a poor poor way to end up. So clearly I got some different cultural programming.
I do think that balancing childcare, a career, a marriage, and a social life is demanding enough that you'd expect something to fall short of what you wanted it to be. Taking care of kids and perfecting your casserole recipe would be like playing and easy mode version of life in comparison. It would be easier to be great at, but just not challenging enough to be fun, and totally sucky if it's a game you don't want to play. Maybe that's why "very happy is down", but so are suicide rates.
I think this is one of those instances where the majority likes to measure progress by how far we've come (hey, you can vote!), while the minority likes to measure how far we still have to go (how about equal pay now)...
Also, I hope people do read the authors' response, just to be fair. Here's the link again: "Nickeled and Dimed by Barbara Ehrenreich"
I have lots of respect for Ehrenreich as a journalist, but you can see that she's writing about this study through the lens of her current theme of research ("Bright-Sided"). Also, it's a STUDY, ONE STUDY, and we all know how much we should live our lives by the results of studies...
Please explain your comment
Also they don't mean "happiness". They mean contentment. It's a really important distinction. Contentment means at the end of the day you look at your lot and think, "Yep this is pretty close to how I envisaged my life and is satisfactory." Contentment is about saying the destination is good enough for you.
Happiness means at the end of the day you look at what you did that day and think, "Today I took as many steps as I possibly could toward fulfilling my potential." Whether that means you baked a cake for the lonely old lady next door, taught your child to read, clinched a huge merger deal or wrote a poem that moved someone, it's about what it means to you. Happiness is about saying the journey itself is meaningful.
Where women have not the option of the journey (because once a housewife with no prospects beyond, you are at a destination - which for many is all they want and that's fine for them) then to try to be content with that lot is very wise, because the alternative is to go mad. For me, a good day is one where I do at least one productive and positive thing by at least a few of (in no particular order) my husband, my career, our home, our family/friends, and the world in general. But I'm not content because I know there is much more I could be and much further to go. This restlessness is what drives all achievement, all progress and all adventure. That said, it's healthy to be able to just bumble contentedly along some days.
Oh also the simplest argument:
If cavefolk had been happy we would all still live in caves. Civilisation happened because cave life wasn't good enough.
If women had been happy there would have been no feminism. But like other aspects of civilisation, feminism did happen.
Hence, the older studies are, inherently, flawed.
Maybe we are less happy now because we don't let men treat us like second class people anymore. Think about it, if you are complicit in that role, of course you'll be happy. But if you're not and you are greeted with a backlash, happiness goes down. My current relationship is equal and he participates in the equality so we are happy, but my ex didn't take to kindly the equality thing. I mean, he went for it, but not as far as I wanted. So I was miserable.
Sorry for the not-so-clear comment, but I'm really tired. I'm actually about to increase my happiness level by taking a nap ^_^
*facepalm* Oh yeah. If women are less happy today than in 1972, it HAS to be because of feminism. It's not like anything else of note has happened during that timeframe.
And I've got 20 bucks on Mike M being a concern troll.
Just my thoughts:
Without feminism: I'm unhappy, but I don't know why
With feminism: I'm unhappy AND I know why AND i'm going to do something to change it
It doesn't make sense to me how one could put a finger on the cause of a problem and just "stay unhappy".
Why are so many accepting the premise that feminism is the cause of what the study has observed, assuming it has observed anything of consequence in the first place?
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/14/nickeled-and-dimed-by-barbara-ehrenreich/
Wolfers and Stevenson responded. With facts, links to their raw data and an invitation to Ehrenreich to take that data and prove that what they are asserting (not the straw man of 'feminism did it') is unsupportable.
So far, she has not done so.
I remember talking about these studies in the social psychology lab I did internship credit in as an undergraduate. It's not necessarily that women are less happy, it may be that they are more inclined to reporting more towards the middle. So instead of reporting "very satisfied" on a self report scale you get "satisfied". It doesn't necessarily mean that women are unhappier. Also, we talked about how women are more often diagnosed with depression and anxiety not because women get depressed more often but more that women are socialized to be more open to talking about emotions. Tons of men are depressed, they don't talk about it due to socialization, and more men (especially middle aged and older men) complete suicides than women across all age levels. So, news reports of these studies are often misleading and do not examine all of the data.
Additionally, as a woman, the things that bring me down are often issues I have with my body or issues that related to pressure between whether I can go to graduate school and become a scientist or if I should pursue a family. Sexist comments and superficial views of women make me upset too. These aren't the only issues that bring me down, but these are the issues specific to being a woman that bring me down. Feminism and reading about gender has made me feel better about my body because it's given me specific examples of why women feel ashamed of their bodies and exactly how institutions value women's bodies over their intellect. Being able to break down how the system works has made me reevaluate what I really have to offer and how I can use it. Reading about gender has also made me feel empowered in the sense that I don't feel like I need to pick graduate school or a family. I can at least try my best to do both despite discouraging comments.
It's not necessarily that women are less happy, it may be that they are more inclined to reporting more towards the middle. So instead of reporting "very satisfied" on a self report scale you get "satisfied". It doesn't necessarily mean that women are unhappier.
To be honest, I can't remember why reporting towards the middle in self-report was a common practice. I wish I could explain better.