Comments on: Women who are not my role models

By: Career Guru Penelope Trunk: Founder of Brazen Careerist : The Next Women

Career Guru Penelope Trunk: Founder of Brazen Careerist : The Next Women — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 09:38:16 +0000

[...] post on your blog is on women who are not your role models. Are there any that you do [...]

By: Laocoon142

Laocoon142 — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 19:38:46 +0000

No, this is not what boomers view as success. The skill sets are different for being successful in business vs. being successful in raising a family. The choices are hard. Providing financially, including having health insurance and some protection against bankruptcy, or having a life with more "time" for one's children while coping with the frustrations of one's own inadequacy when the bills can't get paid or when the children can't have what they need (and I mean, need, for their development, their education, and their health). I suggest that some of these posters take another look at the financial risks that are imposed on households today vs. the financial risks to households in earlier decades. I think you will see that more risk and responsibility is being shoved down to individuals and households. Boomers have learned that there is no one who will bail anyone out and we have defined success as making tough choices to try to ensure our future economic security. It's not about consumption.

By: Amy

Amy — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 10:30:51 +0000

I already decided if I'm not married and my buns & oven are not working when I turn 40, I'm adopting an older foster kid, like 7 or 8. Those kids are looking for a loving, stable home environmen and I think I can provide them that. That's why I'm not against transracial adoption or gay/lesiban couples adopting foster kids.

By: Lisa

Lisa — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 22:36:44 +0000

Someone I don't respect is Sally Krawcheck. I work for Citigroup, and when she gave a speech to my Associate class, she said she was a great CFO but a terrible mother and wife. She shrugged it off – "you can't have everything." Not a woman to be admired from my perspective.

By: Jake McKee

Jake McKee — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 06:03:37 +0000

Penelope, thanks for starting such a great conversation. It's a fantastic discussion, and one of the best comment threads I've read on a blog in a long time.

SJ said: "you rarely hear someone chide men for putting off fatherhood, or worse, pursuing career goals to the exclusion of children they already have."

SJ, if *you* don't hear it enough, let me chide away now for your listening pleasure.

I'd say that this gets talked about more than you'd think. The "busy dad" is the subject of many movies, books, TV episodes, and news stories (remember the "Deadbeat Dad" stories? This was about more than JUST not paying child support).

Is there balance in the men vs. women chiding? No, not really. But we're overcoming human history of the role of men vs. women, so it's not at all surprising that men and women don't have the same expectations heaped on them.

One story that has stuck out to me since the day I heard about it was about CNN's Paula Zahn. A year or so after 9/11, I read interview with where she talked about hearing about the attacks, dropping her kids with someone (nanny?), and rushing to the site to start reporting (she actually hadn't officially started at CNN yet).

This was lauded by the reporter and many who shared the story as being the brave Paula Zahn. I was in New York that day and I didn't have kids. I now have a 9mo baby and can't possibly imagine leave her while I rushed off, no matter how career related/relevant it would have been. We knew nothing about what was going on, what was happening next, or how dangerous the decision was. Her story turned my stomach (and still does to this day).

I've struggled to understand, in my own head, would I have thought the same thing about a man? Would it have simply seemed brave? Do I have a double standard in my own head?

I really don't know, but I'd like to believe that I'd agree that man or woman, dumping your kids and rushing into danger is a horrendous personality flaw.

By: Wanda

Wanda — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 06:34:58 +0000

This is probably a little (okay, very late) of a response, but I read that article and wanted to offer my thoughts. I thought Sarah Chang was especially great – she is living her dreams, doing something that she loves (music), and winning acclaim and the respect of her peers. She had the opportunity to play in North Korea – how many 20somethings get that? I believe that if any of these women wanted a family, they have the drive and the passion to make it happen. I'm not saying there aren't hard choices to be made, but the great thing is that now we HAVE choices. Not as much as we'd like or as effortless as we'd like, perhaps, or maybe more than we'd like, but I'd rather have choices, than have no choice at all.

By: Anastasia

Anastasia — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 14:30:35 +0000

I think you handled the college situation very sensibly.
And yes, they are are plenty of reasons not to have a pack of kids financial and otherwise, but I think everyone in this thread has been a little hard on the decision. If your career choice is 'mother' the best thing you can do is go to college and get a degree in something that will help you with that goal, like Early Childhood Development, Take your time picking a suitable co-parent, and let your body mature past puberty before you start. Most people who have a pack of kids don't do any of these things, and why? Because it is not so much something they planned as something that came up. My parents, for instance, used every birth control available at the time, and they are bright people. They can read directions. When that happens, I am pleased to see people taking responsibility for the children, doing their best, even if it is not quite enough. Adoption is a viable option, but abortion is a cowards way out of a situation they created for themselves.

By: Duane

Duane — Sun, 11 Mar 2007 23:00:55 +0000

I don't think I "owe" my kids a college education. However, I did pay for their books, tuition, dorm or rent, leaving them to get jobs for their spending, eating, and gas money. My goal is to get them both educations with no residual debt for either of us, and I am about to meet that goal.
My desire for them to go to college was primarily based on their personal success and independence. I didn't want them to think that getting married and having babies was their only option since they had no skills other than being high school graduates.
Related directly to earlier discussions, I think I was able to provide a college education primarily because I didn't have several children requiring resourses. At the same time, the girls had to work for the things THEY wanted, thereby teaching them good financial practices. I honestly think they would be terribly embarrased to ask for money (even though they know I have it), because of their high level of pride in their own accomplishments.
Since my life wasn't overwhelmed with a house full of children, I also think that has made me ready to accept grandchildren more readily when that happens.

By: Anastasia

Anastasia — Sat, 10 Mar 2007 14:37:25 +0000

I don't think that parents 'owe' their kids a college education. At least, my parents don't owe me one. They did without while I was growing up, and now I can take care of myself. I wonder if I would feel the same way if they had the money to spare?

By: Pirate Jo

Pirate Jo — Fri, 09 Mar 2007 22:58:18 +0000

Hey Duane, Anastasia and I learned how to play nice! ;-) It's just a matter of talking things out until you understand where the other person is coming from. Although I admit I did react pretty defensively at first.

You and Anastasia have both shared a similar experience, though – growing up in households where resources were scarce and children plentiful. And you both seem to have made the connection between the two! It's okay to be grateful to your parents but decide for yourselves not to do the same things they did.

I've read a few articles about this very thing – the type of college education, for example, parents can provide one or two kids versus five or six. Is it immoral for a couple to have more kids when it starts to seriously restrict the options available to the children they already have? Where do you draw the line? (For that matter, to what extent do parents even "owe" their kids a college education?) The connection between more kids and less money is quite obvious, though. Certainly in this day and age, people can't think babies "just happen" – your observation about birth control is very relevant.