Iyow - in your own words

This was a deeply geeky thing to do, but I lost a whole afternoon at Green Apple Books reading political scientist Linda Hirshman’s Get to Work. I smirked when I saw the word “Manifesto” on the cover, but once I got through the preface, I was totally there and promptly found a cozy wood chair to get through the rest.

Slate’s Meghan O’Rourke also nods grudging approval to Hirshman’s ideas. Foremost, Hirshman wants women to take their careers as seriously as men are encouraged to do, to take total responsibility for their financial well-being, as well as being mothers and partners and wives. She’s not advocating super-womanism – just better negotiation tactics by woman who often cave in on their own ambition and potential to play supporting roles taking care of others. Not a newsflash, but an essential reminder to resist a trend I’ve witnessed in my own personal circle, regardless of what statistics say.

What’s particularly refreshing is that Hirshman says that line about “my choices are not anyone else’s business” is bullcrap. No, she argues, every time we make a choice, it has impacts in the larger world, especially when you’re in a group that’s still fighting for something. (I think this is precisely why the privacy issue is still contested in abortion politics – there is a grain of truth to the notion that we are invested in each others’ lives whether we like it or not.) Work is a public contribution to society that can have impacts far beyond one’s immediate family.

Hirshman also calls women out on copping out of work because it’s not perfect. Though she acknowledges that work isn’t always fulfilling or rewarding, she bluntly reminds readers that women will never be in positions to attain those goals without getting in the game in the first place.

And… last but not least, I love love love that she wants the gender work equity battlefield to address the unbelievably sexy areas of accounting and taxes. Why, she says, are childcare costs always mentally deducted from women’s salaries in home accounting, often leading women to opt out? Costs of childcare should be attributed to both household members. The benefit here is that women’s contributions would be seen less often as whittled away… and they wouldn’t be encouraged so easily to disengage from the real world job market, losing years of salary raises and new skills.

Finally, she suggests a total winner of an issue for feminists of all sexes and political affiliations to take on: the higher taxation of joint income over single filers. Repealing this marriage tax penalty, she argues, would go a long way towards making childcare and family expenses more affordable. In family accounting, it would remove the too-common rationale that the lesser salary is more expendable because the second career pushes the family into a new tax bracket. It’s pro-family, pro-women, pro-work without being powered by exclusion politics – what’s not to like?

What I take away from her book is the feeling that she is someone who deeply cares about women’s empowerment, ideas, and how these things can make everyone’s lives better. That’s a leader.