it *is* the economy, girlfriend
posted by Delia Christina
Gag! Gag! Gag!
I know I shouldn't read these NY Times style articles before my morning coffee; I know it. And, yet, here I am reading about the 'widows' of New York financial guys who need a support group because their alpha male traders, bankers and whatnot are melting down along with the economy.
From the piece:
Dawn Spinner Davis, 26, a beauty writer, said the downward-trending graphs began to make sense when the man she married on Nov. 1, a 28-year-old private wealth manager, stopped playing golf, once his passion. “One of his best friends told me that my job is now to keep him calm and keep him from dying at the age of 35,” Ms. Davis said. “It’s not what I signed up for.”
Really, Dawn? Your boyfriend quits golf and *that's* the moment you realized the economy was in trouble??
My eyes rolled so hard they almost got stuck.
She may not have signed up for nursing her husband through this fiscal crisis (though I believe that's what 'for better or worse' covers) but neither did a lot of women sign up to stand at the edge of our economic pit of despair. I was on a conference call last week with some other association folks and one of them said that she's frustrated by how this recovery package is being compared to, and perhaps modeled on, the New Deal. She said, 'Our workforce is different now! A significant portion of the workforce is low-income women with children. How will this package help them?' She has a point.
Where do women work? The majority of women work in the service industry, in education, child care, human services and other 'traditionally' female sectors (like nursing.) But what are the priorities in the stimulus package (at least, the House version I read)? Green industries, technology, infrastructure and science. How many jobs will be created for women? What about making it easier for businesses to provide work supports for women with families? Paid sick days? Child care support (which is included in the package, yes.)
When the talking heads spew crap about the stimulus package, there is an assumption that what's good for dudes will automatically trickle down and benefit the ladies, but maybe not.
The Senate version of the recovery package is going to undergo changes as the two sides dicker and bargain over the next week. (Keep your eye on S. 336, the Senate appropriations bill for the recovery package.) I've heard that the administration wants to be able to sign this bill by President's Day, so things are going to be moving fast. But it's crucial to make sure work supports that directly impact working women stay in the bill. (GOP senators want to obstruct? Whatever. Their ideas didn't work the first time.)
Extra reading:
Ms. Foundation's recommendations (including allied organizations)
The Obama administration's explanation of the job impact on women
Linda Hirshman's observation that the recovery package is stuck in the 50s
The Nat'l Women's Law Center's breakdown of the recovery package
(sorry, no fun posts from Ding; this has been a douchebag of a work week.)
I know I shouldn't read these NY Times style articles before my morning coffee; I know it. And, yet, here I am reading about the 'widows' of New York financial guys who need a support group because their alpha male traders, bankers and whatnot are melting down along with the economy.
From the piece:
Dawn Spinner Davis, 26, a beauty writer, said the downward-trending graphs began to make sense when the man she married on Nov. 1, a 28-year-old private wealth manager, stopped playing golf, once his passion. “One of his best friends told me that my job is now to keep him calm and keep him from dying at the age of 35,” Ms. Davis said. “It’s not what I signed up for.”
Really, Dawn? Your boyfriend quits golf and *that's* the moment you realized the economy was in trouble??
My eyes rolled so hard they almost got stuck.
She may not have signed up for nursing her husband through this fiscal crisis (though I believe that's what 'for better or worse' covers) but neither did a lot of women sign up to stand at the edge of our economic pit of despair. I was on a conference call last week with some other association folks and one of them said that she's frustrated by how this recovery package is being compared to, and perhaps modeled on, the New Deal. She said, 'Our workforce is different now! A significant portion of the workforce is low-income women with children. How will this package help them?' She has a point.
Where do women work? The majority of women work in the service industry, in education, child care, human services and other 'traditionally' female sectors (like nursing.) But what are the priorities in the stimulus package (at least, the House version I read)? Green industries, technology, infrastructure and science. How many jobs will be created for women? What about making it easier for businesses to provide work supports for women with families? Paid sick days? Child care support (which is included in the package, yes.)
When the talking heads spew crap about the stimulus package, there is an assumption that what's good for dudes will automatically trickle down and benefit the ladies, but maybe not.
The Senate version of the recovery package is going to undergo changes as the two sides dicker and bargain over the next week. (Keep your eye on S. 336, the Senate appropriations bill for the recovery package.) I've heard that the administration wants to be able to sign this bill by President's Day, so things are going to be moving fast. But it's crucial to make sure work supports that directly impact working women stay in the bill. (GOP senators want to obstruct? Whatever. Their ideas didn't work the first time.)
Extra reading:
Ms. Foundation's recommendations (including allied organizations)
The Obama administration's explanation of the job impact on women
Linda Hirshman's observation that the recovery package is stuck in the 50s
The Nat'l Women's Law Center's breakdown of the recovery package
(sorry, no fun posts from Ding; this has been a douchebag of a work week.)
Labels: the economy, women and kids, work
Posted at 8:06 AM
|
