![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
So.
I've been reading Laurel's Kitchen which is a vegetarian cookbook crossed with a philosophy-of-food tretis.
I really like it.
BUT. It's got that Thing going on -- the thing that a lot of attachment parenting and whole-food/slow-food proponents have. It's the idea (implicite or explicite) that it's *women* and women *alone* who are expected to take on the various burdens (economic dependence, extra chores, longer work hours for the same degree of results and/or recognition, having a kid hanging around your neck 100% of the time, etc, etc) and make the various related sacrifices (no personal time, no personal income, etc, etc) in order to make those Life Styles happen.
And that irritates me.
I mean, part of me is going "This book was written in, like, 1974. Cut her some slack." But another part of me is going "This book was written in, like, 1974. In Berkeley, California, for goodness sake, home of Goddess Spirituality among other Women's Empowerment ideologies. Why the fuck isn't she more feminist?"
Why not advocate for *both* parents to work part-time[1] so that *both* parents are economically dependent on *each other* and *both* parents have a significant hand in raising the kids and *both* partners have a significant hand in the maintainence of the house, preparation of the food, tending of the organic garden, and so-on?
It bugs the hell out of me that, despite statements like "I would *never* suggest that women shouldn't take jobs," that is, pretty much, exactly what she's doing[2]. It bothers me to no end that she's suggesting that it takes less effort to get (and hold) a job than it does to actually work on making friends in your community, or (really irritating) that friendships with "the wives of your husband's co-workers" will somehow be better (in quality? more meaningful relationships?) than friendships cultivated with your own co-workers.
There's something about that that just strikes me as SO wrong-headed. It makes me mad.
That said, I still like her stories about learning to make bread.
And, with that in mind, I'm going to make some myself. :-)
- TTFN,
- Amazon. :-)
[1] Yes, I know. When women typically work jobs that have lower salleries and/or fewer benefits than those that men typically work, it makes sense to keep the highest-earner in the outside-the-house work force. But don't get me fucking started on how much that mindset/neccesity contributes to the continued ghettoization of women (in- and out-side of The Home).
[2] Although she at least does recognize that this isn't, ecconomically, an option for a lot of women.
I've been reading Laurel's Kitchen which is a vegetarian cookbook crossed with a philosophy-of-food tretis.
I really like it.
BUT. It's got that Thing going on -- the thing that a lot of attachment parenting and whole-food/slow-food proponents have. It's the idea (implicite or explicite) that it's *women* and women *alone* who are expected to take on the various burdens (economic dependence, extra chores, longer work hours for the same degree of results and/or recognition, having a kid hanging around your neck 100% of the time, etc, etc) and make the various related sacrifices (no personal time, no personal income, etc, etc) in order to make those Life Styles happen.
And that irritates me.
I mean, part of me is going "This book was written in, like, 1974. Cut her some slack." But another part of me is going "This book was written in, like, 1974. In Berkeley, California, for goodness sake, home of Goddess Spirituality among other Women's Empowerment ideologies. Why the fuck isn't she more feminist?"
Why not advocate for *both* parents to work part-time[1] so that *both* parents are economically dependent on *each other* and *both* parents have a significant hand in raising the kids and *both* partners have a significant hand in the maintainence of the house, preparation of the food, tending of the organic garden, and so-on?
It bugs the hell out of me that, despite statements like "I would *never* suggest that women shouldn't take jobs," that is, pretty much, exactly what she's doing[2]. It bothers me to no end that she's suggesting that it takes less effort to get (and hold) a job than it does to actually work on making friends in your community, or (really irritating) that friendships with "the wives of your husband's co-workers" will somehow be better (in quality? more meaningful relationships?) than friendships cultivated with your own co-workers.
There's something about that that just strikes me as SO wrong-headed. It makes me mad.
That said, I still like her stories about learning to make bread.
And, with that in mind, I'm going to make some myself. :-)
- TTFN,
- Amazon. :-)
[1] Yes, I know. When women typically work jobs that have lower salleries and/or fewer benefits than those that men typically work, it makes sense to keep the highest-earner in the outside-the-house work force. But don't get me fucking started on how much that mindset/neccesity contributes to the continued ghettoization of women (in- and out-side of The Home).
[2] Although she at least does recognize that this isn't, ecconomically, an option for a lot of women.
