Why Women Still Can’t Have It All

In discussions like this one, "having it all" can often be translated as "having the same options a man has without having to constantly apologize for having them."

 

Not really. And not really even close. The whole gist of the article is how women can have the career opportunities of men while also being able to be fully committed to parenthood. Men have historically chosen one at the expense of the other.

 

I gotta agree. We all make mistakes; hopefully we learn from them.

My sis-in-law has already lined up her second husband and she's not even legally divorced from my brother yet. Is that a red flag or what? If they will do it to someone else, they will most assuredly do it to you, too.

 

I was referring to the discussion here - and how certain traditionalists seem to interpret the phrase "having it all" - not the article.

 

Wait, I can take 20 days off a year by saying "it's a medical thing?" Not so much. I would have been fired from any of my jobs for trying this.

And what, pray tell, prevents you from job hopping, ask about telecommuting or cutting down your hours?

 

Shit, I never got the "it's a medical thing" memo. I guess that means I've got 400 or so days off coming to me from my company (I didn't get the job-hopping memo either). Apparently, I've been coddled, too! Wow! :

 

Guy walking on the beach finds a lamp. Rubs it, Genie pops out, grants him one wish.
"You know, I've never been to Hawaii," guy says. "But I'm afraid to fly, Can you build a bridge over the Pacific Ocean so I can drive there."
Genie says, "impossible. The Pacific is miles deep. Even with all my powers, I can't do that. Think of another wish."
Guy then says, "Well ... my wife and I are having some problems. I love her and I don't want the marriage to end. Can you help me understand women?"
Genie thinks for a minute, then says, "You want that bridge two lanes or four?"

 

I liked that one, hondo. I started thinking of the reverse of that joke whereby a woman finds the bottle hoping to understand men, and unfortunately it quickly turned X rated when the genie simply pulled down his pants.

 

Take my wife, please!

 

In many cases, it's not a matter of women wanting to "have it all," or men wanting to "have it all" for that matter. Ruthlessly chasing higher pay at the expense of family and other things may be a financial necessity.

In many parts of the country, a family with two kids probably needs a combined income of $100K a year just to be able to save anything. On the east coast (where I am) and west coast, that number is considerably higher. There is day care when they're babies and toddlers, then sports or other activities. Not to mention Catholic or any other private school if that's what you want for your kids (those aren't free either).

And forget saving for college and the like - you never know when a CEO desperate to please the shareholders (or, in the case of our industry, a CEO who is upset over a hockey box score in that day's paper) will cut one of your incomes and you'll need that savings simply to avoid being thrown out of your home.

For many families, two high-level incomes are a necessity. And high-level incomes come at a price.

 

Here's all I want:

Raise 2 kids who are healthy and happy.
Spend quality time with Mr. Lugz.
Have time for myself... exercise, my friends and SportsJournalists.com.
Start my business, my second career, which absolutely blows up successful.

Possible?

 

This is not true at all and it gets to what I said earlier about how much people think they "need" for happiness versus how much they actually need. What I bolded, not one of those things qualifies in any remote way as a need. If you want to spend it and make your life more difficult, that isn't anybody else's problem. And I say this as someone who lives in one of the highest-priced areas of the country.