More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner

Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner

Posted: August 26, 2010 03:39 PM

It's Women's Equality Day, the date marked to celebrate women getting the right to vote in our nation 90 years ago today. It's both hard (and easy in some sad ways) to believe that it was just 90 years ago that women got the right to vote in our nation.

Reflecting on this, I called my grandmother, who turns 95 this year, to see what she recalled about women winning the right to vote, and who had this to say with a twinkle in her voice:

"Well, I wasn't able to vote when I was 5 years old and women first got the right to vote. Although as a child I thought I should be able to vote, but of course I couldn't. I had to wait for what felt to me like a very long time to be old enough to vote. I remember when I first voted and going into the polls. I remember that all my girl friends voted too. We all voted. We wanted to take part in what was going on in the world. The only way we could do that was by voting."

Fast forward 90 years to now in 2010: Women do have the right to vote, we also have a modern economy with women comprising 50% of the entire paid labor force for the first time in history this year, and women now take part in what's happening in the world in many more ways than appeared possible to my grandmother when she could first vote.

But that doesn't mean women in our nation have achieved equality yet.

That's right. It's not yet time to pop the bubbly and celebrate victory on Women's Equality Day just yet. There's one very large group of women in particular who are experiencing significant inequality in our nation: Mothers.

The issue of wage and hiring discrimination against mothers is bigger than most people realize. The maternal wall is what's standing in the way of most women even seeing a glass ceiling.

In fact, while most women without children make 90 cents to a man's dollar, mothers make only about 73 cents to a man's dollar, with mothers of color experiencing increased wage hits. Since over 80% of women in our nation have children by the time they're forty-four years old, the majority of women face this kind of discrimination at some point in their lives.

And, this discrimination can't fully be blamed on mothers for choosing different career paths, as many have done. In fact, there was a study done on this very topic at Cornell University a couple of years ago which found that even when people have identical resumes, education, and job experiences, women with children are much less likely to be hired.

There's real discrimination here.

As a result, families are struggling. Moms who work full-time still struggle to put food on the table. This hurts children. This hurts taxpayers. This hurts us all. Case in point: Almost 1 in 4 kids in our country are experiencing food scarcity due to family economic limitations, according to the USDA.

In this economic downturn the paychecks of moms are critical to keeping families afloat. In fact the majority of families need two parents in the labor force to make ends meet these days. Frankly, we have 1950s public policies when it comes to families, while the rest of the nations in the world have sped ahead.

Without such policies, having a baby is a leading cause of poverty spells in our nation. One of the big reasons for this is that people end up having to quit needed jobs when they don't have the bridge of paid family leave for a few weeks after the birth of a baby--like 177 other countries do.

We can do better. We can't celebrate Women's Equality Day just yet.

We need to see family economic security polices pass that are the norm in most other nations--policies that studies show help lower the wage gaps--including paid family leave, access to affordable childcare, sick days, flexible work options, and the Paycheck Fairness Act among other things.

Modern women are between a rock and a hard place, and we need to band together in organizations like MomsRising.org, The National Partnership for Women and Families, 9to5-National Association of Working Women, AAUW, National Women's Law Center, and more to push for family economic security policies that make it possible for everyone--not just moms--to be able to excel at work, to have a life, and to care for loved ones.

There are now more ways for women to be involved in our nation than in my grandmother's time when she felt the only option open to her was voting.

It's now time to use those increased options for our voices to be heard to take those next steps for family economic security policies and to lower the wage gaps so we can fully celebrate Equality Day with our daughters and granddaughters.

Here's to making it so!

 

Follow Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner on Twitter: www.twitter.com/rowefinkbeiner

 
 
  • Comments
  • 83
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ipolitics123
What an excellent day for an exorcism.
11:24 AM on 08/27/2010
"Frankly, we have 1950s public policies when it comes to families"

What we could use in this country is some 1950s families to go with them. Back then, there were two parent (imagine that!) families, and one parent worked while the other raised the kids. Now both parents work, day-care raises the kids, everybody's unhappy and somehow this is all somebody else's fault.

Feminists demanded and got no-fault divorce, then discovered raising kids by yourself isn't all fun and games. Feminists demanded and got laws against hiring discrimination based on gender, then discovered working while you try to raise kids by yourself is even less fun. Now these same women are complaining that having to take responsibility for your career, family and life choices and live with the consequences of them is sometimes no fun at all.

Welcome to reality.
12:48 PM on 08/27/2010
You blame feminists for this state of affairs when the real culprit is trickle-down voodoo economics which have ensured that wages stagnate while productivity rises, thereby transferring wealth away from the middle class to the top 1%.

Back in the 50s women were banned from working most interesting jobs. Black people were similarly confined to mindless service sector or physical labor. Forgive me if I have trouble regarding it as some kind of idealized utopian dream.

Though I agree that it would be fabulous if the average family could make ends meet with ONE parent working instead of two.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Venicelady
Ignorance is NOT bliss.
08:16 PM on 08/28/2010
Many ideas of what 1950's and 1960's families were supposed to be like were shaped by idealistic T.V. shows, such as Donna Reed, Father Knows Best, My Three Sons, Leave It To Beaver, etc. Not that TV should make such impressions, but it did.

Don't remember any of the mothers in my neighborhood while I was growing up wearing pearls or designer dresses, perfectly coiffed with immaculate houses, dinner miraculously appeared on the table somehow. They worked very hard managing their often (large) families, (including my mother), there was only one income (usually from the father), and somehow we made it through.

Perhaps this is what ipolitics123 is referring to.. However, to blame feminism for changing the way it was is a veiled way of this person saying that women of today are to blame for the situations they are facing, and if only we could go back to being like Donna Reed types, everything would be OK again.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SaraSH
Athi*est Scientist Independent Old Fashioned
03:20 PM on 08/27/2010
EXACTLY.
10:06 AM on 08/27/2010
Ms. Rowe-Finkbeiner,
Exactly who do you expect to pay for these policy changes? Have you noticed that there is not currently enough money to pay for the EXISTING social services?

The earning disparity statistics are quite real, but they exist because of the demands of leaving th workforce or curtailing workforce participation as a result of rearing children.

You can legislate a tax or a whole series of 'leveling' agency support and you will get lower growth as a result. See Europe for the result. In addition, even with those support policies, Europe's birthrate is lower and in some cases, less than the replacement rate.

Sorry, but your advocacy is a prescription for a 1% economic growth rate forever.

Small businesses, where most jobs are, cannot afford your proposed support programs. The result, and I know this from personal experience, will be fewer hires.
11:21 AM on 08/27/2010
Aw, that's real cute...it's just too inconvenient, so let's not change anything!

Thanks for clearing it all up and making it easy for us! Now I can just go bake some cookies and not worry my silly little head about icky things like equality and fairness!

Yay!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ipolitics123
What an excellent day for an exorcism.
11:43 AM on 08/27/2010
Half of nothing is still nothing. Let me know if you need me to explain that further.
12:32 PM on 08/27/2010
I do apologize, but I can tell you from personal experience running many small companies that if the proposed changes are enacted, it will mean fewer people are hired. When you have to make a weekly payroll you have to ensure that the dollars are there to pay both the salary of the person who is working and the applicable federal taxes. It concentrates the mind on a weekly basis.
09:37 AM on 08/27/2010
I would like to see more paid days off for ALL workers, not just workers who CHOOSE to have children. Children are a choice and I think people should be able to take maternal or paternal leave but what about people who choose NOT to have children?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:41 PM on 08/28/2010
I agree, good point. Equality is for everyone, not just particular voting blocks.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SaraSH
Athi*est Scientist Independent Old Fashioned
01:19 AM on 08/27/2010
As a mother and a scientist and a feminist and a liberal, I must say that some women seem to be quite OUT OF their minds. As long as women have uterus and ovaries, they are, I repeat, THEY ARE the primarily MOTHERS and then other things. I just lost a fellowship option I could have taken 2 yrs ago. Am I crying over it? NO. Because the first 4-5 yrs of my child's life is the most crucial in brain wiring/development and I won't leave my child to nannies and grandma's for a whole three months. And I am not jelous of those DADs who could take the fellowship, simply bc they are DADs. Physically and mentally, women and men differ RADICALLY. Women are better at certain things and men are better at certain other things. WE ARE NOT EQUAL. Women do have, shall we say, more baggage. The correct way of handling the situation is to make sure men UNDERSTAND that and respect that, but at the end of the day, we must also understand the NATURAL biases that come with different genders and not complicate or read too much into certain cultural settings, not all cultural settings are set by men or societies, many of them actually ARE natural and quite appropriate and not really qualified to be in the category of 'discrimination;, especially when it comes to gender roles.
03:34 AM on 08/27/2010
Hear, hear!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cmaciain
09:09 AM on 08/27/2010
Ah, sorry NO. Uteri and ovaries no more make a mother than testes a father. Women are NOT walking breeding machines. You want to play mommy and give up your career. Fine. Women are not better parents than men nor are they more nurturing etc. It takes NO skill to reproduce. None. No one should be proud that he or she can reproduce. It's not that hard. And those natural biases you mention go out the window for MANY people. Women are not all soft, caring baby lovers nor are men all macho warriors. You want your gender role, fine, but stop pushing it on other people.

The fact that you say you're a scientist frightens the hell out of me. Jesus, who do you work for, the Texas textbook group? You sound like you're from the 50's with your tripe. Go back to your Focus on the Family group.
10:09 AM on 08/27/2010
Please explain, then, why there are so many single mothers and so few single fathers.

We are not talking 'absolutes'. All human behavior is along a spectrum, but answering the above question will go a long way to plotting the graph....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SaraSH
Athi*est Scientist Independent Old Fashioned
01:33 PM on 08/27/2010
scientifically speaking, you couldn't be more wrong. And for me, SCIENCE is the ultimate truth and logic and reason. Women ARE biologically EVOLVED to nurture. Our ancestors sat in caves and tents and BRED and WEAVED and RAISED babies and picked up berries and nuts and provided meals and supported men. And MEN were out there MONTHS or YEARS away, hunting, fighting in wars. Only someone who thinks we were created 5600 yrs ago by some God from Adam and Eve could be so narrow minded and SMALL in her thinking. Humans are PRIMATE ANIMALS, first and for most. And we all share these gender roles like other females and males in the animal kingdom.
There are MANY books out there you can read on the RADICAL differences that exist between men and women, their BRAIN, their HORMONES, their PHERMONES, their physical capabilities, and yes, MANY IT IT has to do with ovaries and testies. Give women another 100 of yrs and YOU WON'T SEE lots of women pilot, fire fighter, soldier, police, construction worker, etc, women are NATURALLY prone NOT TO be FOR hunting type positions, our body works against that. And give men another 100 yrs and they'll SUCK at nurturing, multi tasking, many aspects of literature, Emotional Intelligence,etc
ACCEPT the reality and don't give women a bad name. American STYLE feminism has destroyed men in this country.Men are either wimps,OR gay in Urban American cities and I am appalled by some views of modern American women
12:20 AM on 08/27/2010
How many more victims groups can there possibly be? You made a choice, you had a child you reproduced. God bless you it is a miracle you are one of the luckiest people on the planet, but Im sorry someone who can commit more to the productivity of my company is worth more to me. You are NOT a victim. You seem to want to create incentives or subsidize mothers. Well what about the able bodies person they are replacing? Where is the concern for the single male or female who was not as blessed as you? So apparently under your logic unwed and single people who havent procreated yet are less valuable to society? Screw that, count your blessings quit whining and please don't teach your children your twisted views on society or I'll have to repost this in 18 years.
03:35 AM on 08/27/2010
Well said!
10:48 PM on 08/26/2010
Looking at parental leave (paid and unpaid) stats around the world just make me shake my head. For a country that supposedly is so "pro-family" America sure has a funny way of showing it. Paid maternity and paternity leave should be a given. The U.S. has a lot to learn and catch up on.
10:11 AM on 08/27/2010
Let me know who you plan to have pay for that. Please factor in European growth and unemployment rates over the long term.
10:16 PM on 08/26/2010
To pile on insult to injury, the average social security payout is $13,900.00/year while women receives only $11,000.00/year. The pay differential isn't only immediate but, also reduces the SS payments after retirement.

So, when are you women going to demand equal rights?
09:47 PM on 08/26/2010
Hear hear. Mandatory paid parental leave is an essential tool in the fight for women's equality. It would also make things more equal for men who want to be able to take care of their children as well. And of course all of this would benefit children, who will be the caretakers of this world--and us--when we are old and feeble. It's a no-brainer.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:50 PM on 08/26/2010
Mandatory paid parental leave would only further weaken a woman's prospects for employment.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Mister Biggles
10:38 AM on 08/27/2010
Not if men were given the same MANDATORY paid parental leave. But Idon't agree in designating parents as a superior class over singlesor couples without kids.
12:45 PM on 08/27/2010
Well maybe we should raise everyone's wages so that families don't NEED two wage-earners to survive, eh? Or maybe we should do like Sweden did and set aside paternal leave to ensure that men start caring for their babies just as much as women do.

We have options here. What's YOUR suggestion for making sure that women aren't penalized in their professional lives for becoming mothers?
09:37 AM on 08/27/2010
What about people who choose not to have kids or who have already have had kids?
What about their paid time off from work?
12:40 PM on 08/27/2010
They should get that too. Frankly we need to move away from this outdated, 1950s model of employment that we've been using. It doesn't work for parents or children or anybody else except Type A borderline sociopaths.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Mister Biggles
08:36 PM on 08/26/2010
If you are going to look at collectives rather than at each individual situation...

Women DO cost more to employ because of maternity leave, time off, higher insurance costs, etc.

Who should pay for that?

Should men and singles subsidize them?

That is essentially what the debate boils down to...
09:46 PM on 08/26/2010
Yes, they should. Men and single women benefit from the work that mothers do in raising the next generation.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cmaciain
10:50 PM on 08/26/2010
Hold the phones. I'm a feminist and this argument is crap. NO ONE asked these women to have kids for society. Male or female, if you chose to have a kid, that's a choice you make and a luxury you want. Children are NOT necessities! Parents are subsidized, given tax breaks and given privileges. That's plenty of privilege. Should childcare and education be better? Yes. So should care for the childfree. Parents should happily give up their tax breaks for kids and that money can be allotted to schools so that kids have better schools. The childfree already pay for the next generation. And if you choose to be a mom or dad, then you choose the life that you want. If you have to sacrifice your career, fine. (Both parents should have to, by the way, not just the mother.) Abolish parental leave and offer every employee six weeks off for personal time. And get off the high horse that mothers and fathers are so bloody terrific and the world should kiss their butts. If you chose to be a parent, you chose it and no one should be giving you kudos for that.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ADP4
07:02 PM on 08/26/2010
But it's encouraging that this is in the Politics section and not Living...
06:43 PM on 08/26/2010
It's a fact that women in the workplace who choose to become mothers need to take time from their jobs to care for their children. Absence from the workforce, for however long, makes you less valuable as an employee. Not taking time from work to care for your children makes you a bad Mom. This isn't as easy to solve as it may seem.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ADP4
06:58 PM on 08/26/2010
Not easy at all. Especially since losing time at work not only means losing the pay, but also losing the Social Security earnings.

Still working toward the day when taking time from work to care for your children is also recognized as essential for dads.
09:06 AM on 08/27/2010
It should be essential for Dad's as well. But Dad's will also need to realize that taking time away from work will result in lower earnings.
09:44 PM on 08/26/2010
Right. It's easy... when you're rich.

I guess if you're poor and you absolutely need that job, you don't have the choice to be a good mother.
09:07 AM on 08/27/2010
You still have a choice. You always have a choice.
10:24 AM on 08/27/2010
If you are poor and need that job, having a kid is not a good option. If you are poor, need a job and Daddy leaves about 5 seconds after birth, it is even less of a good option. Repetition of this axiom seems not to prevent its widespread adoption as a life choice.....
photo
Pearlswan
Born in Philly yet my heart's now in Frisco
06:21 PM on 08/26/2010
I had to take 10 years out of my work life once I had my children and their father abandoned us with no child support. I would have a 37 year work record if the 10 years I spent doing the job of single-mother were counted as work. Instead,only 27 years counts toward my social security retirement benefits and my disability benefits. I get no benefits whatsoever for NOT abandoning my children after their father did. Yet, their father now enjoys a 6-figure salary with no work interruptions and his new wife, who didn't work for over 15 years, gets credit from the federal gov't for all of his earnings while I have to wait until I reach retirement age to even get credit for the 10 years of abandonment that ruined my professional work life and gave me zero dollars in contributions to my own social security insurance during that time. If that's not discrimination against motherhood, I don't know what is!

In fact, my children and I still struggle to survive while he and his wife live in a huge home and drive expensive vehicles and take yearly vacations. The kids still get nothing. So, even women discriminate against motherhood--its systemic. Injustice hurts. It doesn't just hurt me, the mother. It's still hurting my children and my grandchildren today in less earnings and less opportunities. I have lost hundreds of thousands in earnings & benefits. Discrimination has devastated my life.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SmileAndActNice
Utilitarianism, the -ism that works.
06:37 PM on 08/26/2010
Your story is precisely why I advised my cousin to abort when no-good left her.

She didn't and now lives in abject poverty when she isn't living with her parents. If we had government provided childcare like most of Europe she wouldn't have had to choose between having a child and being able to adequately provide for one. She could have finished her degree and would be a certified paralegal now.

But that would be a REAL pro-life agenda where children and mothers are supported with real social safety nets. Much more work and $$ than the fake one.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
myth buster
02:03 PM on 08/27/2010
The real pro-life agenda says get married before you have sex. Being married makes it much harder to bail out when things get inconvenient.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SaraSH
Athi*est Scientist Independent Old Fashioned
03:38 PM on 08/27/2010
Realize that in Europe, where I grew up most of my life, women DON'T GET pregnant as much, are MUCH MORE thoughtful of what they do with their bodies and ABORT in rare cases that they do get pregnant. Overall, they think and live a more rational life and then they have the amazing 2 yrs of maternity leave all paid for and all kinds of other help, which are all essential. USA is perhaps one of the least friendly place for average people raising children and starting families. They also don't have the severe case of illegal immigration which are breeding babies like ...and are draining the social system in many large states, such as in CA. Overall, they are more rational and LESS religious and as a result, they are breeding less soldiers...shall we say, as Americans do.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:02 PM on 08/26/2010
How is it that your children are not getting child support from their rich father?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TraceyES
05:33 PM on 08/26/2010
The day I see a headline on a men's interest magazine (GQ or Maxim) that reads something like, "How to Balance Work and Family," I'll believe we have equality. Until then...
10:21 AM on 08/27/2010
Ain't going to happen. It may be sad, or unjust, or....whatever...but you will not see that as a serious injunction.

Most women are too decent to just chuck the kids, so they are stuck. Marriage, and later enforced support, are there for a reason.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Venicelady
Ignorance is NOT bliss.
01:32 AM on 08/28/2010
So, what are you saying about the men? Once again, I noticed you used the word "stuck".