Last week's mama drama with Hilary Rosen’s comment about Ann Romney never having worked a day in her life put the politics of mothers on the kitchen table so to speak. Until I read Rosen's comments here, I admit I was part of the brouhaha, but not so much against Rosen oddly, but against the comments of people who felt that Ann Romney represented the typical stay at home mom, or that because she had chosen to stay home, or because she had staff, she had no skills that could be translated to employment. I'm not an Ann Romney fan, but I had to disagree; suggesting that just because she had staff she had no concerns or skills is ignorant and classist. Having staff working for you on a large estate, in the workplace, or in the home requires managerial skills, which last time I checked, were respectable and practical skills. I also resented the people who suggested that women who stay home with their children have loads of spare time. I don't know who these people are, but I don't think they actually have children or spend time around children or know children.
To be clear, I do agree with Rosen that as far as economic advisers go, Mitt Romney could do a little better.
Yet I do have to say what I appreciated about last week's mama drama in the media is that it revealed a lot of how people perceive not just SAHMs, but mothers and women. It revealed a lot of the underlying bias that people aren't even conscious of thinking, hence the remarks that SAHMs have plenty of spare time, little stress, are out of touch, ignorant, live in a bubble, are spoiled so on and so forth. (Though granted, SAHMs are a diverse bunch. There are plenty who probably do fit this description. However, to be fair, I also know a fair amount of working mothers who fit this description. I also know of working and non working men who fit this description.)
Cut to Sunday morning, and me having my morning coffee at my kitchen table with my family. Like every day, we were listening to NPR's Morning Edition. Rachel Martin was talking with Mara Liasson about the Presidential campaign, Ann Romney and Mitt's issue with women. Liasson then clarified for all of us listening (and only those of us listening because NPR would later go back and edit the transcripts) that "Mitt Romney doesn't have a problem with stay-at-home-moms, he has a problem with educated women."
Oh yes. She did.
Within minutes I was at my computer leaving a comment on NPR's site asking, "Did I just hear that?" (For my comment, the other incensed comments and the edited transcript you can go here). Needless to say, Liasson, like Rosen before her, made a rather poor choice in words.
Later in the day, when the transcript was up, I checked for any acknowledgment from NPR about Liasson's slip of the tongue (if we're just going to give her the benefit of the doubt).
Nothing. Except an edited transcript.
And now I'm a little disappointed in NPR's Morning Edition - Sunday. When This American Life retracted a story, they did a whole episode on it. I thought they handled the situation with an amazing amount of integrity, responsibility and authenticity. Morning Edition's stunt in comparison just looks cowardly. One person who commented called for Mara Liasson's termination. I don't know that she should be terminated, but an apology wouldn't hurt. As I wrote NPR, do I really have to point out in 2012 that SAHM moms are a diverse and educated group? We have Ph.Ds, MAs, MBA and all kinds initials that follow our names. The vast majority of us have college educations and have had careers and for a variety of reasons have chosen to stay home for a bit. To assume otherwise is ignorant.
THANK YOU! I have been trying to get people to pay attention to this error by NPR all day. I really cannot believe that they are just covering it up and acting like Ms. Liasson never said such a thing. Great post! I wrote an incredibly similar one last night as well. It seems you and I might be the only ones out there that have. :-)
ReplyDeleteThanks for reading! I don't know - Twitter was lit up about it for a bit. I am surprised nothing has been said; I'm waiting for the Letters section on Thursday. But not with much hope.
DeleteInteresting points... I can't believe an NPR announcer said that. Underlying bias indeed.
ReplyDelete