|
|
January 28, 2010
By The Sexy G.
At one time, women tended to marry up. Now it seems the opposite has occurred.
In a Pew Research Center Publication; a study was done by Richard Fry and D’vera Cohn, Pew Research Center, January 19, 2010. It is entitled, New Economics of Marriage: The Rise of Wives. The Executive Summary stated that “The institution of marriage has undergone significant changes in recent decades as women have outpaced men in education and earnings growth. These unequal gains have been accompanied by gender role reversals in both the spousal characteristics and the economic benefits of marriage.
“A larger share of men in 2007, compared with their 1970 counterparts, are married to women whose education and income exceed their own, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of demographic and economic trend data. A larger share of women are married to men with less education and income.”
This is startling news especially to an older generation. What happened to the earnings of men? How did women get into the lead when they still earn less income as compared to men in similar jobs? The Pew Report also states “…Women’s earnings grew 44% from 1970 to 2007, compared with 6% growth for men. That sharper growth has enabled women to narrow, but not close, the earnings gap with men. Median earning of full-year female workers in 2007 were 71% of earnings of comparable men, compared with 52% in 1970.”
The Pew Report continues, “Part of the reason for the superior gains of married adults is compositional in nature. Marriage rates have declined for all adults since 1970 and gone down most sharply for the least educated men and women. As a result, those with more education are far more likely than those with less education to be married, a gap that has widened since 1970. Because higher education tends to lead to higher earnings, these compositional changes have bolstered the economic gains from being married for both men and women.”
In an online article entitled Dime Crunch, Gwen Parkes discussed the Pew Research Center report by Richard Fry and D’Vera Cohn. What struck me is the last two paragraphs which she titled; Results. She refers to the writings of Andrew Cherlin, a sociologist at Johns Hopkins University. He wrote, “The Marriage-Go-Round: The State of Marriage and Family in America Today, “It’s not that women are calling the shots. It’s that husbands and wives are sharing the decision-making power.”
According to Parkes, “Cherlin hit the nail on the head. Yes, there is a noticeable change that has occurred in marriages and gender roles within the last 30 years, and yes both men and women are benefiting from these changes, because it has become more of a shared partnership between the couple. After all, isn’t that the exact definition of a partnership and the purpose of a marriage? Obviously couples in the U.S. are getting better at working together toward common goals so that both partners can reap the benefits. Now if we could just get the divorce rate down then we would be the picture of marriage perfection.”
It seems to me that Parkes hit a hot button. So, now that there is a tendency towards more equality in relationships, why is the divorce rate so high? I think one very important factor is that women, despite earning more or working in more prestigious jobs, are still basically responsible for domestic issues whether it may be all of the home scene or in large part. When a woman is working as hard or harder than her spouse and still has to tend to most of the chores at home and the children’s activities, a good deal of resentment develops.
Rebecca S. Powers, is an assistant professor at East Carolina University. An online link called SpringerLink, quoted Powers’ article, Doing the daily grind: The effects of domestic labor on professional, managerial, and technical workers’ earnings, published in a journal called, Gender Issues, publisher is Springer New York, and dated June 25, 2004.
The abstract states: “Using two waves of data from the National Survey of Families and Households, I examined how domestic labor tasks including daily grind tasks, female-type and male-type tasks affected the earnings of workers in professional, managerial, and technical occupations in the short and long term. The results show that performing daily grind tasks reduces the earnings of college-educated workers in high prestige occupations immediately and over time. Further, domestic labor explained an additional 19 percent of the gap between the earnings of women and men in professional, managerial, and technical occupations. These results suggest that despite having jobs that offer higher pay and more autonomy, the time spent doing the daily grind, negatively affects earnings, especially for women in professional, managerial, and technical occupations.”
I find it ironic that women are in a better position economically now yet can’t close the gap in earnings for similar positions compared with men. Nor, for the most part, can they equalize the domestic responsibilities. Yes, men participate more these days but often it is to placate the spouse or it is minimal. Come on guys, just go the distance. Let’s get that divorce rate down. Remember, men who are truly equal partners are having more and better sex with their wives.
SexyG
To support WRR’s mission, and our commitment to good storytelling, please make a tax-deductible donation by clicking here: Wild River Donation.
January 14, 2010
By The Sexy G.
I have two grandsons and both are wonderful, brilliant children (of course). The other day the six-year-old sent an e-mail, thanking me profusely for giving him an Ipod for the holidays, and he used it to send me the message. He expressed how much he had wanted one and how wonderful that I answered his wish. He asked how I was and sent his love.
Then I received an e-mail from my eight-year-old grandson. He asked how I was feeling, and how I was getting along in the cold weather. He then told me he was having a great Sunday and asked me about my activities for the day. I told him it was too cold to go out so I stayed in and did my writing. He asked me what I was writing about. I responded and mentioned the concept of a short story that I was working on and about an interview I had done. He said that was cool!
Stay with me here. This is not merely about bragging rights. I have a point to make. These children were curious and sincerely interested. I won’t even say I received this kind treatment because I’m their grandmother. I’ve seen them show the same interest to their parents and friends.
Mind you, they are boys through and through. They play soccer, baseball, basketball, tennis, ski, swim, wrestle and fight with each other from time to time. They love music as well and play piano and guitar. At the same time they are being encouraged to allow a sensitive side to develop. Sports and a moderate amount of competition are quite compatible with nurturing skills.
The point I’m making is that the brief interlude, approximately fifteen minutes of back-and-forth messaging, demonstrated more interest, empathy and concern than ninety-five percent of the men I have dated over the last eight years, present beau excluded. They showed more curiosity and expressed more feelings in fifteen minutes than some of my dates did in five months or so of being involved in a relationship.
I don’t mean this for every male, but I have seen it in enough men to detect a pattern. So, here’s the generalization; the most glaring flaw in men, in my opinion, is an emotional disconnect that runs through so many. I try to dredge up reasons by looking at society’s attitudes and the blatant male entitlement that is rife from infancy to adulthood to old age.
What I see is that heavy duty competition is placed on males at an early age. Then on to Little League which appears to do the most damage. I don’t believe it is the sport itself but the intense desire of parents to see their children win – winning at all costs. The concept of team cooperation is excellent. But playing up the winning angle removes a big chunk of childhood. That time of life should be about fun, games and a time to foment creativity. They should be taught to play for fun, have consideration for kids of lesser ability and even care about the opposition. Rather I see all too often that the attitude is “kill” the competition as in warriors entering the arena to face the lions.
Then we have society telling males they must succeed – another intense component of competition. They must best others. Very little is said about compassion for mankind because that can become a hindrance to success. It is implied that giving an inch to someone means they will take a yard. It is considered sissy for men to be compassionate and nurturing. Yet, these are qualities that necessarily must be instilled at an early age or it becomes a grating issue in adult relationships. I don’t believe it can be learned later in life and if it can it has to be extremely difficult.
I don’t get it. We no longer live like cave people, vying for a limited amount of food. Why do we raise our male children and stifle their ability to develop a deep emotional capacity? Why do we discourage their sensitivity? When I discuss this with men, many times they insist they are sensitive. Yes, I agree. They are sensitive to their own needs and hurts. If they feel disrespected, humiliated or insulted then sensitive they are. But the ability to empathize that sensitivity to others seems lacking.
My fervent hope is that my grandkids never lose the compassion and concern for fellow humans that they show now. Yes, they will see the lack of these qualities in some of their contemporaries along the way. I hope it’s not catching. Men have to be very strong to not repress their emotional life. It is not a trait in men usually applauded in our society.
A good guy friend always tells me that life is only about bucks, fucks and adventures. Say it isn’t so.
The SexyG
January 8, 2010
By The Sexy G.
I’m going off the usual path on this blog based on personal experience. A friend of mine recently had serious back surgery at a well-known hospital. My expectations for service were high. Instead I found myself in a position of combative advocacy against, what I saw as, a staff hiding behind vague rules that contained little humanity or compassion – much to my dismay.
The first two days after an operation my friend was zonked out on pain medication and the effects anesthesia after major surgery. He could only utter a few words within three seconds before he conked out again. After searching for his nurse, I asked how long he’d be in the hospital and would he be sent to a rehab center. He had good insurance and his stay in a rehab would be covered. The answers were not only fuzzy but, to me, downright nonsensical.
I was already disconcerted because there was no approval prior to surgery for the rehab. It depended on his condition. How many people after major surgery are ready to go home? If he was discharged on the third day post surgery, as was suggested, he had to be home alone with no way to get food, shower, dress or tend to himself. The bathroom was down a flight of steps. He was not allowed to drive for at least 6 weeks and was required to wear a neck brace at all times during this period of time.
When I approached the nurse she told me they would question the patient on the third day post-surgery as to whether he felt he could go home by himself or not. I pointed to the patient who was totally unconscious. I know my friend. In his semi-comatose state, he’d woozily probably say sure he could go home. They’d have to carry him on a stretcher in order to get him into an ambulance. Then what? Drop him in bed and leave?
When I mentioned the home situation, she tried to blow me off. She insisted he could walk and even do stairs. How did she know this? I have no idea for the man only awakened in order to say hello and then immediately lapsed into a deep sleep again. He managed to inform me that they helped walk him to the bathroom which was six feet from his bed and more than that he could not do.
After much insistence she told me to talk to the case manager who didn’t show up in person. She called on the phone instead. Now comes my second awakening.
After the came manager repeated the same gibberish about talking to the barely-awake patient, I told her I was simply making a case about his home condition. He could not survive in those with no one there. That had to be taken into consideration. His son was in Reading and worked all day. I lived almost an hour away and work. If he fell, which seemed like a certainty, he was a dead man. And in less than 24 hours they wanted to discharge him with the possibility of no rehab.
In a somewhat haughty manner she told me it was, after all, elective surgery which I took to mean that he had to suffer the consequences for choosing to have this operation with no one at home to help. Elective? He’d gotten to a point where he was barely able to walk, with numb toes – hardly elective. In a short time he probably wouldn’t have been able to walk at all. He had counted on rehab to get him to a point where he could manage at home however ineffectively. The next thing she wanted to know was if I lived near him, implying I guess that I should become the caretaker. Due to a large geographic distance it wasn’t possible.
Then she informed me I didn’t have power of attorney and she’d speak to his son who was so designated. My friend’s son was working non-stop and unable to communicate with the hospital during the day. I insisted this was a situation that needed clearing up now. Then she informed me after this grueling conversation that I’d have to talk to the physical therapist as it was their decision in the final analysis. Why was I put through this grinder, having to make an urgent appeal for the health of this patient? I thought it was their job.
From my perspective she was making me the case manager. I said I had no idea who in PT had seen my friend and suspected I’d get another run-around if I finally did contact someone. I asked that since I wasn’t in the hospital 24/7 could she please inform them of his home situation. She reluctantly agreed.
I thought her questions of me were impertinent. Instead of saying she’d take the matter into consideration and handle it she insisted they’d have to question the patient prior to discharge – tomorrow, the third day following surgery, a man hardly awake. I could only imagine him falling down unable to get up for hours until someone came to visit – if they did that day.
I left the hospital without any firm commitment. The next day, the case manager informed my friend’s son he’d be in the hospital for another three days and then admitted to rehab for four days. No more questions. No more arguments. What happened? Were they afraid of a lawsuit in case my friend fell? Was it my persistence?
Maybe, just maybe there is a case for advocacy. I see the moral of this story as — don’t let yourself be pushed around. What about the patients who have no one to advocate for them? I hate to think about it.
I have to wonder what underlies this line of thinking. I know the insurance companies are demanding people be discharged from hospitals as quickly as possible, many times before it is safe. But I don’t get why they were so reluctant to send him to rehab. It doesn’t seem to me to be any skin off their teeth. If anyone out there knows, I’d be happy to listen.
The SexyG
Powered by WordPress
|
Archives
|
