Work Over Family Research Paper

In today’s economy, it is a hard fact that many women will have to enter the workforce. In her article for The Atlantic, “Why Women Still Can’t have it All”, Anne-Marie Slaughter examines the difficulties faced by women who either have children or would someday like to do so. Having given up on the task of holding a high powered government position while being the mother of a teenager, her kairotic moment, the author discusses the changes that would be necessary in order for women to find a real work-life balance. Although Slaughter 's target audience is primarily women who seek high powered positions, the article contains ample information that should appeal to both men who seek to balance the needs of a growing family with their work responsibilities, as well as workplace policy makers who could help usher in the necessary changes. Her goal in sharing her experiences is to argue that women can succeed at the very top level of their organizations, “But not today, not with the way America’s economy and society are currently structured” (Slaughter).

Stephanie Coontz in “The Way We Weren’t: The Myth and Reality of the Traditional Family” emphasizes that the traditional and ideal nuclear family widespread in media and textbooks are false and far from reality. In fact, it is common to see more similarities to the traditional family consistent of “male breadwinner and nurturing mother” (1) today than in the past.

First thing let us start with a little overview of what Milton Friedman exposed in his article. It seems that the whole point of his essay revolves around one basic statement which clearly says that the only social responsibility of business is to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long it stays within the rules of the game (Milton Friedman, the social responsibility of business is to increase profit).

In life we are told to “have it all” by raising a perfect family, getting a beautiful house, and having a high paying job; but is it possible to have it all? How many people can honestly have it all, when so many are just trying to survive? In the articles, “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All” and “Why Men Still Can’t Have It All,” Anne-Marie Slaughter and Richard Dorment, discuss how women function in the workplace and the different expectant outcomes for each, mainly focusing on the upper class. The primary objective of Slaughter’s passage was to show how women are treated poorly and how they are held to a different standard than their male counterparts. Dorment focused mostly on how neither women nor men should strive to “have it all” because nobody can. Together they consider the subjects of workplace discrimination, housework standards, family involvement, and striving to “have it all.”

What Friedman implies is that shareholders should only be concerned with maximizing profits and not be obligated to be “socially responsible.” In that case, the manager would only have one priority, to maximize profits. However, what if that manager determined that social endeavors is the best option to maximize profits? This would make the corporation socially responsible while still maintaining maximum profits. The argument presented by Friedman in this case is that while the manager is performing as expected by maximizing profits, this type of “social responsibility is frequently a cloak for actions that are justified on other grounds rather than a reason for those actions.”

“Look at us! We’re just like everyone else. We’ve bought into the same ridiculous delusion; this idea that you have to settle down and resign from life.” (April Wheeler, Revolutionary Road). It has become a society norm that women are meant to serve housewives; to cook, clean, garden, and nurture children, even though they are much more capable of other things. The role of women is greatly overseen, as they are not perceived to be of their full potential, rather than as societies idealistic expectation. This is because men and those who are wealthy are unable to look past gender and accept women as of equal significance.

In “The End of Men?,” an article featured in The Atlantic in summer 2010, author Hanna Rosin illustrates the drastic, ascending shifts perceived in modern society. Rosin poises the theory of how men were traditionally seen as the superior gender. The author believes there is a contractionary shift in gender roles and that the new era is “[B]etter suited to women” (Rosin 304). Recent studies show that women are becoming prominent in the workforce, education, and family. Accordingly, she explains how women are miraculously able to balance work while nurturing their children. Rosin believes that this occurs because men are not biologically made to tend children. Additionally, Rosin analyses how men lost “8 million jobs” during the Great Recession (Rosin 306). During that time, women were becoming what made a majority of the workforce. There were increases in women’s presence in what used to be male-dominated fields: school, politics, and business. Rosin questions this drastic shift concerning women and men’s roles in society, stating how they are now equally competing for jobs. Moreover, the way women behave now show their commendable abilities in the workforce and how society is changing as they establish their dominance and authority everyday. Once, women were frowned upon, but nowadays, more people favor having girls than boys. Today’s era is commending women with their admirable work ethic and self-worth. Throughout most of history, men dominated the

Her list of accomplishments stretches infinitely long, including her work as a law professor at Princeton University, the dean of the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton, and, “the first female director of policy planning at the State Department,” (Slaughter 676, 680). She worked in the government for two years, before returning to her original job at Princeton, and the most common question she was asked was why she gave up her government job just to be home with her children (678). It is hard to comprehend why it is so difficult for women to want to have a family life without being shamed for it. The main issue that Slaughter struggles with is that she never realized how many women are affected by people who preach false words, such as that it is “easy” to have a fulfilling work and family life. Slaughter used to give speeches pertaining to this subject, motivating women to work hard in their home and work lives, but what she realized eventually was that, “[she had] been part, albeit unwillingly, of making millions of women feel that they are to blame if they cannot manage to rise up the ladder as fast as men and also have a family and an active home life (and be thin and beautiful to boot),” (678-9).

In the article “The End of Men,” Hanna Rosin offers several examples of women overpowering men. The inequality between men and women has become a critical issue in today’s society. According to Rosin, women are slowly surging ahead in the workforce and family life while men are left behind struggling to meet expectations. Rosin argues that this role reversal is taking place because women are simply better suited for postindustrial society.

In life we are told to “have it all” by raising a perfect family, getting a beautiful house, and having a high paying job; but is it possible to have it all? How many people can honestly have it all, when so many are just trying to survive? In the articles, “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All” and “Why Men Still Can’t Have It All,” Anne-Marie Slaughter and Richard Dorment, go through how women function in the workplace and how there are different expectant outcomes for each. The primary objective of Slaughter’s passage was to show how women are treated poorly and how they are held to a different standard than their male counterparts.

In the article “Why women still can’t have all” and “why men still can’t have it all”. Both Anne-Marie Slaughterr and Richard Dorment focuses on the main points of their career and family. In Dorment article, it focus more on sacrifices done by men and in the Slaughter article focused women role in their career and family. But Slaughter gives more detail about how women still cannot have what they wants. Slaughterr tells several reasons for unresolvable tension between family and career. Salughterr decision that women are equal as men (6). The main argument of this article is she believe that women can also do the same things as men. Slaughter give reader with hope and however, she also give women design for achievement. Both men and women

Robert Dorment’s summary from his article talked about that women always complained about men did wrong but men who worked so hard for their family and work-life balance. Richard used that word “castigate” for men that means women scold men, but they did not realize men worked so hard. Other quote about the castigation of men, “…person whose husband, by her own admission, sacrificed much in his own academic career to do other heavy lifting with their children, all so she could pursue her dream job and then complain about it, bitterly, in the pages of a national magazine” (Dorment 708). Anne-Marie Slaughter explained that women who get promotion from other positions that they realized they do not have spent time with their family and some women who leave their jobs because of their family reasons. The quote said, “It is unthinkable that an official would actually step down to spend time with his or her family that this must be a cover for something else” (Slaughter 682). Third article called Women, work and work/life balance: Research roundup talked about the wage inequality and unequal responsibilities between men and women. Women have more family responsibilities than men do because some women are staying at home while taking care of their kids. Last article, Work-Life Balance – An integrated Approach: The case for joint and several responsibility talked about the

Milton Friedman wrote in his famous 1970’s article in The New York Times Magazine, that “the one and only social responsibility of business, is to increase profits for shareholders.” Milton Friedman's view on business responsibility accentuates the importance of maximizing firm's value. He pointed that the “there is one and only one social responsibility of business –to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engaged in open and free completion without deception or fraud’’ and by taking on the burden of social cost, the business becomes less efficient (Milton Friedman, 1962).

The traditional family roles that have been established by American patriarchal culture have set women at a professional disadvantage due to the presumed duties that they are often expected to uphold. Women were expected to stay home with children while men were the “bread winners” and prosper professionally. This stereotypical approach to family was prevalent and has carried over to the workplace today. Slaughter explains how her own mother fell victim to these cultural practices. She recalls “My mother built a successful and rewarding career as a professional artist largely in the years after my brothers and I left home—and after being told in her 20s that she could not go to medical school, as her father had done, and her brother would go on to do, because, of course, she was going to get married.” (par. 17) Slaughter’s testimony illustrates the thought process that restricted her mother’s professional achievement throughout history. Throughout history, the relegation of women to the family has kept countless women from realizing professional prowess and solidified their status as “The Others.” Men were expected to work, thus allowing them to achieve positions of power and establish the culture of the American work force. This male dominated professional culture forged the tempo, and environment that would become the standard of American employment and Promotion.

Friedman (1970) presented another perspective of social responsibility in business. In consonance, Friedman (1970) writes that the first step in understanding the social responsibility doctrine is to find out what social responsibility implies for each entity