Lisa Hickey responds to an article in The Atlantic about ‘having it all’ and debates feminism and Tom Matlack along the way.
“It’s time to stop fooling ourselves, says a woman who left a position of power: the women who have managed to be both mothers and top professionals are superhuman, rich, or self-employed. If we truly believe in equal opportunity for all women, here’s what has to change.”
♦◊♦
The Atlantic, King of the Stupid Headlines, is running a much-discussed article called “Women Still Can’t Have it All.”
Why is the headline stupid? Because it is harmful to both genders to imply that one gender “can’t have it all.” Does that mean the other gender can?
♦◊♦
Shortly after my fourth child was born, my then-husband had had enough of me and my career. Shannon was barely 6 months old, and I wanted fly out to shoot a television commercial in Los Angeles. Alone. For a month. My husband discussed the situation with me calmly. How would he get the kids to baseball practice he asked? To ballet school? With an infant in tow? Did I really think he’d be able to do all that and go to his full-time job, too, without any help, while I sat in a studio somewhere eating bon-bons?
He had a point. So I flew to LA with a 6-month old. My boss was not happy. I didn’t care.
After one particularly long day of shooting we headed back to the glitzy hotel where production crews abound. The director and camera crew and agency folks crammed into the elevator – with their gear, the movie cameras and tripods, mikes and clipboards. The elevator door opened on the next floor and a women looking to get in took in the scene. Ten guys and me. With Shannon on my hip. “I’ll take the next elevator. But you…” she said, pointing to me, “You should be the poster child for the feminist movement.”
♦◊♦
When I listen to the stories of the men I meet at The Good Men Project, there are common themes. One that comes up all the time is that the men want to be good dads. They also want to be seen as good dads. Not the meatheads and knuckleheads and incompetent bumblers portrayed in the media. They want to be seen as good dads because they ARE good dads. Not because they are trying to get away with some master plan of going off to work and ruling the universe while their wives stay home and wash the dirty laundry.
“Women can’t have it all” implies that men can. That it’s more fun to go off to work than to stay home with the kids. That the jobs these men are running off to are all intellectually stimulating, high-paying, and that every single guy can rise up the corporate ladder just by showing up and wearing a tie. Nobody mentions the fact that there’s not enough room at the top for everyone who wants it. Nobody mentions that guys are often going off to work two jobs. Or a job in a middle management job where the CEO makes 231 times the salary of the workers. Maybe on a construction site, a job where there are more deaths than in all of the armed forces combined. Or a job where a 12-hour work day is the “new normal.” Is that included in women’s vision of having it “all”?
♦◊♦
I’ve been a CEO twice. I’ve had jobs where I got paid more than the President of the United States. During that time I raised four kids. The last seven years as a single mom. My oldest daughter is in grad school at MIT, launching her own start-up with a group of all-male engineers. Along the way, I did so many things wrong that I still cry at night when I think of them. And I’m happiest now, when I don’t have nearly as much of “it all” as I did at one time. What I have is people I can tell stories to, and people who will listen. People who can tell me stories back, so that we both might change.
You see, having it all, dear Atlantic, is a men’s issue as much as a women’s issue. The way to solve it for women is to actually NOT make it a women’s issue.
The way for women to have it all is to realize that men don’t have it all, at all.
***
It was a cold day in January when I pulled into a parking space on a street in Harlem and squinted around to find the right address. Ran up the three flights of stairs to an office with some still remaining holiday lights and a plate of cookies. Julio Medina came out and gave me a hug.
We walked into a squished conference room where his staff was sitting around a table. I had come to teach Julio’s staff about social media, but first I listened to their stories. Everyone at that table had been in jail. All had thought their lives would change for the better once they got out. But, as one guy said, that was a feeling that lasted only for twenty-four hours. After the one day of getting out of prison, he said, it just kept dawning on him that yeah, he was out, but he was out in a world with no job and no prospects, somehow had to feed himself and what was left of his family. Being back in jail no longer seemed like the worst thing in the world.
True, my experience wasn’t exactly the experience Tom had. I wasn’t in Sing Sing. I was in a small cramped office in the middle of Harlem with ex-cons not lifers. I was there because I wanted to help a bunch of guys who had recently gotten out of jail stay out. And I wanted to help Julio grow and expand his business. I had been as enthralled by the story of how Julio founded his business by realizing what he was good at as I was about the story of the pool of blood in Sing Sing. A story Tom had told me the first day I met him. Yet, I disagree with Tom that there was anything different about what was told to me in that room because I was a woman. I disagree that the guys I met with couldn’t be helped when I listened to their stories without judgment. I disagree that the amount I was changed when I walked out of there was any different because I was female. The experience changed me for the better, the same way sitting with Tom that first day at lunch when he talked about The Good Men Project and the power of men’s stories changed me for the better.
But one of the best things about The Good Men Project is that I’ve also learned that my experience isn’t the only experience in the world.
♦◊♦
We’ve talked a lot about the tragic case of Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman. Trayvon was shot by George Zimmerman. That was an indisputable fact. Zimmerman shot him either because he was afraid for his life and acted in self-defense or because Zimmerman made some assumptions about Trayvon’s “goodness” or “badness” based on the color of his skin.
I care about the case as anyone interested in men, violence, societal pressures that cause people to act in certain ways, social justice, and racism, would be interested in the case.
And what I am interested in most is not the story of what happened the moment when Zimmerman pulled the trigger. What I’m interested in most is the decision before the decision before the decision to pull the trigger.
If guys spilling their guts to each other can help prevent a story like that from happening, then I’m all for it. If that takes me walking out of the room so that story can be told I will walk on out in a heartbeat. Maybe that change – the change that happens to the teller of the story and the change that happens to the listener – is more powerful when it’s guy-to-guy. Who am I to say? Maybe Tom is right – that the guys sitting there in Julio’s office could only have told me about themselves after some moment of transformation that changed the way they thought of themselves as a man. If so, let that happen. What I believe in most is that it has to happen.
“If we truly believe in equal opportunity for all, (note, Atlantic, not “women”) here’s what has to change.”
The stories need to be told, in a place where people feel safe, in a way that others listen, without judgment.
♦◊♦
Sometime after we had first started The Good Men Project I was, like I am now, trying to make deals with everyone. And I had a business call with a guy, the stand-up comedian for The Ellen Show; who had also started a dad site, The Life of Dad. When I got on the phone, I started off by saying, “Sorry if you hear any weird announcements or I have to go suddenly – my daughter’s in the intensive care unit of Mass General Hospital’s and I’m in the waiting room.” And Tommy Riles said “Believe it or not, I’m in a hospital with my daughter as well – I don’t know if you know that my daughter was born with a rare heart disorder and needed open heart surgery as soon as she was born.”
Tom Riles and I still work together. As far as business deals go, it was one successful call. A few days later we ran this video where he talked about his experience to the Ellen crowd.
This doesn’t sound like a guy who doesn’t get the need for a gender-neutral work-life balance. Tom Riles started his website, The Life of Dad, to celebrate all that is good and funny and heartbreaking and complex about being a dad. Tom was also there in the hospital with his daughter when her heart stopped and she needed CPR. And I’m sure as heck not going to accept that award for poster child for the feminist movement unless Tom Riles accepts it with me.
♦◊♦
The surprising thing isn’t that Tom Riles has a story like that to tell, in fact, almost every dad has a story like that to tell. Every dad that that I’ve encountered wants a work life balance the way that Anne-Marie Slaughter wants in her article. The dads are willing to learn: one of our most popular articles of late is 25 Failsafe* Rules for Dads and their Daughters. The dads want to form a community that helps each other however they can.
And the guys in our comments section, the angry ones, those who complain about father’s rights and custody battles? Well, guess what. They do so because they want nothing more than to build more treehouses with their sons before it’s too late. I was talking to a feminist about why custody battles were so important and he said “well, actually, 85% of cases where males ask for joint custody get it.” And you know what? That percentage is too small.
“Not having it all” for working dads means they can’t spend as much time with their kids as they’d like to. “Not having it all” means men who stay-at-home with their kids instead of pursuing careers get ostracized. “Not having it all” for everyone means having to decide – moment by moment and day by day – not just what is best for you but best for those you love. Sound familiar, feminists?
♦◊♦
In the thick of a flurry of discussion about feminism, a writer and editor for The Good Men Project, Marcus Williams, told me, “I’d love to respond to this feminist debate but I’m too busy taking care of my twin girls. Can it wait until tomorrow?”
If we truly believe in equal opportunity for all, these are the stories that change everything.
–
Read more at our Men and Feminism Roundtable.
–
photo of vintage book by Shutterstock
About Lisa Hickey
Great piece Lisa. I still don’t agree that a woman walking into the bowels of Sing Sing is going to be the identical experience to a guy walking in there to meet a room full of lifers. But otherwise we are on the same page.
A few things to add. I am sure that part of the chip on my shoulder is that for the last 15 years I have been told to my face by my ex wife, often at a scream, that I am a shitty father despite devoting myself to fatherhood above all else. Maybe it is just my fault for choosing poorly in my first marriage or maybe there is something more universal there. I don’t know. But it does matter to me that my kids see me as a good father and that at crucial moments in their lives they know that I will do absolutely anything I can to show up for them.
The other thing I wanted to say was that I met our contributor Dave S. yesterday who has 3 month old twins. He is in bliss. We were talking about this idea that being a dad is something that is instinctual and almost beyond words. That the trick is actually not to listen to what other people tell you about how to be a good dad and just go with your gut, with your intuition, with the feel and smell of your kids that overcomes you with the need to kiss and love them.
I think this is important since the very headline that women can’t have it all is a backhanded way of slapping men like Dave…and me. The biggest mistake in my life was walking away from the instinct I felt when my first two children were born. I knew I wanted to be with them above all else but I went back to work … and to drinking and to running from any feelings I might have had. It took me almost three years to crash and burn and ultimately come back to the realization, when I was feeding my baby son a bottle, that being a father was my destiny as a man. So many men I know NEVER wake up to that. They hide in work or sex or booze or god knows what else. And the damage to them and their kids is enormous.
I am grateful to have a chance with my kids. I am grateful that in many ways I have had as close a chance as anyone to “having it all.” But I have had to make tough choices throughout about what is more important to me…kids, romance, career. The same way we all do whether we are men or women.
Thanks Tom. I agree with your point about “having it all” being a backhanded slap to guys like you and Dave, and that’s what infuriated me about that original post at The Atlantic.
One story I meant to tell in this piece, I’ve told it elsewhere. Early on, you and I were working together and we had a call — about financial analysis on the book sales. And I remember the exact conversation, you said “And so the profit margin would be…hang on one second, will you?” And then, in the background I heard a tiny voice say “Wheeeeee, thank you daddy!” And you continued “Sorry about that, I just had to put my son up on my shoulders. Now, about that spreadsheet…”
And that really stuck with me, how effortlessly you were able to attend to your son exactly when he needed it, but not miss a beat with the task at hand. Of all your many accomplishments, I was in awe of that moment as much as anything you had done.
As always, appreciate your starting the conversation around these issues.
I read that Atlantic article and the things that struck me were:
1) If you have to ignore the well being of your family in order to make change, be truly successful, and lead, then there may be something entirely fucked up about the system you want to lead within.
The value is not in the structure of raising human beings to be amazing creatures AND leading in ways that sustain that, we are living in an either/or situation and success as defined as “money” or “power” is the key indicator.
2) I’m not sure anyone can have it all, all at the same time, but in all her notes about women leaving leadership to be with family, I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a post about a man leaving leadership to be with family. Men have wives to be with families so men can work, that’s how that works or at least used to. I wish I’d see more men leaving to support family and helping women stay in jobs of power but then the men would be scorned and ridiculed which is BULL.
This is wrong, for men long for their families, long for their children and so instead of keep on working in the same system, why not all of us create a new one with dads and home and women at work, then vice versa, then something new?
3) The scorn and derision of women to women makes me sick. Just using the proverbial Master’s Tools to keep the rest of the system in line, “Don’t fuck this up for the rest of us ladies, just because your kid is having a hard time! Don’t know you keeping women in power is more important than one kids mental health??” Again, the indicator of success here is power and money, not family, not compassion. I think this is a huge issue.
4) I’m glad she noted how privileged she is to have these issues because there are so many women and men in the world who don’t have any fucking power or money, and have to work horrible jobs with terrible work structures all while their kids don’t get what they need. This seems like a 1 % issue to me.
5) I’d have titled this article “why no one can have it all because everything costs something and if you are willing to work in a system that doesn’t give a shit about your family life, emotional health, and places power above people, then you’d better just get ready for everything in the article below.”
Where is see the best of feminism is in change. Change of roles, change of identity, change in how that freedom works. Where i see the worst? Is when it has adapted itself to corporate structures that say, to be a successful woman means being a less than successful person, denying love, connection and family while expecting men to do so as well.
Hi Julie,
I think actually everyone can have it all, they just need to know what it is they want. (#5)
The idea of leadership is interesting to me. Being a leader, whether in the house or the workplace, is what gives you freedom to do other things. It may really be as simple as that.
Despite my relative successes in my career, no one actually *taught* me to be a leader until I met Tom Matlack. No one even tried. That’s why I try to teach as many people as I can, as fast as I can, even if it’s something I learned only 5 minutes before.
Here’s something that bothers me, though: this article, and a lot of other articles on here, refer to being a father as an integral part of being a “good man.” I’m in no position, financially or emotionally, to be a father. I’m afraid that people are starting to apply the same standard of “success” to men that has been unfairly applied to women in the past.
monkey, I didn’t mean to imply that being a father was an integral part of being a good man, I’m sorry if you took it that way. The only reason there was so much emphasis on fatherhood in my article was because it starts out by trying to fight the “having it all” stereotype, and that usually implies that “all” means being a parent on top of everything else.
But it’s those kinds of hurtful stereotypes that I’m actually fighting against — that “all” doesn’t need to include being a father or mother, and that goodness most certainly does not either. Thanks for your comment.
Lisa, I didn’t take any personal offense, I hope that wasn’t the impression given. But “having it all” isn’t for everyone.
No — I didn’t think you meant it personally. I just hate when I’m not clear in what I am saying! I am very much on your side, monkey, and do agree that having it all is not for everyone — AND that we should certainly have our own personal definitions of what “all” means. That is most certainly a post for another day.
Interesting observation. I wonder if it is based partially a hold over from a man success and worth derived from sexual conquest or attracting women.
I really appreciate this piece.
Even though I almost never comment there, there “Dads Good” section is probably one of my favorite parts.
I was born to a father who I know to love me dearly and who is regularly involved in my life to this day. I know that he made sacrifices for me, some of which I never knew about until years after the fact. I’ll never forget that he drove a four hour commute (two hours each way) for two years so that my brother and I would never have to move house in the middle of a school year. I’ll never forget because I started waking up at 5:30 every morning so I could eat breakfast with him; a breakfast that he always prepared without complaint.
For reasons I cannot understand, there’s rarely any media portrayal of men like him. That needs to change, and I’m thankful that the Good Men Project is working on it.
Thanks Mike,
I love hearing that story about your dad. And how you didn’t know the sacrifices he made til years later.
You’re right — we couldn’t find any depictions of dads like that in other media companies. That’s why we had to start one.
This is an great article, Lisa. You mention in above in one of the comments; I think the biggest challenge is for each of us to redefine “all” for ourselves.
Thanks Stephen. Yes, wouldn’t it be great to think we all can have it all.
I don’t need to talk about feminism because Lisa just said it all (thank you).
Lisa you actually described my reaction to Tom’s piece too, but I’d actually enjoy talking about that. It just seems odd to me the way he sees it, but at the same time I’m sure he’s right about how many men see it, and I’m sure he knows more about it than I do, and if it takes excluding women for men to talk, well the most important thing is that it happens… and yet….
I don’t recognise it in my experience and I don’t like it. I want an explanation for it. Things should not be that way (I am not questioning Tom’s experience – just unhappy that it is that way).
So I am trying to imagine this AA-like process Tom describes. For me I’d be more likely to talk to someone if it was someone I could trust which would specifically mean someone I wasn’t likely to be horribly embarrassed about by telling stories where I wasn’t going to look so “good”. But thinking about it I can see that might tend to exclude women because I’d be a lot more ashamed talking about my worst side if I was talking with women present. And if it was a woman I actually like, or admire, I think that might make me even LESS likely to say anything.
“You make me want to be a better man”
The flip side is when women make you more ashamed of your dark side, and that means you’re not going to want to open up unless the story in question is one where you already have it tied up in a nice bow with a happy ending where you “learned something” like saint Peter denying Christ or something. That stuff is OK, because you end up looking good. But the really nasty stuff where you don’t have any answers? No. I couldn’t say that. At the least it would be a lot more intimidating.
David,
I think Tom’s point, which I agree with, is that it’s easier to talk to someone who has shared your experience. Sometimes only someone who’s walked a similar path can understand you. Just like I can feel compassion for women who suffer discrimination, but I can’t ever fully understand it, because I’ll never experience it.
Hey, David Byron! Welcome back!
I asked Tom to explain WHY men didn’t feel as comfortable revealing the truth to women, and I’m not sure he really articulated it.
The thing about the rooms at AA — is 1) Because they are strangers and also sworn to anonymity, it doesn’t matter what they think as much. 2) People are told up front to be non-judmental, and there’s a code of non-judgmentalism. 3) Everyone goes around and tells their truths, so it’s almost impossible to tell your story and not have someone tell a story that is worse.
And Ben — the “shared experience” comes through loud and clear in AA — while no one has the exact same story, everyone has a similar one (usually some version of “losing everything” they held dear).
But what I’m trying to figure out is — what shared experiences ARE uniquely male? I suppose the really hot button issues we talk about here — custody, male sexual abuse. And prison is much more male, unfortunately. But — in day to day life? Are there really experiences that are “uniquely male” that are better shared with men? I have a hard time thinking of any.
Great article Lisa.
I enjoyed the Slaughter article too: it was her story, told to other women, and I didn’t think it was necessary to cover the male side. In large part that’s because sites like GMP were sure to do it
On the whole I didn’t find it offensive, other than the suggestion that women inherently care more about their families (I think that’s a result if societal structure more than anything else).
My view (and I think I’m paraphrasing Tom here) is that men are fighting their way back into families (rather than being absent figureheads) in the same way women were/are fighting their way into work. Hopefully we meet somewhere in the middle, where the social norms allow all of us the find the balance in our lives that makes us happiest.
This is spot on Ben, thanks! Exactly what we are trying to highlight. –>> “Men are fighting their way back into families (rather than being absent figureheads) in the same way women were/are fighting their way into work. Hopefully we meet somewhere in the middle, where the social norms allow all of us the find the balance in our lives that makes us happiest.”
Oops,msprry for the double post. Feel free to delete one of them!
I Like what you have to say here, though I do still agree with Tom that there are some things one can only fully open up to with others of your gender. This doesn’t exclude the possiblity of sharing those experiences with women, but chances are (and this is just my experience), if it is a story never discussed, I will not be comepletely open to telling it in whole with a woman invlved. I will be open to such if I have already explored that story amongst other men, which is what I suspect occurred with the men who had just gotten out of jail. I suspect they had their talkking sessions well before meeting you, had explored their feelings and stories, and were opening up to you with what they had already learned by doing so. I could be wrong. If I’m right, that doesn’t invalidate your own experience, and what you learned and gained from your listening. It doesn’t invalidate the idea they could have further gained and grown from their telling. But I suspect they would have gotten the full benefits in a male only envirounment before your inclusion.
The only other thing I wanted to mention was this:
“well, actually, 85% of cases where males ask for joint custody get it.”
I despise this statement because it is dishonest and harmful to men and fathers rights. I realise your not saying it, not even promoting it, so this isn’t directed at you. I also acknowledg this statement was actually being used in defense of fathers rights, noting the 15% that are denied is too many. But this statement is amongst the most damaging and marginalizing statements in the discussion of fathers rights. After all, what is joint custody? What joint custody did the father ask for? Did he get what he asked for, or just “joint custody”? How many of those 85% of fathers asking for joint custody and getting it, asked for 50/50 time with their kids and got 25%? Is this kind of “compromise” acceptable? Is counting that as a win for fathers acceptable? I don’t think so.
Hi Mark,
Thanks for commenting. I hope it was clear — I don’t disagree that there *should* be those spaces if that is what is needed to get guys to open up and share. And I do think you are right about the stories of the guys who had been in jail. It’s part of the system though, a system that puts more guys *in* jail in the first place. So, personally, I’d rather try to help change that then worry about whether I should or should not be in the room when guys talk. Whatever moves the conversation forward is what is important to me.
I appreciate your calling me out on the custody statement too. Agree it’s not a win for father’s. Agree that it is something that needs to change. We’re going to talk to Father’s and Families about getting more of those stories told. They are important.
“I don’t disagree that there *should* be those spaces if that is what is needed to get guys to open up and share”
Sorry. I know you weren’t implying men shouldn’t have those spaces, and if my comment came out as if to suggest you were saying that. My apologies. It just seemed your post was saying there wasn’t a need (even if you agree it should be allowed when desired) for men only spaces, and I would disagree. I think men can uniquely benefit from male only spaces (and I suspect women too. I’ve been the fly on the wall on a woman only conversation. I was a quiet, long haired, easily forgotten wall flower type youth sitting with about 10 girls after all the guys had left to do other things. the conversation clearly changed.)