tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3979501558241561585.post311740328385858676..comments2023-11-02T07:09:21.601-07:00Comments on Local or Express?: A Mom on the CourtRobin Aronsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03080623538120396969noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3979501558241561585.post-14799941823553431572010-04-26T18:05:10.209-07:002010-04-26T18:05:10.209-07:00I'd underline that I suggested a woman with ki...I'd underline that I suggested a woman with kids nominated to the Court wouldn't be a roadmap. Her path would be, obviously, exceptional in many ways, but I'm not sure it would help other women actually get or stay in the work place, at least not in the way Beinart suggests.Robin Aronsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03080623538120396969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3979501558241561585.post-7491386016032590722010-04-26T17:48:39.595-07:002010-04-26T17:48:39.595-07:00Well this goes right to the whole chicken-egg ques...Well this goes right to the whole chicken-egg question. Where do family friendly policies originate? What drives not only their implementation, but a true and robust embrace by the public and private sector? Sure, typically men who have a wife and kids at home haven't had the same kind of choices women do and that makes them less sensitive to the issues women and families face and less innovative in coming up with policies to address those difficulties. I can't speak to the numbers of women with children in government in other industrialized societies--I don't know those figures. I get all that. And still, I don't think motherhood is a top line resume item for a Supreme Court nominee right now. It'd be fantastic, for sure, but, for me, given the make up of the court, recent decisions like the one giving corporations the status of individuals in elections, it's not central. If Beinart's purpose for suggesting it was to spark discussions like this, well, then job well done. Beyond that, we'll see.Robin Aronsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03080623538120396969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3979501558241561585.post-57295626224367896002010-04-26T17:24:38.894-07:002010-04-26T17:24:38.894-07:00Just catching up the news after the wkend and want...Just catching up the news after the wkend and wanted to catch up with you. Very provocative post, although as someone who believes that the last feminist issue--or more properly the first--is supporting mothers who work outside the home I must say I disagree. Yes, of course, all moms are just doing their best to get by. That however does nothing to address the country's dearth of women with children in government; a number lower than any other post-industrialized nation. This fact, most would agree, contributes to its dearth of genuinely family friendly policies. The lack of such policies hurts all families--particularly the majority who can't choose for moms to cut back when their kids are in middle school. Put differently the fact that our government is run by men whose wives mostly do not need to, or do not choose to, work outside the home or by single women has contributed to a problem that hurts all but the very, very wealthiest families. So, I say, yes, while not certainly the only issue, putting a woman on the court who confronts the struggles that the vast majority of women in this country deal with deserves our support not our derision.<br /><br />So that is my peace, my friend.hilarynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3979501558241561585.post-61683231860547653022010-04-26T13:52:31.619-07:002010-04-26T13:52:31.619-07:00And nice to see you Carolyn!And nice to see you Carolyn!Robin Aronsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03080623538120396969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3979501558241561585.post-32880087929807418112010-04-26T11:32:32.927-07:002010-04-26T11:32:32.927-07:00Could not have said that any better!Could not have said that any better!Carolynnoreply@blogger.com