Men May Have It Bad, But Unemployment Statistics Obscure the Hit Taken By Single Moms

[marmar]

AlterNet / By J. Goodrich

Men May Have It Bad, But Unemployment Statistics Obscure the Hit Taken By Single Moms
Break down today's unemployment stats, and it looks like women are faring much better than men in the great recession. That is, unless they're single and raising kids.

March 4, 2010 |


Much has been made of the fact that, when examined through the prism of gender, the Great Recession appears to have affected the employment of men far more than that of women. And, taken as a whole, that's true. According to figures released on Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the unemployment rate for men (age 20 and over) stands at 10 percent, while 7.9 percent of women rank among the unemployed. (When the recession began in December 2007, the unemployment rate among men and women was the same: 4.4 percent.)

But spend some time rummaging among the unemployment statistics, and you'll find a significant group of women struggling mightily against a brutal economic tide: single women with children. They, the breadwinners of their families, are more than twice as likely to be unemployed than married women who have a spouse present. While this has been true for the last ten years (PDF), its effects are amplified in the current economic crisis.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics, in a report released on Friday, showed the unemployment rate for married women at 6.1 percent, while that of single women "who maintain families," in the parlance of the BLS, reached a whopping 11.6 percent -- 68 percent higher than when the recession began. Add to that the fact that women, as a whole, earn only 77 cents for every dollar a man brings home, and you find many single women whose situation has gone from difficult to dire. .........(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.alternet.org/economy/145918/men_may_have_it_bad%2C_but_unemployment_statistics_obscure_the_hit_taken_by_single_moms

[Double T]

1. Screw the gender arguments. ALL GD PEOPLE need jobs as this nation is going down the tubes.

[Berry Cool]

2. Yeah. There are more than just two kinds of women out there.

This article compares the fate of married women to the fate of single women with children. Well, there are single women WITHOUT children who are suffering too. But it's like we're invisible, because we have no children who are suffering from our job loss. Yet we are still solely responsible for our own livelihood--we cannot rely on income from an employed husband while we cope with unemployment the way married women can (even if it's difficult). We are out here on our own, and it's like nobody cares because we haven't met our obligation to society by having children.

[Double T]

3. There are plenty who care about EVERYONE that has lost their job..........

and livelihood. Millions are already suffering and most know they are only a pink slip away from the same fate. No one should be having children NOW; the future is uncertain at best and part of the reason there are not enough jobs is because there are already far too many people. The solution is simple; WE need to stop exporting our jobs and stop importing everything WE consume. The wealthy elitists need to be stopped by a government of 'WE the People'. Ouster every member of the DNC (do nothing congress) and make certain their replacements are NOT candidates of the GOP (Greedy Old Psychopaths).

[JoeyT]

4. +1

Basing the value of a woman entirely on the number of offspring she's created isn't limited to anti-abortion groups and the quiverfull movement.

[Doctor_J]

5. As with all Darwinian undertakings,

those who are weakest, most vulnerable, and most voiceless will suffer the most.