Time Magazine Cover "Moms Staying Home" instead of "Spain 3-11" Grrr

[RamboLiberal]

I got so ticked at this idiocy I fired off the following email.

This past week Spain suffered its own 9-11 attack with the casualties proportionally to population it probably equaled what happened to the U.S. in 2001. I expected this would be your cover story. Instead you have a soft cover story on Stay-at-home moms.

This attack has repercussions on the U.S. as well. It could well be Al-Qaida. It occurred on the 11th and I understand 911 days since 9.11. It could well be payback on Spain for supporting the U.S. in the Iraq war. Many of the Spanish people are outraged over this support. It also shows just how vulnerable we all remain to these kind of attacks.

This is a tragedy for Spain. Just as the world showed us such sympathy and grief, we need to do the same.

Shame on you for not having this as your cover story. No wonder Americans are considered such self-centered dolts!

[MSchreader]

1. And you're surprised?

It looks like BushCorp has come up with the solution to unemployment: force all women workers back into the home, and give the open spots (minus a few hundred thousand -- to remain "competitive", of course!) to unemployed men.

Martin

[ant]

2. is it that time again?

I thought it'd been a while since the media tried to make women feel guilty about their life decisions. How quickly time flies...

[liberalhistorian]

3. Yeah, and usually the very members of the media

most responsible are WOMEN with their own families! If there's one hypocrisy I just simply cannot stand, it's women who are mothers making a career out of telling other women who are mothers why they shouldn't have careers!

And I'd love to stay home, but, as a never-married single mother, I don't have any fucking choice, I HAVE TO WORK! And I'm tired of apologizing for it because Mr. Right hasn't come along yet!!!!!!!!!!

[ant]

8. don't feel a need to justify it

I was looking at the Time website and noticed an article that talked about women having to work. While I certainly don't doubt this is true - hell, who, male or female, would really work if they didn't "have" to? - I'm a little resentful of the idea that it's only ok for women to work if they HAVE to. Even if Mr. Right were to come along and offer to support you and your children, you should STILL be able to work if you choose to without having to feel guilty or explain that choice to anyone. And if you choose to stay home, same deal.

It's just bullshit that women would have to say anything other than BECAUSE I FUCKING WANT TO to explain their personal choices...it's bullshit that we have to explain our personal choices at all, actually. There are plenty of people out there whose parents worked and they turned out just fine. There are far fewer women being stay at home moms today than there were two generations ago, and somehow civilization has not collapsed.

It's not about working or non working mothers, it's about good and bad mothers. (And fathers, but of course we all know that everything bad that happens to kids is because of their mothers.)

Grrr.....

[liberalhistorian]

9. Oh, I totally agree, I certainly

didn't mean to imply at all that the only reason women really work outside the home was because they "have" to, and that if only their knight-in-shining-armor men made enough money, then they wouldn't have to and they could go back to baking cookies and gazing lovingly at their perfect, quiet, always-well-behaved-and-clean children (as if such a thing ever existed, BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!)

Indeed, I have NEVER EVER heard ANYONE question MEN as to their own career choices and how such choices would affect their children, if at all.

My mom was a teacher all while I was growing up, and I turned out just fine, and so did all of my other friends whose mothers worked. And some friends whose mothers didn't work, who stayed home with them, did NOT turn out as well! It's this whole simplistic bullshit that staying at home automatically means it's great for the kids and they'll all turn out perfectly, whereas working outside the home means it's automatically bad for the kids and they'll suffer all kinds of horrible, terrible things, that just drives me absolutely crazy!

Whether we choose to work outside the home or not, or whether we have to or not, is our own damn business and no one else's.

[girl gone mad]

4. The Time cover made me laugh.

As if children of stay at home mothers just gaze up lovingly at them all day long and everyone can walk around in pristine whites with perfectly manicured nails because there are no accidents in this world.

[yardwork]

7. Hear hear!

I wonder if the editor of Time ever spent ten minutes with a toddler? I would guess not, based on that cover.

[joeybee12]

5. Time has turned into such a rag...

...I used to read it all the time. Now, whenever I glance at it, I end up shaking my head in disbelief at such dribble.

[MAlibdem]

6. it was totally changed after 9-11

Rall was dropped and Joel Stein was basically demoted, he no longer has a regular article, which was SO funny.