If, when the recession ends, a resurgence in births follows, it could be made all the more strong by the pent up demand of women who’ve delayed. Which could mean an even greater rise in births to women 40+.
March is women’s history month, but this year we’re getting a special kind of history lesson. The anti-woman agenda being ram-rodded through legislatures this term is ancient. At least since Helen of Troy, our leaders have been actively denying women the right to choose how to run their private lives.
a href=”http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-gregory-birthrate-20110109,0,2745694.story”>Here’s a link to my op-ed today in the LA Times.
But the two kinds of “women’s work” — the labor done outside the home (for 23 percent less pay than for men), and the bearing and rearing of the citizenry done at home (for nothing) — are entirely interdependent. Failure to pass the PFA will give women yet another reason to have fewer kids.
Pull your socks up! And sit up straight! These homely mottoes are generally preparation for getting things done.
Fertility rates in the US have fallen slightly, and it happens that the birth rate is the lowest ever in the US. But the needs of the news cycle for drama notwithstanding, nothing drastic or frightening is happening on the fertility front this year. It’s just plain family planning.
Though we’ve heard a lot about this recession affecting men’s jobs more than women’s, the jobs that we’ve heard that women have no trouble holding on to are the low paid jobs in traditionally female fields. IIn the past, where women had made inroads into better paid, traditionally male fields they were often disproportionately represented in the layoff pools. Is that still the case – or have we turned a corner?