Blog Archives

It’s astounding and outrageous that the United States continues to be one of the only developed countries in the world that doesn’t mandate a guaranteed paid maternity leave for its working mothers.  A paid maternity leave is essential in helping to ensure that all American women have the ability to realize their full potential within their careers.  Since this issue persists within the public sphere of employment, it is worthy of our discussion.

Let’s first discuss how insufficient the current protected parental leave period is in the United States.  Though no paid leave is guaranteed, new parents are permitted 12 weeks off after the birth of their child before returning to work.  However, this is only if certain stipulations are met.  The 12 week leave is mandated by the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, which only guarantees time off to employees who have been with a company for a year, worked at least 1,250 hours during that year, and work for a company that has 50 or more employees.  Thus, an estimated 40% of U.S. employees are not entitled to any sort of parental leave.  Individual employers may decided to permit more time off, but this is not required.  For those who do receive the 12 weeks off, this period is abysmally low compared to other developed countries.

The result is that women are barred from reaching their full potential in the workplace.  For many women, 12 weeks is simply not enough time to recover emotionally or physically from labor, or to properly care for their child in the earliest stages of development.  This often means that a new mother can’t return to work when her 12 weeks are up (if she was given any maternal leave at all) and is forced to quit her job.  When she does return to the workforce, if she is even able to do so, she’ll face many barriers.  First, she will need to find a new job after quitting her previous employer.  If she had earned any promotions or raises, or worked up the corporation ladder at her previous workplace, she will now find herself once again at the lowest level of employment.  She will also be several steps behind her male counterparts, or other women without children.

Even if a woman does receive adequate time off from work after having a child, it’s unlikely that she receives a paid leave.  Giving a new parent paid time off is not required of any employer in the United States.  If a woman isn’t earning an income while recovering from labor and caring for her newborn, her male partner often steps in to work more and become the sole breadwinner.  This reinforces antiquated gender dynamiques that trap women in the role of home-maker; preventing women from pursuing their goals and reaching their full potential.  The consequences of unpaid maternity leave are even more severe for single mothers, who may find themselves with no source of income at all after giving birth.  Being barred from an income as a consequence of the biological necessities of reproduction is a truly egregious infringement on the rights of women.

It’s clear that the lack of a maternity leave infringes on a woman’s liberty to pursue a career and thus establish her own financial security.  A woman’s biological predisposition for having children should never interfere with her rights to realizing her true potential.  It’s high time that the United States mandates a paid maternity leave, and thus liberates its women.

FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP/Getty Images

It has been a long and winding road, the path for women and equality; a plight that ranged from the most pressing academic challenges to personal issues within the family structure. Only until 1980, we had women attending college in equal numbers to men. Back then, it seemed that women were swimming against the current, and in many ways, it seems it still is no different. This past August, executives at Google made the decision to fire an engineer who wrote a memo questioning woman in tech. In the internal memo, James Damore expressed his thoughts on diversifying the workplace and the inclusiveness of women in tech. I acknowledge that Damore’s memo has been accused in the media as in favor of “male separatism” and “the end of gender diversity efforts.” Therefore,  I encourage readers to read the memo with an open mind before reading any articles that could be right or left wing biased.

Damore makes a mostly fair argument when he says, “Feminism has made great progress in freeing women from the female gender role, but men are still very much tied to the male gender role. If we, as a society, allow me to be more “feminine,” then the gender gap will shrink, although probably because men will leave tech and leadership for traditionally “feminine” roles.” He wrongly assumes, however, that by allowing men to be “feminine” they will leave the tech industry. He adds, “The traditionalist system of gender does not deal well with the idea of men needing support. Men are expected to be strong, to not complain, and to deal with problems on their own.”Here, Damore makes a good argument since equality needs to challenge gender roles. Yet, the rest of his proves, in my humble opinion, the following flaws.

Damore presents some research to back up his claim that women are more prone to anxiety and therefore less likely to pick high-stress jobs. However, there are generalizations that are not backed up by evidence, such as “Openness directed towards feelings and aesthetics rather than ideas. Women generally also have a stronger interest in people rather than things, relative to men.” Or “Extraversion expressed as gregariousness rather than assertiveness, Also, higher agreeableness.” It’s absurd to think that women are less reasonable than men because of their “soft nature,” although Damore does mention that these are generalizations, he is contributing to the stereotype by even considering them as factors. Furthermore, in his attempts to differentiate men and women, he argues that men are more assertive than women which is why men are more likely to get hired and receive bigger salaries. This argument lacks reason. These are not biological differences between men and women but a social conditioning issue. When a woman is assertive or aggressive, she faces negative treatment compared to a man who shows these same characteristics.

Damore also writes, “The same compassion for those seen as weak, creates political correctness.” Although women have been historically disadvantaged this should not be perceived as weak, or in need of protection. As Mary Wollstonecraft said, “If girls were only treated as boys in terms of their fear and displays of weakness, they would grow up to be more respectable.” It is important to acknowledge that both men and women have differences that are both advantageous and disadvantages for both genders. We often do a disservice when we pretend that men and women are equal. It’s important to clarify these distinctions. Women do play different roles within society, raising children for example, but this doesn’t mean that our mind is incapable to do the same things men do. It is still important to advocate towards equal opportunities regardless gender so we can leave a legacy for our children that we can be proud of.

Upon reading it carefully, there are some valid points. Damore, however, fails to present a reasonable argument to a more diverse workplace. The memo in itself should’ve started a conversation between the company instead of demanding his immediate dismissal. In order to have an equal opportunity for integration for women, the mind should be cultivated through discussion.