Well said.

IMHO Equality means access to the same CHOICES, but our gender/biology defines the consequences of those choices.

I was most offended by the sunny-side-up presentation of the EXTREME family dysfunction within the Palin family.

Everyone has dysfunction, each family's dysfunction is as unique as a fingerprint.

1. Sis-in-Law Sarah interjecting herself into her sister's divorce.

2. Pregnant MINOR.

3. Todd's sister getting arrested in Wasilla for burglarizing the home of the man she was having an affair with.

4. Grandbaby's OTHER Grandma arrested for Oxycontin distribution.

Yet all these super-duper Prosperity Christian types just say it was all out of Sarah's control.

Uh, bullshit.

Why do some women continue to look up to women who only take ownership of their successes and blame their failures on everyone else?

Good for Sarah Palin. You don't have to stay in a closet with a special needs kid. (Okay, so mine makes a mess at the restaurant table and my brother gets disgusted - tough luck. So mine looks "uncomfortable" with me carrying her around - how would you look with a tube stuck up your nose, and would she be more comfortable lying in a crib with no external stimulation and the same tube stuck in her nose?). I've had so much advice from outsiders who don't have much conception of the various challenges and logistics, and there are certainly lots of other kinds of special needs, some much more demanding.

What's the first thing a female President will do? The dishes. Oh, so Sarah Palin took her kids on official duties? Good for her, let's call it "Affirmative Action". Obama's wife was a medical school VP - any way she might go on a 2 week business trip and leave legislature hubby with the kids? No way. So part of the cost of integrating women in positions of responsibility is helping them with those home obligations that won't go away. Per diem for telecommuting from home? No problem. We pay for Camp David, we probably pick up Presidents' green fees for their golfing, which are certainly much more. We fly politicians around the world on unnecessary junkets, like all those supporting Abramoff and his corrupt dealing in Marianas and the Middle East. But have a female politician try to balance a family and public life and we're horrified? So we only get allegedly lesbian public officials like Janet Reno and Condi Rice (possibly Sotomayor), or we get past-their-parenting-and-most-productive-years politicians like Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi?

Try this disturbing line: "In 1987, after [Pelosi's] youngest child became a high school senior, she decided to run for political office." So presumably our highest elected female official voluntarily refrained from serious public service until her kids were sufficiently grown, when she was 47. Has a man ever done this? Is this in the greater good of our country?

you rabid, unrealistic and irrational feminist, you!

:o)

Can you "have it all"? Short answer (IMHO): Depends.

Let's start with what does "have it all" mean? If you mean simply work and have children, sure. But doing it successfully is dependent on several factors. These are some of the ones that come to mind:

-financial position
-chosen profession
-if you have one, your partner's profession
-the degree of support in your work environment
-the degree of support amongst friends/family

I just don't think the answer to your main question is the same for everyone. Too many variables.

Regardless, whether a woman chooses/has to work, chooses/has to stay home, works part time, etc., I, for one, am tired of the Mommy Wars. I know from personal experience how heart wrenching it is to make "the decision" and I think we put enough guilt on ourselves without others piling on.

Re: Palin as working mother model
There is a difference between softening some of the arbitrary lines between work and family life and exploiting one's children for personal ambition, as I believe Sarah Palin has done.
Daycare for pre-school children at the office so that moms (or dads) and their children can have lunch or other contact during the day? Great. Parents attending school-sponsored career days in which they explain what they do for a living, or, conversely, children attending office days opened up especially for children of employees? Fantastic. Telecommuting from home? Great -- with one proviso -- so long as the children actually get some parental attention when they ask for it, and are not waved off as if they do not matter, at all, in comparison to whatever business task is at hand (worse than having parents at the office, imo). Children of any age traveling with parents on business when one or the other (or even a reliable minder) is available to focus on childcare and entertainment? Great -- expanded horizons, social ease, etc..
But not one of these examples of healthy blending of business and family life is what Sarah Palin actually did.
Instead, she purposely and repeatedly exposed Trig to klieg lights and amplified sound at all hours of the night throughout her campaign with McCain... when the consensus of opinion about Downs Sydrome infants that I've read says that they are easily traumatized by too much sensory stimulation and that they need routine as well as plenty of rest.
So zero points to Sarah for Trig.
What about Britney? Pregnancy is, in principle, nothing to be ashamed of under any circumstances. But there is a big difference between a parent choosing to exhibit a low key acceptance and protective nurturance of a pregnant teenager.... and Palin exposing her pregnant but unmarried daughter to embarrassing media enquiry and international scrutiny that it is truly difficult to imagine that Britney welcomed -- after which photo ops she was, more often than not, suddenly handed Trig to deal with while her mouther smiled and winked to the crowd.
Zero points to Sarah there, too.

In fact, I would give Sarah the award for greatest consistency in what not to do.

What about Obama, then, you ask? Well, I had problems with his showcasing of his children as well, especially when the event was at night. But at least he invariably held the hand of one child while Michelle held the hand of the other so that there was a tangible, physical connection between parent and child, as there was the comfort for them of a well-loved, competent grandmother behind the scenes, a familiar presence in their lives who was not an impersonal minder. Nonetheless, I think the Obama children could have been spared more exposure than they were spared.

And what about the rest of us? Those of us who are not in the limelight, but rather, just trying to make good choices, because we cannot avoid making them?

I empathize with the working parents of this GenX or Y generation. The children of my generation many have been working parent guinea pigs, but at least, for a decade or so, the cultural tide was with us, and that positive cultural reinforcement was something our children heard and understood. Not so much for the children of today's working parents, who are as likely to hear right wing condemnations of their parents as they are to hear empathy or encouragement.

A few years ago several of my long term friends (all working) and our grown children had an interesting discussion about whether our careers had been positive or negative influences in their own development. The consensus? Ambivalence, summed up by two comments: from a son --- "I was proud of what you did, but I still wanted to come home for lunch like the Campbell soup kids on TV" and, from a daughter -- "I'm proud of what our mothers accomplished, but I want to stay home with my own kids..."
And so we proceed, one step forward, one step back, one step forward, etc..

Great discussion. My biggest concern is that many women (Palin in particular) blame their lack of success on something outside themselves and that this cycle of failure and blame is counterproductive to the goal of equality. If a woman wants all the credit for her success, and sometimes more if she overcame bias - then she should be just as enthusiastic about accepting the credit for her failures. It wasn't the media that took Palin down, it was her naivete wrt to the media.

I work in a man's industry, as is my choice. I can spend my time complaining about the inherent bias in the construction industry or I can, through my work, dedication and professionalism prove that I deserve to be there. I actually find that being underestimated is a fantastic advantage when negotiating contracts - in certain situations.

I have been insulted many many times in the course of business but have chosen to take the high road and be an example of poise and class (which takes all my effort, and doesn't come natural =-) instead of constantly pointing fingers and labeling each obstacle as misogynistic.

Some of my favorite feminists are men.

I wanted to throw in a couple of points to move the discussion around.

1. I think its a myth that men are never caught in the family vs. work conflict.

2. I'm not sure I want my family/career choices to be compared to men - in general, if anyone else at all.

"I know from personal experience how heart wrenching it is to make "the decision" and I think we put enough guilt on ourselves without others piling on."

I think this point is key. How much of this demand for gender equality is fueled by the guilt we place on ourselves (as women)?

I think corporate paid daycare makes a helluva lot more sense than corporate paid health insurance - it would help everyone just about equally IMHO. I just don't see how daycare costs could jump 30-50% year over year like healthcare does - so much easier to forecast the costs.

Life is a series of choices, all I ask is that women are afforded the same choices as men. The consequences (or rewards) from those choices are uniquely individual and not necessarily gender related.

I know my husband would have made a much better stay-at-home parent than I have been - I am a loner and I find it very difficult to focus all my time and attention on the minutiae of someone else's life (even my children) and I wish I could say I feel guilty about that self-centeredness, but I don't.

Living honestly is the only way to achieve balance in ANYTHING.

My husband is far more offended by the pay gap than I am because his earning potential is so much greater than mine he feels "trapped" into being the breadwinner. I wish I could say I felt trapped by staying home with my kids for 10 years - but I don't, the rewards were so much more than I thought they would be. I learned a lot about myself and others.

Desidero:
When you say; " the experience of your mother running for VP might quite likely be worth missing 4 months of school and dealing with Klieg lights...." you seem to be speaking with the sensibility of a sophisticated, worldly adult, rather than either a six month old child with Downs Syndrome, or a backwoods pregnant teenage girl.
Then you say: "As long as they're not being pimped or abused, none of my business...." which in principle is true, except who is defining "abuse"?

Do you really think the experience of Trig and Britney was not one of abuse, despite the glitter/glamour? Because I am speaking of the unscripted, primal relationship between parent and child -- you know the one I'm talking about -- the one that is not an observational summary achieved at some effort, as well as some distance of time and experience.... but rather, the primal relationship that we yearn to have and depend on because in some unconscious way, every child perceives that his or her survival depends on it.
So although I respect your opinions in almost every instance, I would assert that yours is an adult perspective, rather than an offspring's perspective, when you summarize by saying: "People should raise their own kids and other people should butt out. Whether they stay up late or go to bed early, eat healthy or junk food, ride motorcycles or have their heads in books. As long as they're not being pimped or abused, none of my business. Be a friend if that's in the cards, but leave the judgment behind."
Yes? No? Maybe?

Would these children think that, years hence, in hindsight? Maybe. But that would be then, when their traumatic experience was in their formative experience.
Yes? No? Maybe?