I'm Not Totally Convinced

    I have always known about income inequality based on gender, but was unaware of the income inequality based on gender and socioeconomic status. In Gwendolyn Mink’s piece, The Lady and the Tramp, she discusses how poor women are at the biggest disadvantage when it comes to income, and that there should be more actions taken to help them receive the welfare they need.

    While I do agree, after reading Mink’s article, that poor women are very much disadvantaged, I feel like Mink did not cover as much information as she should have covered, and she left many questions unanswered. For example, it would be more convincing for me to understand and support her ideas if she had included some insight into men who receive welfare. After reading the article, I went back and scanned it to see if I had missed something about that topic. No. Mink did not bring up poor men. This leads me to wonder whether the inequality is based solely on gender, or if it has to do more with socioeconomic status.

    Another thing with which I had a problem was the feeling I got from Mink that women should have children and be mothers and not work. In this sense, it was a pretty anti-feminist article. Mink was, in a way, talking about working women without children in a bitter or judgmental tone. It almost seemed that she felt that these women were bad people for the choices they made. She said, at one point, that welfare mothers are seen by many as victims, not as autonomous agents who are capable of making decisions. At the same time, she is strongly arguing for women to take the path of motherhood without question, almost as if it is the natural and right thing to do.

    However, I did like how Mink brought up the double bind present in the lives of adult women with or without children. Those who choose to work and not have children are seen as radical. Those who choose to work and have children are seen as neglectful. Those who choose to work in the home and have children are seen as irresponsible. There is no “right” choice for women.

    I know that every woman has the right to choose whether or not to marry, to work, to bear children, et cetera, but I also know that each choice should be thought through before it is made. When Mink discusses how welfare mothers cannot work because they have children, so they must work in the home, it annoys me because I feel that these women should have thought about how their life would be more challenging with children involved. It is unclear whether or not these welfare mothers were very poor before they had children or after, but I think in either case, that it is wise to think about the implications of having a child. If I were in a very low socioeconomic status, there would be no way I would have a child. It would be too difficult for me to cover all the expenses, especially if I were a single mother.
    I realize after all this that I seem insensitive, but I simply did not find a very convincing argument in Mink’s article. Maybe it was because I would have liked more information. Or maybe it was because I thought Mink was saying there was only one option. I am not saying I am for or against welfare policies, but rather that if I had to vote on a policy and my sole source of information came from Mink, I would not feel that my decision was an educated one.