Surprise! The "opt-out revolution" was a myth

New census data shows that women aren't abandoning high-powered careers to become stay-at-home moms

Judy Berman
October 1, 2009 6:02PM (UTC)

Can I have a show of hands from all the readers out there who have always known that Lisa Belkin's "opt-out revolution" was pure fiction? Of course, this isn't exactly news in the Broadsheet universe: Salon's own Joan Walsh -- a lady who can certainly speak to the experience of moms with high-powered careers -- jumped on the story when it first surfaced, nearly six years ago. Since then, we've been reporting on scholars, from family-studies professors to economists, who take issue with Belkin's claims. But guess what? Now we've got definitive proof that the "opt-out revolution" never happened: census data.

According to Donna St. George at the Washington Post, stay-at-home moms are still a "widespread phenomenon," with 5.6 million women -- that is, almost a quarter of all married mothers with kids under 15 -- forgoing employment. But it turns out that the vast majority of these full-time moms don't fit Belkin's profile. Rather, writes St. George, "stay-at-home mothers tend to be younger and less educated, with lower family incomes. They are more likely than other mothers to be Hispanic or foreign-born." While 38 percent of all mothers surveyed had a bachelor's degree, only 32 percent of stay-at-home moms were college graduates. Perhaps most strikingly, full-time mothers were almost two and a half times more likely to be living below the poverty line than the average mom. Oh, and by the way -- this data was collected in 2007, before the economic crisis forced countless formerly well-off families to find ways to replace lost income.


As Pamela Stone told St. George, stay-at-home moms are, in general, "the more vulnerable women, for whom I would argue the issue is lack of opportunity. They have a hard time finding a job and finding a job that makes work worth it." That is to say, between the exorbitant cost of childcare and the thankless, insultingly low-paying jobs available, it just doesn't make sense for many mothers with little education to work outside the home. If we really look at the census data, stay-at-home mothering begins to seem less like a post-feminist choice than a decision often made out of pure necessity. Not to say it's a universally undesirable one. (The census found that 165,000 dads are doing it, too.) But the most statistically significant group of full-time moms turn out to be the women who have never reaped the benefits of white, middle-class feminism. Perhaps this is the phenomenon that actually deserves a Times Magazine cover story ... but I won't hold my breath.

Judy Berman

Judy Berman is a writer and editor in Brooklyn. She is a regular contributor to Salon's Broadsheet.

MORE FROM Judy Berman

Related Topics ------------------------------------------

Broadsheet Parenting


Read Now, Pay Later - no upfront
registration for 1-Hour Access

Click Here
7-Day Access and Monthly
Subscriptions also available
No tracking or personal data collection
beyond name and email address


Fearless journalism
in your inbox every day

Sign up for our free newsletter

• • •