Can women have it all?

By Deauwand Myers

American news and social media have recently focused on the notion of women, particularly those in positions of power, ``having it all.” ``Having it all” may mean balancing a family life and professional career in a cogent and fulfilling fashion.

``Can women have it all?” It’s a sexist question. In it lies an implicit bigotry, the same as saying a black person speaks ``articulately,” as if articulate-speaking black people are somehow rare and otherworldly. We do not say of white folks, ``s/he speaks articulately.” It’s expected, isn’t it?

Similarly, we do not ask men in positions of power: ``Can he have it all? Can he have a balanced professional and familial life?” Fathers are not expected to invest as much time or energy into taking care of the home or the children as their female counterparts.

This double standard is obviously problematic; worse, it’s another example of a false choice. Women of power can and do balance their family and professional lives. The matter is a class issue, too. The wealthier a woman is, the more choices she has in whether she will work, how she will work, and the human capital she may need to utilize in pursuing a career (e.g. nannies, housekeepers, and the like).

But even as I write this, I wonder aloud does the biological fact of women having to bear children complicate the notion of mothers being able to achieve balanced lives in the home and at work.

Furthermore, when I look at history, there are many women in positions of power who remained single and childless, sometimes in an overt effort to maintain power. Queen Elizabeth I is the most obvious example. Condoleezza Rice, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor are more recent, American examples of this. Korean presidential candidate Rep. Park Geun-hye is probably the most prominent of these examples, as she may very well become the head of state of a large and developed democracy.

The question of women successfully balancing work and home is particularly urgent in America and Korea. Both score poorly when it comes to governmental policies aimed at supporting working mothers, especially when compared to other OECD countries.

Paid maternity leave, affordable childcare and health care (this health care issue pertains to America, not Korea), flexible working hours, equal pay for equal work, fair employment practices, including work evaluations and promotions, and proportional representation in legislative, corporate, and educational spheres are all serious problems disadvantaging mothers who work, and women in general.

The question, then, should not be ``can women have it all?” The question should be: do we value women as being co-equal, productive members of society? Do women deserve fair, equal, and living wages? Do we think motherhood and raising children deserve the financial and governmental support it requires?

Especially in a country like Korea, with a very low birthrate, are we going to create an atmosphere conducive to women choosing to have children more often, with the proper support such an undertaking requires? Does the state value women?

These questions are critical for us to engage and answer. If we do think women are equal, what are we willing to do to make it so?

The writer holds a master's degree in English literature and literary theory and is currently an English professor outside of Seoul. He can be reached at deauwand@hotmail.com.