Boundless has an interesting piece on the homemaking program at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary that I wrote about a few months ago.

It frustrates me to see how society views stay-at-home-wives. Just because some women choose to stay home and tend the house and kids full time, doesn’t make her weaker than her husband. That is a choice that feminists should respect and allow individual couples to make. Homemaking is just as worthy as being a CEO of a company, yet in our society a women working outside the home as a cashier at Walmart is valued more than a SAHM.

I doubt we’ll ever return to single-income families as a society. However, it’s time that all women support and respect the option of staying at home full time. It’s not a lesser choice. It’s not a punishment. It’s not sacrifice. It’s a choice that married couples make and should be respected as that.

The British press has some interesting columns today–the quasi-traditionalism of twentysomethings and the same feminist blather about being too accomplished to find a husband, err partner.

Kate Mulvey at the Times complains that she has to hide her glittering skills on dates because she intimidates men:

The widespread view is that accomplished women are at a disadvantage in the marriage market because men start out by saying they want a strong, powerful woman and then end up running off with the secretary. I should know. A few years ago my Swiss banker found my conversation too arty and cast his attentions on a lovely Spanish girl who worked in his office.

It’s the same battle of the sexes whining that you hear all the time. If the column was a bit more atagonistic, Maureen Dowd could have written it. Mulvey reveals something interesting in the last paragraph.

Having grown up with successful women such as Margaret Thatcher and Madonna as role models, and with popular culture awash with fantasies of all-powerful women, from Lara Croft to Buffy the Vampire Slayer, men are not so uncomfortable with the woman in control. This value system recognises the trend of female supremacy, which while not as yet the norm seems to be pointing the way for future relationships.

The trend of female supremacy? I thought feminists just wanted equality with men. At least that’s the official talking point.

The Telegraph contrasts nicely with an article on the trend of people settling down in their twenties, buying homes and starting families before 30.

William Strauss, a generation historian who has written three books about this age group, has a theory. He blames the parents. ‘These are the kids of the baby boomers, who were all about individualism. Children tend to correct the mistakes of their parents – youth culture is defined by adults in that way – and so what we are seeing now is a product of them being uncomfortable with how important self-exploration has become. There’s a sense of needing to find a balance between community and the individual, the latter being too strong and the former being too weak. There’s a push towards having more decorum. There’s every sign that this generation has more of a civic instinct. I think they will create new mores, because they feel that their parents’ obsession with individualism has vanquished them.’

This is true. Generational studies show that young Xers and older Millenials (those born after 1977) spend more time than any other generation volunteering. We’re also taking up traditional habits like knitting and gardening and try to balance careers with personal lives.

I couldn’t agree more with this paragraph:

The parents are not solely responsible; the Bridget Jones generation plays some part in the formation of the New Victorians. Put simply, the cult of the singleton has terrified twentysomethings. ‘The women just before us were so career-orientated and wanted it all, but did they get it?’ Kate Ballinger is sitting on the vintage leather sofa she bought on eBay (she now gets more excited by the prospect of buying furniture for her home than she does clothes) and musing about the seemingly never-ending reports of infertility and IVF. ‘You read so many stories about being single and not having babies, I suppose there is an element of wanting to get your skates on. I want to do well but I don’t want to put off the experience of children. I want to create a balance.’ Sharland agrees. ‘Oh God, the number of mothers in their late thirties who tell me they wish they’d done it when they were my age.’

We watched Sex and the City and read Bridget Jones in college. Then we read columns like the one from the Times, and people wonder why twentysomethings want more to life than a high-powered career? Those women apparently “have it all” and don’t seem very happy about it now.

A few months ago, Morra Aarons at techPresident and Blogher started a discussion about women and political blogging. At first I rolled my eyes and cited a few statistics from Pew and IPDI about men and women using the web for the same activities at equal rates. Then the NYT Caucus Blog delved into the topic a bit more. Earlier this week, I took a more irreverent stab at it, but some of the comments at the NYT have a point.

Men and women are using the Internet at the same rate for gathering news, sharing videos, checking e-mail and blogging. We know what people are doing online, but do we know why?

There’s a perception problem that far more men are engaged in online politics. Sairy at Blogher does a rundown of leading women, but note that most are grouped together at sites like Blogher or specific policy issues. Women are engaged online, but in different places than political blogs. They’re hanging out at mommyblogs, feminist websites, cancer support groups and craft forums. While the focus of these blogs and forums may not be political, their insights and topics reflect what women encounter in their daily lives, and politics play a major role. They care less about the horserace and more about the big-picture issues.

What does this mean for campaigns? We’ve understood this in the media for a long time. There’s a reason why candidates and their spouses share cookie recipes, tour the country talking about education and fight for the covers of women’s magazines. Female voters respond to these efforts, yet web communication is still one-size-fits-all.

Elizabeth Edwards gained the favor of Democratic women a long time ago with her involvement on the web. She and Hillary took in rave reviews for stopping by the Blogher conference while everyone else failed to have a presence. What about Republicans? Yesterday, the Romney campaign launched AnnRomney.com and is on the right track. There’s also Jerigirls.com, started by female Thompson supporters and devoted to all things Jeri Thompson. Does it take a female web director, like Mindy Finn at the Romney campaign, or a dedicated female supporters to reach women on the web?

Blogger outreach and community building are more important than ever. Women aren’t going to pick up on the blow-by-blow updates that political blogs cover, yet they will discuss them when it relates to the issues that they care about. They enjoy policy discussions when there’s a human interest angle. They don’t want soft news, but more interesting packages of news that are deserve our valuable time. If you’re still confused, realize that Madison Avenue has spent the past 100 years and billions of dollars trying to grasp how women think.

I can’t emphasize the impact of community enough. Mommyblogging started when moms connected with each other through their blogs. Free Republic has recipe threads, and iVillage hosts thousands of message boards. We think about the web in flat, equal terms with every blog or web site connected through a series of social networks or blogrolls. In reality, especially with women, the web is a group of clusters ranging from Blogher to neighborhood listserves like Capitol Hill Mommies. Finding these clusters and understanding how your candidate and his or her issues fit into them can make the difference.

We do this with outreach. Why did Hillary speak at a hairdresser convention? She went where her supporters where. It’s time to mimic this on the web.

With the most basic software, it’s possible to target the female vote, but it takes time, staff resources, a bit of creativity and the willingness to try to understand women.

Cross posted at TechRepublican.

When I saw the NYT Caucus Blog today questioning why there are more men involved in online politics, I groaned, yet here I am writing about it.

It’s not enough that gender discussions surround us everywhere. Didn’t the Internet even things out? Look at the statistics. Both Pew and George Washington University found that not only are men and women equally online, but they’re equally engaged in political discussions online.

We’ve covered the gender gap in blogging and the gender gap in politics. Why not the gender gap in online politics?

For some reason, people believe that there are more men blogging about politics than women. Study after study disproves this. Women and men write equally about politics, and both sexes are equally engaged in online activities. There’s a far larger age gap than gender. I have a theory, but I’ll make you read my entire post first.

The comments on this post are fascinating. Many seem to rely on stereotypes.

Stereotype #1: The fairer, gentler sex is far less aggressive and bored with politics.

(more…)