Get to Work: A Manifesto for Women of the World (Hardcover)

~ (Author) "If Betty Friedan had lived just a little longer..." (more)
Key Phrases: choice feminism, flourishing life, own damn business, Betty Friedan, New York Times, Supreme Court (more...)

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

A former attorney and professor of philosophy, Hirshman labeled child care as a low-status job and urged all women to rejoin the work force in her now infamous American Prospect article "Homeward Bound." Now she's back, using statistical research and convincing anecdotal evidence to challenge the politically correct assertion-as well as the moral, value and economic judgements inherent therein-that children, and ultimately society, benefit when mom stays at home. In her attempts to "restart the revolution," Hirshman spotlights the emptiness of "'choice feminism,' the shadowy remnant of the original women's movement," that puts the freedom to choose before progress or equality. "Stay-at-home moms do not like to hear that the sacrifice of their education, talents and prospects to their spouses' aspirations and their children's needs was a mistake," writes Hirshman, "so they contend the stay-at-home decision cannot be judged." But by making that "stay-at-home decision," Hirshman contends, women are creating, collectively, their own glass ceiling, in the end harming society as a whole by keeping educated, affluent women hidden at home. In this slim treatise, Hirshman adds intelligent and much-needed dialogue to an important and emotional debate.
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

From Booklist

Hirshman, retired philosophy professor, expands on an article she wrote that ignited a firestorm of criticism from the Right and the Left. She criticized the decision of many well-educated women to return to hearth and home, maintaining that the decisions these women think are entirely personal are influenced by social--and even governmental--pressures to stay home. Hirshman responds to blunt criticism that what women decide is "their own business" by suggesting they test their decisions against canons of Western philosophical ideas of the good and worthy life: Are they using their human capacities to the fullest, maximizing their independence, and doing no social harm? By leaving the workplace, these women are setting back achievements for gender equality and demonstrating indifference toward the larger society. Hirshman is critical in general of women who have settled for a "useless choice feminism," one that fails to address the issues of work and family life. This slim book is likely to continue to fan the fires of an argument that hasn't lost its incendiary potential since The Feminine Mystique. Vanessa Bush
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 112 pages
• Publisher: Viking Adult (June 8, 2006)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0670038121
• ISBN-13: 978-0670038121
• Product Dimensions: 7.6 x 5.3 x 0.6 inches
• Shipping Weight: 7.2 ounces
• Average Customer Review: 3.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (70 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #558,711 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

78 of 92 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars The Subtitle is "Manifesto"!, June 26, 2006

By	Mercy Otis Warren - See all my reviews

Previous reviewers here have complained about Hirschman's alleged lack of "balance" in this book. But the author never claims to present a "balanced" view of the work/home dilemma that many middle-class and privileged women face. (BIG HINT: the subtitle of her book includes the word "manifesto"! It's printed very cleverly as a "little red book!" Get it?)

This book is a polemic, not a sociological or historical analysis of the work/home issue like Judith Warner's _Perfect Madness_. _Get to Work_ challenges women and men to ask themselves the classic philosophical question, "what makes for a good life?" and challenges them to defend their choices, understanding that their choices have moral implications for themselves, their families, and the rest of the world.

The previous reviewer asks what she thinks is a rhetorical question: "Imagine the outrage if someone wrote a manifesto saying all women should be compelled to stay home and raise babies!" I think that book's been written, several times over, by Laura Schlessinger, James Dobson, Danielle Crittenden, Caitlyn Flanagan, Penelope Leach, T. Berry Brazelton, Phyllis Schlaffly, Rick Santorum, and dozens more reactionary celebrities who cling to essentialist ideas about gender because of their fear of American values, democracy, and modernity. We're so accustomed to hearing the "opt-out" decision framed as a moral choice that sanctifies wives and mothers who don't work for pay and demonizes women who do as grasping, unnatural, and selfish that it is a bracing shock to the system to read an argument that turns this so-called "morality" on its head. She makes a compelling case that women should remain in the paid workforce for two big reasons: first, because true feminist change is unlikely to happen if a majority of educated women "opt-out" of reaching the highest ranks in their profession, and second, for the family's economic security. Thus women who "opt-out" endanger both the goal of true gender equality and their own families.

I seriously doubt that most of the reviews here were written by people who have bothered to read the book. I think these are mostly reactions to her recent articles in the American Prospect and the Washington Post, by people who may have been (reasonably) offended by Hirschman's claim that there's something infantilizing about working in the domestic sphere only. I have my questions about Hirschman's prescriptions--for example, she doesn't say who exactly should do all of the domestic work she slights--but I think her book gives us a refreshing take on work/home issues.

53 of 64 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Thought Provoking, June 18, 2006

By	Michelle Saint "Ms Saint" (Arizona) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

At the end of the day, the freedom to choose one's way of life is the greatest freedom of them all. However, Hirshman raises an incredibly important point: there are consequences to our choices and we need to realize what they are. Hirshman's thesis may be contentious, but you can't say she doesn't have a point.

Even if you're the happiest housewife in the world, it's important to recognize the cost of your happiness: economic freedom, social prestige, and intellectual productivity. Even if -you- don't put much value on these, you must acknowledge that society does. And society will judge you by them.

Of course, at the end of the day, it is every woman's right to choose how she will live her life. But this book raises a point that is strangely ignored in this age of equality: this choice that each woman makes is the exact same choice as is made by each man.

The question of equality between men and women cannot be considered without an inquiry such as Hirshman's. And each woman's choice as to who she is relative her husband and children should not be made without considering the points Hirshman raises.

21 of 25 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars Interesting, but flawed, August 22, 2006

By	MJR (Houston, TX USA) - See all my reviews

Upfront, so you know my "politics," I am a 40ish working mom with an advanced degree, and 2 toddlers at home. My husband and I make about same salary, and financially either one of us could choose to stay at home.

Overall, I found Ms. Hirshman's manifesto to be overly harsh and unbalanced. I do agree with some of her points -- women should be able to be financially independent, and it is important to get an education and pursue something you enjoy, and I also agree that changing diapers and some other "baby duties" can be a bit tedious (although for me personally, those things are far eclipsed by the joy I get from my children). I also agree that husbands need to pitch in, and do an equal share around the house and with the children. I also think that female attrition in the workplace does make it more difficult to get equal treatment.

However, that said, I miss my children terribly and I can certainly understand why a parent would want to be home with their kids or work part-time. Furthermore, I think it is absolutely ludicrous to expect a parent to sacrifice the happiness of their family "for the good of womanhood/society." It seems that searching for a way to align family and societal interests would be more productive.

I do think it is risky to quit working and be completely dependent on your spouse for income. Although my spouse and I trust each other completely, I have seen men take advantage when the balance of power (money) shifts in their favor -- so, I understand the concern. In my experience, the workplace seems to be accomodating to me as a parent, but less so for him (i.e. my employer tolerates my taking time-off for kid-related things much better than his). In other words, our culture/society needs to change so that it is not so lopsided in how it treats/accomodates moms and dads -- which is also part of her mantra, but does not get the attention it deserves.

As a mom, I have noticed that early-on alot more of the child-related burden is on the female; no matter how supportive a husband is, he cannot be pregnant or nurse the baby. Also, I have noticed that even though my husband is an equally involved parent, my children tend to prefer mom over dad (I suspect this will change over time as they grow up). In summary, her Manifesto totally ignores the fact that early motherhood is exhausting for the female esp. when working, and that work often becomes alot less interesting/meaningful when you become a new parent.

I really respect women who stay home -- it is a difficult job and requires unending patience and love. I have a hard time criticizing someone who chooses that.

I do not think the answer is to flog and insult women (or men) who choose to stay at home with their children. I think the answer lies in understanding, accomodating, education and tolerance.

I would like to see society/employers allow parents some flexibility to place greater emphasis on their families. I would like us to learn as a society that spouses should treat each other with respect and as equals, no matter what the role. I would like parents to raise their male and female children to expect to "share the load" whether it be household responsibilities or income. In short, I believe, while Ms. Hirshman's book contains some basic truths, it does not offer a palatable solution, and is often critical and judgemental.