Insulting Motherhood

So the Washington Post and the rest of this town are all in a tizzy because twenty years ago Supreme Court nominee John Roberts dared to suggest that homemaker might be a more noble profession than attorney:

His remark on whether homemakers should become lawyers came in 1985 in reply to a suggestion from Linda Chavez, then the White House’s director of public liaison. Chavez had proposed entering her deputy, Linda Arey, in a contest sponsored by the Clairol shampoo company to honor women who had changed their lives after age 30. Arey had been a schoolteacher who decided to change careers and went to law school.

In a July 31, 1985, memo, Roberts noted that, as an assistant dean at the University of Richmond law school before she joined the Reagan administration, Arey had “encouraged many former homemakers to enter law school and become lawyers.” Roberts said in his memo that he saw no legal objection to her taking part in the Clairol contest. Then he added a personal aside: “Some might question whether encouraging homemakers to become lawyers contributes to the common good, but I suppose that is for the judges to decide.”

The most depressing part about this silliness is the capitulation of no less an icon of traditionalism than Phyllis Schlafly, who is quoted as saying, “I don’t think that disqualifies him. I think he got married to a feminist; he’s learned a lot.”

The President of NOW was more blunt: “I find it quite shocking that a young lawyer, as he was at the time, had such Neanderthal ideas about women’s place.” No doubt Roberts will also retreat when he gets asked about it at the confirmation hearings.

Where is the conservative unafraid to say, “So what?” It shouldn’t be controversial to suggest that the country needs fewer lawyers and more homemakers. Critics of his statement are assuming that being a lawyer is unquestionably more worthy and important than being a full-time mother. Well, at the risk of shocking someone with my “Neanderthal ideas,” I disagree. I am convinced that the average homemaker contributes far more to the common good than the average lawyer.

How did it become acceptable in America to devalue and insult full-time motherhood, and controversial to defend it?

UPDATE: Here’s an additional point of note from Barbara Comstock on The Corner, “I also recall fondly at my graduation from Georgetown law school that Justice Sandra Day O’Connor — the Justice whom Judge Roberts will replace — spent much more time in her graduation speech talking about the value of the 10 years that she spent as an at home mother with her three boys than she did on her legal credentials.”

This entry was posted on Friday, August 19th, 2005 at 7:40 am and is filed under Constitution and Courts, The Culture. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.