There has been much talk of women’s collectively plunging mood since Maureen Dowd took on the unhappy matter in her column, which was based on Marcus Buckingham’s reporting in the Huffington Post. While they hit on a profoundly important phenomenon, both sadly gloss over the real reasons for it. Dowd winds up writing off the malaise as a natural consequence of having too many choices, while Buckingham tosses out some of the real culprits—rigid gender roles, long working hours, and the “second shift” of housework—like so many wadded-up tissues, as if they are too obvious to be true.
Buckingham dismisses the usual work-life issues by pointing out that things have begun to change. And he’s right, they have. Women are in the workforce in greater numbers, and men do more of the housework. But things haven’t changed nearly enough. It turns out, the problem isn’t that we have too many options—it’s that they all suck. Without real accommodations for working women, the choices are all still pretty disappointing. It may feel as if we should be done with “work-life issues”—the term itself sounds so '90s, evoking upbeat, pre-BlackBerry workshops. But we still haven’t fully confronted, let alone resolved, the unpleasantness of trying to do too much at once. As a country, we’ve done little in terms of easing women’s dual roles, and it turns out it’s affecting our mood.
The international picture helps explain why American women in particular have wound up on a downward emotional trajectory. While women in rich countries around the world may be becoming generally sadder (Buckingham cites a British study as well as two international studies that point in this direction), American women are still probably the gloomiest. Only 3 percent of people in Japan experience major depression in their lifetime, for instance, compared with about 17 percent of Americans, according to the most recent cross-national comparison of depression rates, conducted by psychiatrist Myrna Weissman in 1996. (Lebanon logged the highest level of any nation studied, at 19 percent.) While cross-cultural differences make true happiness tricky to measure, several studies using the same clinical definitions came to similar conclusions: Across the board in every country where depression has been studied, about twice as many women become depressed as men, and the disease typically sets in when women are in their early to mid-20s, around the time they’re probably grappling with the incompatibility of their competing responsibilities.
In the international studies, happiness tracks closely with national policies that address the work-life balance. Though happiness, too, is hard to quantify, one Dutch professor, Ruut Veenhoven, has tried, using data from surveys that asked participants around the world to rank their happiness level on a scale of one to 10. Veenhoven, professor of social conditions for human happiness at Erasmus University in Rotterdam and director of the online World Database of Happiness, ranked those in the family-friendly (or at least family-friendlier) nations of Sweden (in eighth place), Denmark (second), Finland (seventh), and Holland (13th) as happier than we are. For what it’s worth, the United States, birthplace of both “happy hour” and “the Happy Meal,” ranked only 31st in overall happiness.
So why are American women so particularly blue? For women, two of the most potentially life- (and mood-) altering factors are family size and work hours. American women have notable distinctions on both fronts. First, we have more babies than women in most any other developed country. While an American woman still typically has around 2.1 children over her lifetime, in other rich countries, family size has dropped significantly as women have gained access to jobs and education. More than 90 nations throughout Europe and Asia now have fertility rates well below ours. Second, even while we’ve continued to raise sizable families, American women have achieved the very highest rate of full-time employment in the world, with 75 percent of employed women working full-time.
SNL: Equal Opportunity Objectifiers
Jon Hamm spent most of the Saturday Night Live episode he hosted last night shirtless.
Confessions of a Woman Comedy Writer
Allison Silverman accepts one from New York Women in Film & Television (and tells us why it's rare).
Comments
SO UNHAPPY
By: smartguy | Fri, 11/20/2009 - 04:10
So, being a mother AND having to actually work is why all American women are So Unhappy? 75 percent of working women have full-time jobs?
I guess this is indeed terrible. Half the world lives off of our equivalent of $2.50, with unspeakable horrors that never make a paper. All those greater life prospects American women are given......just a nuisance aren't they?
You listen to me good. I'm single and no kids. My taxes go straight to YOUR stupid kids to babysit them. YOU WANT TO KNOW WHO IS REALLY REALLY UNHAPPY?
The End
mandatory paid maternity and
By: measured | Mon, 10/12/2009 - 18:15
mandatory paid maternity and paternity leave is what we need. of course it is women who physically go through birth, but its about time that men see the role of fatherhood as actually requiring their presence, time and energy rather than just being the "providers" and spending only "quality time" - i.e. fun on the weekend as opposed to supervising homework/dinner. Only giving women paid maternity leave, places women in a position of physically recovering, looking after a new born and expected to step up their share of housework. in the longterm it will also "make more sense" for the woman to continue to stay at home rather than the man as she has already took a break from work.
Women's equality has gone almost as far as it can go into entering the previously "men's world" - men need to seek the equality with women or women need to demand that men do an equal share of the care-taking roles that are left to women today.
that's all well and good...
By: GK | Thu, 10/08/2009 - 10:02
I'm single (not by choice) and childless (by choice), and at age 42 have yet to meet a married-with-children working woman who I'd like to trade places with. I never expect to, either.
However, mothers asking for what their semi-socialist European counterparts have is not realistic. As a nation we struggle w/ redistribution of wealth, and I do support our being able to retain the fruits of our legal labor. The lengthy leaves, national childcare, etc. are expensive; this is a redistribution of wealth.
More personally, what they are asking for comes at MY career expense. A U.S. employer is not going to hire a temporary replacement for the woman on leave; I will be expected to do her work AND mine for NO additional pay, and not even a "leg up" for promotions, raises and other goodies, when she returns. Are childless women in Europe who hit menopause entitled to a paid, job-protect sabbatical the length of about two maternity leaves? It's bad enough I pay school taxes and am taxed disproportionally to support other peoples' chosen lifestyle.
I think paternity leave would likewise cause similar discontent among men. Do you honestly think men are helping their wives w/ the new babies, allowing for physical and emotional recovery post-partum? No, they're enjoying hunting, fishing hanging out in man caves, avoiding honeydos, etc.
Simply put - it is NOT the village's responsibility to raise a child; it's the parents. Having a child is a choice and a privilege for which a father and mother must take 100% responsibility. Yes, they need to get creative in how they make their household work (I liked the other poster's idea about supporting grandparents in exchange for child care) - but those ideas are NOT acceptable if they are at taxpayers' and co-workers' expense.
May I suggest...
By: ZoeCat | Mon, 10/05/2009 - 15:53
changing the title of this article? Or at least changing one word?
Substitute "mothers" for "women." This article is about mothers, not women in general.
I would like to see the numbers on how happy child-free women are.
Now, just to be perfectly clear, I agree with what this article is saying...American families need more support so that both parents are free to pursue life outside of the home if that's what they want to do. We are terribly lacking in child care and paid maternity leave, and paid paternity leave is almost unheard of.
I think it's rooted in sexism, almost as a way of punishing women who choose (or have) to work outside the home.
Perils of choice
By: Esau | Mon, 10/05/2009 - 10:29
Having more choices should not in itself be bad, but can be dangerous for those who would make them poorly.
A common theme in the stories of unhappy women is the shortcomings of the men in their lives: husbands are distant and unsupportive, boyfriends are selfish and unfaithful. Taking these claims at face value, one cannot help but ask: why didn't these women choose better men? It's not, after all, as though better men are not available, if by "better" we mean thoughtful, caring, generous and happy to do the dishes. Be honest: who within the sound of this blog does not know a man or two (or more) who are fine, caring, honest and upstanding people, and yet perennially single?
Marcus Buckingham
By: NotTelling | Mon, 10/05/2009 - 04:48
Who is this Marcus Buckingham and why does he get to decide whether or not I am happy?
Perhaps we should question what we read and make our own standards for our happiness. For awhile I just knew him as an overpriced speaker that would get booked at conferences where overpaid business professionals would listen to him. He was on a speakers circuit and would get paid loads of money just to talk about managing your strengths in business and what ever else was the topic of the day. (http://premierespeakers.com/marcus_buckingham/bio)
I think Marcus Buckingham knows full well that American women have disposable income. Isn't it interesting that he is just getting hooked up with Oprah now about the time this new book of his is coming out .... hm two and two together? Anyone? (www.oprah.com/article/money/career/marcus_bio_about).
Wouldn't he want his new FEMALE audience to buy into what he says? Maybe he is sowing the seeds of a well organized PR campaign to establish himself as an expert on female happiness so that in the coming months and years we women will buy his books and his advice. Trust me - he is hooked up to corporate juggernauts like Fortune magazine and Oprah - the BEST in the PR biz. We women are cash cows to him, and more importantly, to those who pay him. AND, he's an easy sell to us American women because of his British accent (always makes someone seem more authoritative to American audiences - SuperNanny anyone?) and because of his good looks.
Maybe we should use our education to form the judgment that the money we make in our careers is not worth spending on anything that he sells since he's engaging in an age old tactic: Making consumers (in this case women) feel they are worthless and inadequate so they buy whatever is being sold - it used to be machines to make your cellulite go away, thighmasters, and various beauty treatments.
Well, I betcha if you did some research in the profitability of certain products that are marketed to middle and high income women you would see women are buying different things than their mothers did - like more books for school and maybe even books on their careers.
Question the source ladies!!! Marcus Buckingham is a business man and he has everything to gain from your unhappiness!!!!!
the comments here reflect why women are unhappy: stop judging!
By: svinas | Sun, 10/04/2009 - 01:48
I think the worse thing that we can be doing as women is judging each other: I'm sick of the battle between the "stay-at-home mom" and the "feminists that go off to work" those are just dumb stereotypes that don't consider that some mothers HAVE to go out and work to support their family, or that some mothers are better mothers when they work part time because they are happier than staying at home all day while the kids are in school.
Every situation is different, and that is why I agree with giving working mothers more benefits.
My situation: I am a young mother who will be graduating from college in December. I would love to go out and work part-time, but daycare is so expensive that I would just be working to pay for it. My daughter is still small, but we have a while here (I'm from Spain)
In Spain children go to daycare for free at the age of 3, so I'm begging my husband to finish school by the time she is 3 and move to Spain so that I can do the MA in Journalism I've always dreamed of.
Here in the U.S I can't do that! I can't work, I can't get my MA..or well, I CAN! but I would be an unhappy woman because I will feel guilty that I'm paying to be away from my daughter.
And that leads me to what I think is the reason why women are unhappy: we want everything at the same time! We want to have children, work, be great wives, have a gorgeous house, have amazing kids, be fit and beautiful...We have to realize that there is a season in our lives that is just right for some things but wrong for others...and other women can't judge that, WE have to decide.
Personally, realizing that I don't have to do everything in the space of 5 years has helped me enjoy the stage I'm at, and has made me so much happier!
so girls, stop judging other women! and even if you are not working, all women should support better conditions for working women, they deserve it, and if you were in their shoes you would want it also.
Bucking the trend
By: clwho | Sat, 10/03/2009 - 09:22
I was thinking about all these articles the other day and started thinking about my own happiness. I seem to be one of the exceptions - I'm much happier at 39 than I was at 29, and I was happier at 29 than I was at 25. My situation is very different from the average American woman's - I don't have kids, I'm not married, and I'm not sure I ever want to be.
So what happened as I got older? First, I stopped having unsuccessful relationships. Not that I stopped having relationships, but I made better choices about them, both in terms of the people I chose to be friends with and the people I chose to date. Even though I haven't found a permanent partner, the last couple of relationships I was in weren't bad relationships, there were just some tangible reasons why they probably weren't a good choice for the longer haul. I stayed friends with both former boyfriends and ended up making a lot of wonderful new friends through them.
Second, although I am not wealthy, money is not a source of fear and stress in my life. Money can't buy happiness, but not having money - as was the case in my 20s - can be a source of constant, unremitting anxiety. Money also allows me to have my own place rather than sharing with roommates, and it allows me to own that place. Because kids are not on the horizon, my spending and saving priorities are clear, and I don't have the possibility of saving for a kid's college tuition looming over me. Furthermore, my parents are financially secure and currently healthy. The second part could change, but the first part isn't likely to. That means that even if the second part does change, I don't need to worry about helping my parents financially, so again, my financial concerns are limited - if I can stay employed, I'll be fine keeping a roof over my head and saving for retirement. But I think women who have kids worry more about money, even if their family income is sound. I'm not saying men don't; I think they're concerned about it, and they take the steps they can to manage their money effectively, but for some reason, I think the psychological burden of balancing multiple financial priorities seems to weigh more heavily on women.
Third, I don't care what the rest of the world thinks of me and how I choose to live my life. That doesn't mean I'm reckless or don't consider the feelings of others, but I'm good about tuning out societal pressures and stereotypes and live my life as I choose. But it's kind of easy as a single, childless woman - yes, there is a lot of ugly sterotyping about women of a certain age who haven't settled down - but it's so ludicrously off the mark for most single women I know as to be meaningless. But I think it's much, much harder for moms to ignore the endless chorus of voices telling them that if they make choice A, they're a bad mom, which leaves them with choice B, which makes them a bad mom, or maybe just a bad person. It's also almost certainly harder to deal with for women who don't have the luxury of down-time activities as an outlet for stress; a lot of the moms I know don't have much time for exercise or hobbies or any of the things that help offset the frustrations of daily life and help maintain an individual identity apart from motherhood.
And finally, I like and value the wisdom that comes with age. I'm glad I have it. I'm grateful for all the experiences that helped me acquire it. Our popular culture constantly sends the message that a woman's value as a human being is defined by her physical beauty and youthful vigor; it hardly ever sends the message that a woman's value increases with wisdom and experience. But who cares what that culture thinks? The people close to me do value all those things, and that's what matters most.
How Terrible
By: lawdog67 | Sat, 10/03/2009 - 03:52
Wow. So you'd like free childcare, MORE time off to be new mommies, and a regulated program to "ease you back into" the workplace when you finally do decide to make a grand re-appearance. Gosh, is there anything else you'd like? Perhaps a nice government-mandated spa vacation at your employer's expense? Or a chauffeured minivan for the first two years of your re-employment, so you can feed your infants while being whisked to work? (Just for a few hours a day, of course.)
You know... it's almost as though there are real, actual, biological or physiological (and psychological) differences between the two genders' ability to handle the workplace. Since, you know, you're asking for all kinds of concessions to enable you to perform this grand experiment of yours. But that can't be right... because, as I understand it, the whole gist of this feminist get-moms-out-of-the-house movement has been the insistence that there IS no difference between the genders, that women can do everything that men can do. So I must be misunderstanding the clear implication of this article.
Why are young men so unhappy?
By: projectshave | Fri, 10/02/2009 - 11:21
When I look at the graph of happiness for men & women vs. age, I wonder why women are so happy from age 20-30, and why men are relatively sadder? At that age group men & women lead fairly similar lives. They are single, usually childless, and their careers are just beginning (so the pay disparity is minimal). At age 20, men are as unhappy as women are at age 60, and women are happier than men will ever be!
My wild guess is that happiness tracks the relative attractiveness of men and women as they age. At age 20 women are fielding advances from multiple men, and men are facing rejection from multiple women. As women age fewer men pursue them. When women have children they become relatively invisible to other men. As men age, they feel fairly good (or deluded) about their appearance, which results in a mild upturn in happiness. The erosion of female looks is one of the few things that are constant across cultures, which may explain why happiness declines over age.