I think another way to look at it is similar to what you say about your husband — pursuing a well-paying route doesn’t close off social justice work. Most well-paying skillsets have pro bono options. Business — helping fund and and counsel startup ventures by low-income women. Law — pro bono work, in all kinds of environments. High tech, eg web development — doing occasional pro bono work for social justice orgs to help their online outreach. If you have these convictions, you’ll make it work. Sometimes 2-5 hours a week and a nice check every six months are more meaningful than having great intentions but getting overwhelmed by debt and family responsibility.

So I guess one thing to figure out at the outset is — do you feel strongly about having your main job be one that has public interest aspects, or do you want to find a high-paying main gig with enough time flexibility (they are out there) to do meaningful outside work?

I agree with the bulk of your comments and I would never recommend that other women make the same kind of choices that I have made in my life. Yes, I believe that women should have some economic leverage in relationships. At the same time, I never expected to make a lot of money considering the kind of work that I enjoy doing. My husband is pursuing the biz degree not simply for the money, but also because he actually likes some aspects of that world, and he believes that he will somehow be able to do the work without compromising his commitment to social justice. I respect his decisions but I don’t know if I could do the same. I agree with your idea of there being some happy middle ground and I really want to find that place. I think a masters in non-profit management may be one way for me to go. I think it would allow me to do admin. work (read better paying) in environments that I enjoy. Or maybe I should strengthen my technical skills (read move into a male dominated field). I really don’t know the answer and I spend way too much time at the bureau of labor statistics site looking at growth projections.

I would also like to add that I have known quite a few former practicing lawyers. I know some who stayed in jobs that they absolutely hated just to pay off their law school debt. And I know one housing rights lawyer who loves his job but makes a very small fraction of what his school mates earn.

I hear you on the connection between the pursuit of career happiness and relative economic privilege. Although, when I was at a point in my life when I had to accept food donations, I still felt this way. I was raised in a working class home, by a functionally illiterate mother, and am the only member of my extended family (poor and working class) to go to college, and that is including my younger cousins. I was raised to believe that the pay check is the most important thing about a job, but I have different ideas.

But you’re using a very limited example. Most people qualified for a high-status job can find less stressful high-status alternatives.

For example, I used to have that situation as a litigator at a big firm. Instead I went into a field where I could use those qualifications but on my terms, and also optimize economics, so my workday is now 9-7 but I take long lunches, workout breaks, and time away where needed for family stuff.

So I am not arguing that we should give up personal or family fulfillment. I think if you look at ways in which I was using “happiness requirement” you’ll see that. There’s a happy medium between investment banking or BigLaw hours and starving artistry: a challenging, stable job leaving time for personal and family goals. If I thought the “happiness /fulfillment requirements” being articulated by some women left open a variety of these kinds of possibilities , I’d have no problem with them.

I have similar problems with men who put career front left and center and are lousy fathers or partners. I’m not saying the solution is for everyone to turn into a corporate automaton.

I’ve heard this argument before. People use it all the time in my field where 14 hour days are required and the expectation is that nothing outside your job is as important as your job. I’m responsible for caring for my ailing father and the response at work is…don’t you have sibling or something that can take care of that? High pressure, high paying careers often come with a sacrifice of personal space and time.

When a woman leaves I often hear “well, women have different priorities” as if that were something built directly into our ovaries and as if it were ridiculous that anyone might possibly value things other than this career.

It always leaves me wondering something. Aren’t those who don’t value career over our personal life *right* to have happiness requirements around employment? Isn’t it better to seek personal fulfillment in addition to financial fulfillment? Isn’t it an error in the social definition of masculinity (broadly, generalizing here) that requires men to place their career above all else in the universe. And if so…shouldn’t we be working to remove that harmful idea from the definition of masculinity rather than adding it to the “To Do” list of women?

[Note: This obviously is only from the perspective of a highly privileged individual...I note that having these choices places me in a vastly better position than those that do not.]

Also, I am so sorry for the triple posting! I thought I hit the wrong button. Mea culpa.

These things jumped out at me:

• Most of my jobs have been in academia/cultural institutions, in predominately female and low paying fields.
• I have never worked in the corporate world, except a few customer service jobs during high school.
• In order for me to be happy in a job, I need to see that I making a positive impact on individuals or the society at large.
• It needs to be work that is not too all consuming that allows me time/energy for my family and other pursuits.
• My husband has a similar background, and is probably more practical than me; he is going back to school for an MBA this fall.
Do you see where I’m going? This is absolutely not meant to be any kind of negative reflection on you as I feel strongly that there’s no one right choice on an individual basis.
So – there is a theme here. You mention that you have gravitated towards “predominantly female and low paying fields,” need immediate helping-others ability for you to be happy, need time flexibility, and have a male partner who has chosen a more likely-remunerative route.

No stereotype here; seems like your husband is an egalitarian guy who does his share of parenting.

But over larger percentages, where women set up happiness-requirements (even informal ones) around employment that men don’t have, eg re helping (which doesn’t apply as much to lower-income women who cannot afford to insist on this), time allotment, non-corporate, we are ceding the leverage and power to men.

Of course there’s a good counter. Not all power is financial, they love us and won’t take advantage, they value our contributions even though we don’t contribute monetarily as much.

Thing is, 52% of them don’t. (That’s not about you, your guy sounds like a gem). And even where one doesn’t divorce, I’ve found that over time, the best leverage comes with the kind of power that has an internationally understood and respected meaning.

So again – I don’t think we should critique individual women’s choices. But I don’t think we should avoid looking at patterns, averages. We cannot have it both ways. If we are choosier in terms of our employment requirements, we will lose power and we will be less able to weather recessions than our male counterparts.

Thank you for such a thoughtful response.

Most of my jobs have been in academia/cultural institutions, in predominately female and low paying fields. I have never worked in the corporate world, except a few customer service jobs during high school. As much as I love working with original sources materials/cultural objects, I know that I can not continue to go from adjunct job to grant funded project. In order for me to be happy in a job, I need to see that I making a positive impact on individuals or the society at large. If I knew of work that pays well while not being too harmful to the earth and her peoples, human or otherwise, I would be all over it. It needs to be work that is not too all consuming that allows me time/energy for my family and other pursuits. I’m strongly considering going back to school for yet another graduate degree and am trying to match my skills/experience with something much more profitable, but I haven’t found that yet. My husband has a similar background, and is probably more practical than me; he is going back to school for an MBA this fall.

I consider myself extremely fortunate to have been able to work part-time during my daughters first year. My husband was a fulltime dad during her second year of life. She has just turned two and hubby is now going back to school. We had some savings, but we incurred considerable debt during these last two years, compounded by our preexisting school debts. In spite of the debt, I feel so luck to have married a man who values fulltime parenting.

I’m not great with money. I’m cheap and probably have a bit of a money phobia. I know that it is important that I model for my daughter a more positive relationship with money. And I agree with all your ideas about gender and toys/books.

I mean, obviously, they are. No question.

But for those families that have two parents, one of which is male, people aren’t saying ‘it’s hard to be a father in a recession, because you have to think about things the kids need’.

I mean, clearly we know why – because so often fathers DON’T worry about the kids – or at least not as much as their mothers. But that’s not fair to all the fathers that do. What about single fathers? What about two-father households?

What about not buying into the idea that children are women’s job, their problem?