In the current political climate, it is sometimes challenging to think
back to the heyday of second-wave feminism, probably around 1970, when
women in many facets of our society were applying critical concepts when
thinking about their position inside and outside the family. It is challeng-
ing because it's so far from the current reality, in which "feminism" has
such a bad name.
How was this shift accomplished? While Susan Douglas and Meredith
Michaels do not give us the complete answer (perhaps no one can), they
well illustrate that a shift in our popular vision of feminism has occurred,
discuss in detail the extent of this shift and its impact on the lives of
Americans and their families, and go on to offer a skillful explanation of
the political forces that led to this situation.
A huge part of our fervent and growing embrace of so-called "tra-
ditional" family values is what Douglas and Michaels call the "new
momism." Momism is the ethic that has impossibly raised the levels of
time and expertise needed to meet the rapidly rising minimum level of
"good enough" mothering. Women today have incorporated a version of
expert mothering into the scale by which they're evaluated, and by which
they evaluate themselves-a scale so harsh that most internalize perma-
nent feelings of failure both on the work front as well as the mom front.
That women are aware that these stakes are impossible is evidenced by
the popularity of TV shows, films, and books either dramatizing or laugh-
ing at the incompatible ideals today's moms are supposed to embrace. Put
another way, why do American women continue to evaluate themselves
along the impossible double axis of "good enough" (meaning excellent,
high-quality, all-encompassing) mothering paired with successful career-
ism/working? Put yet another way, why do I feel I should be at home
playing with my six-year-old even as I sit here writing this long overdue
review?
The answer to this question is a "complexifying" mix of political and
economic interests using women's susceptibility, vulnerability and guilt,
and true concern about their children's welfare and future in the interests
of a power structure that evinces precious little of the same concern. The
Mommy Myth poses the question in no uncertain terms: "The question
is why one reactionary, normative ideology, so out of sync with millions
of women's lives, seems to be getting the upper hand" (24). It goes on to
do a masterful job of illustrating the existence of this ideology in multiple
facets of postmodern life-the toy industry, television news, magazine
This content downloaded from 128.143.1.179 on Thu, 15 Aug 2019 17:46:44 UTC
All use subject to
https://about.jstor.org/terms 236 ANDREA PRESS
coverage dragging celebrities into the momist debates, and almost every-
where else. The reasons explaining why momist ideology predominates
vary from sphere to sphere, composing an ideological whole that is
troubling to say the least.
The Mommy Myth also illustrates that there is widespread evidence of
sentiments critical of the new momism. Even if Hollywood film embraces
the most reactionary ideas about motherhood, TV entertainment shows
in particular give us plenty of wise-cracking, back-talking, less-than-
perfect mommies, once we look beyond the June Cleavers of early televi-
sion. These images coexist alongside a power structure and concomitant
set of government corporate policies, which bolster the opposing, reac-
tionary images, and make life uncomfortable, difficult, and sometimes
dangerous for American moms and their kids. When I quiz my bright,
intelligent undergraduate women students on their family plans, why does
every last woman disavow feminism and state her intention to be a stay-
at-home mom, at least for the years her kids need her. As one who's come
full circle through the feminist movement, having grown up determined
not to replicate my mother's housewife status, I now listen to my bright,
well-read daughter question my work hours (other moms play with their
kids!) and lecture me on the evils of abortion, which, she informed me last
week, kills innocent babies (and she's only ten!). Most bizarrely of all, last
week I went to view the remake of the feminist film Step/ord Wives and
discovered that in the 2004 version, it is a woman's idea to turn Stepford's
wives into robots, and why? Because feminism, in the incredible words of
a wife in the film, has already "caused us to turn ourselves into automa-
tons": once again, feminism is the cause of all our problems, a message in
this case inserted even into one of the most feminist stories ever adapted
by Hollywood. When do WE get a Michael Moore?
The Mommy Myth helps us document the scary trek from feminism to
a post-feminist netherworld that makes the false assumption that femi-
nism's goals have all been achieved, questioned, and surpassed. For that,
American women, and all our moms, are deeply indebted to this book.
Andrea Press, who teaches media and women's studies at the Univer-
sity of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign, has published widely in the area
of feminist media studies. Her latest book, with Bruce Williams, is
What's Important about Media Studies? She is currently working on an
ethnographic study of teenagers, social class, and new media.
This content downloaded from 128.143.1.179 on Thu, 15 Aug 2019 17:46:44 UTC
