Unreasonable Media Attacks on Kellyanne Conway

[Jayne]

The media are being unreasonable.  It must be a day that ends with "y".
http://thefederalist.com/2016/12/09/kellyanne-conway-tells-truth-about-working-moms-competing-priorities-media-flips-its-shit/

As a working mom does in a frantic effort to keep down the volume waiting for once she hits the desk again, I checked email between errands. It included a link to the latest from Donald Trump's campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway. She's not sure if she'll take a full-time White House job, The Week reports: "'My children are 12, 12, 8, and 7, which is bad idea, bad idea, bad idea, bad idea for mom going inside [the White House].' Her kids 'have to come first, and those are very fraught ages,' Conway said, but turning down a White House job 'would be my personal choice and not a demand on me.'"

ABC News further reported: "Conway said that while there are opportunities for working mothers in the nation's capital, 'we still have to make choices, and there are limits.'...Despite Conway's personal concerns about juggling motherhood and a formal White House role, she dismissed any notions that Trump does not support mothers in the White House. 'Mothers and married women and unmarried women — they're all welcome in the Trump White House, and he's made that very clear to me.'"

Besides, working for the president is not just a full-time job; like mothering, it's an all-time job. Pretty hard to do both of those well at once without hating your life. As Conway tells (still quoting The Week) male colleagues wondering why she's not gunning for a full-time White House job:

Conway said that when she helps interview potential Cabinet appointees, 'I do politely mention to them the question isn't 'would you take the job,' the male sitting across from me who's going to take a big job in the White House. The question is would you want your wife to?' she said. 'Would you want the mother of children to? You really see their entire visage change. It's like, oh no, they wouldn't want their wife to take that job. But it's, it's all good.'

Well, that might be what a middle-America mom like me thinks of Conway's totally sensible and totally mainstream thoughts on this issue, but Slate predictably jumped down her throat for daring to voice a typical mother's thoughts about how professional work can or cannot fit into raising children. "Kellyanne Conway Suggests That Women With Kids Shouldn't Take Jobs in the White House," their headline read.

I know, it's Slate. You should expect that from them. But it's not just Slate. "Kellyanne Conway Suggests Mothers Shouldn't Take Jobs in the White House," tooted New York magazine. "Kellyanne Conway muses that the White House is no place for working moms," misconstrued Mic.com. A pack of howling lefty writers and outlets took to the Twitter streets, like they do, to bash Conway's rather amazing willingness to prioritize her four kids above seeking further glory and influence.

There is more in the article but this was the part I found interesting.  Although I suppose that media bias should just be boring now.  It does seem to be standard procedure.

[Chestertonian]

feminists claim to be all about choices, but really it seems like to them, there are two choices--Either be a full time stay-at-home wifey or get to work full time, lean in, and don't you dare think about stuff like 3 months maternity leave or wanting breaks to pump breastmilk for 20 minutes (which i think trump disparaged a woman for


heaven forbid women actually consider people other than themselves (such as husbands and children) when makng career decisions.  its not like she is saying "im going to be a stay at home mom and bake cookies all day"

overall, i think it is sad that in our culture you're expected to live to work and not work to live.  i dont like the fact that corporations pressure men to sell their souls to their corporations at the expense of being there for their children too.

[OCLittleFlower]

I don't think an employer should have to pay someone for pumping breaks.  If you want to work longer hours to add those 20 min back, fine by me, but productivity should remain the same, or pay should be docked.  Period -- you want equal treatment, well, there you go.     But these women don't want equal treatment, they want special treatment.  They want a man's salary without doing a man's job.  They want to get paid while pumping, while other people pick up the slack.

If women with children are expected to take more breaks, do less work, etc, then they should be paid less.  Simple as that. 

[Chestertonian]

I don't think an employer should have to pay someone for pumping breaks.  If you want to work longer hours to add those 20 min back, fine by me, but productivity should remain the same, or pay should be docked.  Period -- you want equal treatment, well, there you go.     But these women don't want equal treatment, they want special treatment.  They want a man's salary without doing a man's job.  They want to get paid while pumping, while other people pick up the slack.

If women with children are expected to take more breaks, do less work, etc, then they should be paid less.  Simple as that.

It's salary not getting paid for hour often my wife works 14 hour days also what do you know about "these women"

[OCLittleFlower]

I don't think an employer should have to pay someone for pumping breaks.  If you want to work longer hours to add those 20 min back, fine by me, but productivity should remain the same, or pay should be docked.  Period -- you want equal treatment, well, there you go.     But these women don't want equal treatment, they want special treatment.  They want a man's salary without doing a man's job.  They want to get paid while pumping, while other people pick up the slack.

If women with children are expected to take more breaks, do less work, etc, then they should be paid less.  Simple as that.

It's salary not getting paid for hour often my wife works 14 hour days also what do you know about "these women"

And some women I know who make this complaint aren't salaried or work barely 8 hours even before the pumping break.  Not everything on this site is an attack on your wife directly - as far as she goes, if her boss is happy that's fine with me.  But as far as what the law should mandate?  "Equal pay for equal work" goes right out the window the second they want special breaks to pump.  Lifestyle choices about what/how to feed a baby should not be guaranteed accommodation while at work -- if an employer wants to offer that, fine by me, but to me it's in the same category as free dry cleaning and "bring your pet to work" from a legal standpoint. 

[dymphna17]

I don't think an employer should have to pay someone for pumping breaks.  If you want to work longer hours to add those 20 min back, fine by me, but productivity should remain the same, or pay should be docked.  Period -- you want equal treatment, well, there you go.     But these women don't want equal treatment, they want special treatment.  They want a man's salary without doing a man's job.  They want to get paid while pumping, while other people pick up the slack.

If women with children are expected to take more breaks, do less work, etc, then they should be paid less.  Simple as that.

It's salary not getting paid for hour often my wife works 14 hour days also what do you know about "these women"

And some women I know who make this complaint aren't salaried or work barely 8 hours even before the pumping break.  Not everything on this site is an attack on your wife directly - as far as she goes, if her boss is happy that's fine with me.  But as far as what the law should mandate?  "Equal pay for equal work" goes right out the window the second they want special breaks to pump.  Lifestyle choices about what/how to feed a baby should not be guaranteed accommodation while at work -- if an employer wants to offer that, fine by me, but to me it's in the same category as free dry cleaning and "bring your pet to work" from a legal standpoint.

That's a little harsh.  Who peed in your Post Toasties this morning?  "The second they want special breaks to pump"  Why is it OK with you if the employer wants to offer it, but almost in the same breath you mock the situation (which again, is fine by you) by trying to make a Mother's trying to make the best of a bad situation, by trying to feed her child that which is best for it, equivalent to "free dry cleaning" and 'bring your pet to work"?   How do you know they aren't putting in equal work?  Most of the women I have known work their butts off to put that time in.  You act as if they sit at their desk or whatever, and suddenly decide, "Well, I think the work I'm trying to do is hard, so I'm going to go pump just for fun,  Maybe then someone else will pick up my slack, because I just really don't feel like doing this."

And your snotty remark to Chestertonian about "not everything on this site is an attack on your wife directly", was completely unnecessary and rude.  He never said everything on this site was an attack on his wife.  It did look like you were attacking his situation whether you realize it or not.  Neither he nor his Wife deserve to be approached with such an attitude any more than you and your Husband would.  Hopefully you didn't realize the way you were coming across.

[Chestertonian]

iwould say pumping to provide necessary nourishment for your baby is not at all on the same level as dry cleaning or pets,which are both luxuries.  women have the important task of carrying and sustaining life and this is a good thing that does deserve special protection even in the workplace.  it's for the good of society not just for the good of the individual.  it would be better still if they did not have to go into the workplace  but a lot of these people who thinkthat women should not be in the workplace also look down on  things like welfare ad medicare so it sure beats not being destitute
my wife has her own office with a lock on the door so a lot of times on her pumping breaks sheis doing work while hooked up to the pump...often on a conference call or stuff on the computer.  often makes up for it by eating lunch at her desk instead of going out to lunch with her mostly male coworkers. and then working late.  no one in the office actually works 9-5 you work until you're done with your work, and if you dont do that,you get fired whether youre pumping or not.  you arent necessarily "getting paid for pumping breaks" in an establishment that doesnt specify amount of time for breaks and such.  i believe that in establishments that give paid breaks,you would be paid as if it were a paid break but anything over that is unpai

[Bernadette]

That escalated quickly. And Trump strikes me as the kind of man (at least in business) who would quickly rid himself of anyone whom he felt wasn't giving his company 100%. But most big business people probably would. I know that when my aunt was in business, she was expected to give her job priority over everything else. When we kids were very young, my mother actually lived with my aunt while my dad was stationed overseas: my aunt worked 14-hour days, and my mother went to school part-time and took care of us kids. But my aunt certainly wasn't the one calling in sick when we all came down with the chicken pox. So yes, I can see a mother turning down an incredibly demanding job for the sake of her kids.

[OCLittleFlower]

I don't think an employer should have to pay someone for pumping breaks.  If you want to work longer hours to add those 20 min back, fine by me, but productivity should remain the same, or pay should be docked.  Period -- you want equal treatment, well, there you go.     But these women don't want equal treatment, they want special treatment.  They want a man's salary without doing a man's job.  They want to get paid while pumping, while other people pick up the slack.

If women with children are expected to take more breaks, do less work, etc, then they should be paid less.  Simple as that.

It's salary not getting paid for hour often my wife works 14 hour days also what do you know about "these women"

And some women I know who make this complaint aren't salaried or work barely 8 hours even before the pumping break.  Not everything on this site is an attack on your wife directly - as far as she goes, if her boss is happy that's fine with me.  But as far as what the law should mandate?  "Equal pay for equal work" goes right out the window the second they want special breaks to pump.  Lifestyle choices about what/how to feed a baby should not be guaranteed accommodation while at work -- if an employer wants to offer that, fine by me, but to me it's in the same category as free dry cleaning and "bring your pet to work" from a legal standpoint.

That's a little harsh.  Who peed in your Post Toasties this morning?  "The second they want special breaks to pump"  Why is it OK with you if the employer wants to offer it, but almost in the same breath you mock the situation (which again, is fine by you) by trying to make a Mother's trying to make the best of a bad situation, by trying to feed her child that which is best for it, equivalent to "free dry cleaning" and 'bring your pet to work"?   How do you know they aren't putting in equal work?  Most of the women I have known work their butts off to put that time in.  You act as if they sit at their desk or whatever, and suddenly decide, "Well, I think the work I'm trying to do is hard, so I'm going to go pump just for fun,  Maybe then someone else will pick up my slack, because I just really don't feel like doing this."

And your snotty remark to Chestertonian about "not everything on this site is an attack on your wife directly", was completely unnecessary and rude.  He never said everything on this site was an attack on his wife.  It did look like you were attacking his situation whether you realize it or not.  Neither he nor his Wife deserve to be approached with such an attitude any more than you and your Husband would.  Hopefully you didn't realize the way you were coming across.

My husband has worked with some really lazy women.  So has my father.  Always calling off work because of their kids, extra breaks, etc.

Ches' wife managed to work it out with her boss, has a private office, and isn't even taking a true break.  She is NOT in the same category as the women asking for special treatment.  He has a history on this site about making things about him/his family/his situation when that is far from the truth in terms of both the situation itself and in terms of a poster's intentions.  Generally I like Ches quite a lot but this one trait does push people's buttons every now and then, and it's my turn to get a bit ticked over it this time around I guess.  He's the one who made it about his wife and I tried to simply state that, to me, it is not about her but about certain women who try to demand extra special treatment.  She's not the people lobbying for the law to be changed or for special treatment -- she's able to seamlessly work around her lifestyle choice, from the sounds of it.

If an employer wants to work it out with their workers, great, but it shouldn't be a legally required thing, IMO, any more than employers should have to provide any of the many perks they often do.  It's a perk, and not needed by any stretch of the imagination (nor is feeding the kid or the method of feeding the kid responsibility of the employer unless they choose to make it so).  Providing the best of everything for the employee's child isn't the job of the employer.  Keep in mind, though, that I'm not big on most perks being mandated by law (including health insurance, even).

As for pets, well, there are documented medical benefits to having them, especially in early childhood.  To me, nursing vs formula is in that same category -- not absolutely essential but it has definite benefits.  But on the other hand, we don't have to provide our children with every single benefit known to mankind.  If you can and want to?  That's great.  Not your employer's problem unless they decide to offer that perk, but some perks come with an odd price...

If anything, dry cleaning often has more to do with the employer, especially if they are the sort of business that requires certain dry clean only clothes as a condition of the job (like a suit and tie).  So some companies give it for free as a way to keep you at work (can't using picking up the dry cleaning as a reason to leave work at a normal time when it gets delivered to and picked up from your office for free).  A lot of the much envied perks of working at Google (free food, free daycare, free dry cleaning, bring the dog if you want) are ways of getting people to stay for extreme long hours.  Can't use eating, kids, dry cleaning, or feeding the dog as an excuse to leave, because it all comes to you.