Andrea has been all over the blogging-every-day-in November thing, and now even M, who had previously been letting her blog die a natural death, is back on the train. Thus inspired, here I am! I've already missed 1/3 of the days in November, but even if I only post 4 times this month it will be more than any other month this year.
M's post about the Erica Jong article in the WSJ got me to actually read the article, and the companion piece/rebuttal by Erica's daughter, Molly. I agreed with Erica's "attachment parenting is a trap for women" thing--how can you have an adult life if you think you have to spend 24-7 focused entirely on your child? And it seems to be 98% women who do this (Mothering magazine--whatever it is, it's not gender neutral.) But she lost me when she started to ramble about celebrity adoption and Sarah Palin. It seemed almost like the WSJ had told her "we'd like to use pictures of Angelina Jolie and Madonna along with your piece, can you work in some mentions of them?" Also, whereas "attachment parenting is a trap" is a critique of a societal pattern, the Angelina/Sarah stuff is very blame-individual-women-for-the-world's problems. Retro stuff, Erica.
But what was really interesting was Molly's passive-aggressive gem of a response. She's basically like "My mom didn't pay any attention to me because she was traveling all over the country carrying on with various men and trying to stay famous, and I needed a lot of therapy, and I would never do that so I'm a stay-at-home attachment parenting guru. But I totally appreciate that my mom made enough money to allow me to do that." WOW.
But most of all, the juxtaposition of the two articles was annoying because it made the whole discussion into a women-blaming-each-other fest. Neither Erica nor Molly mentions where Molly's dad was while she was getting raised by nannies, or where Molly's kids' dad is doing while she helicopter parents and resents her mom all day.