As we approach Women’s Equality Day I have been thinking about the question; Can women have it all. Even as a simple yes or no question it is terribly weighted and has evolved greatly over the years. It was first coined in 1982 by Helen Gurley Brown in her book Having It All: Love, Success, Sex, and Money…. Even if You’re Starting with Nothing. At that time the phrase was pointed mostly balancing love and relationships with a highly successful career, inspired by Brown’s rags to riches story of becoming the editor in chief of Cosmopolitan. Over time, the ability of women to have it all has transitioned to be more of a balance of career, marriage, motherhood, and selfcare. It doesn’t just stop there though. To have it all you cannot simply check the box on all of the things, having it all means excelling in all of them.
Is it true, can we have it all?
On one hand I think this is a pretty uninteresting question. I mean, can women excel in their careers, have amazing relationships with their spouses, be incredible moms, and make decisions and take actions that support themselves, of course they can. The question evolved over time to include a half answer. Women can have it all but not at the same time. The assumption being that you can spend years working on your career, then stop and focus on kids. Then when they leave the nest, either focus on hubby, career again, maybe herself. The world is your oyster at that point, dream big.
It is just silly to assume that a woman cannot thrive in all areas of life, and she has to choose one at a time. Note that I am not saying it is silly to focus on one. I am saying it is silly, for her or anyone else, to assume that one is all she’s capable of.
What is interesting is why we ask this question.
Why do we even bother asking if women can do it all and why don’t we ask it around other combinations? Can men be successful parents, with healthy careers, strong bodies, and good relationships with their spouses? Could kids be good in school, have great friendships, be helpful parts of the family unit, and still have time for fun? Let’s take the person out and go with a role for simplicity. Could a leader, teacher, police officer, etc. Have it all in a full and well-balanced life? For some reason, just taking the word women out of the sentence turns it from a question of if to an assumption that it should be happening.
Kids are my favorite example. Take your average 17-year-old kid. With all we heap on them, and they heap on themselves, and we expect them to excel. We even tell them (and ourselves) that when they do more they are setting themselves up for more success. They are expected to have amazing friendships with many other kids (and we get scared when research says they don’t have 5 best friends). We expect star athleticism (and cringe if they little league at 9 instead of 4). Not to mention, we expect ability and interest in college with a high GPA, foreign language training, volunteer hours, and a great ACT/SAT score. This is not an all-star student, friend. What I’m describing is considered average, baseline. Now, in a few short years that kid goes from being classified as girl to woman and suddenly, nobody knows if she can have it all even though she’s been demonstrating just how much she can hold for 5-10 years.
So, what changed?
The dynamic changes when I woman hits a certain age. We expect that she’ll take a specific track and excel only in what is available there. You want to be a mom; you are in the mom line, and you can do these limited things. You’re a career woman, get in that line and you have these totally separate options. It would be like if you saw three different buffet lines (yes, a food reference). We expect that whichever line a woman got in she should only eat from that table. We forget that she can get in all the lines and heap her plates with fruit and beef tips and salad and broasted chicken. Then you know what, she can come back for more. She could bring a completely separate plate for dessert (we’re all allowed a second act in life right?).
Do a little reflection here. What do you mean when you say, have it all? Are you giving permission to women to eat from every buffet? Are you giving permission to yourself?
What if women do it differently?
What if we defined it differently, again?
For some women, have it all doesn’t include marriage? For another maybe the trifecta is kids, career, and faith. There are many women who define, have it all as marriage, kids, health. Then there are plenty who have it all by taking the phrase back to its roots, and not including kids at all. Do those women in any of these paths have an easier time? Of course not. These women with all of their different goals and aspirations make an amazing community of hard-working incredible women.
What if we stopped asking?
Asking can women have it all? assumes you should. It assumes that women don’t have it all, however its defined, aren’t trying or have an easy life. Anyone who’s spent half a minute with a stay-at-home mom, single mom, or a strong career minded woman, knows they have incredibly hard jobs. The experiences will vary but they truly are working with many of the same struggles. So, what if we just stopped the assumptions about what women should be striving for by not asking.
What if we just gave permission to live it out?
Instead of asking if it’s possible to have it all and all the weight and assumption that came with it, could we just live it? Could we leave that by the wayside of stupid questions, just like we did ‘Do blonds really have more fun?’ and move on with our lives by simply doing it. I mean, never have I worried if I was missing out on life because of my hair color because I was too busy living it. I have it all, no air quotes required, and I’m not really concerned about how anyone else feels about it.