Lady and the Tramp

Gwendolyn Mink’s article “Lady and the Tramp” brought up a number of interesting issues regarding welfare politics and the role that feminism has played in the pursuit of equality for mothers. Mink starts off with a very valid argument that should speak to any woman, she says that “welfare reform risks many of the rights and protections upon which women’s security and equality depends.” With reforms such as the Personal Responsibility Act, poor single mothers were stripped of their entitlement to welfare—and Mink argues that this “war” against poor women is really a war against all women. It was interesting to me (though perhaps not surprising considering the largely white middle-class upbringings of women in Congress) that most women did not vehemently contest the Republican welfare paradigm. I personally had never even heard of the Personal Responsibilities Act, perhaps because I was 6 years old when it passed, but it seems so obvious to me that it is genuine and unprovoked attack on poor women with children; the members of our society with the most need for government welfare were subsequently denied their right to that welfare and ultimately “a million more children have been driven into poverty.” Mink presents this issue as a women’s one and called for a return to true sisterhood, for women to uphold the rights of the poor mothers as they do their own. In my opinion it should also largely be considered a children’s issue, a social problem that economically hurts mothers but perhaps more importantly, harms the next generation. Poor children are the members most negatively impacted by growing up in families with a single parent who tries to assume dual responsibilities of breadwinner and caregiver. It seems obvious that this Act not only disenfranchised the women who most need government help, but even more tragically their children who also suffer the consequences of having a poor single mother. The larger societal issue of class inequality is discussed by Mink but is not given the full attention such a massive issue deserves. The underperformance of lower-class children in schools may be directly correlated with the lack of a parent who can devote themselves to anything but work. There is a vast advantage for children with a mother (or any caregiver) that can devote the necessary time and energy to that child's education and upbringing. I think the impact that the Personal Responsibilities Act has had on children could be included in Mink’s argument to further emphasize the sustained inequality that the act promotes. In terms of the author’s argument for a “payment” in the form of welfare for the exhaustive work of a parent assuming a dual role in the household, I believe her idea is good in theory, but simply could not be applied to the full extent here in America. We already hear battle cries aimed at Democrats for turning the United States into a socialist welfare state after this most recent health care bill. I cannot even imagine the opposition that a bill proposing government subsidies for stay at home moms. I definitely think mothers or fathers who are parenting alone deserve a safety net from destitution. However a socially provided income for solo parents would never pass in Congress, it is simply an unrealistic burden to place upon the state and would result in chaotic complications when it comes to figuring out who actually deserves this welfare and how much. Instead more immediate action should be taken to reform the traditional roles of families, because this would have a more lasting social impact than simply dishing out money where it is needed. Changes should be made which allow women to claim independence for themselves, with or without children, rather than being economically dependent on a husband OR on the state. Although Obama has already made strides in this direction, there needs to be action to change the role of fatherhood, especially in these poor communities where a single mother is the only parental figure in her child’s life. All of these poor single mothers had to get that sperm from somewhere. By forcing poor single fathers to take a more active role in raising their children we can release the burden of dual responsibility falling unfairly on the mother. The deeper social issue in Mink’s argument should promote equality using a bottom-up strategy, by reforming the longstanding problem of care giving always falling squarely on the mother’s shoulders, such changes (in addition to providing welfare where it is still needed) could begin to reverse the plight of poor single mothers.