Friday metablog

Steven Pearlstein takes on the idiotic arguments abounding from the stimulus debate. So does Jon Stewart in an excellent episode. won't even embed the first segment because you should just go to the website and watch at least the first two segments.

Just in time for anti-Valentine's Day, the Times brings us two articles that present, inadvertently, a less than rosy perspective on marriage. The first, nicely summed up as follows,

“Given how stark and concentrated the job losses are among men, and that women represented a high proportion of the labor force in the beginning of this recession, women are now bearing the burden — or the opportunity, one could say — of being breadwinners,” says Heather Boushey, a senior economist at the Center for American Progress.

, touches on the imbalance of labor in the home:

Women like Ms. Mohammed find themselves at the head of once-separate spheres: work and household. While women appear to be sole breadwinners in greater numbers, they are likely to remain responsible for most domestic responsibilities at home.

On average, employed women devote much more time to child care and housework than employed men do, according to recent data from the government’s American Time Use Survey analyzed by two economists, Alan B. Krueger and Andreas Mueller.

When women are unemployed and looking for a job, the time they spend daily taking care of children nearly doubles. Unemployed men’s child care duties, by contrast, are virtually identical to those of their working counterparts, and they instead spend more time sleeping, watching TV and looking for a job, along with other domestic activities.

Many of the unemployed men interviewed say they have tried to help out with cooking, veterinarian appointments and other chores, but they have not had time to do more because job-hunting consumes their days.

“The main priority is finding a job and putting in the time to do that,” says John Baruch, in Arlington Heights, Ill., who estimates he spends 35 to 45 hours a week looking for work since being laid off in January 2008.

While he has helped care for his wife’s aging parents, the couple still sometimes butt heads over who does things like walking the dog, now that he is out of work. He puts it this way: “As one of the people who runs one of the career centers I’ve been to told me: ‘You’re out of a job, but it’s not your time to paint the house and fix the car. Your job is about finding the next job.’”

Ahem. Look, asshole: Your wife is busy 35-40 hours a week, too. Get off your ass and share the load. I just find this unbelievable. No, "unbelievable" is the wrong word. I believe it because I hear my friends bitch about it all the time.

Moving on. Let's look at this fascinating piece by Judith Warner. We'll leave aside the more risquee aspects and focus on the matter at hand:

The other day a friend of mine confided that in the weeks leading up to the election, the Obamas’ apparent joy as a couple had made her just miserable. Their marriage looked so much happier than hers... “I was at a place where I was tempted daily to throttle my husband,” she said.

as well as Ms. Warner's observation that, "As we all know, in journalism, two anecdotes are just one short of a national trend."

I'm also not going to dwell on the regret/exclusion stuff:

For some, not knowing the Obamas has almost turned into a feeling of being snubbed or excluded. Like in middle school. It’s funny. Almost.

“Why won’t my kids be sleeping over at the White House? And as my daughter noted, why couldn’t she get to sit front and center and see the Jonas Brothers and Miley perform at the kids’ inaugural concert? If she went to Sidwell, then she might have these chances, she said …” wrote a mother whose kids are not at Sidwell Friends school with Sasha and Malia.

I don't blame people for looking back, but I'd point them to Malcolm Gladwell's book. Also, teachable moment for your kids: you can't always have what you want.