It's not your grandmother's economy

The Times Magazine on how women have better adapted to an economy that requires adaptation:

Many women worked at Russell — as seamstresses and occasionally as managers — but they were never allowed to be part of its ruling fraternity. For most women, Russell was never a way of life; it was just a job, and jobs are, as Charles says, transferable. Once it all started to fall apart, some women in town took out loans or used savings to go to school to become nurses, human-resources managers and legal secretaries. Many were willing to take low-paying jobs because they hadn’t spent their lives expecting to be the primary breadwinner. They did not find the available jobs humiliating or beneath them; they found it thrilling to be making steady money. After years of receiving promotions while their husbands looked for work, many women ended up in Patsy Prater’s or Sarah Beth Gettys’s position as the main source of support for their families. 

The article also gets into how the women, especially, eschew the concept of feminism. Also, an interesting discussion about separating the concept of "head of household" from that of primary breadwinner.