
Oh please, the right is reviving a tired trope about women
Tribune News Service
Here we go again. A bunch of successful, conservative professional women are telling young women they don't need careers to have fulfilling lives. All they need to do is avoid college (or better yet, just use it to find a husband), get married, have babies, stay home and live happily ever after. Perhaps you've noticed the proliferation of "tradwife" (i.e. traditional wife) influencers on various forms of social media, or the coverage of conferences like the woefully misnamed Young Women's Leadership Summit that recently took place in Dallas. A project of Charlie Kirk's conservative student organisation, Turning Point USA, the summit promised to focus on "foundational aspects of womanhood" such as "faith, femininity and well-being."
The conference drew 3,000 women who, according to reports, were mostly college students or young professionals. They sported pins that read "My favourite season is the fall of feminism" and "Dump your socialist boyfriend," and they were told by Kirk, "We should bring back the celebration of the Mrs. degree."
"The left wants women to feel angry and like victims, and like your rights are being taken away," a 31-year-old influencer named Arynne Wexler told a reporter for New York magazine. Not to put too fine a point on it, but in fact her rights are being taken away. Perhaps she has forgotten that the Supreme Court overturned the right to abortion in 2022? Anyway, there is absolutely nothing new here. A certain subset ofwomen — straight, white, conservative, religious — has always fought against gender equality for their own reasons, but mostly I'd say because it threatens their own privileged status and proximity to male power. Nearly half a century before Wexler bemoaned "the left," Phyllis Schlafly, lawyer, author and anti-feminist crusader, said basically the same thing: "The feminist movement taught women to see themselves as victims of an oppressive patriarchy. Self-imposed victimhood is not a recipe for happiness."
Hmmm. I'm pretty sure it was the oppressive patriarchy that prevented women from owning property, having their own credit cards and bank accounts, from earning equal pay, accessing legal birth control and abortion, serving on juries and holding public office. Until second wave feminism came along in the 1960s and 1970s, I'm pretty sure, too, that oppressive patriarchy allowed employers to fire women once they married or got pregnant, and that domestic violence, marital rape and sexual harassment were not treated as crimes. Oh, and it was feminists who pushed for Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, which addressed gender inequality in education, including, crucially, in sports.
Attacking feminism because you've never experienced a time when women were not, for the most part, legally equal to men springs from the same ignorant well as believing measles vaccines are unnecessary because you've never experienced the (largely vaccine-eliminated) disease for yourself. Indeed, reciting the accomplishments of feminism reminds me of that classic scene in the 1979 black comedy "Monty Python's Life of Brian." You may recall it: What have the Romans ever given us? (Just sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system and public health.) A consistent thread in the argument against gender equality is that feminism makes women feel bad for staying home with their kids and not pursuing careers. In Dallas last month, young conference-goers told the New York Times "that it was feminism and career ambition making them unhappy, not the broader stress of puzzle-piecing together the responsibilities of modern life."
In 1994, former First Lady Barbara Bush said she had experienced a period of depression and partly attributed it to "the women's movement," which, as she told NPR, "sort of made women who stayed home feel inadequate." I get that. But in response, I would paraphrase Eleanor Roosevelt: No one can make you feel inadequate without your consent. If you are lucky enough to be able to stay home with your children and do not feel compelled to carve out a career, more power to you. Alex Clark, a popular podcaster and influencer who headlined the Young Women's Leadership Conference, offered the crowd her Make America Healthy Again formula: "Less Prozac and more protein. Less burnout, more babies, less feminism, more femininity." But having lots of babies is stressful — having one baby is stressful — and can certainly lead to its own kind of burnout.
One of the most popular tradwives in the country, Hannah Neeleman, is a Mormon mother of eight young children. She is married to a rancher who is the son of the founder of Jet Blue, has more than 9 million social media followers and, as a former professional ballerina, posts under the handle Ballerina Farm. Last summer, in a profile published by the Times of London, she was dubbed the "queen of tradwives." We learned that she does all the food shopping, makes all the meals and has no help with childcare. I would submit that she is a career woman as well, since she runs popular social media accounts that generate millions of dollars a year in income. In a stunning admission, her husband told the London Times reporter that his wife "sometimes gets so ill from exhaustion that she can't get out of bed for a week."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Gulf Today
a day ago
- Gulf Today
Student loan caps might worsen national doctor shortage
Shalina Chatlani, Tribune News Service Twenty-eight-year-old Michaela Bonner has been working 12-hour shifts as an emergency medical technician in Norfolk, Virginia, for the past four years, while attending and paying for college to finish her prerequisites for medical school. But now that President Donald Trump's signature tax and spending law bars students from borrowing more than $50,000 annually in unsubsidised federal loans for medical school, Bonner is worried her dream of becoming a doctor is financially out of reach. 'I get told, 'Well, we really need you. We have a physician shortage, and you've done all this work leading up to this point,' and that's true as well, and it's not that I want to quit,' Bonner said in a recent interview. 'But there are no systems in place that I can rely on to support me now that I can't take out the full cost of living through loans.' The tax and spending law includes provisions that significantly alter the student loan process for higher education. The law halts current student loan repayment plans for loans that are granted on or after July 1, 2026. On that date, the law also terminates Grad PLUS loans, which have helped people pay for their higher education degrees and total cost of attendance. Current borrowers will be grandfathered in. The federal law gives current borrowers enrolled in loan repayment plans for students based on income — such as those plans known as SAVE or IBR — until July 1, 2028, to switch to a new plan. Interest collection will resume Aug. 1 for students enrolled in the Biden-era SAVE plan. At the same time, medical or law school students hoping to get unsubsidised federal loans — in which the borrower is responsible for paying the interest at all times rather than the government — will only be able to borrow $50,000 per year, with a $200,000 lifetime cap. Those seeking advanced degrees in areas such as history or philosophy have a $100,000 lifetime cap. The average yearly cost of medical school for the 2024-25 academic year ranged from around $42,000 to $72,000, depending on whether the school was private or public and whether the student was a resident or nonresident, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges. Some congressional Republicans say that students need to be working harder to pay for higher education, like medical school, on their own. Others say the caps put the onus back on colleges and universities to rein in the rising cost of tuition. But critics of this legislation say the loan caps are only going to harm students, especially from lower-income backgrounds, and will exacerbate physician shortages. In recent years states have tried to ease physician shortages by implementing various policy solutions. Since 2023, at least nine states have made it easier for doctors trained in other countries to get medical licenses. States have also participated in interstate licensing compacts, allowing nurses and physician assistants to travel across state lines to work, so long as they are licensed in one state within the compact. For student loan relief, more than 20 states have enacted legislation to address student loan forgiveness, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, a group that tracks state policies. Georgia passed a measure that will expand a cancelable loan programme for physicians working in rural and underserved areas. Idaho also created the Rural Nursing Loan Repayment Program, offering nurses $25,000 in forgivable loans after three years of service in a rural area. McKenzie Richards, a health care policy fellow at the conservative think tank Cicero Institute who has been studying the pace of physician shortages, told Stateline that the national physician shortage could potentially exceed 100,000 by 2034. At the end of 2024 that projected number was closer to 64,000 physicians. Richards said states will be looking toward more policy solutions should the student loan changes exacerbate physician shortages. 'We know what's going to be happening coming down the line in just five years, so I think policies that states can adopt to get out of this are really important to be looking at now,' she said. 'The hope is that by capping (federal loans), it will encourage schools to lower tuition prices,' Richards added. 'Then maybe they need to be admitting more students, which would have a great downstream effect for getting more doctors through.' Other students will be in the same boat, said Lesley Turner, an associate professor of public policy at the University of Chicago and an economist. 'This is going to hit some students worse than others,' Turner told Stateline. 'Those (students) in more expensive programs tend to borrow more, and so for those students they will need to return to private student loans or other ways of financing their graduate education.' Many students were already questioning their capacity to go to medical school before the student loan caps, said Shannon Jimenez, dean of the Arkansas College of Osteopathic Medicine. 'I expect that this bill, this cap, is going to push people out of primary care and into specialties to help pay off those higher interest rate loans,' Jimenez told Stateline. She added that caps will likely deter students from lower socioeconomic statuses from going into primary care — important in places like Arkansas, where she says there is a 'maldistribution of physicians.' 'Many schools like us try to attract those students, because they're more likely to go into primary care and serve in underserved areas. So it's going to tie our hands in a lot of ways.' Large states and more rural states will feel the gaps more deeply, said Richards, of the Cicero Institute. Louisiana, for example, is projected to be short almost 5,000 doctors from a variety of specialties by 2030, including close to 400 primary care doctors. Already more than a third of Louisiana physicians are close to retirement age — similar to the situation in neighboring Arkansas. As for whether schools will just be able to lower tuition, Jimenez said, 'it makes no sense.' 'We still function in a somewhat market-driven economy and have to compete with other schools around us, so our cost is based mostly on what we have to pay our faculty, and that's not going to go down,' she said. The annual cost of attendance at her school is between $80,000 and $85,000. Bonner, the EMT, holds a political communications degree from Regent University and now is studying biomedical sciences at Old Dominion University. She already has $20,000 in loans, she said, and for the rest of college tuition, she has paid out of pocket. Since she's supporting herself, she hasn't been able to save much. She'd planned to take the medical school entrance exam next spring, but now worries about how she'd pay for living expenses while attending. 'Medical school scheduling doesn't allow for working, so you have to take out loans for living expenses,' she said. 'A lot of people, I feel, would be panicked if you had worked for eight to 10 years of your life and found out that all the systems that you were banking on in a really academically challenging space are disappearing,' Bonner said. 'I don't see a path forward for certain, but I'm fighting to make one.'


Gulf Today
a day ago
- Gulf Today
Coal-powered AI robots are a dirty fantasy
Liam Denning, Tribune News Service The same day President Donald Trump launched his AI Action Plan, his Energy Secretary Chris Wright pulled federal support for a power project with ties to renewable energy that could help that plan. Not coincidentally, Trump instructed Wright at his AI summit that he must say 'clean, beautiful' before any mention of the word 'coal' and that the US must compete with China's construction of new coal-fired plants. Possibly the only thing more bizarre than Trump's enforced catch-phrasing is his vision of 21st century robots running on a power technology that hasn't been cutting-edge since the days of Thomas Edison. Coal has long been a political prop for Trump, but this has taken on greater significance in his second term, with a naked assault on both the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions and zero-carbon technologies (nuclear power excepted). When coal isn't being touted as beautiful or clean, it is pitched as reliable and cheap, and due for a comeback if freed from overbearing rules. This is a fantasy, and a bleak one at that, not just for the climate but also that AI plan. You don't need a conspiracy theory to explain coal's decline in the US. It lost 31 percentage points of market share in US power generation between 2005 and 2024, and natural gas picked up four-fifths of that. Why? Gas got cheaper. Five times the cost of coal in 2005, on an energy-equivalent basis, that gap was all but erased by booming shale supply (which Trump also backs). Meanwhile, the cost of building new coal plants, already a multiple of that for gas, went up even as it went down for gas (and renewables). Coal's decline was well established by 2015, when former President Barack Obama unveiled his Clean Power Plan — which was never implemented anyway. The problem is straightforward: Coal-power is an old technology outmatched by newer ones. The average coal-plant running today began operating when Jimmy Carter was president. The youngest, Sandy Creek in Texas, came online in 2014. By 2020, its owners were reportedly in debt restructuring talks and the following year the plant tripped offline in Texas' winter blackouts. Utilisation, or the proportion of the year it actually runs, has slumped. The cheapest existing coal plants remain competitive, according to Lazard Inc.'s latest analysis of levelised costs. Yet they are hardly a slam-dunk compared with gas or unsubsidized wind and solar. The latter are intermittent, of course, and securing firm power to back them up, such as contracting with a gas peaker-plant or battery, boosts their cost considerably. Even then, new coal is in a similar cost range — and that is only with the implicit subsidy of spewing unpriced carbon. This shows why rising forecasts of power demand, stoking fears of dark datacenters or blackouts, offer a lifeline to some existing coal plants that would otherwise retire. But this won't catalyze new ones, even when you consider the suddenly rising cost of new gas plants. Utility NextEra Energy Inc. recently cited a levelised cost for new gas-power of $90-$115 per megawatt-hour. That would put it closer to new coal, but there are reasons why there's a backlog for turbines, not for boilers. Gas plants are more efficient than coal, especially in ramping up and down to match shifting demand and output from renewables, and also emit about half as much carbon. The whiplash of US energy policy over the past decade demonstrates why a developer must think in terms of not the next three years but the next 30. Similarly, AI hyperscalers are prioritising sheer speed over net-zero now, but tethering their reputations to coal over the long term would be inadvisable. This is why, for all of coal's vaunted qualities, the Trump administration still tries to tilt the field so heavily toward it and away from renewable competitors. Wright has made extensive use of federal powers to keep coal plants running that might otherwise close or run minimally; roughly a fifth of all such emergency orders since 2000 have been issued this year. Similarly, Wright's decision to pull an agreed $4.9 billion federal loan-guarantee for the 800-mile Grain Belt Express transmission line reeks of politics, rather than the economic analysis his department claims. The project, bringing wind and solar power from the Great Plains to states further east, had secured approval from four states, partly due to expected cost savings, as well as court victories over opponents.


The National
a day ago
- The National
Tesla approves $30bn stock award for CEO Elon Musk
Tesla has approved an interim stock award worth about $30 billion for Elon Musk and said it would put a longer-term chief executive compensation strategy to a vote at the electric vehicle maker's November 6 annual meeting. The new agreement includes 96 million shares of the car maker that will vest if Mr Musk continues to serve in the top post for another two years, the company said on Monday in a regulatory filing. The restricted stock has an exercise price of $23.34, equal to the price in a deal originally granted in 2018. Shares in Tesla rose 2.7 per cent to $310.80 before regular trading in New York. The board emphasised the importance of retaining Mr Musk, saying in a shareholder letter that the award was a first step 'good faith' payment. 'After all, a 'deal is a deal.'' The move comes after a prior compensation package valued in excess of $50 billion was voided by the Delaware Chancery Court after a shareholder lawsuit. That is currently being appealed and a special board committee has been exploring ways to offer Mr Musk a new compensation agreement after shifting Tesla's legal home to Texas last year. The proposal underscores Mr Musk's grip on the company and could ensure that he won't relinquish the chief executive title in the near term. Mr Musk has served as the car maker's top executive since 2008. He told Bloomberg in an interview in May that he is committed to still being at the helm in five years. Tesla's board is sticking with Mr Musk despite his competing priorities. Besides overseeing four other companies, politics has taken up a lot of Mr Musk's attention this year. His decision to bankroll President Donald Trump's re-election campaign and lead the Department of Government Efficiency's effort to remake the federal government sparked a backlash against the electric vehicle maker.