Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Room 300, Erb Memorial Union
PO. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-mail: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online Edition:
www.dailyemerald.com
Editor in Chief:
Jessica Blanchard
Managing Editor:
Jeremy Lang
Editorial Editor:
Julie Lauderbaugh
Assistant Editorial Editor:
Jacquelyn Lewis
Friday, May 10,2002
Point / Counterpoint
Family or career?
Hugbes decision should be praised
It takes a real woman to put family first,
and Karen Hughes, senior counselor to
President George W. Bush, has done
just that with her recent departure from the
White House. Not only has she resolved to
spend more time with the people who mat
ter most to her, she has also stepped up and
shown that being a mom and a career
woman is no easy task.
As a result of her high-profile relocation
to Texas, eyebrows have raised at the role
gender has played in her situation. Hughes
has been received both warmly and harsh
ly by the media. Some criticize her for
abandoning President Bush during this
turbulent time in America.
However, Hughes has been a key part of
the White House staff and will continue to
advise even after she leaves Washington.
According to Bush, “Karen Hughes will be
changing her address, but she will still be
in my inner circle.” He even goes so far as
to support her decision with his personal
insight of her devotion to family. In times
like these, it is especially important to be
involved in the lives of those closest to us.
Hughes has taken the initiative in creating
a better environment for her family, an ac
tion that should not be remembered only
in the wake of tragedies. Indeed, it should
be top priority on everyone’s schedule.
Unfortunately, the need for money and
possessions often puts quality family time
on the back burner. Women are put in fur
ther complicated circumstances because of
the simple desire for the best of both
worlds — balancing a loving family and a
successful career. Not to say men do not
want the same, but society often identifies
Guest Commentary
Lindsey
Newman
men as breadwinners, while women fall
into the role of emotional supporters in the
household. Women should theoretically be
at home taking care of the kids. That is why
it becomes increasingly difficult for
women to get ahead in the business world.
According to a 2000 survey conducted
by the American Federation of Labor and
Congress of Industrial Organizations, more
than one-half of working women have no
paid sick leave to care for a baby or an ill
family member. One-third have no flexibil
ity or control over their work hours, and a
staggering 74 percent say their employers
do not offer child care benefits
Does anyone else suspect a conspiracy
here? It is true that men may not receive
these benefits either, but it is logical to con
clude that if both husband and wife are
employed, at least one should be able to
provide child care. Perhaps the main rea
son men do not get these same “privileges”
is simply that they do not ask for them.
Regardless of your opinion of Hughes’
decision, if you think it frivolous or com
mendable, it is definitely a reality check.
People — men or women — choosing to
put their family on a pedestal is all too un
common today. I hope people see the posi
tive side of Hughes’ actions.
Lindsey Newman is a senior at Willamette High School
and a spring intern for the Emerald. Her opinions
do not necessarily reflect those of the Emerald.
Fathers marginalized by Hughes’exit
Last week one of the most important
women in Washington resigned in or
der to spend more time with her
lawyer husband and 15-year-old son at
their home in Austin, Texas. President
George W. Bush’s most trusted adviser,
Karen Hughes, may have a noble reason for
leaving, but it is typically something that
can only occur with the women of Wash
ington. It could also point to the increasing
marginalization of fathers.
A top White House advisor leaving is not
unheard of; during the Clinton Administra
tion, America saw the president’s domestic
policy adviser, Bill Galston, leave for family
reasons. What makes Hughes’ situation
unique is that the media took her resignation
(and her reason for doing so) at face value
and did not spin it politically. When Galston
left office, many in the media took it as a sign
he was failing his job or was caught in a scan
dal. It’s true, when a man claims to leave his
job to spend time with family, many suspect
there is another reason. In the case of Hugh
es, however, I believe that she really does
want to put family first.
The media’s acceptance of Hughes want
ing to spend time with her son and hus
band is, in many ways, something that
would not occur with a male counterpart.
U.S. News and World Report’s Gloria Borg
er has asked the question on many minds:
“Would Hughes have to leave if she was a
guy?” Most men don’t have to leave work
for family, and many times it is not even an
option.
The media reaction to Hughes’ decision
has me wondering about the perception of
father figures in America. The media will
Guest Commentary
Michael
Lichens
jump on fathers wanting to leave their jobs
for quality time with the kids, while it is al
most expected from mothers. Father fig
ures are often perceived as less important
to the family structure than the mother fig
ure, which is why Hughes is able to leave
the political arena without much scrutiny.
If Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld
wanted to leave office to spend more time
with his children, he’d likely be criticized.
It seems to me mothers in Washington
are expected to raise children and keep the
family together while fathers continue
their careers. As counter-feminist as it may
seem, family men of Washington are usual
ly asked to sacrifice family time for their
jobs because the mindset is still focused on
mothers looking after the family.
The idea that fathers are not important is
something that the Bush Administration
has expressed by letting Hughes leave her
top White House position. Even after years
of progress by the women’s rights move
ment, mothers are still expected to be the
sole guardians and protectors of their chil
dren. Meanwhile, men are expected to pro
vide for the family and continue their ca
reers. Until that stigma has changed, and
stay-at-home dads become more common,
we can’t really say we’ve changed.
Michael Lichens is a senior at Willamette High School
and a spring intern for the Emerald. His opinions
do not necessarily reflect those of the Emerald.
Letter to the editor
Vote Castillo
to support public education
I was glad to see that The Register-Guard had
the wisdom to endorse Susan Castillo as the
most qualified candidate for school superin
tendent. As its endorsement pointed out, Castil
lo is well-known and well-respected in this area
because of her past media experience and her
past service in Salem representing the people.
Rob Kremer, who is being supported by Bill
Sizemore, is using a computerized phone message
to falsely state that Castillo is a member of the ex
treme left. Castillo is not an extreme anything.
As a person who has spent most of my work
ing career in the field of education and who
presently represents Springfield on the Lane
Community College Board of Trustees, I know
that Castillo is a supporter of public education
and that Kremer is not. Our schools are all fac
ing the necessity of making major cuts, because
in large part of the efforts of Bill Sizemore and
his supporters.
To me, the race represents a clear and stark
choice. If you want your schools to have their
budgets cut further, then vote for Kremer, the
Sizemore clone. However, if you value educa
tion and recognize the importance of public
education to your children and the economy of
Oregon, vote for Susan Castillo.
Dennis Shine
Springfield
CORRECTION
David 2ev Harris' name was spelled incorrectly
in Thursday’s news brief about his visit to campus
(“Reporter to speak on Middle East conflict/’
ODE, May 9).
The Emerald regrets the error.
Peter Utsey Emerald
"^-r'5 t>me a i?e\/isionI.
//