There's an elephant in the Argument: Why don't women adopt these elite ideals and leave their kids? We should at least have an explanation why either nothing si

There's an elephant in the Argument: Why don't women adopt these elite ideals and leave their kids? We should at least have an explanation why either nothing significant changed in the last 100+ years (a stretch), or something else that is counteracting said elite ideals. To put another way, why did the elite woman act against her own publicly professed Expectation? [0] Another hint there's something amiss is the flawed premise. Men are not doing nothing! I see a whole bunch of consumption. Here is one of the author's citations: > Edin and Kefalas describe the behavior of young males in low-income neighborhoods: >> [...] Young mothers regularly rail against young fathers who squander too much of their earnings on alcohol, marijuana, new stereo components, computer accessories, expensive footwear, or new clothing, while the needs of the family are, in their view, not adequately met. [... Amy] had a boyfriend who worked steadily but insisted on spending on selfish pursuits. This is what eventually broke the young couple up. All those are true, but try to tell that to every one of those Industries. If you were the CEO of a shoe company men spending on food is money not spent on your shoes. Why have your primary consumer spend less with at your company, even if that benefits the broader social fabric? It is in your material interests (one could argue your "Fiduciary Responsibility") to drive spending towards your company, which is why you pay the Marketing Department the big bucks. If I were to throw out a guess, I suspect the difference is between Expectation and Ideal, or the difference between external and internal motivation, respectively. You can't form a cohesive self-identity from constantly shifting external expectations (ask your therapist), it must be stitched together from already free-floating desires/values/signifiers of society. Where I think the author gets close is how society influences how and what to Desire [1]. [0]: For those who read Cialdini's Influence this is an apparently powerful violation of the Commitment to Consistency, which hints something deeper is going on. Her deliberately going out of her way to correct the interviewer's view of her perhaps speaks to a greater commitment to another consistency? [1]: https://iep.utm.edu/lacweb/#SH2b https://iep.utm.edu/lacweb/#SH2b