Brandon Galicia 1

Professor Percival

ENGL-1302

8 March 2020
Who Can Have It All?

In Anne Marie Slaughter’s article, ‘Why Women Still Can’t Have It All’, she discusses

the current state of life for career-driven women in America. And argues that for many women,

compromises have to be made with their careers and personal aspirations in order to prioritize

and raise their families. She drives this argument with her own personal life story, as she

discusses the relationship between her career as a former high-ranking government worker, along

with her familial obligations as a mother of two teenagers. She also supports her argument with

observations she has made throughout the course of her life. The most important point that

Slaughter makes in her argument is that the current structure of “America’s economy and

society” disavows any kind of balance between fathership and mothership, and that this

imbalance typically leads to the mother being in charge of most familial responsibilities

(Slaughter 534-554). Another key to her argument is when she claims that most of the

responsibilities in a parental structure fall onto mothers, as fathers are much more willing “to

choose their job at a cost to their family”, whereas mothers are more willing to “choose their

family at a cost to their job” (Slaughter 534-554). Altogether, Slaughter’s argument for mothers

and their responsibilities as both workers and caretakers is very well appointed, as she clearly

believes that women must alter their lifestyles if they want to have a family.

In an article entitled ‘Why Men Still Can’t Have It All’ by Richard Dorment, an

argumentative response is provided as a counter to Anne Marie Slaughter’s article. In Dorment’s

article, he argues that America is just and fair in terms of how everything is economically and

socially structured, and that in the end, “No one can have it all” (Dorment 555-582). Dorment
 2

supports his argument with statistics and personal observations, along with the way his own

family is structured. He claims that currently, men and women both share a near-equal amount of

time when it comes to focusing on their families, and that society doesn’t have any particular

preference when it comes to the occupational success of either men or women. He supports his

claim that society is fair for both men and women when he provides some facts, such as when he

writes that “Nearly 60 percent of the bachelor's degrees in this country today go to women”, and

that “There are about as many women in the workforce as men” (Dorment 555-582). Dorment

also supports his claim that familial responsibilities are typically split 50-50 both inside and

outside the home, when he cites statistical evidence that proves that both “men and women are

putting in roughly the same number of hours: fifty-eight hours for men and fifty-nine for

women” (Dorment 555-582). In the end, Dorment makes a good counter argument against

Slaughter’s claims, as he cites various verified resources that work to strengthen much of what

he says.

Between both Dorment and Slaughter’s arguments, there’s not much in terms of

agreement. However they do seem to agree when it comes to how they view the power-structures

between men and women, with both of them agreeing that men are typically more ignorant when

it comes to the needs of women. This is evident in Dorment’s article when he claims that “Men

have oppressed their wives and sisters and daughters for pretty much all of recorded history”,

and that women’s distrust of men as 50-50 caretakers is understandable, as this distrust may stem

from the ignorance of men (Dorment 555-582). The evidence of this in Slaughter’s argument can

be found throughout several portions of her article, when she debunks several statements that

men typically provide in retort to the notion that life is harder for women. With these statements

being, “It’s possible if you are just committed enough”, “It’s possible if you marry the right
 3

person” and “It’s possible if you sequence it right”. The debunking of these statements works to

show just how ignorant some men may be when it comes to understanding the difficulties that

job-focused mothers deal with.

In terms of disagreements, both Dorment and Slaughter have several disputes between

their arguments, with Dorment’s article being an actual counterargument against Slaughter’s

article . The most important disagreement between Dorment and Slaughter is clearly the issue of

how the responsibilities of parenthood are designated between fathers and mothers. With

Slaughter’s article claiming that the current state of the United States has put mothers in a box,

and that they can only truly choose between two options in life: being a full-time mother or being

a full-time worker. And Dorment’s article makes the claim that the United States is a fair

country, with no real bias towards any particular gender. Meaning that both mothers and fathers

have their own issues in terms of how they balance their occupations along with their families,

therefore there is no true unfairness with how mothers and fathers balance their lives, and the

sacrifices made between both parties are seemingly equal. Dorment and Slaughter also disagree

in terms of how they view the scope of opportunities available for both men and women, with

Slaughter believing that women have been slightly disenfranchised in terms of what jobs they

can get, and Dorment believing that both men and women have equal opportunities. This is

evident in Dorment’s citation of various sources that show the success of women in the

workforce, such as when he writes that “There are about as many women in the workforce as

men”, and that out of the “fifteen professions projected to grow the fastest over the coming years,

twelve are currently dominated by women” (Dorment 555-582). And this is also evident in

Slaughter’s argument, when she claims that “the only way to make it as a woman was to act
 4

exactly like a man”, and that many opportunities have “fallen out of favor with many high-

potential women” (Slaughter 534-554).

Between these two arguments, many fair and justifiable statements are made, many of

which are provided with real-world evidence. But overall, Dorment seems to make a much more

strong and realistic argument, as he provides many facts and statistics that makes the gender-

inequality gap in America seem exaggerated. The issues that Slaughter brings up in her argument

are very much important and real, however Dorment seems to shut down many of the arguments

that she makes in her article. He uses facts to shut down the notion that there’s not as many

occupational opportunities for women as there are for men, and uses real world examples of

families who have a fairly balanced structure in terms of who’s doing the caretaking. However,

one could argue that statistical and factual evidence doesn’t show the full scope of a situation.

And that there should be a more in-depth look at women’s situations to truly understand the

gender-inequality gap in the United States. And this is very understandable, as statistical and

factual evidence can be skewed, whereas looking at people’s stories and situations may give a

much better understanding of how a situation is actually affecting people. In finality, both

Dorment and Slaughter make great arguments that bring light to the situation of gender-

inequality in America, and how for many women, occupational opportunities aren’t always

available. The discussion of gender-inequality is necessary in order for people to understand why

women care so much about representation and equality in the workforce. Because when

everybody is working towards a common goal, society can only become much more

understanding and fair.

Works Cited

Dorment, Richard. “Why Men Still Can't Have It All.” They Say I Say, 4th ed., Norton, W. W.

& Company, Inc., 2018, pp. 555–582.

Slaughter, Anne Marie. “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All.” They Say I Say, 4th ed.,

Norton, W. W. & Company, Inc., 2018, pp. 534–554.