Holding It Together

1. American Women: The Invisible Safety Net

In the absence of a robust social safety net, the US avoids catastrophe and keeps our society and our economy from crumbling by relying on women as the invisible glue.

Women's disproportionate burden. American women carry a heavier load than men globally, shouldering a disproportionate share of unpaid caregiving while often working underpaid jobs. This imbalance is unique to the U.S., where institutional support systems are lacking. Women are expected to be the primary providers of childcare, kin-keepers, family health managers, budget managers, and head volunteers, often caring for the sick and elderly.

Filling critical gaps. This unpaid, essential labor keeps society and the economy from collapsing. Without women stepping in, critical services like childcare, eldercare, and community support would falter. The expectation that women will "hold it together" allows policymakers to avoid investing in a robust social safety net, creating a precarious system for everyone.

Societal consequences. This reliance on women leads to widespread societal issues. The U.S. experiences higher rates of depression, sickness, and premature death compared to other high-income countries. We work longer hours for less productivity, have higher poverty rates, slower economic growth, and more political unrest, all exacerbated by the absence of a strong safety net.

2. Historical Choices: Prioritizing Profit Over People

We in the US could have followed their example. The postwar boom left us with plenty of money to build a national childcare system and a national healthcare system and offer more support to families in need. But we chose short-term profits over long-term prosperity—which meant not building a stronger social safety net and forcing women to stand in for that net instead.

A missed opportunity. During World War II, the U.S. temporarily funded an effective national childcare system (Lanham Act) to enable women to join the workforce. However, this system was dismantled post-war, driven by the belief that women should only work out of necessity and return home once men returned. This decision marked a critical divergence from European allies like France, who invested in equitable economies with universal childcare and healthcare.

The great risk shift. Following WWII, the U.S. actively dismantled its nascent social safety net, shifting responsibility from government and employers onto individuals and families. This "great risk shift" was engineered by ultra-wealthy businessmen and neoliberal economists who promoted ideas like "trickle-down" economics and self-reliance, leading to:

• Decades of stalled federal minimum wage.
• Cuts to welfare benefits and increased work requirements.
• Attacks on labor unions.

Long-term consequences. This historical choice prioritized short-term profits, leading to long-term societal costs. The lack of a robust safety net has left millions struggling with housing, food insecurity, and healthcare access. This underinvestment has rippled out, affecting not just women but undermining the security and stability of all Americans.

3. The Motherhood Trap: Forced into Caregiving

The laws and the culture of American society are designed to force women—and anyone who can be pregnant—into motherhood, into caring for children, and into bearing the risks that come with filling those roles.

Grooming for caregiving. From a young age, girls are socialized to be "mothers-in-waiting," taught meekness, given caregiving toys, and tasked with looking after younger siblings. This cultural conditioning equates womanhood with motherhood, making caregiving seem like a "natural" female purpose, which then justifies underpaying women for this labor.

Legal and social coercion. Beyond socialization, legal and social pressures actively push women into motherhood. The U.S. has high rates of unintended pregnancies due to inadequate sex education and limited access to affordable birth control. The overturning of Roe v. Wade further tightened this "motherhood trap," making it harder for women to avoid or control the timing and number of their children.

• Brooke's accidental pregnancy led her to leave college and take low-wage jobs due to lack of childcare and family support.
• Audrey felt coerced into a second pregnancy by her husband's actions and her church's anti-abortion stance, despite her own wishes and marital stress.

Punishment for "failure." When mothers struggle, they are often blamed and punished, especially if they deviate from societal expectations. The child welfare system, for instance, often removes children from struggling mothers without providing adequate support for addiction or mental health, as seen with Destiny and Sylvia. This system disproportionately affects Black families, perpetuating cycles of precarity and reinforcing the idea that mothers are solely responsible for their children's well-being.

4. Economic Precarity: Leaving Women No Choice

If mothers in the US aren’t part of the formal economy, it’s usually because we’ve left them with no other choice.

The "missing middle" trap. Many stay-at-home mothers, like Erin, are not home by choice but because they are caught in childcare's "missing middle." They earn too much to qualify for public assistance but too little to afford the high cost of private childcare. This forces them to choose between their entire paycheck going to childcare or staying home, often leading to financial strain and reliance on meager government programs.

• Erin and Mark's combined income of $30,000 made them ineligible for public childcare but unable to afford private options.
• Erin's attempt at a split shift with Mark led to exhaustion and ultimately her quitting her job.

Erosion of community support. Generations ago, communities offered more support, but today's social networks are often too strained to provide substantial help. Many parents, especially those with lower incomes, lack reliable access to emergency childcare or financial assistance. This isolation intensifies the burden on mothers, who become the default caregivers with nowhere else to turn.

Gendered career penalties. The economic system incentivizes fathers to be "ideal workers" through "daddy bonuses" while penalizing mothers with lower wages and fewer advancement opportunities. This dynamic pushes women out of the workforce or into low-wage, flexible jobs, further entrenching their role as the primary, unpaid safety net.

• Mark's promotion at the mine offered more career growth than Erin's grocery store job.
• Erin feared re-entering the workforce due to potential job loss from prioritizing sick children.

5. Moral Dilemmas: Privilege and Exploitation

In our DIY society, the only way to avoid the risk of precarity is to dump that risk downstream.

Outsourcing precarity. Women in higher-income families can afford to outsource domestic and caregiving labor, allowing them to compete in the workforce. However, this "choice" is morally fraught, as it often relies on the exploitation of women in more vulnerable positions who fill these low-wage care roles. This system creates a hierarchy where privilege is maintained by shifting risk onto others.

• Holly and Kathleen, a high-income couple, felt guilty about their reliance on underpaid childcare workers.
• Childcare workers, often women of color, earn low wages and lack benefits, making their labor affordable for privileged families.

The cost of "affordable" care. The high cost of quality childcare in the U.S. is not due to high wages for caregivers but the labor-intensive nature of the work. To keep prices "affordable," centers often cut compensation to the bare minimum, leading to:

• Chronic understaffing and high turnover.
• Workers like Brooke being pushed into childcare jobs due to limited options.
• Caregivers taking multiple jobs or facing medical debt, as seen with Willa's teacher.

Hoarding resources. Even privileged families, facing the overall precarity of the DIY society, feel compelled to hoard resources rather than advocate for systemic change. This self-preservation instinct leads to a tacit acceptance of the exploitation of others, as seen in Holly's realization that her family's security depended on the underpayment of childcare workers. This perpetuates a cycle where individual insecurity justifies collective inaction.

6. Meritocracy Myth: Blaming the Individual

They tell us that if we’re struggling, it’s probably our own fault for being lazy or making bad choices.

The "success sequence" fallacy. The meritocracy myth, promoted by neoliberal think tanks, claims that success in America is guaranteed by following a "success sequence": finishing high school, working full-time, and marrying before having children. This narrative, however, ignores systemic barriers and falsely attributes poverty to individual "bad choices" or laziness.

• Jocelyn, despite following the "success sequence" (high school, marriage, breadwinner-homemaker goal), faced financial instability and domestic violence.
• Her husband's struggling business and her low-wage jobs forced her into a precarious existence.

Psychological soothing and self-blame. This myth is psychologically appealing because it offers a sense of control and hope in an unequal society. It reassures those who are not struggling that their success is deserved and provides a framework for the downtrodden to believe they can overcome obstacles through sheer will. However, it also leads to:

• "John Henryism": single-minded determination leading to burnout and self-blame for failure.
• Demoralization and judgment of others who struggle, as seen with April's views on "lazy parenting."

Undermining the safety net. Belief in the meritocracy myth directly undermines support for a universal social safety net. It fosters the idea that:

• People in poverty are "undeserving" and haven't worked hard enough.
• Government assistance should be punitive and require proof of "worthiness."
• Programs like welfare and food stamps are "easy" and lead to dependency, despite their inadequacy.
  This skepticism leads to a fragmented, bureaucratic, and often demeaning system of support.

7. Mars/Venus Myth: Justifying Gender Inequality

Gray’s arguments may sound scientific, but it’s merely a pseudoscience sheen. Instead, Gray is promoting the Mars/Venus myth, which equates gender (and sexuality) with biological sex, treats both as a set of binary opposites, and asserts—without solid evidence—that biology dictates gendered skills, temperaments, preferences, and needs.

Pseudoscience of gender. The Mars/Venus myth, popularized by books like John Gray's, asserts that men and women are fundamentally opposite, with distinct biological roles and temperaments. This pseudoscience, rooted in outdated evolutionary theories, claims women are naturally nurturing and men are naturally competent and powerful. This narrative justifies unequal gender roles and men's exploitation of women's unpaid labor.

Perks of patriarchy. Men like Dennis, while claiming to support gender equality, readily accept the "perks" of a breadwinner-homemaker arrangement. They rationalize their limited involvement in housework and childcare by:

• Citing their higher income as a logical reason for their wife to stay home.
• Claiming their wives are "happier" at home or better at domestic tasks.
• Weaponizing incompetence, as Dennis did with laundry and dishes.
  This allows them to save their time off for "fun things" while their wives manage the domestic sphere.

Muzzling women's complaints. The myth also discourages women from complaining about unequal divisions of labor. Women like Bethany often self-correct or defend their partners, fearing they will be seen as "ungrateful" or "crazy" for challenging the status quo. This "gaslighting" effect is reinforced by broader societal misogyny, which dismisses women's concerns and punishes those who defy gender norms.

• Bethany excused Dennis's anger and limited involvement, despite her own exhaustion.
• Candace feared her husband would leave if she pushed too hard for more help.

8. Supermom Myth: Weaponizing Maternal Guilt

That myth paints a portrait of children in constant danger and of mothers as the only ones with the power to rescue them from harm.

Mothers as sole protectors. The Supermom myth portrays children as constantly vulnerable to various threats (sin, suffering, academic failure) and positions mothers as the sole, indispensable protectors. This narrative, whether religiously or secularly framed, places immense pressure on mothers to be hyper-vigilant and responsible for every aspect of their children's well-being.

• Kara, an evangelical Christian, saw herself as "Supermom against Satan," believing her role was to protect her children's souls through strict discipline and homeschooling.
• Monica, a secular mom, focused on optimizing her children's health and academic success to protect them from "suffering" in a competitive world.

Guilt and self-sacrifice. This myth weaponizes fear and guilt, compelling mothers to sacrifice their own needs and ambitions. Mothers are bombarded with conflicting advice, leading to constant self-doubt and the feeling that they "can't win." This guilt often drives them to:

• Opt out of paid work or pass on career opportunities, as seen with Monica and Teresa.
• Overwork themselves, as Chloe did, trying to be both a "Pinterest-perfect parent" and a successful professional.
• Suppress their own desires, believing it's "selfish" to want more than their caregiving role.

Undermining collective solutions. The Supermom myth, by inflating mothers' importance, undermines support for a stronger social safety net. If mothers are seen as capable of conquering all threats, then systemic support seems unnecessary. This leads to:

• Mothers opposing policies like free childcare, believing their own care is superior.
• A focus on individual child success over collective well-being, perpetuating inequality.
  This belief system leaves mothers isolated and exhausted, while simultaneously justifying the lack of broader societal support.

9. Pandemic Relief: A Glimpse of a Better Net

In essence, pandemic relief efforts offered a silver lining of security for millions of Americans in an otherwise desperate time.

A temporary lifeline. The Covid-19 pandemic exposed the deep inequities and gaping holes in the U.S. social safety net, prompting an unprecedented, albeit temporary, cascade of relief efforts. The CARES Act and subsequent programs provided:

• Direct cash payments to taxpayers.
• Expanded unemployment benefits.
• Rent relief and a pause on student loan payments.
• Universal free school lunches and an expanded child tax credit.

Life-changing impact. These programs were a "life raft" for millions, significantly boosting families' financial resilience. The expanded child tax credit alone lifted over three million children out of poverty, and combined with increased food assistance, it cut child food insecurity by almost a third.

• Sierra, a low-income single mother, used stimulus checks for car insurance and saved the rest, allowing her to stay in her apartment and spend quality time with her son for the first time.
• Christine appreciated universal free school lunch for easing her grocery budget and mental load.

Benefits for the "missing middle." Unlike the pre-pandemic safety net, which often excluded families earning too much for poverty programs but too little for basic necessities, pandemic relief was more universal. This allowed families like Mandy's, who were living "check to check," to access crucial support and even build small businesses, as Laura did with freelance marketing. This demonstrated that a more inclusive, less bureaucratic system could benefit a wide range of Americans.

10. Profiteers' Power: Undermining Collective Well-being

Billionaires and big corporations not only killed our chance at a stronger social safety net; they also used the pandemic to get ahead while the rest of us flailed.

Killing "Build Back Better." Despite the clear benefits of pandemic relief, efforts to make a stronger social safety net permanent, like President Biden's "Build Back Better" plan, were ultimately thwarted. This plan, which included affordable childcare, universal preschool, and increased taxes on the wealthy, was killed by:

• Intense lobbying and campaign donations from billionaires and big corporations.
• Key politicians, like Senator Joe Manchin, who received significant funding from these interests.
  This demonstrated how concentrated wealth translates into political power to block policies that benefit the majority.

Exploiting the crisis. While most Americans struggled, billionaires and big corporations used the pandemic to their advantage. A Washington Post investigation revealed that over half of federal pandemic spending went to big companies, allowing them to:

• Furlough workers while claiming tax breaks, as seen with The Cheesecake Factory.
• Post record profits and boost the stock market, disproportionately benefiting the wealthiest 10%.
• Engage in "excuse-flation," raising prices on goods and services far beyond increased labor or supply costs.

The cost of corporate greed. This manipulation of the crisis led to increased wealth inequality and further precarity for everyday Americans. The auto industry, for example, cut lower-priced models and hiked prices, making vehicles unaffordable for many. This "profit-price spiral" was largely driven by corporate greed, not labor costs, yet policymakers focused on curbing wages, further disadvantaging workers.

11. Union of Care: Reclaiming Shared Responsibility

A union of care would reject those divisions and treat care as a collective responsibility for ensuring the dignity that everyone deserves.

Beyond individual solutions. Self-help solutions and individual "good choices" cannot solve systemic problems. The Icelandic Women's Day Off in 1975 demonstrated the power of collective action, leading to significant improvements in women's lives and a stronger social safety net. The U.S. needs a similar collective approach to dismantle the myths and structures that force women to be the de facto safety net.

The essential work of care. Care is a shared, fundamental human project that extends beyond financial support. It involves noticing needs, planning solutions, and actively supporting others' well-being. A robust social safety net should strengthen these networks by:

• Freeing care work from profit pressures through universal public systems (healthcare, childcare, education, eldercare).
• Funding these systems adequately to ensure high-quality, dignified care from birth to death.
• Removing bureaucratic hurdles and trusting care providers and recipients.

Caring for caregivers. A "union of care" would acknowledge that everyone has care responsibilities, formal or informal, paid or unpaid. It would ensure caregivers have the resources, time, and energy to perform this work sustainably, including:

• Guaranteed monthly stipends for families with dependents.
• Paid family leave, sick leave, and vacation time.
• Stronger minimum wage laws and protections against penalties for care-related accommodations.
  This would empower families with real choices, decoupling precarity from morality.

Leveraging linked fates. This union would unite all members of caregiving networks—paid and unpaid, givers and receivers—to recognize their "linked fates." By understanding that harm to one part of the network affects all, this collective power can challenge the engineers and profiteers who benefit from division and precarity. This movement would redefine societal value, prioritizing care over achievement, and ensuring dignity for all.

Last updated: August 25, 2025