Single Means Lifeless
Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell gets in trouble for saying being unpartnered means you have no life. And obviously, not having kids and a lot of obligations means you can work more -- I certainly do, by choice. I've been working day and night, including weekends, to finish my book -- because I can. Because the kids in my life live next door, and have other parents. Recently, Gregg had to go alone to a screening on a Monday night (my deadline night) and to a party. But, I chose to keep working on my book and double columns so we could get to Paris and have a week off together.
I can understand why single people feel bad about this sort of remark -- because I've had the experience, for example, of being made to stay late when I worked at a big company because the married people had to go pick up their kids, etc.: "Do her work, she's got a life." Gail Collins writes about Rendell's remark for The New York Times, quoting my friend, UCSB prof Bella DePaulo, author of the terrrific book, Singled Out: How Singles Are Stereotyped, Stigmatized, and Ignored, and Still Live Happily Ever After:
Ed Rendell can't believe that he's being asked about the fact that he said that Barack Obama's nominee for head of homeland security, Janet Napolitano, has "no life."...He was explaining that Napolitano was "perfect" for homeland security "because, for that job, you have to have no life. Janet has no family. Perfect. She can devote, literally, 19-20 hours a day to it."
... And it sure sounded as if he was saying that single people like Napolitano exist in a state so dark and barren that the empty hours can only be filled up by guarding the nation's borders against terrorists and preparing for the next hurricane.
You will not be surprised that Rendell -- reached by phone in Pennsylvania and game as ever for conversation -- feels as though he's been totally, deeply and completely misunderstood.
"It was meant to include all workaholics," said Rendell, who is married with a grown son. "I have no life. I'll give you a perfect example." He launched into a story about coming home late at night and watching a two-hour cable TV review of the Pennsylvania budget. Which actually, if you were a governor and it was your state's budget, might be kind of fascinating.
"I have no life either," he repeated. "But I couldn't run Homeland Security because I don't have the background."
... All this was a real blow to Bella DePaulo, the author of "Singled Out," who had recently posted on her blog, celebrating the fact that after Napolitano's nomination was announced, "I haven't found any hints of singlism" in the articles about her.
"Oh, no!" she said, when reached by telephone Wednesday morning.
DePaulo says that "singlism" -- a term she coined and for which we are prepared to forgive her -- is not just aimed at unmarried women. She referred to an MSNBC interview that Chris Matthews had with the presidential candidate Ralph Nader in 2004, in which Matthews demanded to know how Nader could say George W. Bush was irresponsible: "He's raised two daughters; he's had a happy marriage. Isn't he more mature in his lifestyle than you are?"
This did seem strange, since there are so many excellent reasons unrelated to marital status why Ralph Nader would make a terrible president. (The list does not, however, include "likely to let the big financial firms ruin the economy due to lack of regulation.") To be fair, Matthews also asked Nader if the fact that he did not own a car meant that he had not "had an American experience."
But it's unmarried women at the top who often wind up portrayed as vestal virgins who live only to serve their chief executive. (Condoleezza Rice's public image is so extreme that people must be wondering if she plans to immolate herself on the White House lawn during the inauguration.) Instead of being celebrated for their achievements, they wind up regarded as slightly fanatic.
And single women comprise between 43 percent and 51 percent of the adult women in the country, depending on how you count. They are universally regarded as folks with time on their hands, and thus the most likely recruits for taking care of aged parents, adjusting their schedules to accommodate their married friends and working overtime. "Employers ask you to cover for everyone else," said DePaulo.
Which actually makes them sound busier than their married peers.







I love how she worked the lie about Bush trashing the economy into a piece that isn't about Bush at all.
You stay classy, Gail.
brian at December 5, 2008 5:11 AM
Heh. I had a boss who gave me (and one other co-worker) the line about "stay here until 10:00 pm and do all the work - everyone else has kids and needs to leave at 4:30." Well, my co-worker had kids and I got another job. Wonder who does the work now? This boss had three of the most unruly, misbegotten brats I have ever seen. They'd come visit the office once in a while and the whining never ceased. I always thought it made more sense for HIM to stay late at work, since when he went home all he was going to do was listen to those three hellions fight with each other anyway. I, on the other hand, would have gone home and done something fun. Oh well. Hence, the new job.
Pirate Jo at December 5, 2008 6:34 AM
Heh. I remember my life B.C. (Before Children). It was fun! It was fantastic! It was fraught with uncertainty! It was frequently exciting! Life A.C. (After Children)? Fraught with anxiety sometimes. Fun sometimes. Frequently routine and boring. Functional mostly. Fucked up once in a while. Not unlike single life. Definitely different. But never, once, did I NOT work overtime when I had kids. Being a single mom for most of their lives, I needed every dime I could get. I thank the gods that my parents took care of my kids when they were younger, because that allowed me to work overtime. When I took time off for any of their school "events" I always used vacation time, even if it was only 4 hours. I never expected anyone to pick up my slack, because I never left any. I always make sure, even to this day, that my work is done or can be put off until my return, if that's what it comes down to.
Flynne at December 5, 2008 7:22 AM
I think I worked a lot harder after I had kids, but whatever. But Amy, you're not Ralph Nadar. You have friends, work, large social circle--I know plenty of married people who don't know anyone other than themselves.
But, having close long-lasting relationships does give a person certain experiences that set them apart from the loners among us. Rice is probably alone with her piano at the end of the day. Nadar probably stares gloomily at photos of blondes in Chevettes and thinks of what might have been.
Kate at December 5, 2008 7:43 AM
The "you should work longer and harder, you have no life" routine isn't just for singles. My husband of 2.5 years and I have no kids and no immediate plans for any, which leads not only to expectation that I will cover my coworkers when they have to leave in the middle of a big project because the daycare closes at 6, or when they stay home because Jimmy has the sniffles; but to inquiries about whether I dislike kids or have a medical condition.
For the record, I like kids, as far as I know I can have kids, and I intend to someday when I'm financially and emotionally ready.
Beth at December 5, 2008 8:11 AM
I thought Condi was seeing Jack Donaghy.
Paul Hrissikopoulos at December 5, 2008 8:27 AM
Eh, why the whining here? He was pointing out she had no family that would get messed up by her not being home. Not being home is obviously going to be part of the job. Amy should be championing the fact that a single person got it, since all parents have no business working (per her Palin comments).
All the working parents I know do tend to put the job first. I don't agree with it, but I really doubt they're dumping work on single colleagues. At least not any more than the singles coming in late and hungover on fridays. And tuesdays.
momof3 at December 5, 2008 9:00 AM
> Nadar probably stares gloomily
> at photos of blondes in Chevettes
> and thinks of what might have been.
While probably disagreeing with the point of your comment and presuming that you meant Corvairinstead of Chevette, I nonetheless wish I'd said that.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at December 5, 2008 10:26 AM
"Nadar probably stares gloomily at photos of blondes in Chevettes and thinks of what might have been."
That blond is most likely smiling and naked and never says she got a headache. Why being alone has to be lonely?
Chang at December 5, 2008 10:37 AM
I had a silver (with black racing stripes) '64 Corvair Monza, 4 on the floor, with a CB radio and an AM/FM 8-track tape player. I hope the stupid bastard who hit it when it was parked in the street near my friend Ron's house suffers a really painful and lingering death by blue balls. And that the last thing he remembered was the shock on my face when I saw what he had done, before he took off, never to be found. (Bastard. I hate him with the heat of a thousand suns. May the fleas of a bazillion camels infest his crotch, while the siren of his dreams is just beyond his reach, holding a huge tube of cortizone-10. And an ice cold Michelob Amber. In a frosty mug.)
Flynne at December 5, 2008 10:57 AM
Flynne....please don't hold back. Tell us how you really feel. :)
wolfboy69 at December 5, 2008 11:59 AM
"But, having close long-lasting relationships does give a person certain experiences that set them apart from the loners among us. Rice is probably alone with her piano at the end of the day. Nadar probably stares gloomily at photos of blondes in Chevettes and thinks of what might have been."
Oh, please, Kate. Plenty of single people have tons of friends, including ones that date back for decades. Don't those qualify as "close long-lasting relationships"? Some of my close friendships go back further than most people's marriages. Perhaps you have no close friends. Many of us do, and need never sit "alone with [our] piano" unless we want to. Grrrrrrrr.
Gail at December 5, 2008 12:11 PM
> Flynne....please don't hold back.
Yeah, we've got to get this girl out of her shell.
(I felt the same way when a drunk took out my '71 Dart that was parked on the street. It was no sex toy, that coupe... But it laughed at the Indiana winters.)
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at December 5, 2008 12:38 PM
"not having kids and a lot of obligations means you can work more...I've been working day and night, including weekends, to finish my book -- because I can."
- No, it's because you want to, you're driven.
"I certainly do, by choice" - Exactly.
Something tells me you would find a way to get the important things in life done even if you did have to tow around an anchor in a stroller.
The guy in the cube accross from me works from somewhere around 7 am (wouldn't know, don't get in that early) until 5:30, when I leave. He has 3 kids, he's driven.
I'm not just cheerleading for my team here, I really believe it has more to do with your dedication to the job than the particular hours of the day that you are available for work. Of course that does change if all you are selling your employer is time.
smurfy at December 5, 2008 1:23 PM
> Rice is probably alone with her
> piano at the end of the day.
Gail is correct to take note of this passage. It seems sort of psychologically backhanded. The pity has a pornographic quality that mirrors its pretense, as if actually longing for a scrap of musical solitude.
And I'm reminded of this blog post from McCardle, cited in these comments earlier, in which she suggests that Obama will feel isolated when he has to give up email & Blackberry to avoid subjecting associates to subpoenas and other FOIA intrusions. (I'm not using the word "feel" inadvisedly- Her precise word is "lonely".
McArdle says this about a man who's preparing to take the position often described as "leader of the free world." And he's taking that office when government power-- United States government power-- is surging to new heights over Wall Street and capitalist enthusiasm. The personal attention this man and his family will receive from mass media are the envy of the brightest Hollywood stars. There are few treasures on Earth as valuable as a moment of this man's time in conversation, and everyone --friend and foe-- knows it.
He will not be "lonely."
Consider this passage from the author of the Atlantic piece on Rice (link near top of page):
| She is younger than most Cabinet
| Secretaries. Her background is
| different. Her interests are
| different. She has the capacity
| for doing a number of things at
| a very high level, any one of
| which would be pretty impressive
| in isolation. If I met a fifty
| year old woman who was in much
| better shape than I am, and who
| had a flamboyant love for
| fashion, and who dated two NFL
| All Pro wide receivers, I would
| think, wow, that's a pretty
| unique person. I haven't met
| anyone like her before. The same
| with a black woman with a Ph.D.
| who spoke fluent Russian and
| became the provost of Stanford
| University. The same with a
| woman who was a concert-level
| pianist but was also an expert
| on American foreign policy. The
| same with someone who worked at
| the NSC, became the National
| Security Advisor, and then
| became Secretary of State.
| Condoleezza Rice is all of those
| people, and she leads a
| physically punishing schedule
| that makes exceptional demands
| on her body and mind alike, at a
| particularly difficult time in
| our history. To be a black woman
| in America and to negotiate all
| those worlds at once is mind-
| blowing. I don't have the
| slightest idea of what that's
| like, other to say than it is
| beyond the realm of normal
| experience-it's extreme.
Rice's life was not going to be like other people's lives anyway.
And if she's really feeling lonesome at the piano, Condi can call me on my cell. Anytime, anytime... I'd walk out of my Daddy's funeral to meet her for a short coffee at Starbucks on a snowy night. I'd bet there are other men and women who'd do the same, people with achievements and sophistication who're also eager to share time with her, for even the most meager social purposes.
In this post, Amy's a little closer to saying "Shove your pity up your ass!" than I am, and I agree that tightly-bonded people have "certain experiences that set them apart from the loners." But as another contentedly single person, comments like Rendell's seem too inane to be condescending. We grownups in America get to live our lives as we see fit.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at December 5, 2008 1:25 PM
Also, Singlism, really, do we another victim classification?
smurfy at December 5, 2008 1:37 PM
I'd bet there are other men and women who'd do the same, people with achievements and sophistication who're also eager to share time with her, for even the most meager social purposes.
Ah, yes, and you know, Cridmeister, I feel this same exact way about you...
o.O
Flynne at December 5, 2008 5:55 PM
You just have to love those parenthetical ignorant insults. Perhaps she is unclear about the Community Reinvestment Act. Perhaps she doesn't know that the Congress is the legislative branch of government. Perhaps she doesn't know that the legislative branch is supposed to pass these laws of which she writes.
MarkD at December 5, 2008 7:49 PM
Flynne, you flatterer you... And I never even had an oil tanker named after me..
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at December 5, 2008 10:13 PM
But Gail-- I didn't specify married people--there's married loners.
And Crid--you're right. I spaced on the name of the car. But thanks. It was a neat turn of phrase, wasn't it?
But as to Condi--I think she's glad to be alone--she's surrounded, hounded and pounded all day long. And not pounded in the way you think, you dirty old man.
Kate at December 6, 2008 8:38 AM
Please don't interrupt my pathetic fantasies... They're all I have down here in Mom's basement
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at December 6, 2008 8:50 AM
The more things change the more they come around to the same old things...
Remarks like that are part of what fired up the 'women's' movement in the late 60s and early 70s. It's ignorant, stupid, and insensitive, but it is a fact that people who do not have spouses and/or children can devote more time to their jobs or other pursuits - a definite plus if one doesn't mind not having the patter of little feet in the house. Choices/consequences. We can have everything we want if we work hard and don't expect to have everything all at the same time.
What always galled me was the idea that employers thought I was supposed do both my work and someone else's because the other person had decided to become a mom or dad and was getting several weeks off with paywhile I was expected to double my workload. Hmmm...
The way I prevented that from continuing to happen to me was that I found a stellar temp agency and worked when I wanted, where I wanted, often covering for pregnant moms-to-be during their maternity leaves. I did that for over ten years. It was wonderful because it game me the power of choice.
hazeleyes at December 6, 2008 1:01 PM
Employers always thought I'd do all the work of all the stupid people, so I guess it works out. While I might have spent the odd company minute on child-care related phone calls, I made up for it by not locking myself in a stall in the ladies room, crying about some fool who dumped me by text message.
Kate at December 6, 2008 3:25 PM
Being single means never being alone if you don't want to be, and being able to get left alone when people get on your nerves. I think the nasty comments about single people are from those who are jealous.
And on the subject of getting shit on at work: I live in the city and some of my coworkers have to take the communter train in and out of the city, so the assumption is 'you can work late-you don't have to catch the train', or if there's a snowstorm, they can just not show up at all because 'the trains aren't running', while you can't use that excuse.
I just refuse to be treated unfairly at work-I say no to these unreasonable requests. I do wind up doing some of the work of the stupid people, but I make sure that I'm paid a lot more than the stupid people.
Chrissy at December 7, 2008 10:12 AM
Leave a comment