評論
打印
"First, there is a wage penalty for motherhood of 4% per child
“首先，媽媽們平均每生一個孩子，就要遭受4%的工資損失，
that cannot be explained by human capital, family structure, family-friendly job characteristics,
而且是用人力資本、家庭結構、對家庭友好的工作的特征，
or differences among women that are stable over time," she wrote.
或是女性之間一直都穩定存在的那些差異都無法解釋的損失，”她寫道。
"Second, this motherhood penalty is larger among low-wage workers while the top 10% of female workers incur no motherhood wage penalty."
“其次，母親這一身份帶來的工資損失在低工資人群中更為明顯，處于女性職場頂端的10%的女性則完全不會面臨這一損失。”
Part of the disparity between fathers and mothers may be due to employer discrimination, Budig explained,
父母親職場待遇的這種差異部分來源于用人單位的歧視，布迪格解釋說，
citing research suggesting that companies view dads as more competent and worthy of promotion than moms.
他為此援引的研究表明，企業通常認為，父親比母親更有能力，更值得提拔。
"Ideas of what make a ‘good mother,’ a ‘good father,’ and an ‘ideal worker’ matter," she writes.
“人們對‘好媽媽’、‘好爸爸’和‘好員工’的定義也很重要，”她寫道。
"If mothers are supposed to focus on caring for children over career ambitions,
“如果社會認為媽媽們就應當把主要精力放在照顧孩子而不是職業抱負上面的話，
they will be suspect on the job and even criticized if viewed as overly focusing on work."
要是其他人覺得她們過于專注于工作，她們在工作中就會受到懷疑，受到批評。”
But modern motherhood is also relentless.
現代社會的媽媽們面臨的處境依舊很殘酷，很無情。
Not only do mothers in America today continue to spend more time on both childcare and household chores than fathers do,
當今美國的媽媽們不僅在照顧孩子，料理家務方面花的時間依舊都比爸爸們多，
despite men’s increased involvement at home,
盡管男性對家庭的投入已經有所提升，
they also spend more time with their children than they did in the 1970s,
而且，和上個世紀七十年代，也就是龐貝克寫媽媽們即便是做著全職工作，還依然要有三頭六臂的時候，
when Bombeck wrote that mothers had to have six pairs of hands, even as they worked full-time jobs.
和那時候的媽媽們相比，現在的媽媽們在孩子身上投入的時間也是有過之而無不及。
Unable to justify the cost of childcare compared with their wages
工資無法和照顧孩子相比，
or, in the case of a global health crisis, faced with no childcare at all,
又或者，在這場全球性的健康危機的影響下，完全沒有了托管的幫助，
women end up being the ones to walk away from work.
許多女性最后都成了各自家中離開工作崗位的那個人。
Previous economic crises in the U.S. have put men out of work, and we’ve bemoaned the hit to masculinity.
美國以前的經濟危機下失業的都是男性，那時候我們還在哀嘆經濟危機對男性的打擊。
This pandemic has hit women, specifically mothers, particularly hard,
被這次疫情打擊得尤其嚴重的卻是女性，尤其是媽媽們，
but instead of contemplating the creativity, discovery and productivity that are lost when women are forced from the workforce,
然而，在女性被逼離職場時，與其考慮因此流失的創造力、發現和生產力，
we expect them to lean in so far, they fall off a cliff.
我們期望的卻是她們再向前一步，徹底摔下懸崖。
In the Bombeck column, the angel comments that the mother is too soft.
在龐貝克的專欄文章中，天使評價母親太過軟弱。
"But tough!" God replies.
“但（她們）堅韌！”上帝回答說。
"You can imagine what this mother can do or endure."
“你可以大膽地想象她的潛能和忍受能力。”
How much longer will fables of valor be held up as an excuse for using mothers to prop up a failing system?
英勇的寓言被視為利用母親來維持一個失敗的體制的借口，這樣的日子還要繼續到何時？
Even if women can handle it, or at least appear outwardly to be handling it, does it really have to be this hard?
就算女性能扛下來，或者至少表面上看還能扛下來，難道就一定要讓她們的處境如此艱難嗎？
How many fathers would find "enduring" to be a satisfying existence?
有多少父親會覺得“忍受”是一種令人滿意的生活狀態？
American mothers have been the under-supported cog in the wheel of American capitalism for too long.
美國的媽媽們充當美國資本主義車輪下的齒輪的時間太長了。
We must now completely reimagine their role and start over.
我們必須現在就徹底重塑她們的角色，然后重新來過。
譯文由可可原創，僅供學習交流使用，未經許可請勿轉載。
