November 20, 2017

Why Men Still Can’t Have It All – Esquire

English: An artist's depiction of the rat race...

 

Soooo many words have been dedicated to women and men not “having it all” recently. The latest comes from a father’s point of view. This piece by Esquire’s Richard Dorment is well written and thought provoking and certainly worth a look if you have the time and energy.

 

If you don’t, here is a quick summary:

 

1) No one knows what “having it all” even means. Though a baby or two is unquestionably part of the recipe.

 

2) No one can actually have it all unless they do not need sleep… unless good sleep is also part of “it all”.

 

3) Just chasing it all is stressful. and ultimately no one seems completely satisfied with our collective “work-life balance”

 

4) It is unclear whether this unsettled state is a product of our culture, biology, competition between the sexes, cooperation between the sexes, or the unrealistic expectations hoisted on us by each other, advertisers, technology and contemporary society.

 

5) I am sure I am missing something (a lot). I read the story during a sweltering blackout at two in the morning and found myself wondering:

 

a) Has the ability to work remotely made our lives more full and balanced and provided us with unprecedented opportunities to balance our lives? Or the opposite? Everyone seems to be working their asses off when they are not pretending to be fulfilled… not that meaningful work, conquering challenges and purpise-driven living is unfullfilling.

 

b) Is all of this emphasis on capturing an elusive, undiefined thing intended to make us feel inadequate and insecure so we keep working harder and buying more things?

 

I digress. Read the article. Give us your definition of “having it all” or skip the words and go directly to the slideshow by clicking here
Read more: Why Men Still Can’t Have It All – Esquire

 

 

in response to Why Women Still Can’t Have It All – Atlantic

My best definition of having it all: Living a purpose-driven life of one’s own choosing.

But here’s the problem for parents I think: Putting kids at the top of the purpose pyramid means you may only get to choose ONCE, while the childfree can adjust their pupose and pursuits as they grow… Thoughts?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Post a comment!