"Ladies, it ain't easy bein' independent"

In this morning's Courier & Press, I read a rather disturbing AP piece on some feminists take on the career move of ABC anchor Elizabeth Vargas. In the article, Jocelyn Noveck reports the reactions of a few agenda-driven women to Vargas' decision to focus on her family. Their take: the prospect that a powerful, successful woman cannot balance a career and family must mean that women of today still cannot "have it all." Poor babies.

I consider myself a feminist in the traditional sense. I believe women should have the right to equal pay and respect if they so choose to enter the workforce. I also believe a woman's decision to stay home for the good of her family should be respected and not subjected to conspiratorial scrutiny from a small but very vocal sect of feminists.

The feminists noted in the piece claimed Vargas was forced to step down by higher ups (although they had no evidence of this and Vargas herself denies it). President of the so-called Feminist Majority Foundation Eleanor Smeal bemoans the vestiges of patriarchal oppression calling Vargas' move "a demotion" and asking, "Is this a return to the days when it was tougher for women to get ahead?"

The answer, Ms. Smeal, is no. Vargas herself proves that getting ahead as a woman is not impossible. Success is difficult for anyone, but if you're going to make a broad statement like that, please account for the successes of Katie Couric, Barbara Walters, Diane Sawyer, and the countless other women I see in cable news anchor seats. The truth is that many women value relationships over the corporate ladder. When the time comes to decide between the two (and I know from experience that high-track journalism and family cannot coexist in an egalitarian partnership), these women choose family not because Patriarchy made them do it but because, get this, they want to.