For weeks now, I’ve been fuming over the misogynist media pile-on that took place after a horrific car crash on New York’s Taconic Parkway, in which Diane Schuler killed herself, her daughter, her three nieces and three men in another vehicle. An autopsy showed that she had drunk 10 shots of vodka and smoked marijuana just before the crash. Despite the medical examiner’s findings, Schuler’s husband claims that his wife never had any problem with alcohol and that the autopsy must have been botched. He–and many in her family and hometown–simply refuse to believe that a caring wife and mother like Diane Schuler could have been a blackout drinker. Moms, we’ve always been told, simply don’t do that.
The Diane Schuler case–and other media meltdowns over women and alcohol which we’ll talk about in a minute–has enormous personal resonance with me. A majority of the women on one side of my family are addicts, including two who have suffered from from life-threatening alcoholism. One of them was a stereotypically abusive, rage-y drunk, but the other is like Diane Schuler–the seemingly perfect suburban mom who was a secret drinker. Her husband never saw her drink. Her children never saw her drink. But for a couple years she was downing a half pint of vodka in the wee hours of the morning as her family slept. No one was the wiser, although her children noticed that she “drove funny” when she took them to school in the morning. By God’s grace and blind luck, her drinking never killed anyone, although it damn near killed her.*
So when Diane Schuler’s family expresses complete disbelief that she was a closet drinker who went on a deadly bender, I know how they feel. It’s very possible that they didn’t know–it can take a while for alcohol abuse to register if the drinker is secretive and quietly high-functioning. And, of course, denial is infinitely easier than having to admit, as one of my family members did, that “I thought we had this perfect family and now we don’t.”
But there’s also an unmistakeable whiff of sexism to this denial, and to the condemnation of Diane Schuler, who, as PhDork noted, was branded “Monster Mom” as soon as the autopsy results came out. Sympathy was replaced with hard-nosed condemnation, both of Diane Schuler, and of mothers–and women in general–who have drinking problems. In a much-reprinted AP article, the blame even spilled over to–you guessed it!–feminism:
“Younger women feel more empowered, more equal to men, and have been beginning to exhibit the same uninhibited behaviors as men,” said Chris Cochran of the California Office of Traffic Safety.
Kjerstin Johnson of Bitch Magazine rightly notes that this
“does seem to be coded language for “Feminism drove Diane Schuler to drink and then to drive,” an anti-feminist myth with dangerous repercussions.”
I completely agree with Johnson. It’s thinly-veiled anti-feminism, with an additional shot of ignorance: it also sounds like Cochran believes women never drank to excess until recently, which is completely ridiculous (The most severely ill female alcoholic in my family was born in 1918 and attending AA meetings with other women in the 1960s).
Women abusing alcohol is not a product of feminism, nor should feminism ever be mistaken for an invitation to get wasted in the name of empowerment. And yet it does, often thanks to women themselves. I once got temporarily banned from commenting on Jezebel.com after I confronted an editor there who was quoted in New York Magazine as saying:
“I don’t think that the drinking in and of itself is feminist, but I do think that it comes from a feminist place, that it can bolster one’s sense of herself as liberated,” says Jezebel editor Jessica Grose. “You know, the whole point of Third Wave feminism is that individual choice should not be judged…if you choose to drink yourself unconscious in some random guy’s bed, that’s also your prerogative. To say that you shouldn’t would be paternalistic hand-wringing, implying that a woman needs to be protected from herself.”
I said at the time that this was a big, reeking bag of bullshit, and it still is. Getting so drunk that you “drink yourself unconcious in some random guy’s bed” is a dangerous, self-destructive thing to do. If that happens when you drink, you have a problem. It’s not “paternalistic hand-wringing” to say so, it’s common fucking sense.
This kind of ignorant glorification of heavy drinking as a quasi-feminist, liberated act crops up in the mommy blogosphere too, including blogs like mommywantsvodka. Blogger and writer Stephanie Wilder-Taylor, author of Sippy Cups Are Not For Chardonnay and Naptime is the New Happy Hour, made a good living publishing wink-y books about mommies who tipple, saying of drinking:
“It was a way to express that we’re still fun people. Just because we have babies doesn’t mean we can’t have an adult side.”
She and other pro-drinking mommies used drinking as shorthand for Hey, we may be stay-at-home moms, but we’re not stodgy! We can still hang the way we did in our twenties! We choose our choice!
Because of my own experiences with moms who drink, I always found these blogs and books more alarming than fun or subversively clever. I was not at all surprised when this spring Wilder-Taylor–who the New York Times dubbed the “heroine of cocktail moms”–admitted that she was an alcoholic and had quit drinking.
“I was drinking to be kind of present, just not all present…[Wilder-Taylor said in an interview] “The drinking got progressively worse.” Whenever her husband questioned her nightly routine, she would retort, “I’m fine.” On May 23, she awoke on the couch, fully dressed. “I thought, ‘I have these kids who are depending on me,’ ” she said, weeping over the phone, “and I have a bad problem.” She called a sober friend and said, “I need help.”
All of the sudden, the aging-hipster cuteness of “Mommy needs a cocktail!” was revealed for what it was: “Mommy’s drugging herself to deal with stress.” The New York Times article about Wilder-Taylor even referred to the Diane Schuler case, saying it caused an explosion of “outrage and bafflement over mothers who drink to excess.”
That “outrage” and “bafflement” is pure, double-standard sexism. There’s nothing baffling about why women drink to excess: they do it because are in pain, they are stressed, they suffer from depression, they are genetically pre-disposed to alcoholism, they are compulsive–all of which are exactly the same reasons men drink. I would also argue that because of the injustices and expectations of our patriarchial society, women are more likely than men to be stressed, depressed, in pain, etc. Society just wants us to pretend it’s not happening, the way they want us to ignore so many of the ugly realities forced upon women. If there’s any outrage here, it’s the outrage women should feel about the chauvinist image of mothers as household saints who couldn’t possibly be tempted by demon liquor, or the even more chauvinist (and sadistic) idea that a woman’s lot is inevitably going to be hard, so she should suck it up and suffer instead of seeking comfort in the bottle.
This brings us back to the drunk driving issue, because obviously, if women have problems with alcohol, it’s inevitable that they will get in a car drunk, particularly suburban and rural women who necessarily spend a great deal of time in their cars. The Washington Post ran an article this past week about the uptick in the number of women being arrested for DUI.
“Sadly, the number of arrests of women driving under the influence is on the rise,” LaHood said. “This is clearly a very disturbing trend.”
No, what’s “sad” and “disturbing” is not that more women are being arrested, but that that DUI arrests are going up, period. The idea that it’s sadder or more disturbing when the drunks are women rather than men is simply old sexist attitudes being imposed on a new-ish trend. It also evokes shades of Barbara Ehrenreich’s old chestnut that:
“Of all the nasty outcomes predicted for women’s liberation…none was more alarming than the suggestion that women would eventually become just like men.”
Alarming to us feminists, maybe, but probably more alarming to men, who have to face the reality that when it comes to abusing alcohol, their saintly wives and mothers are, after all, just as vulnerable –and dangerous–as they are.
*I’m deliberately being a little obscure about exact identities here, in order to respect the privacy of these family members. NB: I am NOT writing about MamaSharper, who has never had any kind of substance abuse problem. One of the relatives I mention has been sober for almost a year now, thanks to help from Bill W. and his friends. The other, despite occasional periods of sobriety, continued to drink until her death last year.
@kristina: Duh indeed. And I don’t think judging it should be misinterpreted as slut-shaming or hand-wringing as you said.
I think it’s an entirely fair judgement that if a woman needs to alter her state of mind with alcohol in order to feel liberated…guess what? She ain’t liberated.
Yeah, because feminism was responsible for the 19th Century ladies hid their drinking by sipping gin out of china teacups.
Seems like feminism has mostly created spaces where women can *admit* they drink and/or are alcoholic. And I’m pretty sure for AA and other alcohol-recovery programs admitting is pretty crucial.
As for “drink[ing] yourself unconscious in some random guy’s bed” I think the key part when it comes to alcoholism is “drinking yourself unconscious.” Because the “random guy” business sounds like a cross between the kind of slut-shaming and fear mongering that leads women to, well, bottle up their alcohol problem in the first place. Always primly drinking yourself unconscious alone in your own bed isn’t exactly an improvement.
figleaf
To follow up on what figleaf said: I think that slut-shaming has made women afraid (or at least uncomfortable) owning/expressing their sexual desires, and it’s been my observation that that fear can lead to drinking. If a woman actually pursues someone sexually, or says what she wants — well, it wasn’t really her, she was drunk! Or at the very least, tipsy, because she had to loosen up a little in order to express herself because it makes her so uncomfortable.
But I do want to add that while primly drinking yourself unconscious alone in your own bed is not healthy, I’ll guess that overall it’s safer than passing out with someone you don’t know in their bed (see Kristina’s post).
[...] Harpyness has an interesting commentary, albeit one with which I am not in 100% agreement, on the gender aspect of the waves of how-dare-shes raining down on the “Monster Mom.” Some commentary has taken to blaming feminism for an alleged increase in alcohol abuse among women (although to be fair, it does not state that explicitly; nonetheless I tend to agree that it can be inferred). I can add nothing to the stupidity of that statement that I did not volunteer when K-Lo blamed feminism for domestic violence. It seems like a patently ridiculous claim, no? The alcoholic / pill-popping 1950s housewife is a stock character in American culture – not to mention, if you feel like going way back, the laudanum- and brandy-swilling 19th Century frontier wife. These pre-Women’s Liberation movement examples seem to nod in recognition of widespread social problems throughout our history with women drinking and drugging to escape the desperate unhappiness of strict gender roles. [...]
@BeckySharper
“I think it’s an entirely fair judgement that if a woman needs to alter her state of mind with alcohol in order to feel liberated…guess what? She ain’t liberated.”
Thank you for a sudden bust of sobriety in an otherwise sleepy afternoon. My ex boyfriend had often complained that I was uptight and that I was ‘more fun when drunk’. For a while I thought it was all my fault for being uptight and prim and that he left me because I was boring. So I started drinking more after that, wanting to liberate my ‘real self’ that way.
You’re right though if a person needs a mood-altering substance to be liberated, she isn’t at all. Time to find the real self without the influence.
@MoneyPenny: Absolutely–if you’re only happy with yourself when you’re drinking (or using pot/coke/whatever), then there’s a problem.
I had a boyfriend who was a little like that–he was a big drinker and would get sort of testy with me when I turned down a second glass of wine–this was before I gave up alcohol altogether–when he was on his fifth glass. Really what he meant was “I’m uncomfortable with my own behavior, so you have to change yours.” It was a big red flag.
[...] The Pursuit of Harpyness: On Women, Alcohol, and Anti-Feminism [...]
Excellent post.
I can’t recommend enough Caroline Knapp’s book “Drinking: A Love Story” for insight into alcoholic thinking and the relationship that women in particular have with drinking, sex and inhibition.
I also have conflicted feelings about the whole happy-hour playdate phenomenon. On the one hand, it’s a needed adult activity for some women, especially given the perception that any drinking by any mother is most horrible and neglectful.
On the other hand, there will always be those women who can’t just have a glass of wine or two and mistake drinking for edginess or liberation. And are frankly kind of tiresome about it long past the age where it’s all shiny and new.
And really, the kids know the difference. I knew my dad was a drunk, and I knew what it meant when he had a drink in his hand — there would soon be a lot of bellowing, possibly a trip to the liquor store in a swerving car, and after he passed out we’d have to be very quiet. And I knew what it meant when my mother, who rarely drank, had a drink in her hand — she felt relaxed and would sometimes get giggly.
I may be tasteless, but I’m not an alcoholic.
I second ZUZU’s recommendation about “Drinking: A Love Story.” I read it…10 years ago during a period in my life where the denial was completely gone, and replaced by total shock, and a whole lot of anger. The book was a great insight for me, and from what I’ve heard from addicts I know who have read it – a pretty good approximation of their experiences.
Have you even READ MommyWantsVodka? Or Baby On Bored?
There’s this thing in the real world that we little people like to call ‘research’. You may not have heard of it yet, it may be kind of new in your anti-feminist neighborhood.
I have read Aunt Becky (mommywantsvodka)’s archives; she does not blog about vodka shooters, I can assure you. Matter of fact, if one reads her blog and her ‘About Me’ sections, you’ll find that she really doesn’t even like vodka. If mommies want to take some time off to go out with some girlfriends (sans children) and chit-chat over a few drinks, what the hell is the problem with that?
If your vindication that she ‘ignorantly glorifies’ heavy drinking owing to the name of her blog, I can assure you that she does not. It’s called humor and sarcasm. If you’re running under that assumption, does that mean I should also assume that you are actually half bird, half woman? I am fairly sure you are not, and by deduction of COMMON SENSE figured that out on my own. After all, the feathers would make it difficult to type with, yes? See, taking things TOO literally isn’t always the best path to choose.
So instead of immediately bashing someone based upon their blog name or the fact that they’re blogging about their sober journey (As Stefanie Wilder-Taylor is doing), try that new-fangled thing called research. Because it takes a strong person to get out there and admit they have a problem. Rather than bashing her, why not encourage your cause by congratulating her on admitting she has a problem and that she got help for it?
As someone who is sober, I would think that you of all people would understand the difficulty in abstaining. Did other sober people put you down this way when you started on your sobriety journey? I certainly hope not.
Why not support other women in a positive fashion, by offering sincere commentary and offering to help when you see there is a problem? There are so many other ways human beings (and I’m not even going to dip into the feminism pool) can support and encourage one another. Instead, you chose – in this post, anyhow – to be vicious and negative.
@Ashley: Nowhere did I say that that the author of mommywantsvodka was an alcoholic. Nor did I say anywhere in the post that I am an alcoholic (I am actually one of the few female members of my family that is not). You should follow your own advice and read more carefully before you make assumptions.
Furthermore, at no point in this post am I “vicious and negative” towards women alcoholics. Quite the opposite. Which, again, you would know if you’d read the post carefully.
I am also not half woman/half bird. It would be pretty awesome if I were, though, and if you know how to make that happen, please let me know.
Not once did I say in my comment that you were an alcoholic; I read the comments and in your response to Ms. Moneypenny you said:
“I had a boyfriend who was a little like that–he was a big drinker and would get sort of testy with me when I turned down a second glass of wine–this was before I gave up alcohol altogether–when he was on his fifth glass.”
Using common sense, one would take that to mean that you abstain from drinking in much the same way an alcoholic would.
Nor did I say that I thought Aunt Becky is an alcoholic. Before we get into some pissing contest, I wonder if you’d clarify something; how do you think that MommyWantsVodka ignorantly glorifies heavy drinking? Perhaps if I understand your reasoning behind that particular statement – taken from the post that I DID read – I could understand why you feel that way. When I made the off-the-cuff remark about the vodka shooters, I was not saying that she blogs about drinking. One might think that by basing their opinion solely on her blog’s name.
I applaud you (sarcasm-free) for giving up the sauce and abstaining. I think it’s wonderful that you’re resisting the same ‘curse’ that has struck many other members of your family. I, too, come from a family with many heavy drinkers and alcoholics.
Once I read, re-read, and read the section about Stefanie once more, I realized that you weren’t being vicious or negative toward her. My bad. And if one were to follow information on that article, they would know that she was not happy about the reference to Diane Schuler in the article. However, the tone of your post does seem a bit vicious, but I realize now that it’s directed toward society’s viewpoint on female drinking versus the female drinkers themselves.
So I realize that I misconstrued your blurbs about Stefanie. I’ll let those go. However, I’d still appreciate some clarification on why you believe Aunt Becky’s blog belongs in this article in any way, shape or form.
I also do not have information on turning women into harpies… Though, if I did, I would be happy to share it with you.
Thanks, Ashley. I actually abstain from drinking for entirely run-of-the-mill gastrointestinal reasons, although it’s true that my family experiences with alcoholism makes alcohol pretty unappetizing.
As you said, the point of my post is that I’m angry with society for the double standard they set up for women who drink, and for their tendency to heap condemnation on women alcoholics–particularly mothers–in a way that they simply do not for men. That was the target of my anger, not alcoholics themselves.
I have a lot of sympathy for Stephanie Wilder-Taylor. I know many women like her and I think she’s very brave for going public with her recovery. It sounds like her honesty and candor is already helping other women who might also need to take the First Step.
As for mommylovesvodka, I really dislike Aunt Becky’s constant joking about alcohol and drugs. The tagline of the blog is “Because I couldn’t spell Percocet”, and earlier was “Because Mommylovescocaine was taken”. Today when someone said “why don’t you have a Vicodin instead of a drink” she says “why should I choose?” I’m sorry, but I don’t buy into the whole LOL! BOOZ N DRUGZ R FUNNY! ethos of her writing. She has said she’s not an alcoholic, but she does keep up a constant patter of wink-y bragging/boasting about booze and drugs. Is she just being tasteless and juvenile? Maybe. Or maybe she’s like Stef. I don’t know her, so I can’t say for sure, but I think the message she’s putting out is not a healthy one.
Alright then; now that I understand your point of view…
It really is just tasteless comedy. It is a way to relieve some tension without actually drinking and abusing drugs. She has said that she’s not an alcoholic nor would she do drugs; and I believe her. She’s been very honest with her candor in her blogging, and I see no reason to doubt her now. Yes, it is a very wink-y sort of place in regards to prescription drugs and alcohol. However, it’s like cracking a joke in a tense situation; you do it so that you don’t really crack. That’s not to say that she’s a perfect copy June Cleaver, but who is? She’s far from perfect, and her personality is what, in my opinion, makes her so hilarious.
From what I understand, this is Aunt Becky’s way of coping with the stress of having three children who can be very trying at times. She chooses to be a SAHM, and rather than actually turning to alcohol to de-stress, she blogs. She’s found a healthy outlet, and it’s really all in freedom of speech as to what sort of humor she uses on her blog.
It falls under that, “If you don’t like it, you don’t have to read it” category. And, as I don’t like the tone of this blog, I’ll choose not to read it. I read this post only because I was curious as to how Aunt Becky’s blog was involved. She’s not glorifying heavy drinking, merely using tasteless humor. So, if you don’t like the way she ‘constantly jokes’ about alcohol and drugs, stop reading her blog. It’s not for everyone. I will continue to be a faithful reader of MommyWantsVodka, because I think she’s a wonderful person, humorous, witty, and a great mom.
It’s the beauty of the internet; you can say what you like. The dark side, however, is that someone will always take it the wrong way or read too much into it.
I’m a bit confused…
“As you said, the point of my post is that I’m angry with society for the double standard they set up for women who drink, and for their tendency to heap condemnation on women alcoholics–particularly mothers–in a way that they simply do not for men. That was the target of my anger, not alcoholics themselves.”
You say that is the reason for your post, and yet, in your comments are targeting anger on someone who is not even an alcoholic just because they use an alcohol word in her blog title and another blogger who uses alcohol words in book titles. Both seem to have a different kind of humor towards alcohol than yourself.
I believe that there is a lot of over generalization present in the article and the post with it. Suddenly anyone that has a drink is an alcoholic? Or anyone that has a girls night is saying “Hey, we may be stay-at-home moms, but we’re not stodgy! We can still hang the way we did in our twenties! We choose our choice!”
That makes me sad. Feminism has always had a shadow associated with it and if we keep being catty to each other without attempting to understand, it always will.
“Suddenly anyone that has a drink is an alcoholic?”
Mrs. Soup, did you actually read the post?
I didn’t say that anywhere in the post. At all.
And I wasn’t “targeting anger” on people for using “alcohol words” in their blogs. I was pointing out that their glorification of drinking as a way to stay “fun” and “young” and deal with their stress was stupid and sends a dangerous and unhealthy message.
I think you’re confused because you didn’t read the post and you’d rather attack me for taking issue with the work of a blogger who you like.
Nobody else who clearly hasn’t read the post will be making it out of moderation.
[...] Hard-drinking moms: The New Straw-feminist. Also, feminists hate babies. (God knows I do.) Anyways, if you want to get a man, try channeling Cinderella. [...]
Thanks for this post pointing out the double standard in the news coverage on the “Monster Mom”. I wish I could explain half as well as you did here why this sort of writing is problematic and contributes to anti-feminism feeling in our society.
Women drinking should have nothing to do with feminism, it’s a separate issue!