"Years of hard work, prizes and promotions can't prepare them for the only true enemy to female ambition in America today: love for their children."

So, one can justly infer that those women who achive their ambition don't love their children!!!

"In studying work/family balance among American women for the past several years, I've come to the conclusion that elite women face the most difficult internal struggles juggling work and family."

Yep, the decision to only work 40 hours a week as to have time for your family or keep working 80 hours to continue to advance is SOOO MUCH MORE DIFFICULT of an internal struggle than deciding between food on the table or medicine for the sick baby.

Where is it written down that in order to be "elite", you have to essentially spend all your waking time at work? Or, is this "elite" status self-given in order to justify someone's ambition?

"the only true enemy to female ambition in America today: love for their children"

Excuse me? Are you being inflammatory and ignorant on purpose?

There are plenty of ambitous women, former "perfect" girls who have successful careers and love their children. I am one of them (I really wasn't perfect as a high schooler, but I was very similar to the girls portrayed in the NYT article--first born feels she has to be that way). I am very offended.

The only valid point you make is that we're ignoring boys. I have a teenage son--smart, talented, etc who I feel is being "ignored" at school. The assignments seem very "girl oriented" (write an essay about your feelings....)and the girls seem to be recognized as being the top students. Needless to say he is going elsewhere next year, but I'm afraid this "girls are perfect, boys are defective" attitude is prevalent at many schools. I am hoping things even out by college when the boys finally catch up with regard to maturity.

And further--I believe that some of these "alpha" girls will burn out. If they "opt out" it will be because of that. If nothing changes for women in professional careers then what will happen for those who are ambitious will be: 1) professional school, 2) successful early career, 3) family--many will not opt out, but stay in and suffer discrimination and set backs to career and 4) few will ascend to the highest levels b/c of lack of mentoring, lack of a ticket into the boy's club, etc.

I think that your personal angst is showing through and is not necessarily generalizable to the rest of the mother population

Everyone -- please try not to attack me or psychoanalyze me here (we've done plenty of that in the past, and I get your points!).

This is what I've seen in the years I've been working on the so-called mommy wars. It's logical -- women who invest the most in their career success have the hardest time with the inevitable compromises of motherhood. This does NOT mean to belittle other, more chronic survival struggles of less advantaged women in this country and other countries.

This internal disappointment, frustration and anger when it comes to juggling work and kids are real struggles for women in this country, and I worry for girls like the ones profiled in the Times article. All women -- especially the least advantaged -- will benefit from changes our society makes to ensure that juggling kids and work, whatever your job, becomes easier.

And sidenote: it is remarkable and disturbing that so little attention is paid to boys' challenges (and successes) today.

Maybe we shouldn't change the world, but the ridiculous, uniquely American idea that you can have everything you want all at the same time.

"I've come to the conclusion that elite women face the most difficult internal struggles juggling work and family."

Sorry, Leslie, I disagree on this. Yes, when girls like this decide they want to have families, they will face an internal struggle over which path to choose. But that is because, given their talents and socioeconomic status, they have the most paths open to them to begin with. And because of those same factors, they will also have the most power to find -- or create -- a satisfying path.

That story was my mom, until she got pregnant with me her freshman year in college. Got married, had to support the family while my dad finished college, all the while finishing school on her own -- only to have my dad leave a few yrs later. I guess it's true that she didn't face much internal struggle juggling work and family -- she didn't have the luxury of choosing, so she didn't feel guilty about doing what she had to do to keep me fed, housed, and clothed.

Ask anyone who is working two jobs to feed their kids: would you rather live this life, or would you rather have all of the options these girls have, but along with that comes an "internal struggle" over which option to choose. Hmmm, gee, wonder what the answer will be? You know why my mom worked so hard all those years? To give me the opportunities those girls have -- to have the whole world open before me, and be able to choose my own path. Yes, freedom and choice, and the responsibility for your own life that comes with it, can be scary (just look at the former Soviet countries). But having the power to choose what we want our lives to be like is the most incredible luxury we have. If sometimes those choices are hard, well, that's a tradeoff I'm damn lucky to have to make.

For those who think the solution lies in not having children, another kind of torture awaits them.

-----------------------

Do you mean some internal disappointment that they will never find any other happiness or that they will suffer external judgement???

As a woman with no children I would like to know what kind of torture I should expect to endure and when?

What! No religion in the Alpha Girls' balance!

I worry a bit about these girls too but for a very different reason... I think they in many cases they are less ambitious than they are afraid to disappoint. In high school you can please almost all adults (ditto in college) through hard work and still manage to have some fun. However, whatever path you pick afterwards you will get lobs fired your way from one camp or another. At some point you lose the "right" path, "right" choice and that can be a struggle (at least it was for me).

This is shaping up to be a mean discussion today so I am going to say out of it.

As a woman with no children I would like to know what kind of torture I should expect to endure and when?

Posted by: KLB SS MD | April 11, 2007 07:54 AM

KLB unless you call sleeping in on the weekends and never having to wipe up bodily fluids that aren't yours torture, then I dunno what she's talking about. I'm so over the everyone's gotta have kids thing.

"But no matter how smart, hard-working and determined they are, they're not going to find a way to be on the playground and in the boardroom simultaneously. "

I don't think this is a woman's issue. It is a career person's issue. An "elite" man is going to have just as much difficulty being in the boardroom and on the playground simultaneously. Men have always been told they can do ANYTHING they want. Yet they as a group have pretty much figured out that "duh, this means that I have to (at least sometimes) choose between boardroom and playground."

You can try to spin this so that it's an issue about girls and women but it's not. You have to make choices. Men do it. Maybe you should take note of that.

Where is it written down that in order to be "elite", you have to essentially spend all your waking time at work? Or, is this "elite" status self-given in order to justify someone's ambition?

------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------

We talk about elite athletics all the time & that never raises any eyebrows. Comparing academics is a messy business - I think US News does a huge disservice to HS students - but at some point I don't think it should scandalous to look at what the girls (and boys!) in this article have accomplished and say that it sets them apart from the average. Academic success isn't perfectly correlated to hard work but there is some relationship there.

I think it is harder to be one of these they have CHOICES. I understand what Leslie is getting at. A woman who's struggling to get by doesn't question her decision to work because it's not a decision -- it's a necessity. An upper- or middle-class woman who's well educated, excels at and loves her career but feels the pull to be at home with her children suffers (yes, I said SUFFERS) because she often has a choice to make, and if you choose to stay at work, you feel like you've let down your kids. Not everyone, not all of the time, but it's there. Obviously, of the two scenarios, give me the one where I have a choice every time.

I do feel for these girls, because the higher the pedestal you're perched on, the farther the fall will be.

"As a woman with no children I would like to know what kind of torture I should expect to endure and when?"

You'll never get a call from a kid in handcuffs!

You'll never have a grandchild put up for adoption!

I feel a Blog Stats survey coming on.

Thanks for the warnings of the torture I and other childless women will be forced to endure. I will take my punishment quietly.

"I do feel for these girls, because the higher the pedestal you're perched on, the farther the fall will be."

If a girl is smart enough to be fluent in Spanish, learn Latin, take care of herself phsycially, and go to top graduate schools, and isn't smart enough to figure out that you can't spend 70-80 hours a week at work and be with their children at the same time, then she deserves to have a nice fall off the pedestal.

Leslie - If you were one of these girls, and you think you succeeded, why wouldn't these elite girls succeed?

These girls have parents that have provided them with all the material things they need and I hope they get the emotional support they need as well. Whether you are wealthy or poor parenting has a much larger impact on someone's success or failure then a book on the mommy wars or a NY Times article.

The elite girls are just going to have to deal with life and babies and navigate the "playground vs. boardroom" like the rest of us - one day at a time. Anyone that relies on "society" for approval of their parenting is going to be sorely dissappointed.

KLB - Are you waiting with baited breath for torture to come knocking at the door?

Sorry, anonymous at 8:17, but I disagree that anyone deserves a fall of a pedestal. I remember being young, smart, talented, and driven and thinking I could have it all. Wrong. But there are still people out there who seem like they do have it all (thanks to the media, mostly and my own skewed perceptions), and that keeps me wondering if it's just me.

I think comparing "elite" career people to "elite" athletes is a strawman, though. No athlete stays at the top of his (or her) sport for more than 10 years, 15 years tops. By that time, if they managed their money wisely, they're set for life and can do whatever they want.

Is this "internal conflict" Leslie refers to within "elite career women" exclusive to US women? Or is it universal for all women in this situation? How do successful women in other countries manage having a family and a career?

As for men not having this internal conflict, ISTM that that may be because we're not as intimately involved in creating/raising the children. After all, we're not the ones having the child growing inside us, or being so intimately involved early on with caring for the child (although we can do so it's not as often). Men are typically in the supporting role when it comes to caring for young children, making it easier to balance the home/work decisions.

There's a point here, but as usual Leslie has come off so condescending it's hard for some of us in the trenches to get past the BS. It's the same reason I cancelled my "Working Mother" sub--reading about how some CEO "always schedlued my business trips to Indonesia to be home for daughter's soccer game" while I'm trying to calm a sick infant and a con call made me throw the magazine against the wall!

Back to the point--I think burnout is a very real issue, and not just when they have kids. My superstar in high school sis is working at Macy's as a clerk at 25 b/c she dropped out of the pressure. She makes 8 bucks an hour, but somehow makes it work!

WorkingMomX-What you said!

I certainly had no idea what life was going to throw at me. As one of those overachievers back in high school and college, I thought life would somehow just work out. It didn't.

I discovered myself by making and living choices. Yes, there was angst while making those choices and I envied those who didn't have to choose (e.g., the guys). However, I believe I am a stronger person because I lived by and with my choices. This strength was something I didn't know anything about when I was in school.

Hi "Please Specify" -- I meant both -- society's bizarre judgment of women who choose not to have kids, and internal regret/mixed feelings that some, but definitely not all, childless women experience.

Sorry to be cryptic in the original post. I didn't mean to be.

Dotted, you are so right. Our choices ultimately reveal so much about who we are, but making them can be hell. Say it with me: that which does not kill me makes me stronger. And then go get some chocolate!!

Leslie - If you were one of these girls, and you think you succeeded, why wouldn't these elite girls succeed?

----------------------------------------

Leslie has talked about struggles with anexoria & written a book about external pressures. You come across as very content with your choices... which is the ideal. But giving a child self-confidence seems tricky in the same way as passing on faith (as opposed to religion). As far as I can tell my parents are perfect and did everything right - but I still lack self-confidence in many regards. I worry not that these kids are too ambitious, but they are too used to pleasing others.

I will side with Leslie on this one. Motherhood is the great leveler. You don't get transcripts with A+ down every column, promotions, bonuses or any kind of external affirmation of your success. You cannot have it all. It is rare that a person can have the kind of success in their career, comparable to these girls academic success, without a lot of personal sacrifice - primarily in terms of time - time for yourself, time with family. I remember wanting to leave my law firm but not having the time in the day to put together a resume and do a job search. Obviously, this is all depends on one's definition of career success but when you look at their academic accomplishments and the direction they are heading it is a particular kind of career that is likely to be attractive to them. And, this kind of career is going to be very hard to maintain once children come into the picture. And, having to give up that world is not going to be easy when they've spent their entire childhood working towards that goal.

So those Alpha girls will just have to start thier own companies so they can feed their ambition and still be available for their kids! In my experience, these are not mutually exclusive.

What we REALLY need to do is redefine balance. It is tough to be in balance over any one day. If you expand your timeframe for balance to a week, a month, or a quarter, it is much easier to obtain WITHOUT the nagging guilt that comes from consoling a sick child while on a conference call. If that were me (ptjobftmom), I would either leave my phone on mute, reschedule the call, or have someone else cover for me. Worst case scenario, apologize for the noise and tell them they're lucky your not meeting in person!

The bottom line is about redefining what "having it all" means to you and not worrying about what anyone else thinks about it!

In some ways I have "succeeded" but it has been far more challenging than I ever imagined, and there is no doubt I failed at the career I originally set out to achieve. I think a system that only allows the luckiest, most determined, gifted women to "succeed" in juggling work and family is a flawed system.

The "elite" issue seems to sidetrack so many people on this blog. You can always find examples of someone more privileged or less privileged. But that doesn't diminish the pain felt by either party.

Also, these juggling issues are far more challenging for women (sorry, dads). More is expected of women in terms of daily childcare and household responsibilities, we are paid significantly less for our work, and societal bias makes others judge us (consciously or unconsciously) for choices men make without recrimination.

I am not particularly ambitious but have still ended up climbing the career ladder. Never for a minute would I consider dropping out of the workforce to stay home with my DD. What a waste that would be of the 11 years I spent in college and grad school, how limiting for my future and what a bad example to set her. Of course I'd like more time for personal stuff, so would everyone. If my husband wanted to stay home, that'd be fine by me, but he likes working, too. Anyone who assumes that only women should be required to have the internal dialog about career vs family deserves a swift kick in the behind.

The dearth of articles of challenges and achievement of boys??? You've got to be kidding! I hope you won't have any problem in identifying the gender of the highest management of virtually all Fortune 500 companies today (excluding Pepsi and maybe a handful (if that many) of others), as well as the gender of most high positions of national and local governments. While, as a woman, I am gratified that more women are stepping up in the political sector, it is still a challenge for women to run the show in corporate governance at the level which really matters (not just a cog in the wheel).

Boys may face challenges, but it's still the boys who are in charge -- and, trust me, the boys know it. Girls and women face challenges which do not register *at all* with boys and men -- witness the comments from Don Imus, for crying out loud.

"What can we do to help our society's most ambitious girls navigate balance?"

Internet resources like this blog are great, actually.

I've been reading for months now. I'm an overachieving type-A egghead doing space robotics for the government, and I'm expecting my first baby in May. Like a good egghead, I've been doing my research. (And yes, if there's one thing I've learned, it's that doing research about being a parent is nothing like actually being a parent. Got it.)

While I can't say anything for certain until my son is actually here, it's my hope that reading these many articles about work/family balance, and the many, many, many ways of coping with them will help me find my own ways of coping. It's raised my awareness of the issues I'm likely to encounter, and exposed me to multiple possible solutions and ways of thinking about the problem. It doesn't solve the problem for me, but it does give me some tools to apply to it.

"More is expected of women in terms of daily childcare and household responsibilities"

Expected by whom?? Just because women DO more of the childcare and household responsibilities doesn't mean that it's expected.

Here we go again. Not a day goes by in which the "Mommy Wars" topic splashes all over the newspaper, TV or Radio. Why? The answer is to generate buzz for the purveyors of controversy of course. The author of this article, and those like her, need to periodically raise this "issue" in order to keep their jobs and justify their existence.

When are you going to figure out that you're being used? Do what feels right to you, and don't worry about what other people say or think. Set reasonable expectations for yourself. Reach that point, and then you'll really be liberated.

Well, I was a driven kid, and a driven college student, and an ambitious worker. And now I have two kids and a husband and a house and it's a struggle--I don't want to slow down my career, but I also don't want to have to travel/work a lot of nights and weekends/be generally stressed from management responsibilities, at least to the extent that time/attention for my kids suffers. I also have to balance my internal balancing arrangements with my husband's career goals and ambitions, as well as his desire to be an involved father. It's hard. Not as hard as worrying about having food on the table, but it is my life, and the life of a lot of people who read the Washington Post, and we should be able to discuss on a blog without being judged for not having worse problems. I'm not a whiner--I was a successful student and am a successful adult because I work hard and look for solutions to problems. For the most part I get through each day just fine without beating myself up about the choices I'm making. But it would be nice to be able to discuss the tough days, or to learn more about how other people deal with particular challenges (snow days, sick days, childcare arrangements, what to do when both parents have to travel), without all the damn sniping.

Leslie,

I think part of the problem is worrying about how society judges us! True, sometimes that judgement results in reduced pay for the same work or being put on the "mommy track" without our consent. But rather than feel 'victim' to societal biases, I agree with you that we should work to change it! That is why I believe in the empowerment of entrepreneurship. Why not start your own company and prove that you can be profitable and still have a life - that is what I did and was able to extend that "life" to my employees.

I think it was Ghandi that said "Be the change you want to see in the world.."

Leslie - PLEASE!! More articles about the successes of boys! what about thousands of years of history, all of those dead white men we study in history class? I think that it is amazingly impressive that woman have done so much to catch up and even surpass men over a period of a generation. This should be discussed more!

Also, one of my pet peaves is now take our daughters to work, is now take our daughters and sons to work - misses the point entirely of introducing women (who once had only a few defined career choices) to new careers and options out of the box... We should also have perhaps - take our sons home to work, and follow a sahf for a day to see what family life and fatherhood is like rather than bring him to the office where he will end up...

1) I get all the recognition I need when I pick my daughter up from school and she runs to me happy and excited. If I lost my job tomorrow, I'd find another one so what. Dr. so and so is right that some people don't look on motherhood as being a hard job, but I think it is the hardest job I've ever had to do and I have been doing it way longer than the three years I have been blessed with my daughter.

2) I worked with an alpha girl who left to go to law school. She was the most self centered person I have ever meant in my life. When I got pregnant, she said gross. Refused to come into my cube because I had a picture of my sonogram framed and one day when I walked into hers she turned around disgusted and told me my stomach made her sick.

Not to say they are all like her, my babysitter is a wonderful alpha girl and is on her way to a good school and a bright future just like Leslie says.

However, when you think the whole world revolves around you because it always has, sometimes the reality of the real world is shocking. I sometimes think the motherhood will be the least of some of these girls worries.

I think that leslie has some good points. I actually wasn't necessarily one of those girls, but certainly went to high school with them (and most in my (public) high school went on to the ivy league or other elite private colleges-poor me only went to a state school). I understand what she is saying- many men don't necessarily have these choices ahead of them-but most men want to be able to have them. They aren't (as discussed before) necessarily discriminated against at work, but they want to be more involved.

But more is the fact that the focus has been on women and girls for so long that boys really aren't getting the attention they need. Boys are the ones typically diagnosed with add- but I believe this is more due to the fact that elementary schools have been cutting back on recess and boys need more physical activity than girls. Girls are attending college in record numbers, while boys are not going as much(which creates many other switches in our society, with jobs, marraige, etc). There is more than meets the eye.

A Woman writes: "I don't think this is a woman's issue. It is a career person's issue.... You can try to spin this so that it's an issue about girls and women but it's not. You have to make choices. Men do it."

This is exactly right. The relevance of this point, for this discussion, is what young alpha girls can learn from BOTH their parents about how to make choices.

Certainly, these young girls can and should look to their mothers, grandmothers, aunts, and other female role models. But these young girls should also learn from the experiences of their fathers, grandfathers, uncles, and brothers as well.

And the same goes for young alpha boys too - learn from both your male and female role models about how to make choices for yourself.

"we should be able to discuss on a blog without being judged for not having worse problems"

Yes, but we should also not have to read things like this: "elite women face the most difficult internal struggles juggling work and family". Even if you take those women who are struggling to put food on the table out of the mix, you're still left with a large percentage of women who might not be "elite" - they were B+ students in high school, they went to state universities with no graduate school, they work in midlevel positions in jobs they enjoy, they don't "have" to work because they could live a more modest life on one salary - do those women not have internal struggles juggling work and family?

Wow!!! So many people taking this post so very personally today. Definitely too nasty for my blood today. See you all tomorrow.

Your post is sexist. The young men of today have nothing to do with the dead white men of the past. Shame on you.

Today's blog fails to acknowledge that not all women want to have children. Some of these girls will never encounter the "enemy of ambition," because they will choose to pursue other callings. Other girls will not encounter it due to circumstances beyond their control. And others will decide it's better to do one thing well than two things average. Still others will devote all of their talents and ambition into raising their children. Why can they not also use their talents and skills to find a workable solution? It may be true that one cannot be in the boardroom and on the playground at the same time, but that glib example is hardly an accurate indicator of the likelihood of success at home or at work.

I also strongly disagree that children are "the enemy of ambition." It's almost to ignorant to warrant a response, but still worth pointing out that there are plenty of women out there who manage to succeed in their careers and in their families.

And what is wrong with telling girls they can do anything they set their minds to? I was raised that way, and guess what? I may not be able to break the space-time continuum, but I'm still going to find a way to do what I think is important. Period.

"For those who think the solution lies in not having children, another kind of torture awaits them."

What in the hell is THAT supposed to mean? How about those of us who don't want kids? I'm NOT not having them to excel, I'm not having them because it's just not something I've ever wanted.

According to everything I've read, boys are falling behind girls at every level and in every subject in school. So yes, I think we do need to be concerned about boys and what's happening to them.

Maybe you're underestimating these girls. First, maybe they won't have kids. And maybe they won't torture themselves with that decision. Second, if they do, maybe they'll find a way to achieve their perfect balance. In much the way my generation changed the world differently than the way my mother's generation did, maybe the next generation of superteens will get closer to achieving balance. Maybe they WILL find a way to be on the playground and in the boardroom at the same time.

"I'm afraid this "girls are perfect, boys are defective" attitude is prevalent at many schools."

I find this to be sad, and at the same time, baffling. How is it that girls excel so much more in school, but can't seem to bust through that glass ceiling in equivalent numbers? Is it biological? Are we mommy-tracking ourselves? Is it the guilt of more time spent away from home, the perceived emasculation of husbands making less, or just plain old-fashioned sexism? Or are the schools just making it too easy for girls to succeed, thereby giving them inadequate preparation for the real world?

The dearth of articles of challenges and achievement of boys???

---------------------------------------

I work at a college - 80% of honor society members and 90% of summa grads are female. The boys may earn more eventually, but parents have more (on average) to worry about when they send a son to college (90% dismissals are male). I teach a technical subject and do not assign any feelings essays in my courses. I am pretty sure people in other fields stick to their subject matter as well. It is a function of how (on average) students manage time, complete homework on time, and seek help when needed. The balance shifts as college goes on - but for GPA prizes it can be too late.

Indeed my post is sexist - the point is we should be proud of the accomplishments of women over the past generation without lamenting on what happened to the boys each time we discuss the success of women. We have many men in history that boys can look to as mentors and fewer women.

Also - the use of "elite women" by Leslie is quite offensive. Us less-elite, but career driven parents face the same challenges in parenting and balancing our goals.

what I disagree with in this article is the presumption that "perfect" girls are perfect because of their achievements. Yes, in the *me, me* world that would make you perfect, but we would be much better off if perfection was defined by how you made the world better. Where is the focus on helping others, being a good friend, being a good neighbor, and yes, being a loving parent? I believe one of the BIGGEST problems we have today is everyone's relentless pursuit of perfection, at everyone else's expense.

For the "What? Who needs more articles about men?" crowd, you're confusing two very different things.

Leslie isn't saying that we need more history lessons about dead white males of the last 2000 years. Nor is she referring to the vast majority of Fortune 500 CEOs who are male - and probably in their 40s, 50s, or 60s.

Rather, Leslie is referring to the young boys, who are still in school or college, and face daunting challenges and choices and balance issues as well. This is the topic that has been virutally ignored, both in the social sciences and in the popular press.

Again, the relevant point for this discussion is that both young women and young men should look to both male and female role models, while still deciding how to make choices for themselves.

Indeed my post is sexist

At least you can see you have an issue.

Perhaps if the young men/boys see more equality in the home the young women will have a better chance of attaining it down the road.

The words "elite" and "ubor" appear in 189 post by 114 diferent contributors.

Top 3 listed below:

5 foamgnome
5 Leslie
6 Fred

Nothing surprising here.

Blog stats, don't you want to search for

uber

not "ubor"?

I live in Newton, the city profiled in the NYT piece and I can tell you it's spot on when they described the mothers at Whole Foods and at the gym bragging to each other about what school their kids are applying to..how many sports they're playing, etc. etc. I have a 17-month old daughter who will eventually go to the great public high school in the article...i hope she does not feel the pressure to be perfect or have it all. I certainly don't. I work 3 days a week while she goes to daycare. some weeks i do wish i was back full time and others I say to myself "God, I'm glad I don't work any more than 3 days." the mothers in Newton, I think, sometimes get caught up in one-upsmanship with each other. some of the conversations I overhear are neauseating. that said, i think if these girls feel pressure to be perfect that some of that pressure is coming from the parents.

"The words "elite" and "ubor" appear in 189 post by 114 diferent contributors.

Top 3 listed below:

5 foamgnome
5 Leslie
6 Fred

Nothing surprising here"

"Ubor" is a bit of a surprise. What is it?

Was I the only one who read this article and felt a little sorry for these girls?

Sometimes it feels like America is becoming more and more like Japan -- the relentless emphasis on sorting out the kids by achievement, cram schools, the death of childhood, and kids feeling like "losers" if they don't reach the top of the heap, the way society gives everything to the few at the top and leaves nothing for everyone else -- and I find myself wondering if our society is going to eventually going to have the same kinds of social problems as Japan as well -- high rates of suicide, little time for leisure and family, and so forth.

These girls all seemed a little, well, lost to me. It reminded me of that ground-breaking article in the Atlantic MOnthly a few years ago about the "driven kids" at Princeton, with their daytimers and their Blackberries. It featured interviews with some of the faculty at Princeton as well as some psychologists, and it talked about the kids didn't really have any downtime or really understand who they were.

I LOVED the profile of the girl who wanted to be the theologian, because she seemed to be really thinking about what she wanted, not just jumping through the hoops. But I wondered about some of the other characters.

BTW, I just finished that novel "Acceptance" by Kate Coll, and I think we should do that for a "book of the month club" posting. It's about a hypothetical high school in the US and the families as they go through senior year and applying to colleges. Supposedly, the city is really Bethesda, and the high school somewhere in Montgomery County. It talks about that same issue in broader more accessible terms -- what is success in America? Is there more than one brand of success? WHy does everyone seem to fixate on only one type of success -- acceptance to an Ivy League school -- and so forth.

Leslie asks a great question:

"What can we do to help our society's most ambitious girls navigate balance?"

Her answer is "to change our society over the next few decades so our daughters stand a chance of avoiding the mommy wars that plague us today."

Unfortunately, I have to be skeptical of such an approach.

The reason is that if you examine the history of significant societal change, it is rarely driven by ideology. It is far more likely to be driven by technology (e.g. birth control), or by externally imposed pressures (e.g. foreign invasion).

My own view is that Leslie's goal of targeted societal change in two or three decades is too ambitious and unlikely to succeed.

In its place, I would suggest that it certainly is true that individual choices, summed over the population, can over time result in attitudinal, demographic, and political shifts that are detectable and measurable in social science surveys.

And that may be the best we can hope for. We can't predict or control the outcome, but we can try to make progress over time, and see how far we get before the next generation takes its turn.

As far as I can tell my parents are perfect and did everything right - but I still lack self-confidence in many regards. I worry not that these kids are too ambitious, but they are too used to pleasing others.

Posted by: to cmac | April 11, 2007 08:32 AM

I don't disagree with anything you posted. I may well be content but that does not mean I didn't struggle. I never take content and self-confidence as a sign of an easy life, most of the time it is worked out bit by bit, and if I may be so bold as to say, earned.

ParentPreneur: I love how you always hit home with the "start your own business" message. People too often look for satisfaction (personally and professionally) from external sources when they can get it interally as well. I know many entrepreneurs, most love having their own business, but it is 24/7. However is also reaps some of the greatest rewards, cheers!

>>Yes, but we should also not have to read things like this: "elite women face the most difficult internal struggles juggling work and family"....a large percentage of women who might not be "elite" - they were B+ students in high school, they went to state universities with no graduate school, they work in midlevel positions in jobs they enjoy, they don't "have" to work because they could live a more modest life on one salary - do those women not have internal struggles juggling work and family?>>

I don't care where you went to school and what your GPA was. I consider you "elite" if you are highly professionally successful, which generally means you have staff and clients you are responsible for, decision-making authority, and business development targets. And it *is* hard to balance your family life with that kind of professional situation--when you HAVE to be the person who stays late, or travels on short notice, or comes in on the weekend to make sure the big proposal gets done. A person with a 9-5 job will still have balancing issues, but it's not the same if you can leave your job behind when you go home at night.

I read this article last week, and saw myself as a teenager in it. Kinda made me sad, because I realized a few years ago that I worried and obsessed way too much during a time that, in retrospect, should have been a bit more light hearted.

There's nothing wrong with focus and ambition, but as a fellow-student once told me in college, I needed "a good vice". At the time I was insulted. I see now he meant I needed to stop worrying and enjoy life a little and stop trying to be everything to everybody. A bit crude in the delivery perhaps, but an important message nonetheless.

So maybe we need an Ex Alpha Girl club. As part of the requirements these girls seem to crave, they must spend a few weekends with us over achievers.

We can tell them about our failed relationships, because all of our good intentions didn't change the fact that the man we loved started to resent our successes.

We can show them our surgery scars or physical therapy bills, brought on by pushing ourselves into a sport when we should have learned that sometimes its okay to lose, or that we need to accept the limits of our aging bodies.

We can show them our resumes, which show that even though we were destined to be trailblazers and world shakers, that sometimes luck just doesn't run our way.

And finally, we can tell them about our copious therapy, needed after a mini-nervous breakdown caused by all the above made us realize that the world wasn't how we thought it was going to be.

Then we lock them in an apartment for a weekend. They can only watch DVD's of movies with incredibly good looking men and non-serious plot lines (I'm thinking the Ocean's Eleven/Twelve movies). And the pantry is stocked with Ben & Jerry's (no sorbet, only the full-fat, 200% calorie type), pizza, beer & wine, and some crudite to cleanse the palate. Throw in some People and Cosmo magazines - let's be generous and throw in some Vanity Fair's as well. No phones. No computers. Just an environment designed for sloth.

That way they can learn that sometimes, learning how to stop and relax is the best thing for them. That being a little self-indulgent (in the proper setting) can go a long way. And THAT can help them learn balance.

"A person with a 9-5 job will still have balancing issues, but it's not the same if you can leave your job behind when you go home at night.

And maybe that's why the person chose the 9-5 job in the first place.

Leslie, I think this is one of your best posts yet. Maybe it's because I have a daughter, maybe it's because my wife could be considered one of these high-achieving Alpha Girls.

These girls/women spend 25 - 30 years exceling in a mans world on the same terms, they have "equal marriages," then they get pregnant and for the first time for many of them, they find that it's HARD to be a woman. That's gotta mess with your mind.

"Certainly, these young girls can and should look to their mothers, grandmothers, aunts, and other female role models. But these young girls should also learn from the experiences of their fathers, grandfathers, uncles, and brothers as well."

Posted by: Skepticality | April 11, 2007 08:50 AM

That's right! My wife learned from the experience of both her parents. What she learned is that she wanted to be a stay-at-home mother, married to someone who would support her in that endeavor.

"And the same goes for young alpha boys too - learn from both your male and female role models about how to make choices for yourself."

That's right, too! I learned from the experience of both of my parents. And what I learned from being raised by a stay-at-home mother is that I wanted my future children to be raised the same way.

to arlmom - so I guess your definition of elite also includes homicide detectives, ambulance drivers, nurses, and oh so many other professions where - in your words - you HAVE to be the person who stays late, or travels on short notice, or comes in on the weekend to make sure the big -insert type of work - gets done. Right?

"However, these girls have been told and have seen for themselves that they can do ANYTHING they set out to do. But no matter how smart, hard-working and determined they are, they're not going to find a way to be on the playground and in the boardroom simultaneously."

They also can't be in the boardroom and the operating room simultaneously. If you want the time with children, you have to adjust your work hours. Maybe that means changing career aspirations. The true struggle may be choosing a career compatible with family rather than choosing career or family.

Maybe our mistake is in not teaching our children that the 'elite' careers are very time intensive and may require extensive travel and are not particularly family-friendly. Teach these young women and men, actually still girls and boys, that chilren require a lot of time as well. We prepare our children so much for their education and careers, but not so much for their family lives. Maybe some will change their academic paths because they know they want a different kind of life. Others will continue on because of their career ambitions.

I agree with the other poster who thinks that girls/boys who perform so highly may be doing it for external reasons (family expectations) as well as internal ambition/drive.

I think the solution lies in people taking more of a stand regarding how many hours and how much travel they will give their employers. I keep hearing that it is the corporate culture, or you must make partner or basically give up law, but if people stand together, then maybe change will occur. Think unions and strikes of the past. Those workers could not afford to lose their jobs and paychecks, but they stuck to their principles and the employers made changes.

Men doing more at home would ease the burden on women, but the work hours required for some positions are just ridiculous, no matter how much help their is at home. Even if I could afford a live-in staff so that I never had to deal with housework, yardwork, laundry, childcare, or cooking, I still would not want to work 60-80 hour weeks. I would rather be with my family.

is this really rocket science? ... i mean, what is the difficulty in understanding that the topic raised in the blog is apples and oranges? ... ambition? recognition? entitlement? ... i am hoping that today's young women who achieve to such stratospheric heights (tiny minority that they are among young women) AND the partners that they find as adults realize that one can not have everything and all their achivement does not give them a 'get out of hard choices free' card ... they, like us, can choose to be selfish and feel entitled to everything, no matter ho wmutually exclusive, or they can choose to be interdependent and think about building something beyond the reach of their fingertips ...

curious that a blog called 'on balance' can't distinguish unbalanced lives and unbalanced expectations when the topic arises

Updated "elite" stats to include "uber":

6 foamgnome
7 Fo3
7 Fred

Diversion alert:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=3028515&page=1

Charges on Duke Lacrosse players dropped

"I live in Newton, the city profiled in the NYT piece and I can tell you it's spot on when they described the mothers at Whole Foods and at the gym bragging to each other about what school their kids are applying to..how many sports they're playing, etc. etc."

Posted by: Sophie's Mom | April 11, 2007 09:10 AM

What makes Newton kids "elite"? I know people who live in Natick. Are kids in Newton smarter than kids in Natick? What's the average IQ of kids in Newton? Is there any connection between kids in Newton being really smart, and the great scientist, Sir Isaac Newton, being so smart that he discovered Newton's Laws of Motion? If kids in Newton inherit their intelligence from Sir Isaac Newton, doesn't that give them an unfair advantage as compared to kids from Natick? How many kids from Newton get into the elite school across the river ("Founded in 1877 by William Barton Rogers"), as compared to the children of the engineers I know at Natick?

Umm, how about raising our boys to be more than just money-providers? After all, with a little luck, these young people will want to have a partner with whom to share their lives. Even a partner with whom to parent any children.

It's not a zero-sum game, where if one party wins, the other loses.

Of course, if it turns out that someone is homosexual, let's hope they too can find a good partner.

It's darned hard work.

But Leslie, it would be nice if you would branch out and talk with those who are on the lower, even the much lower, economic scale. It would add some additional perspective to your readers who are the economic elite, perhaps get some momentum going in addressing all sorts of issues.

Several posters have said men don't need to make these choices and that is completely false. I struggle daily and hourly with these decsions and choices. I just accepted a job with a $10,000 pay cut and lower profile to cut back my commute and spend more time with family. Men question their choices constantly and struggle with all of the issues Leslie described. If you think women are taught they can (and should) have everything, try being a man. Every one of my male friends also struggles with these issues. And of course, they don't compare to the challegnes most people face, but they still provide hours of self-doubt and conflict. And yes, I know, you need to make your choices and live with them, but hard to reconcile when there are so many options out there (working on this in therapy...)

To change the girls, maybe you can change the parents to actually parent them and show them that life is short and you should not take everything seriously. You don't need to be the best. Maybe the parents can stop using their kids to attain status. Maybe the parents can stop pushing their kids to attain goals that are semi-realistic. Maybe the parents can treat their kids as kids and not buddies. Maybe the parents can realize that quality of life is not about how large your house is or how large your bank account is but establishing peace in your piece of mind...

jds-you are correct about men also choosing. I was wrong. However, generally women choose and men do not. I was caught in generalities, societal expectations, and my own personal experience.

I guess the blog is full of Alpha girl readers. I was one of those and hopefully still am. I worked hard in my education and always strove to be the best or at the best place possible. Have I slowed my career with 'being mommy?' Yes, but only for the period they need me most. That is not forever, As a mother of two girls, I would not want to tell them that they cannot succeed at their chosen path. I hope to tell them that I worked to make it possible for them to have the balance I strive for so much.

I have a lot of guilt about the number of hours they have to stay in daycare, something their equally hard working father doesn't trouble himself over. But the other day, my four year old decided for costume day she wanted to be 'Dr Mommy' with lab coat and stethoscope. Today she wants to be President...So I think striving hard does have some benefits for your kids, male and female. That is what I hope to tell them when they are struggling with balance.

This striving hard also opens opportunities for them in the future: unfortunately access to some of the things these girls talked about in the article are only available to the children of striving adults.

For some reason, you can read the article for free here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/education/01girls.html?ex=1176436800&en=68649bb2de01c61c&ei=5070

"I don't care where you went to school and what your GPA was. I consider you "elite" if you are highly professionally successful, which generally means you have staff and clients you are responsible for, decision-making authority, and business development targets."

Wow, Arlmom, you sound like a prototypical Washingtonian. Do you ask people "what do you do" when you meet them, and then dismiss them if they don't meet your definition of elite?

FYI, I am not "elite" and don't have kids, and am perfectly happy to be a loser who doesn't have to worry about balance at all!

"I just finished that novel "Acceptance" by Kate Coll, and I think we should do that for a "book of the month club" posting"

Huxley's "Brave New World" is much, much more on point: human embryos conditioned to belong to one of five castes: Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, or Epsilon.

Armchair Mom: no, you are not the only one who felt a little sorry for those girls. I did too.
So much achievement for what? I'm afraid the answer is "to have more".
I feel sorry for the current generation of kids: useless homework, little free time to be kids, multiple scheduled activities, no chilhood freedom.
When are we going to let the kids be kids?

Joe D...
The american way is to want to be the best. The american way is to challenge, not to accept. I certainly don't want to change our society to remove the drive to excel in half its members. That is a sure fire way to second class citizenship for women.

"Diversion alert:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=3028515&page=1

Charges on Duke Lacrosse players dropped"

ABCNews is jumping the gun a bit, but the result is going to be the same. The press conference will be this afternoon. When Nifong left the case I told my wife the case was going to be dropped; it looks now as he seized on this case as his "signature moment" without all that much evidence and it has blown up in his face.

I believe in providing the opportunity and encouragement for girls (as well as for boys) to demonstrate their talents in high school, as the NYTimes article about the Newton, MA girls discusses. But as a 67-year-old father, I can see that at some point these young rockets must run out of atmosphere and come down to earth and deal with the rest of us who are not accelerated as fast or who are are older and experienced. These young people at some point after their education ends and their career begins will over-reach: raw ambition and a life of coddled achievement does translate in the career world unless along the way there is a balancing that comes from learning sensitivity and respect for the experience of others. Otherwise the result is a snotty child/adult who will be appropriately deflated.
Working too-long hours is a way of optimizing a career, but this path to "success" pre-empts personal life. Containing the time required for the work-space is thus very important. Being a school teacher, for instance, is a way of exercising intellect while also not being required to compete at the office by being there 80 hours a week. Men and women all need to manage our career hours, and to say when enough is enough.

arlmom,

I agree with you that elite women have internal struggles regarding work and family conflicts.

However, I too was offended by "elite women face the most difficult internal struggles juggling work and family"....

The internal struggle faced by women who are in a position to choose career or home because their paycheck is not a financial necessity is just as difficult for those women who are not "elite". I think it is more reasonable to say that "women who can afford to stay home face the most difficult internal struggles juggling work and family. Women who must work for financial reasons have less internal struggle, although all women (and men) who work have balance issues."

>>to arlmom - so I guess your definition of elite also includes homicide detectives, ambulance drivers, nurses, and oh so many other professions where - in your words - you HAVE to be the person who stays late, or travels on short notice, or comes in on the weekend to make sure the big -insert type of work - gets done. Right?>>

Sounds like these are jobs where people are told they have to come in at weird times/stay late as a condition of their jobs. Different kind of balancing issue--it's due to external requirements. Definitely challenging, I agree. But today's blog was about girls who are internally driven and pursue elite careers where a lot of the pressure and balance challenges are due to internal pressure to succeed. My boss doesn't tell me I have to stay late, or choose between the dance recital and the client meeting. I put myself in that position. It's a different kind of balancing act. That doesn't mean that all kinds of jobs don't come with their own challenges. But I disagree with posters who say that, because I put the pressure on myself (or these girls pressure themselves), that their balance struggles aren't somehow valid, or that we shouldn't try and figure out ways to mitigate.

As an alpha woman I just plain never wanted to stay home with kids. Not that I didn't think about having kids--but I always pictured being a breadwinning parent, helping with homework in evenings, NOT being a full-time nurturer. "Alpha" and "nurturing" aren't very compatible personality traits in my opinion (I certainly don't have both, anyway).

I don't see how this is setting me up for torture. Assuming Mr Bee was willing to be the nurturing parent, we'd have a family balance that is quite common in this century--one parent mostly in the home and one parent mostly out of the home, each covering off a portion of the family's needs for financial and emotional stability.

(Somewhat beside the point, Mr Bee is pretty alpha himself so I don't think we're going to do this at all. But that doesn't torture me either.)

Leslie, the problem with your post (and which is a recurring problem with your posts) is that you take a REALLY snotty point of view. You believe that the internal struggles of the privileged are greater than those of the poorer, less privileged.

This is like saying it's so much harder for Americans who face 60 choices of what cereal to buy than it is for poor people in the Third World who have only one choice (say, cornmeal) of what to eat for breakfast -- and don't even always have that available.

This is just stupid and demeaning. People have pointed this out to you, but yet you insist on standing by your comments about elites having it harder. I have read your blogs long enough and pointed this out to you enough times to conclude that you are one of the snobbiest people around. You actually think you have it the hardest. No one is going to doubt that you, and other elite snobs, have faced difficult internal struggles, but to say that you have the hardest would be laughable if it weren't also so insulting.

"To change the girls, maybe you can change the parents to actually parent them and show them that life is short and you should not take everything seriously. You don't need to be the best."

"Good enough to get by" isn't the standard for EVERY profession. Just most of them. If you or someone you love is scheduled to have an operation, do you really want the third-string surgeon handling the knife? I don't.

Dotted--I never mentioned one sex or the other.

Why does having children represent a failure of ambition? I was one of those elite girls, however, part of my ambition has always been to stay at home to raise my children, not because I think that I should as a woman but because that is personally important to me, just as going to a top law school and working at an elite NY firm were important to me. I chose my partner accordingly. Although I don't have children yet, I do not expect any sort of existential crisis. Yes, I'm sure it will be hard, mind-numbing work at times, but it will be worth it.

Sorry, but it's the parents' fault. NO ONE SAYS NO AND MEANS IT!!!!!!! Can't STAND these overindulgent parents who are more focused on being their friend than their parent.

And parents are ALSO in the dark. They think their precious baby girl could NEVER be mean to anyone...BULL! WAKE UP!

Joe D
Yes you did mention a particular sex (gender).

you wrote "To change the girls" to start your paragraph. Further references don't mention gender, but given your start, they imply the conversation is directed to parents of girls...

I just read the article. Now I really, really feel sorry for these girls. They are flying so high on their expectations that the resulting crash will be devastating. Their perfection -- 360 degree perfection -- is not maintainable. These girls may very well peak early and then head down. Their way thus far has been paved smooth for them by their parents who are keen to give their children every advantage. When they're left to fend for themselves, I think it's going to be rough.

Bravo to ILC re her post below this statement, I'm still waiting for someone to truly define this torture Leslie writes of. Perhaps Leslie did not mean 'torture' precisely, let's give her the benefit of the doubt till she can detail what she means.

"For those who think the solution lies in not having children, another kind of torture awaits them."

"What in the hell is THAT supposed to mean? How about those of us who don't want kids? I'm NOT not having them to excel, I'm not having them because it's just not something I've ever wanted."

There is "no universal road to work/family bliss."

That about sums it up. The choices I made are different from the ones you made. I am satisfied with the decisions I made. Are you satisfied with the ones you made? I used to be very ambitious, but acquiring children has changed that greatly. Now, I am content with less than I had in the past. Others made different choices and are satisfied with the result. So far, in 41 years, I have always been able to turn an unsatisfying situation into a satisfying one, although sometimes it has taken a while for me to figure out what to change, and sometimes I had to give up trying to change something outside myself and just adjust my attitude (or switch jobs or other situation). I don't meant to make it sound oversimplified, but that is my approach in a nutshell.

>>Wow, Arlmom, you sound like a prototypical Washingtonian. Do you ask people "what do you do" when you meet them, and then dismiss them if they don't meet your definition of elite?>>

What on earth in my posts suggested that? I was trying to explain my perspective on how Leslie was using "elite" as shorthand, and point out that the reason we often discuss "elites" on this blog is because that's who a lot of people in DC are, under the definition I suggested. I don't think I said anything that implied that I consider myself "elite" in the sense of being superior to other people.

I don't know what to think about the comment about the issue of balance being a struggle for women who don't have to work, whether or not their jobs are "elite." I guess I don't *have* to work, but I don't consider that a factor in my personal balance struggle at all, because whether or not I had to work, I would--I've never considered not working. I have practical issues with balance, not philosophical ones. But apparently I am in the minority of women on that one.

Dotted, The first sentence was directed at the females. The rest I held gender neutral (Kids) to show that parents need to stop doing it to their kids, male or female.

And it's not about showing your kids they can be the best but to stop pushing them. let them make their own direction and support them in that. The world needs less self indulgent adults...

One of the big problems I see with the women who have highly demanding professional careers is their choices in men. Like all women, they prefer men who are smarter and more successful than they are. On the other hand, successful men prefer beautiful women who can produce and care for beautiful children. It is time to get a clue. If you want to be a CEO, find a really beautiful man with a modest career who can be your balance.

JDS is right about men's struggles with this. DH and I agreed that he would be the one to stay home with DS. DH had to basically put a stop to his self-employment for 3 years and went through a huge adjustment due to that. Wasn't easy for him at all. But, to his great credit, he did it. I am by no means an alpha girl, but I do make more money and hold the health insurance. We made choices and sacrifices that suited our family.

I am/was one of the alpha girls. The difference may be generational for me as opposed to leslie. Also, I suspect that I lacked the neurosis you see in these girls later on.

I had my son much later, so I had achieved quite a bit and was wise enough to know what was really important when I had him. Made it alot easier for me. Didn't freak out like some of the crazy moms in my son's school, who are maybe 7-10 years younger.

"The bottom line is about redefining what "having it all" means to you and not worrying about what anyone else thinks about it!"

I agree 100%! I read this blog but don't comment much - but had to today. It seems that some of the "balance" issues discussed here have much to do with "fitting in" and caring way too much about what neighbors, friends, playgroups, co-workers & family think and say. It is difficult to figure out what is right for yourself & family, but given the resources available to these "elite" girls & women, they have many more choices and should have less of an issue with what others think!

I agree with Jan and Armchair mom. I also felt sorry for these girls and I think it's absurd how much our society demands "perfection" these days at the expense of everything that makes life worthwhile. I knew girls like this when I was in high school about ten years ago. (One of the interesting things about being an older member of Generation Y is that I notice trends about my generation years before the media catches on. But I digress.)

Anyway, while I participated in newspaper, color guard, and other activities in high school, I was almost always in bed by 10:30 on weeknights, watched my favorite TV shows (Seinfeld, X-files, Dawson's Creek - those were the days) and went out with my friends every Friday and Saturday. I believe downtime and time for fun are essentials for everyone at every age. Anyone who pulls an all-nighter is either a huge procrastinator or has taken on way too much.

There is nothing wrong with success in and of itself, but we as a society need to stop worshiping it. The reality is that 90% of teenagers will grow up to be fairly ordinary. It's simply not true that "anyone" can do "anything." You could also say that I "failed" at my first career choice, but now I'm doing something that makes me much happier. (I'm also a working mother out of necessity who will jump at the first chance to stay home or go part-time). These girls will probably be perfectly capable of supporting themselves and their families one day, but only a handful will stay "amazing." We need to tell teens to pursue what *they* want out of life, even if that's to be an auto mechanic, an artist, a stay-at-home parent, or anything else that's not a doctor or lawyer. We need to tell them that it's perfectly OK to be ordinary.

"so I guess your definition of elite also includes homicide detectives, ambulance drivers, nurses, and oh so many other professions where - in your words - you HAVE to be the person who stays late, or travels on short notice, or comes in on the weekend to make sure the big -insert type of work - gets done. Right?"

Don't forget about teachers. Everyone knows THEY'RE considered elite.

I think we need a Blog Stats report on how often Leslie has referred to HERSELF as elite.

I have to disagree with Leslie that elite women have it the hardest when juggling work and family. I'd say the working poor, especially poor single moms, have it much, much harder. Proof? Ask yourself whether you would trade places. I wouldn't. Sure, it's hard to reconfigure priorities after a lifetime of being told, and believing, life is about money, status, promotions and work. But I'd rather reconfigure priorities than attempt to work two low-paying jobs while finding someone to take my kids and make it month to month.

And I'd say Leslie is perfectly accurate to describe professional moms and dads as elite. Look at the median income for this country, as yourself how much more you earn than that, and then figure out whether you're elite. I'd venture to guess many, many people on this board, including Leslie, would qualify as elite. This is like people earning $200,000 claiming they are 'middle class.'

I have to disagree with you Leslie -- it's not about what happens to these girls when they make decisions about motherhood - it's what happens when they face the world outside the cocoon they live in now. I don't care how smart they are - there will be someone smarter. (or prettier, more ambitious, etc). At 18 you are on the top of the mountain... it isn't until you hit 30 you realize how little you actually knew back then. Most women I know weren't truly comfortable in their own skin until they were on the other side of 30.

"Sounds like these are jobs where people are told they have to come in at weird times/stay late as a condition of their jobs. Different kind of balancing issue--it's due to external requirements."

How is coming in at weird times/staying late not a condition of the job for an executive? If it wasn't a condition of the job, than most executives wouldn't put in the kinds of hours that they do. And if they're choosing to put in the hours when they don't have to, then there's not much internal struggling going on - they're choosing to be at the office instead of at home.

Put me on the list of those who would like to know what kind of "torture awaits" those of us who prefer not to have children.

I know several other coworkers who are married without children and they don't seem particularly tortured. Maybe the torture has not come yet and they are still "awaiting" it? Maybe I should let them know to be on guard.

I think the truth is that people just need to recognize that there is give and take whatever path you choose and that's just a fact of life. It always comes back to priorities. If you choose to raise children (and do it well) you can have a full and rewarding career but you may not end up being CEO. The women who have chosen careers over children exclusively and are so offended by the remarks in this column, are clearly still relatively young (30s early 40s probably) and haven't realized yet what it is they gave up. As a married woman who left the working world completely to be a stay at home mother with her sons I have experienced this first hand. My husband's old college girlfriend (that he broke up with back then) never married and never had children. She's now in her early 50s, was recently diagnosed with breast cancer and has nobody at the end of the day. This highly successful career woman was reduced to calling up her old boyfriend, getting together for drinks when she was (coincidentally going to be) in his city (under the guise of won't it be fun to catch up on old times) and instead put on this pathetic, almost groveling performance to convince him that he was her one true love who got away and even though he's married 'would he be interested in getting together with her again?' It was a sad display of a highly successful career woman acting out the advice of every grocery store woman's magazine with respect to looking up those old loves. I don't think she read the paragraph that it only works if he's not married. Even after they parted company that day she followed up with more pathetic emails "I wish you every happiness, but wish it were with me." My point in all this is that there is sacrifice at every turn in our lives. This is what we should be telling our children, male and female. Teach kids that life is about priorities, personal choice and balance. "Having it all" looks good on a motivational poster on the wall, but it's not real life. If a highly successful career one day means that you're lonely at the end of the day, it's because you've chosen "things" and recognition over people and relationships. It really is that simple.

"Perhaps if the young men/boys see more equality in the home the young women will have a better chance of attaining it down the road."

DING DING DING DING!!!!!

I read the original article and was not impressed. BTW, my sister, also not a stud jock but a good student and rennaissance girl was accepted to Middlebury without going to a sterling high school in a soulless suburb. HAH!

But the posts have been good, and I eventually had three thoughts.

1st: Why exactly should I pity these little sh*ts? Is it not a sign of a self-indulgent society to have a stellar education and still complain about it? As the earlier posts mentioned, they have loads of choices to go with their oodles of skills. Oh, the travesty. Trust me, two months ago in the Atlantic there was a much more compelling article on the attempted reconstruction of New Orleans public schools. The girls profiled in that were MUCH more intriguing...or maybe the writing was just better.

2nd: I couldn't gauge the parents profiled in the Times article. They seemed to incriminate themselves for a second, that they pushed their daughter to the limit. If that's more the case, this story gets more interesting.

3rd: Where were all these smart, beautiful girls when I went to high school? All the pretty ones I could have chased were dumb as radishes. Oh wait, they all live with attractive parents in wealthy school districts. Seems the Times has a target audience.

Well, my 20 year high school reuinion is coming up and I'll see where the elite has gone. In talking with friends who still live near there, they haven't acheived any more than I have. I'm sure this would havew killed thei 18 year old selves, but not so sure about their 38 year old selves. We'll have to see, won't we.

I think when leslie said torture, she meant the choice might be torture for many-to come to the realization that one may never have kids-if you wanted them-or that *having*kids would take you out of the boardroom-if that's what you wanted.

oh blah blah blah! I'm so tired of hearing about how women should feel guilty either way (working too much but being "successful" or staying home and being a "good mom"). This type of psychoanalysis just adds to the guilt either way by subtly pushing the idea that there is no right answer but two slightly wrong answers. I disagree! I think many routes are right and none can truly be wrong. I am a successful (in the corporate world) female with multiple degrees and certifications, this makes me happy now and I truly enjoy it. I also know that when I have children in a few years, what will make ME happy is to stay home and raise them. This is MY decision and it will be right for me. Regardless of what others choose, as long as the decision comes from internal analysis and not a sense of pressure from the types who feel a compulsive desire to mold people into one or the other and designate the choice right or wrong, I truly belive that they will probably also be happy and successful in the most important arena- their own lives. To label these girls "alpha" at so young an age and infer that they are clearly superior (which is so cruel and unfair to the girls who are just as capable in different areans, or choose to specialize and excel in one area) is just another step in creating a new generation of hyper-sensitive and pressured adults. How did we get to this point, America?

Someone last week suggested that Leslie write about this article. She does write articles about social policies would (hopefully) impact women with greater need more than they would her. You cannot please all masters everyday.

She said: This is what I've seen in the years I've been working on the so-called mommy wars. It's logical -- women who invest the most in their career success have the hardest time with the inevitable compromises of motherhood. This does NOT mean to belittle other, more chronic survival struggles of less advantaged women in this country and other countries.

She didn't say these girls will struggle more in general (which I assume she knows is false) but they are more likely to be the ones second guessing the ones they were (lucky enough) to make.

Yes other women struggle more... but if you look globally not locally the blue collar class and even the working poor are fat cats with loads of opportunities when placed next to the women of sub-saharan africa. Does this mean that some small corner in cyberchase would be remiss to discuss their troubles when there are much bigger problems elsewhere on the globe.

If she posts an article on something you don't find interesting read something else!

Linda S.

People who marry and have children also get cancer and have "nobody at the end of the day" and look up old loves.

"So much achievement for what? I'm afraid the answer is 'to have more'."

I feel for the girls in this article, for the pressures they face. But I don't necessarily agree that it's all done in order to have more stuff. I think it's to have more options.

One of the realities of this upper-middle-class existence is that, while the parents typically have very good incomes, they cannot guarantee their kids will be able to stay in that socioeconomic position (ie, no massive inherited wealth or family business). Their kids will need to earn their own way in life. So the parents focus on giving their kids the best shot at doing so -- which has been defined as getting them the best education money can buy.

I think these girls have internalized the parental mantra that the Most Important Thing they can do is get into an "elite" college. And that is getting harder and harder to do -- look at the main girl profiled in the story, look at her credentials and clear intelligence, look at the great school she is going to and all of her achievements, yet she wasn't deemed "good enough" to get into her first choice college. So they try harder and harder, take on more AP classes, more activities, all in a continued effort to give themselves the best chance to get into their "elite" college. Because they have been trained that that is what they have to do to give themselves the most options and choices in life.

I do suspect some of these girls will be in for a rude awakening in a few years. Their lives have been to some degree scripted, with the responsibilities and rewards clearly laid out ("if I do X, Y, and Z, then I will get into ABC college"). But what happens when they reach the end of the script? What happens when they enter a world where you faithfully do X, Y, and Z, but then don't get the brass ring despite your best efforts?

I suspect this is where the girl/boy issue gets interesting. These girls have been very well-trained to follow the rules, behave themselves, and do what is expected of them, because that is what makes them successful at school. But that is not necessarily what it takes to succeed in business -- at least at the very high level that some of them aspire to. I wonder whether the very fact that many boys don't seem to be as good at following the rules and behaving at school is in fact putting them in a better position to succeed in business, where you have to be willing to take risks and push the envelope -- and whether facing criticism and negative consequences for their behavior in school helps them build a thicker skin and more resilience to deal with the inevitable failures.

America is better than Canada
England better than Ireland
Newton better than Natick
Staten Island better than the Bronx
Darien better than Greenwich
Alexandria better than Fairfax
Girlz better than boys
My dad's bigger than your dad!

The college admissions rat race for the high achievers has created a generation of useless grinds? I am not sure. When these kids get away from the HS gestapo, and out from under the thumb of uber-parents, I would hope they may find an equilibrium. The risk is that the experimentation with booze or other risky behavior may leave some serious fallout.

As a parent I see teaching my kids how to recognize choices, see consequences and reposibility as important as grades, athletic prowess or how they rank in the popularity hierarchy of their peers.

Type A Male Kids:

Uber-Boys can spend SO much time on athletics that their balance suffers, and academics take a back seat. But then again learning to handle defeat on the sports field serve these individuals, M or F, well once they are up against stiffer academic challenges. The problem with athletics for boys is often that there is no capacity for participation as so many enroll. My girls have a much easier time participating in sports because the pressure isnt as intense, and girls dont get "cut" from teams at young ages the way the boys do.

Academics:

The dumbing down of boys in school happens in our district. Boys peer pressure isnt for academic excellence, so we have to stay on top of things to make sure DS gets positive reinforcement on his effort. If you are smart you still get branded a geek etc by the popular boys... Also the tracks for advanced math, science etc I see as tilted in favor of the female students by the administration and faculty as early as elementary school. These professional spout the different developmental track of boys versus girls - and then stack the deck aginst the boys. The power to select these categories is firmly in the hands of women in our schools. This leads the more experienced parents to hold their boys back for pre-K so that they have a year more of maturity - and dont get selected out for acting their age.

So I am not surprised that the greater academic achievement in higher education is by the girls. Our country made a concerted effort to correct the bias against girls, and it is working like a charm. Culturally, empirically and quantifiably.

Maybe this will produce more Fortune 500 female CEO's? Bully for them. In the meantime a generation of male providers wont be able to compete with better prepared males from the subcontinent (ie Doctors from Mumbai) or computer technicians from europe (ie programmers/engineers from Russia).

Oh well. I am sure I offended somebody out there,

Yale is better than Harvard.
DKE is better than DU.
Rock is better than rap.
East Coast is better than West Coast.
College hoops is better than the NBA.
Go Rutgers!

At 41 (and married to the same great guy for 19 years), I have never had children. We both have doctoral degrees, and I was one of those alpha girls. I have not felt torture at not having kids, and neither has he; the worst is the people who look at us and remark "You'd have made great parents! Why didn't you ever have kids?" I find that question