Caitlin Flanagan writes about motherhood without the sentimentality. In this book she covers every aspect of modern womanhood from overblown wedding ceremonies to the difficult decision to work outside the home. She writes about her twins' nanny, and she writes about Martha Stewart. She sees through the BS.

And she's funny. She willingly self-deprecates in the name of writing the truth.

It's true that this book is really an essay collection cum memoir, but it's nonetheless super enjoyable. If we're going to figure out the modern family, we need voices like hers. ( )

Well, ah, I had read and enjoyed some of Flanagan's writing in the New Yorker and the Atlantic, so somewhere along the line I must have seen that she had written and book, and added it to the "gift list" that I share on Google Docs with my parents. So that's why my Dad said, very skeptically, "is this really the book you wanted?" when I opened it.

Well it is the book I wanted, I suppose, and to hell with what anyone thinks. It was funny and thought-provoking, albeit "counter-revolutionary" as I kept saying to my baffled Marxist brother. It is counter-revolutionary, in a sense, though; Flanagan seems to want to roll back the clock to a pre-feminist age. I found myself wondering what the women at Feministing -- whom I admire -- would make of these essays, and whether it's possible to agree with both of them, or if that makes you a hypocrite or something. Oh well. A better read than many more highly vaunted pieces of cultural criticism, to be sure. ( )

Is it ironic that I listened to this while doing household chores? The author gave me some insights about certain other women, but she really does over-generalize, because the insights didn't apply to me or to other mothers I know. I did like the poignant bit comparing Erma Bombeck to Betty Friedan, though... ( )

I struggled with this book immensely. While I agreed with [what I discerned to be] some of her core points - that the housewife decision is not one to be ashamed of, that not all gender roles are oppressive, etc - I found her to be an extremely unlikeable voice. It appeared to me that her opinion was muddled. At times, it was almost hard to figure out what side of the opinion line she stood.

Her writing is not wrought with wit, as the book jacket alluringly enticed me with. She seems a very petty woman, very naive and unappreciative. Particularly about her "servant" [her own words], Paloma. Whom, she says, was a life-saver and deeply meaningful in her life, but who was oddly vacant from her acknowledgments.

I credit Ms. Flanagan for her unwavering bluntness and for the audacity to dive into the highly controversial topic that she did, but I truly struggled to not throw this book against a wall and light it on fire. I still (despite my inclination to use it as fire starters) found it to be a worthwhile read, for it raises questions and makes you think. ( )

Some good and thought-provoking ideas, but what was her point? Each unrelated chapter left me struggling to discern a clear message. Liberal feminists base their freedoms on the exploitation of poorer minority women, but the author IS a liberal feminist who isn't a feminist, and she employs poorer minority women? I couldn't get a point-of-view to agree or disagree with, so I just responded to various statements. For that, it's worth your time, but it's not life-changing. ( )