« Wednesday | Main | Friday »

Re the "stay-at-home-mom" situation. I felt so fortunate to be able to stay at home and raise my children. Maybe I was a bit arrogant, but I always felt that no one in the world could raise my babies as well as me. And do you know what? both my grown kids say how great it was to come home to mommy and not an empty house and a (relatively) uninterested baby sitter.

Diane Z, KS, USA

I found the following in a recent post to be very funny: "You girls are just going to ruin it all. Women have always been the ones in charge of everything. And now you're letting the men know about it."

However, last Thursday in an interview, the second round actually, I was asked pointed questions about my marital status and if I had any children. The interviewer, a man, posed these questions under the guise of curiousity but I think we all know he wanted to know if I would need to "run out" on a regular basis. I was very brave and politely and firmly pushed back on the relevence of my answers. He got very nervous and back tracked very quickly. Since I was a top candidate I will be very interested to know if I get turned down for this job. Supposedly the decision was to be made quickly but it has been over a week now. I have so many feelings on this subject right now that I need time to flesh them out. When I do I'll follow up. Interesting how this stip resonates for all of us in some way at all times.

Sheila B, East Hartford, CT, USA

My children are now grown and off on their own adventures. I was never there when they were growing up. I was working 60 hours a week. My ex-husband stayed at home. I had no option. Even though many would have considered this situation a "role reversal", it wasn't. Many of my girlfriends and colleagues thought I was setting a great example - "You go girl," they told me. "Let the man stay home for a change." I hated it, but someone had to work to pay the bills and that someone was me.

I think that all of the reactions to this thread show how perserverence by women "back in the day" has enabled women (and men)to choose how to live their lives, but remember my sisters, the grass is always greener on the other side. If you are one of the lucky ones who can choose to stay home or work, count your blessings. Be happy with your choice and don't pine for the other.

Kate, The Netherlands (formerly BC, Canada)

I really don't understand what all the fuss is about. I still see the comics as relevant and funny. I know that women have a lot more independance and we have fought for it and it's great, but, I still see men like John around. I still see women like Elly around. There are still some of us who choose to be stay at home moms, and have moments of wanting to get out of the house now. I hear of men going home at night and still asking what their wives did all day. Some things never change. There are also still some people that moan and complain when there's no need to.

Suzanne B, Winnipeg, MB, Canada

I am an unmaterialistic person but maybe in Nebraska it is possible to live on one pay check, but what about the "stay at home mom's" independence? Is she not entitled to make a name for herself? There are stay at home dads, too, and that arrangement can work out well too. Having some extra money, even if it is just from a part-time or per diem job can allow a few comforts of life and make the person feel more important. We only go around once in life, and if it can be more comfortable, maybe it means working a different shift and taking turns parenting. It can be done and have a parent home at all times.

Geri, New York, NY, USA

Women's rights was a very hot topic 30 years ago. In the day, I was very frustrated with Women's Lib. I didn' feel liberated because I was a working Mom. I felt I had two jobs.

Things have changed, but some problems remain. Lynn addressed these in her classic strips. Michael tended the children, but Deanna did the cooking and cleaning. Therese wanted a career but left everything at home up to Anthony. And April felt dumped on to tend her niece and nephew. Elly decided to retire early although John initially didn't want her to. These are human challenges that everyone faces in relationships, for better or for worse.

PH, Western USA

I am always amused at how the progressive, pro-feminist author of this comic strip manages to portray women. In today's comic strip, Anne comes across as just another example of a frustrated, back-biting, catty female. Instead of congratulating Elly on her new job and wishing her well, and saying something nice about her new outfit, Anne decides to belittle Elly with the "uniform" comment.

John P, Parksdale, AZ, USA

Many comments have pointed out that things were different in the 1979-1980 time frame in which the recently reprinted strips originally ran. But here's the thing. Lynn herself has posited that we are supposed to think of the new-run/reprint continuity as happening "in the modern day." (Go to the Q & Eh section of this site and look for the question "Hi, now that FBOFW has had a reboot, what year is it supposed to be taking place?" in the "Storylines" category.)

In order to support the "modern times" premise, Lynn has changed a "Cheryl Ladd" reference to a "Shania Twain" reference. She changed a $35-dollar jogging suit to a $135-dollar jogging suit. Lynn had a new-run in which John and Ted watch hockey on a flat-screen TV. She even redrew the strip where Connie composes a personal ad on a typewriter (having her type on unspecified keyboard instead).

On the other hand, certain dated references have stayed in: "women's lib"; "male chauvinist pig"; a child holding a magazine with Shaun Cassidy on the cover, and so on. So it's not so simple and straight-forward as saying, "Hey, these are strips from another era--treat them as historical specimens." Perhaps it would be best, though, if Lynn were to say we are seeing 1980 and just run with that.

Katje B, Albany, NY, USA

As you know, there's been a lot of debate about when the new-run strips are happening. Some insist that we're looking at the past while others think we're months away from the 2010s. I happen to believe neither; I think of what I'm seeing as happening in the eleventh year of John and Elly's marriage. The social norms and technology of what we can thus call 11 A.P. are a quirky mixture of both timeframes so what looks anachronistic isn't.

Paul J, Saint John, NB, Canada