MARCH 26, 2012

Q1 1 + M + Obamacare isU1L, L’’WL, amesswe can’tfl1111-l BYRICH livewithout

LU. 1.. LOWRY BY FAREED ZAIiARIA

TheRicher$exWomen areovertaking menas America’sbreadwinners.Why that’s goodfor everyoneBY LIZA MUNDY

Geeks and guns:Two sides of the#Kony2Ol2 war

p

FOOD

Dirt. Twis. Ants.Dinnerwith theplanet’s best chef

$5 .99CAN

13>

3 /www.tlme.com

is changing howmen andwomenwork, play, shop, share, court and evenlove each other Bj UiàlVkrndy

I F YOU WANT TO SEE WHAT THE FUTURElooks like, consider the Hawkins familyofMichigan, whose choices, if they don’t

already, may one day resemble your own.The Hawkinses could have stepped

out of a Hallmark card: back in thex97os, Ford engineer Gary Hawkins supported six children while his wife Marcelle stayed home in suburban Detroitto raise them. Now grown, the Hawkinssiblings can’t tell you when they noticed

Photographs by Andrew B. Myers for TIME

that everything had changed, only thatthey have become a family of femalebreadwinners.Eldest son Danny graduated from the

University of Michigan and took a job infinance, but he rebelled at the crushinghours. So in the mid-’gos, he left to becomea stay-at-home dad to his two daughters.His wife Susan serves as a top executiveat the Henry Ford Health System. He is amaster of the shopping list, appointment

L1.DlIlâ’I

As female economic clout grows, it

calendar and household budget; he hasserved as treasurer of the PTA and thehomeowners’ association; and on Halloween, just for fun, he did a statistical analysis of trick-or-treaters to gauge how muchcandy to buy the following year.

“I have told Susie several times thatmy job is to make her life easier, and Ilike doing it,” says Danny, whose sisterLeslie married a man, Damon Ajlouny,who everybody thought would be a hotshot corporate lawyer. Instead he steppedback to become his family’s secondaryearner, selling real estate, cooking ambitiously and coaching the kids. “We bothhave made sacrifices,” says Leslie, who expands the definition of provider to includewhat Damon does. As a parent, she pointsout, “your priority is to provide for yourfamily—the love, the affection, the nurturing. For us, it’s about what’s best for thefamily.” Another sister, Rhonda, changedmajors in college so many times, she lostcount; now she is her company’s global director ofmarketing, “kind ofby accident,”she says. When her job began to requireextensive travel, often on short notice,her husband Hank reduced his hours inrestaurant management—a job he loved.“She’s had to make a lot of sacrifices toget where she is,” Hank says. “It would bewrong of me to say, ‘Oh, you’re not taking that next step, because I’m ready todo what I want to do.’ I didn’t think thatwould be fair.”Two other Hawkins sisters are also in

female-breadwinner households; only onebrother fills the role ofprimary earner. Sixadult siblings, five households supportedby women. One generation. One seismiceconomic, social and emotional change.Assuming present trends continue, by

the next generation, more families willbe supported by women than by men.Not since women entered the workforceby the millions after World War II hasAmerica witnessed economic change onthis scale. Some of this is driven by thedramatic rise in single-parent families,but it is increasingly true in two-earnerfamilies as well. In 2009, the most recent year for which U.S. Bureau of LaborStatistics figures are available, nearly4 in ro working wives outearned theirhusbands—an increase of more than50% from 20 years before. There was ajump in the first decade of the 21st century, even before the Great Recession began in 2007, suggesting it’s not a blip inthe economic cycle.Think about what this portends. The

primary role men have played since they

departed the cave in pursuit of bison andwoolly mammoths and marched forthin flannel suits to earn paychecks in theMadMen erawill be passed to women. Theimpact will be felt everywhere, from theclassroom to the boardroom to the bedroom, in howmen and womenwork, play,shop, vote, save and share and court andeven love each other.While the change is rarely in the

headlines, it is often behind them: muchof what liberals are calling the Republicans’ war on women centers on the Pill,whose arrival o years ago fostered therise of female sexual freedom and economic power. Women could delay marriage and invest in education withoutworrying that an unplanned pregnancywould derail their pursuit of professional goals. As jobs have moved to thelow and high ends of the socioeconomicspectrum, it is women who are betterequipped for the higher ground: womentoday make up almost 6o°/o of U.S. collegestudents and earn the majority of doctorates and master’s degrees. Some expertspredict that in 25 years, law and medicine

will be female-dominated professions.Already, accordjng to Census Bureau datacrunched by Reach Advisors, a market-research firm, single childless womenages 22 to 30 in the majority of large U.S.cities now have a higher median incomethan their male peers.Before women—or men—start cel

ebrating, some cautionary notes: someacademics and women’s-rights advocatestalk about a stalled revolution and warnthat a premature declaration ofvictorywillreduce pressure on workplaces to improvepay and working conditions. Althoughthe portion of wives outearning theirhusbands has risen, the wage gap persists:women working full time earn a medianwage that is 8r% of what men make. Thissuggests thatmanywomen are supportinghouseholds on less thanwhat amanmightcommand. The glass ceiling remains solid;according to Philip Cohen, a sociologist atthe University of Maryland, the percentage ofmanagers who are women has risenfrom 35% to only 38°/o in the past 20 years.It is still possible for a judge to reject asex-discrimination suit by a woman whoclaimed she was fired for asking if shecould pump breast milk at work and to saythe claim would hold up if the woman hadbeen fired for being pregnant. In this economy, millions ofwomen as well as men aretoo worried about falling out of the middleclass to dream of rising above it.But over the long term, the outlook is

brighter—especially if a growing, globalinformation economy favors an educatedwoman’s skill set. Which raises the inevitable question, Ifwomen in the next generation are poised to do better, does it meanthat men are going to do worse? Or is therea chance, if people come to think differently about money and power and genderroles, that everyone could come out ahead?

The Old Deal Is OffMONEY ISN’T EVERYTHING, BUT WHEN IT

comes to how society is organized, it’s alot. Until the mid—I9th century, women’sproperty—their very identity—was subsumed into that of their husband, a tradition so important that in i868, whenEngland was considering giving propertyrights to married women, the LondonTimes warned that such a move would destroy marriage as society knew it, whichconsisted of “authority on the one side andsubordination on the other.” Were a wifeto become financially empowered, the paper editorialized, she would be “practicallyemancipated” from control by her husband.“What is to prevent her from going where

she likes and doing what she pleases?”Well, plenty, actually. Even after prop

erty laws changed, women’s dependencewas ensured for another century by fac

J)tors including gender segregation in theworkplace, a lower wage scale for women,restraints on the employment of marriedwomen and obstacles to advancementin jobs—all seen as necessary to ensure

j men’s breadwinning ability and guaranY tee that women would remain loyal help-

meets. Feminists like Simone de Beauvoirsaw economic independence as central towomen’s liberation and even humanity,arguing that for centuries—millennia,even—men had used economic power topurchase women’s domestic services andensure their sexual fidelity. De Beauvoir

called this “the deal” and argued thatwomen were poorer in every sense foraccepting it. Evolutionary psychologists,meanwhile, argued that dependence waswomen’s desired condition—that womenwere genetically driven to seek providerswho could support their offspring. Youcould call it a contest between Marx andDarwin: the Marxist camp saw the economic superiority of men as oppressiveand wrong, while the Darwinists saw it asnatural and beneficial to women.Either way, the deal is off. The high-

paying industrial jobs that once enabled amanwith a high school education to bringhome a familywage are disappearing. Andas women become co-breadwinners or primary breadwinners in more households,

all kinds of assumptions about how thehousehold works are changing.Start with the domestic division of

labor. Until recently, it was a fond beliefamong sociologists thatwiveswho earnedmore than their husbands did morehousework, to reassert their femininity,and men did less, to re-establish controland preserve their masculine image Buta 2011 study by OxfordUniversity sociologist Oriel Sullivan showed that data hadbeen misinterpreted, in part because theidea of men’s resisting change was justpresumed. In truth, women’s houseworkhours have dropped as men’s have risen.According to a study by Ohio State University sociologist Liana Sayer, women’shousework decreased by 70 minutes a dayfrom the 19705 to the beginning of the21st century in the U.S., while men’s increased by about a half hour since rg6.Even husbands of stay-at-home wives domore housework than they used to.Beyond that, womens earnings have

given themmore economic influence bothat home and in public. APewResearch Center study found that in households wherethe husband brings in more income, buying decisions are made equally, but inhouseholds where the wife earnsmore, shetypically makes twice as many buying decisions as the man. “Sectors likely to benefit fromwomen’s expanding power includefood, health care, education, child care, apparel, consumer durables and financial services,” predicted a recent Goldman Sachsreport. Financially secure single womenare also a growing market for restaurants,travel and real estate. Developers are designing “permanent-residence houses forsingles,” says Michael Silverstein, a director at the Boston Consulting Group. Theyrecognize that women

SOCIETY I THE RICHER SEX

or apply extra makeup at a boyfriend’s request. “If they met me and wanted to dateme with me being a certain way, they’renot allowed to change the rules later.”Women agreed that they wanted to test-drive men on domestic attitudes. “It bugsme sometimes,” said one, “when they don’tnotice that I’m the one doing all the laundry if they leave their stuff at my place.”Those guys are history.As for child rearing, men have be

come significantly more hands-on overthe past generation, and that trend willonly accelerate as more families let earning power rather than gender determinewho is the primary parent. While somewomen will struggle to adapt to moredistant mothering, they may also relishseeing their children enjoying intimaterelationships with fathers. When thecompany Tony Betts worked for inMichigan went under during the recession, hiswife Kris went back to work in her oldfield of social services. Her husband “hada fantastic summer” with their two boys,she says. “He had worked so hard for solong.” This was the first time the boyswere able to spend uninterrupted swathsof time with their father, which continued after the school year started, whenhe was setting up shop as a consultant.“At the end of the school year, they camehome with their art projects,” she recallswith a smile. “I’m going through them,and I’m devastated. All the art projectsdid not have Mom in them. It was all thetwo boys and Dad. I’m like, ‘Where amI?’ ft’s a joke in the household howl wasdissed in the art projects.”

Renegotiating the DealIN THE FACE OF WOMEN’S RISING POWERand changing expectations, many menmay experience an existential crisis.When the woman takes on the role of primary breadwinner, it takes away an essential part ofmanymen’s identity: that of theprovider, the role he was trained, tailoredand told to do Since he couldwalk and talk.His heroes are likely all Successful in thisarea. AS long as he is the primary breadwinner, it often excuses whatever he maylack in EQ, for failing to engage in longmeaningful conversations or spend moretimewith the kids. He is too busy killing itat work. So when you take that away, menhave nowhere to turn for guidance. There’sno map through that wilderness.

So that adjustment will not come easily. They can resist and retaliate—andsome do. As the late Whitney Houstonnoted in a 2009 interview with Oprah

Winfrey, it can be toxic when partners arein the same field and the woman emergesas more successful. “I think somewhereinside, something happens to a manwhen a woman has that much control orhas that much fame ... if he doesn’t havehis own,” she said. Alternatively, mencan give up. But there is a third option,in which men rise to the challenge, trying harder in the classroom, competingwith women but in a good way. It meansadapting but also broadening the definition of masculinity to include new skillsand pleasures. Hunting but also cooking.Golf but also child care. We are alwaystoo quick to think masculinity is finished. As far back as the Ig5os, historianStephanie Coontz has pointed out, Lookmagazine announced “the decline of theAmerican male.”

So far, the keepers of popular culturedon’t sound much more optimistic. In2020 the Atlantic magazine announced“the end of men” with a provocative coverstory whose theme was echoed in bookswith titles like Man Down and Manning Upand movies and TV shows that depict mendrowning in their irrelevance—coveragethat raised important issues but dwelledon men’s failure to adapt to a new worldorder. Judging by their tireless efforts tosmooth the way forward, women appearto doubt the ability of men to handle the

changes ahead. Successful women cango to extravagant lengths to conceal thestature gap. One university vice presidentadmitted that when she was dating, shetook pains not to let men walk her to hercar, for fear her BMW might make themfeel inadequate. When men asked whatshe did for a living, she would vaguely sayshe worked in administration. A doctor ata Midwestern hospital said she never puther salary or even her profession in heronline-dating profile. A group of youngwomen in Atlanta devised more-elaborateruses: One entrepreneur owns a car, andher boyfriend does not; when they go onan excursion, she makes some excuse forwhy she’d rather he drive and tosses himthe keys. Another, after staying over at herboyfriend’s apartment, quietly restocks hispantry. Still another buys movie tickets inadvance and says they were given away atwork. AWashington-area software consultant says men even in that well-educatedcity can be put off by her geek credentials,so at the outset she tells romantic prospectsshe teaches music.Married women, meanwhile, go to

great lengths to praise their stay-at-homehusbands for what they do, to suggestthat identity can attach to sources otherthan salary. Activities that might havebeen considered hobbies will achievea higher status. A wife talks about herhusband’s blog as if it were a book project. Heavy meals and showy cooking aregratefully received and complimented,even as many women secretly long for asimple meal of steamed vegetables. Timewith kids, the coaching, the homeworkhelp is exalted. The message: The abilityto generate income is not the only measure of value.But these women may be trying

harder than they need to. There is strongevidence that earnings make a womanmore, not less, desirable as a partner. Astudy published in 2001 by Universityof Texas at Austin psychologist DavidBuss and three colleagues found that injust over five decades, there was a hugejump in the weight men gave to women’searnings when ranking traits importantin a mate and a sharp drop in the valuethey placed on domestic skills. In February 2012, an analysis by the HamiltonProject—a Brookings Institution initiative tracking trends in earnings and lifeprospects—found that marriage rateshave risen over the past four decades forthe highest-earning women. Far from being unwilling to commit, demographerChristine Schwartz has noted, “men are

HOUSEWORK

2.Ohr.

0.5 hr.

ii1965 2010

FOOD PREP ANDCLEANUP

2.7hr.0.9 hr.

• lii1965 2010

CHILD CARE6.4 hr.

2.6hr. •

1965 2020

Marriages in which awoman makes morethana man

The NewAmerican Pocketbook. Within a generation,a majority of workingwives will outearn their husbands

In dual-earner Single women are outearning menIn the majority of U.S. metro areas, single, childless women Intheir 20s make more per dollar than their male peers

THE TOP FIVEcouples,womencontributedan averageof 44% offamily incomein 2008—upfrom 39% in1997

$1.18DALLAS

Women are workingmore paid hoursper week

22.2h$1.11RALEIGH, NC

100%

So

6o

0.6h

1965

$1.09LOS ANGELES

The wealthiest womenare marrying more

-20Percentage-point changeIn women who are married,from 1970 to 2011

More men are pickingup the slack at homeMarried men have almosttripled their weekly domesticcontributions since 1965

Educated women see earnings gainsPercentage change In earnings by educationalattainment, 1979-2010

+12Percentage-point change inthe number of highest-incomewomen who are married,from 1970 to 2011

BACHELOR’S ANDHIGHER

40

NO HIGH SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL SOMEDIPLOMA GRAD COLLEGE

cYç 8%

F’———-8%-18%-31%

38%

Less than1 in 5 married-couplefamilies aresupported bythe husbandalone

In higher education, women are gettingdegrees at a higher rate than men

24%As for childrearing, menhave becomesignificantlymore hands-onover the pastgeneration

20

Percentage of childrenborn to unmarriedmothers

60%

MASTER’SDEGREESCONFERRED5% 41%

1960 2020

BACHELOR’SDEGREESCONFERRED

Husbands are lesslikely to determinehow money is spentWho is most likely to makethe final decision abouthousehold finances when...

Sources: Dureau of LHbRr StaIisIics; Families& WRrk InSIIIRI,; the HamilIor, Project at theBroRkings instltutiRn; Current POpulatioSSurvey; National Vital Statistics Reports;analysis by Reach Advisors of the AmericanCommunity Survey, Public-use microdata samplefrom 2008-2010; National Center for EducationStatistics; Pew Research Center

O111,1‘87 ‘90 ‘05 ‘09

Women outearn men part timebut still lag full timeWomen’s

SOCIETY I THE RICHER SEX

increasingly looking for partners whowill pull their own weight economicallyin marriage” and are willing to competefor them.They would be foolish not to. Research

by the Families Sc Work Institute showsthat fathers today spend much more timewith their children than fathers once didand that fathers in dual-earner couplesfeel greater work-family conflict thanmothers. Men may come to understandthat life as a co-earner or secondary earnerwill give them more time for hobbies, leisure and children or for work they findfulfilling rather than lucrative. “Whenculture runs up against economic trends,usually economic trends win out,” sayseconomist Gary Becker, meaning thateven if men had been brought up to feelthey should be breadwinners, pragmatismwill prevail if their wife turns out tohave the better job prospects.As for women, with success and inde

pendence come uncomfortable discoveries that may test some cherished feministprinciples. Up to now, feminists haveargued that breadwinning—for men—should carry no special privilege, thatmale earners were wrong to think theirpaycheck bought them out of sortingsocks. Nowwomen are having to askwhatprivileges, if any, their own breadwinningbuys. One woman, whom I’ll call Rose,struggled with the balance of economicpower after her husband, whom I’ll callMichael, lost his job. Michael was doingasmuch housework as possible—cooking,cleaning, shopping, litter-box emptying—and Rose was working harder than ever.Was she entitled to sign up for travelwhenever she needed to? When Michaeldid get a new job, Rose still earned twice asmuch as he did. Should she continue to lethim do the bulk of the housework? Orwasshe obliged to make sure it was 50-50? Eventhough he was a better cook and cleaner?While he was still unemployed, Mi

chael took their cat to the vet and approvedan expensive procedure without askingRose. “I was kind of upset about it,” shesays. “I don’t know if I would have expected him to ask my permission, but at leasttell me before spending it. I did kind of feellike, You just spent a bunch of my moneywithout telling me.”More than one woman had a hard time

embracing the idea that her earnings werenot entirely hers. One lawyer inWashington is married to a consultant who tookthe slow track, with her wholeheartedapproval. Even given their careful egalitarianism, the wife acknowledges secret,

34

almost illicit proprietary feelings abouther income. “I have friends where it’s theman who’s earning more money, and thewoman says to me, ‘He gets really upsetwhen I want to redecorate the kitchen,’and I’m supposed to be very sympatheticto the woman because I’m a woman,” shesays. “But I also understand the husband’spoint of view much better than I wouldlike to. I understand the feeling that ‘I’veearned it.” The lawyer is aware that feeling more entitled to the money undermines the sharing inherent in a maritalpartnership. “If I caught myself feeling[that way], I would censor it, but I thinkit’s there—it’s there from the culture.”Already these questions and tensions

reach down into the next generation, asgirls hear a new message about their future responsibilities. This goes beyondthe girls-rule-and-you-can-grow-up-to-be-whatever-you-want message. Supportinga family is a far greater burden than justsupporting oneself, and it is now one thatwomen and men are equally likely to bear.As the number of single-parent familiesgrows—41°/o of babies are born to singlewomen—youngwomen are acutely awarethat they may be the sole earner in theirhousehold. Even women with boyfriends

YES NO who are prepared to step back, talce the• slow track and stay at home are not neces

sarily feeling empowered by it. One young• • woman was both gratified that her boy

friend was willing to move for her careerand leery ofgetting “boxed in as the higherearner,” which sounded to her like “a lotmore work and a lot less play.”

• • But in many families, there is a newrealization setting in. The notion of per-

• • fect equality in all tasks, work, wagesand power was never realistic; men andwomen, especiallywhen they form households, are complex creatures with mdi-

• vidual gifts and needs. It would be nice toimagine a world where employers make

• • it possible for all mothers and fathers towork reasonable hours. But some jobs willalways require more than eight hours a

• • day. For a woman, like a man, reachingthe highest levels of achievement may depend on a spouse willing to downshift.

B B What’s new is that the decisions aboutwho dials back will be based on personal

• • aptitude and what works best for eachcouple rather than outdated notions ofwhich sex is better fitted to what.

Adaptedfrom theforthcoming book TheRicher Sex by Liza Mundy. To be publishedby Simon & Schuster Inc. Copyright © 2012by Liza Mundy. Printed by permission

TIME March 26, 2012

Do something different with this year’s IRA, with theexperienced, active management of T. Rowe Price.100% of our low-cost Retirement Funds beat their 5-yearpeer averages as of 12/31/117 in a variety of challenging markets.Results will vary for other periods. Past performance cannotguaranteefuture results. Fund returns have been affected bymarket volatility and are negative for certain periods.

V

ii

100% ofour RETIREMENTFUNDS BEAT THEIR 5-YEARLIPPER AVERAGE as of 12/31/11

Do something different with this year’s IRA,at T. Rowe Price.

Quiz:Who’s GotThe PowerlnYourHousehold?Score one point for every yes answer

I’m more likely than myspouse or partner to

1. Pay the bill in arestaurant

2. Splurge on somethingfor myselfwithoutconsulting him or her

3. Veto a major expense

4. Plan a college-savingsstrategy

5. Set pay for a babysitter or other householdemployee

6. Consult a retIrementcalculator

7. Have mynameona credit-card account orcartitle

8. Open a separatebank account

9. Consider a jobthat would require a move

10. Manage ourinvestments

ANSWER SCALE A high score(7—10) suggests you’re thedominant economic force In yourhome. A low score (0—3) Indicatesthat your spouse takes thelead. A score in the middle (4—6)shows a balance of power

Find the right Retirement4 Fund for your IRA.

I!I - 1.888.744.5407

TOTAL YESANSWERS

T.RowefticetINVEST WITH CONFIDENCE

Request a prospectus or summary prospectus; each includes investment objectives, risks, fees, expenses, and other informationthat you should read and consider carefully before investing.The Retirement Funds are not guaranteed at any time, including at or after the target date (when investors turn 65). The funds’investment strategies change over time from growth, to a balance of growth and income, and finally to more of a focus on incomeand principal stability during retirement. The funds’ substantial allocation to equities both prior to and after the target date canresult in greater volatility.*Based on cumulative total return, 6 of 12(50%), 11 of 12(62%), 12 of 12, and 12 of 12 of the Retirement Funds for individual investors outperformed their Lipper average for the 1-, 3-, and 5-yearand since-inception periods ended 12/31/11, respectively. The Retirement 2010, 2020, 2030, 2040, and Income Funds began operations on 9/30/02; the 2005, 2015, 2025, and 2035 Funds beganoperations on 2/29/04; the 2045 Fund began operatiens on 5/31/05; and the 2050 and 2055 Funds began operations on 12/31/06. (Source for data: Lipper Inc.)T. Rowe Price Investment Services, Inc., Distributor. 1RA080616