Gender equality all way been since time immemorial a vital goal that the United States of America and the world at large has really fought to achieve. Anne-Marie Slaughter in the ‘Can We All Have It All’ argues that the United States of America got a lot of unfinished business to attend to towards achieving equality between the genders. She partially appreciates the efforts towards achieving equality but however questions the correctness of the equality-judgment platform that the United States of America is using and the context and perspective in which to understand and see equality. Slaughter seeks to explain the reason as to why the workplace equality is publicly perceived to be outmoded (Slaughter, 1,2).

Second, she endeavors to outline the areas in and within the society that need to be changed in order to advocate and embrace the long-time-sought-for equality order. Third, the public policy maker is keen to candidly point out the importance of transitioning to a humanist movement from a feminist movement having turned down a high profile job in favor of her family. In her view, the measure of women-men equality still lags in the number of women who hold high strata positions. To her this perception is not any enough to substantiate equality. In fact she deems such a public perception as “only half the real equality”. She goes on to underline that equality is nothing to do with measuring a woman on a man’s terms, Ah! Not all. Slaughter cites that equality has a bigger meaning than that. To her it means much greater institutional changes (Slaughter, 2, 4).

The work place is a pivotal place of interest for Slaughter as she seeks to explain equality. She observes that the best companies highly hold caregiving. According to her, saying that family comes first is nowhere close too meaning that work comes second. She argues that workers who purpose to be home are arguably more productive, with breadwinners who happen to be caregivers too are much flexible and got quite a vast diversity of experience. Of interest too in her view is the public policy. Slaughter underscores the need for governments and authorities to put in place policies that consider and recognize the balance and equal value between caregiving and breadwinning, giving both an equal chance and importance. For instance, she upholds the need to support family health and not just women only. The law should be there to provide universal care and attention cutting across with equality for both males and females (Slaughter, 3).

Third, Slaughter has a word for equality based on culture. She cites the importance for the society to much re-socialize men. A man who chooses to be a caregiver hangs his manhood on the balance against a woman who is respected as a caregiver, a breadwinner or both, for such women are often open to more choices in many societies. Slaughter encourages that men value their female counterparts and seize the culture perception that by default encourages a fight and scramble for the professional ladder. On the other hand she cites that women should completely seize to judge and gauge the success of their male counterparts by the professional post they hold in the workplace. For her it is just okay and cool to encourage boys to take either of breadwinning or caregiving (Slaughter, 4).

In a nutshell, Anne-Marie Slaughter is keen to show the reason behind the outmoded workplace equality public perception. Second, she shows the vital areas in the society that need to change in order for equality to be embrace, and lastly she shows why it is important to change from the feminist movement to the humanist movement. She sees all this as a family issue but not a women’s thing, supporting equality for all (Slaughter, 4).

Reference