...when I'm not hovering over it like an overprotective helicopter mother.

Much like parenting children, parenting novels apparently require a little distance from time to time. I abandoned the Gigantic Novelistic Project (for now) to excellent effect, and am now engrossed in a 12,000 word journey through an imagined 70s-80s sci-fi, feminist, evangelical landscape of bizarre and amusing proportions. Who knew?

Just didn't want you to think that all my...whining...meant that I had abandoned my writing. To the contrary, focusing on standardized testing (see: article today in the WSJ -- can't link for non-subscribers -- titled, "School-Test Backlash Grows," wherein the columnist shows I am part of a revolution), criminal law and the demands of kindergarten and fifth grade have distracted me sufficiently from my low authorial self-esteem such that I've been able to knock out 1000 words per day of questionable value without even trying. Sometimes I'm barely conscious, when writing. It's an effective approach.

Sadly, it turns out I can't drink wine and write at the same time. I can't tell you how disappointing this is, because I had hoped that writing novels would be a relaxing hobby on the order of taking a bath, sipping wine, and reading arguably pornographic novels written for soccer moms (50 Shades of Grey, anyone?). But no. Writing novels is more akin to researching new and frightening areas of criminal law in cases I might actually lose (which is most of them, to be honest). How unfortunate. I can write novels while drinking coffee, but they come out a little like this entry: jittery and wordy and full of sidetracks and segues. 

The best time to write novels is in the eye of the storm, between coffee and wine, at 2:00. The bus comes at 3:00. It turns out I can write 1000 words between 2 and 3 as long as I don't care how good they are.

Not for nothing, I think it's odd that jurors keep falling asleep during the Roger Clemens perjury trial. Also in the WSJ today. Sorry, non-subscribers.

Wow, how about those Greeks?

Gay marriage...yeah, carry on, Xanga.

The killing rage has been stuffed back down into the basement of my subconscious, where it is busily drinking rage-empowerment juice, just so you know. You're forewarned.

I am completely worn out.

Today I spent the day at the zoo with kindergartners, looking for animals that start with each letter of the alphabet. That's 26 animals, if you didn't know. It was hot. And tiring.

After school I had to take my daughter to her talent show practice, because the kindergarten year ends with a talent show. In the meantime, I had to help my son prepare his oral report and costume for the famous American presentation on Wednesday. Oh, and we had to get out field trip clothes for both boys for tomorrow, plan sack lunches, fill out releases and health insurance forms and permission slips, order school supplies and spirit clothes and pay for a spot at the graduation party.

Bought my daughter some new shoes, finally. The dog just chewed one to pieces. Nice.

Tomorrow is double field trips, final oral presentation practice, baseball practice and talent show practice. Wednesday is the presentation and a well-child checkup for one kid. Thursday is coffee with my lobbying friend and then a choir concert for 5th grade. Friday is Field Day x 3...a birthday party/sleepover, a theater arts production and my mother is coming. Sunday is my 17th wedding anniversary but that's a non-event because Mr. OBL is out of town. Next week is portfolio day x 3.

So luckily, we don't have too much going on and it's easy to relax in the evenings.

Just yelled at the kid and the dog. Kid still not sleeping, even though it's nearly 10, because she won't go to sleep in my bed unless I'm in it. Her sleep issues are beginning to create problems. If I had more energy I would try to do something about them.

I've never heard anyone talk about "crimmigration," but I'm enjoying listening to someone talk about it now. Who knew? It's the convergence of criminal and immigration law over the last decade. I run into a lot of crimmigration issues in my usual criminal practice, but I try to refer that stuff out. Too complicated.

Well, not to pieces, exactly. She can still wear the shoe. It doesn't look like a brand new shoe anymore, which is extremely aggravating, but whatever.

Maybe I should watch some Harry Potter.

I could write a flowers-and-hearts post about my three beautiful, healthy, magnificent children and how fulfilled and fortunate and amazed I feel because I'm a mother. It would read like a gratitude journal, filled with rainbows and unicorns. I'm pretty sure I've done that a few thousand times before.

I'm not going to do it today because: a) I assume anyone who reads my blog knows my children are the undisputed center of my world, and I'm fulfilled and fortunate and amazed to be the mother of such beautiful, healthy, magnificent creatures; and b) it's Mother's Day, and I'm a mother, so I can do whatever I want. 

Instead I'm going to write about the separate but equal opportunities in the workforce for mothers, in response to several things: 1) a spread in the Wall Street Journal recently which posed the question, "What's Holding Women Back?" for about eight pages without once mentioning the demands of children, community or family; 2) our recent local school board elections which prominently featured mothers with resumes primarily stressing women's sororities, Junior League, church roles and school volunteer commitments; and 3) the oft-repeated 'gratitude' message given to mothers like myself who protest loudly about the lack of true intellectual opportunities for mothers, coupled with the message that there are appropriate outlets for women, like church, charity and crafts.

Nothing I say in this post is intended to denigrate mothers who prefer the traditionally appropriate outlets for women, like church, charity and crafts, or those who are completely and entirely fulfilled by their roles as mothers, homemakers and homeschool teachers, if those roles are sufficient and satisfying for them.

I've blogged endlessly of my frustration with trying to balance some interesting and fulfilling role in the traditionally demanding, male profession of my background and training (law) with the requirements and pressures of modern motherhood. You can probably imagine that I don't restrict my discussion of these issues to my blog. I like to drive everyone in my real life as crazy as possible with my constant reminders about the plight of mothers in the professions, even in 2012. I live in a conservative, religious, staid place where few women work (unless compelled by financial circumstances) and even fewer women speak out about politics or gender roles or express any controversial opinions. This makes it difficult to find a receptive audience. I don't look for one, generally; I go into any discussion assuming the women sitting around the table consider themselves as having made a choice or choices, and congratulate themselves on doing it in a responsible and unselfish manner; i.e., serving their men and children as God intended. From there I consider it a huge victory if even one person can turn the mental kaleidoscope for a few seconds and see that making a choice is not always the same as caving in to a dominant cultural message.

The other thing about where I live is that nearly every woman I know is well-educated. Many have resumes far, far better than my own. These women who choose to embrace a traditional feminine role were valedictorians at Tulane, law graduates at Stanford, magna cum laude graduates of Princeton, engineers and doctors and accountants and lawyers and architects. All, like me, were raised with the notion that "women can do anything," and women should accumulate as many qualifications for work as possible, in case the man they choose to support them turns out to be a cad or dies prematurely without life insurance.

Then they had babies and dropped out of the workforce to compete vicariously through the accomplishments of their children.

But competing vicariously through one's children doesn't soak up enough hours in the day, particularly if you're a Stanford graduate accustomed to drinking a lot of coffee and working at a killing pace. Especially if your male champion is successful enough to pay someone to scrub your toilets and make your beds.

Women who need more than the role of wife and mother in my community are encouraged to pursue success in different venues from men. Successful mothers in my community become president of the Junior League, or they become active alumni of their college sororities, or they become lifetime achievement members of the PTA. These (unpaid, uniquely feminine) jobs become resume blotters for school board elections and charity positions, places where mothers can become reasonably successful and/or powerful within the community, within the realm of women.

When I first started thinking about this phenomenon Martha Stewart leapt to mind; a woman who crossed into a man-like career by using traditional areas of feminine success and involvement. Another woman who leaps to mind is Sarah Palin. Say what you will about Sarah, she took distinctly feminine positions (beauty queen, hockey mom, PTA, what-have-you) and used them to get herself elected to an office. How sad that her detractors all over the country focused on her unsuitability for public office...let's face it, being a beauty queen, soccer mom, PTA president and sorority alumnus might be taxing and difficult, but it isn't the same as being a well-respected businessman in a traditionally male career. I mean, she's not that smart, is she? 

I have no idea whether she's smart or not and don't get me wrong...I'm not a Palin supporter. My point is just that getting into politics via non-smart career options is the norm in my community and others all over the country, for mothers. Smartness is not the traditional realm of mothers. Sororities and crafts and church and charities are the traditional realms of mothers, and yes, I agree with you, some women who do these things are extremely smart. But it's not quite the same, is it? As being a doctor or lawyer or accountant or counsel to the President of the United States?

Is it?

It's separate, but equal, you might say. It's equally successful and difficult and important to be the head of the silent auction for Ronald McDonald House as it is to own your own architectural firm. But separate.

Here's an infamous quote from Plessy v. Ferguson, a landmark Supreme Court decision supporting the decisions of states to segregate blacks and whites in the years following Reconstruction, a decision which has become an infamous national embarrassment:

"We consider the underlying fallacy of the plaintiff's argument to consist in the assumption that the enforced separation of the two races stamps the colored race with a badge of inferiority. If this be so, it is not by reason of anything found in the act, but solely because the colored race chooses to put that construction upon it."

Justice Henry Billings Brown, writing for the majority of justices on the Court, meant to say, "there's nothing wrong with separate but equal facilities for segments of our population. It doesn't mean one segment is inferior to the other. If someone feels it means that, it's just his/her own problem."

Indeed. When mothers (and occasionally men, if any engage me on this topic, which most try not to) tell me to get involved in spheres of traditional female influence, instead of beating my head against areas of male dominance, they're embracing this idea, I think. They're embracing the fact that sororities and charities and church and PTA are the separate but equal areas of community life mothers are permitted to make their own. They're allowed to succeed in those (unpaid, part-time) spheres; they can even occasionally translate them into political or financial success in the larger world of men (Martha, Sarah). If I find those spheres...inferior, somehow...if I chafe at being restricted to those particular choices...it's solely because I've chosen to put a negative construction upon it. 

I often think about these ideas with respect to my own daughter. Mothers of daughters these days know what I mean when I say that girls have double the extracurricular options as boys. Few boys go in for ballet AND sports. Few boys feel the need to prove themselves in traditionally masculine extracurriculars, like football and scouting and even music, and ALSO need to develop the traditional feminine skills of tumbling, dancing, cooking and sewing.

Is it that girls have double the options or double the requirements? A girl who hopes to succeed in a man's world one day had better learn to compete with the boys, as early as possible. She had better get busy learning to throw a wicked softball, developing her biceps and studying math. But if she has children, she must also be prepared to move into the career options for mothers...which means she must also take on a big role in a college sorority, maybe become a cheerleader, a dancer, a beauty queen. 

She must do both, because motherhood is the branch in the road which will determine which skills she will need. And who can predict, at six, whether or not she'll become a mother?

Happy Mother's Day, Xangans. And thanks for listening.