When Linda Hirshman wrote about how “elite” (read: college-educated) women who stay at home with their kids frustrate feminism, it got quite a response from you all. We continue a series of profiles of moms and whether or not they fit her profile - and whether they think feminism is dead in their own lives. Tonight, Christine K.

I have a BA in geology from Macalester College in St. Paul, MN.  I am 31 with two children - one will be three in February and one will be one in April.

When I chose my major, I was thinking I would go to grad school, get my PhD and enter the world of academia.  When I graduated, I had burned out on school and went into the work force as an entry-level computer programmer. This sort of happened by serendipity, by way of the senior slump and a boyfriend who was a CS major.

I have not gotten an advanced degree, although I have kicked the idea around a lot and actually made a couple false starts at getting my MBA (the first was about four years after I graduated from college).When you graduated from your most recent institution, how hopeful were you of succeeding? What were your lofty goals?
I was extremely determined to be "successful".  I got an entry-level job as a programmer at a growing software company and worked my way through the ranks extremely quickly.  My long-time goal was to either start my own software/consulting company, or become CIO (chief info. officer) for a large retail company (like the Gap or Neiman Marcus).

Are you working now? What are you doing?
I am starting up a home-based business after about two years of not working at all.  When my older child was born, I wasn't working full-time (I was doing some consulting) and I didn't go back to work until she was about 4-1/2 months old.  I quit again when she was just over a year old and haven't worked since.  I am now trying to do something knitting-related and have been working to sell my designs to various magazines.  This is something I've chosen because I love to knit and it fits well with the stay-at-home-mom lifestyle.

And your partner?
My husband works as a consultant for a non-qualified benefits consulting company.  His income is just slightly less than our combined incomes were when we met.  When we first met, he was making slightly more than I was, but his income grew much quicker than mine did from there.

Do you enjoy working?
I don't ever want to work in the corporate world again.  I am really enjoying my knitting business, but it will never come close to replacing the income that I could've had if I had continued on my original career path and hadn't had kids (or had short maternity leaves).

If you are staying at home or working part-time, what factored into that decision?
When I went back to work after my daughter was born, I was really happy to get back to the office at first but after doing it for awhile (and being stuck in a job that I didn't really like), I couldn't wait to quit again.  I had a nanny to take care of Sydney since if I wasn't going to be with her, I was going to have the best possible care I could find.  It got depressing to be working just to pay the nanny and fill up my 401k.

Do you feel satisfied with your "choices"?
Absolutely, although it would be nice to get more of a break from the kids sometimes.  It's not like a regular job where you can leave the office at the end of the day and be done with it (although corporate jobs are becoming less and less like that these days anyway).

Household work: who does what? Do you feel that each partner contributes fairly?
We split things pretty evenly.  My husband cooks and does most of the laundry.  He gets Sydney up and takes her to preschool.  He entertains the kids when he gets home at night so I can knit.  We split bathing the kids, changing diapers (he does it when he's home, I do it when he's not, and it's about even that way), feeding the kids.  I do the dishes and nurse Owen 20 times each night (or at least that's what it seems like!).  The other cleaning gets done by both of us when we get sick of living in chaos or have people coming over.

How many times have you changed jobs, compared to your partner?
I have only had three different jobs since I graduated from college.  My husband has had a new job just about every year (or every other year).

Say a little about your "social power" relative to your partner.
I think that we are amazingly equal.  My husband really respects how hard taking care of the kids all day is, and he doesn't pull the old "well I've been working hard at the office all day, so I should get to relax when I come home" card.  He tries as much as possible to give me a break when he gets home.  We come from pretty similar (poor) financial backgrounds.  When we got married, I actually had quite a bit more money due to some very lucrative stock options I had from the software company I was working for, and I paid off some debt that he had.  I think that this helped even out the balance a little bit, even though he's made significantly more money than me for most of our marriage.

In your opinion, why aren't there more women in "executive suites" and in other powerful positions? Do you ever imagine yourself there?
I think that it's extremely hard to have two people in a marriage who are both extremely successful (as in, executive committee member successful), particularly if they have kids.  It takes so much time and energy to be at that level of business.  Honestly, I think there is somewhat of a trade-off between a position of power and having a family.  Unless you're going to have kids that you never see or have any part in raising, it's really difficult not to have one parent at home when the other is extremely successful.  Success at that level involves lots of travel, lots of extra hours, schmoozing with clients and peers... 

Before having kids, I could easily imagine myself in the boardroom.  Now, I have no desire to be there. I have better things to do with my time and, honestly, this family doesn't need more money.  I also wonder if there aren't more women in the highest positions because they don't want to be.  It takes a certain kind of personality and a serious time commitment to make that kind of success for yourself, and I know that as I've gotten older my priorities have really changed.  I know I don't have the stomach for the politics and stress that go along with an executive position.  I'm probably not alone.

Hirshman says, "The family -- with its repetitious, socially invisible, physical tasks -- is a necessary part of life, but it allows fewer opportunities for full human flourishing than public spheres like the market or the government.
This less-flourishing sphere is not the natural or moral responsibility only of women. Therefore, assigning it to women is unjust. Women assigning it to themselves is equally unjust. To paraphrase, as Mark Twain said, "A man who chooses not to read is just as ignorant as a man who cannot read.""
My reaction to this is, if the family is so terrible, why have one?  It is not a necessary part of life.  Nobody needs to get married or have kids. It's not a requirement.  If you think your flourishing needs to be done in the public eye, stay single and childless!  Does this woman have children?

"Never figure out where the butter is. "Where's the butter?" Nora Ephron's legendary riff on marriage begins. In it, a man asks the question when looking directly at the butter container in the refrigerator. "Where's the butter?" actually means butter my toast, buy the butter, remember when we're out of butter. Next thing you know you're quitting your job at the law firm because you're so busy managing the butter."
Actually, I agree with this, but I'd never marry a man who asked where the butter is...

"Have a baby. Just don't have two... A second kid pressures the mother's organizational skills, doubles the demands for appointments, wildly raises the cost of education and housing, and drives the family to the suburbs. But cities, with their Chinese carryouts and all, are better for working mothers."
This may be somewhat true, except with us, the second child moved us from the 'burbs to the city.  I think this has more to do with your particular family values, and how you want your children to be raised, than by the actual number of children...

"what [the NYT brides] do is ... bad for society, and is widely imitated... This last is called the "regime effect," and it means that even if women don't quit their jobs for their families, they think they should and feel guilty about not doing it."
Where do I even start with this one?  Wasn't the whole idea of the feminist movement to give women options that they didn't have before?  The option to have a great job, the option to move into the boardroom if so desired, or the option to raise our kids ourselves and not have strangers do it.  I do think it's unfortunate that the right is pushing the stay-at-home-mom model as the moral high-ground, because not everyone has the option.  But criticizing those of us who do choose to raise our own kids is not the way to fix that...  I think that every family should be allowed to choose for themselves what works best for their particular situation.  Period.