I suspect there are some things we just accept to be true, never question, never think about, that we’ve maintained since childhood. Here is a horrible set of assumptions: if a non-white woman is pushing a white baby in a stroller, she is hired help; if a white woman is pushing a non-white baby in a stroller, that baby is adopted. Believe me, I feel grimy too. What does this tell us about race and class?

The image of both women, the employer and the employee, working towards a common goal of economic independence, of taking care of their families, almost seems noble. It almost seems like the arrangement is beneficial for both sides. Each is sacrificing time with their children in favor of some other, and in a lot of cases that other is a better future for their children. And yet, these parallel lines have a large gap between them. This “…does not bring them together in the way that second-wave feminists in affluent countries once liked to imagine—as sisters and allies struggling to achieve common goals. Instead, they come together as mistress and maid, employer and employee, across a great divide of privilege and opportunity.” (Ehrenreich, Hochschild 32)

And here we have a different conversation. Let’s talk intersectionality.  

Intersectionality is the idea that things like racism, sexism, transphobia, homophobia, ableism, classism, etc are interconnected and must be examined as such. Intersectional feminism aims to examine the experiences of women of all backgrounds, rather than those of only the affluent, white, ablebodied, cisgendered, heterosexual woman. It also recognizes that what might be good for some women, might not be good for others. While both the employer and employee are leaving their children in the care of others, it is with a much different result.

Through this lens we can begin to look for solutions. Ways to reduce “the ‘care deficit’ that…pulls migrants from the Third World and postcommunist nations [and the] poverty [that] pushes them.” (Ehrenreich, Hochschild 28) Would things changed if male partners increasing did their fair share, and thus made help less necessary? Or if women weren’t pressured to do it all, and didn’t have to juggle things? Would this just take away the opportunities these migrants had to provide economically? Could we find ways to allow them an earning potential close to home? But then again the question remains, who would be the hired help? The article makes it clear that if it isn’t one group of people, it’s another.