Emma Thompson recently stirred a lot of supercilious defensiveness when she said, “You can’t be a great mum and keep working all the time.”

The programmatic limited minds of the go-along women’s movement are offended by motherhood.  They don’t mind being mothers, but they feel that it is a secondary job.

Perhaps because Emma is worth fifty million dollars she has the option to take a year off from work.  Maybe other women can’t afford that luxury.  But the problem is that feminists don’t respect that luxury.  They don’t understand that motherhood can be superior to mindless commercial jobs, that bringing up a child can be more essential to a successful society than being a routine lawyer, an accountant, or an actress.

When I was a teenager, my mother didn’t work.  I still had my problems with her, but I secretly loved the fact that she was a stay-at-home mother.  My dad could afford it, so I had that luxury. 

I welcomed my mom’s opening the front door for me when I came home from school.  Even the times when I was bad and she slapped my face.  Her slap was warm.  I blushed.  Her presence was better than the emptiness of a house where I felt that my mother didn’t care enough for me to stay home.

Quasi-socialist Hillary Clinton feels that it takes a village.  It takes a village to make a child feel lonely and cause him to wander around empty streets on the verge of anger.

Unfortunately, our progressive universe doesn’t find the space for mothers to stay home.  That does not mean that we have to rationalize and pretend that working moms are more precious than stay-at-home moms.

Emma Thompson may have the luxury of doing what other moms can’t and taking a break from the bustling world.   She is still setting a good example for others to follow if they are lucky enough to do so.

To fight with Emma’s work schedule is to hate yourself.  It is to admit jealousy of a lifestyle you are not successful enough to follow and that you do not have the emotional resonance to pursue.