Reply #1: Kicked and Recommended.

[JDPriestly]

This is the rub:

Even professional women in two-parent families are more likely to carry the greater domestic burden, working full-time but choosing the "mommy track." And women who work as full-time, nonpaid caregivers for children, aging parents or others lose an average of $650,000 in lifetime wages and retirement benefits.

Social Security retirement payments are based on 40 years of average earnings (with the lowest five years removed). This means that years spent working part-time or caring for family members full-time results in significantly smaller Social Security checks. In 2008, the average annual Social Security income received by women 65 years and older was $11,377, compared to $14,822 for men.

Same link as the OP.

Women sacrifice career and sometimes even education for their families, for their husbands and children. When a man moves up in his company and moves from one place to another in order to take the promotion, the entire family moves. The woman leaves her job and sometimes cannot find another one. Rarely does a woman get a better job after leaving a good one to follow her husband.

There are exceptional families in which the tables are turned and the husband's career is the second priority. But most often, if someone has to look for a new job in a new city or even just take a child to the doctor, it's the mother, not the father. And, of course, it's the mother who stays home at least a few weeks or months with the new baby if at all possible. It's the mother who is nursing and takes breaks to pump her milk. And it's the mother in our culture who is most likely to outlive the father.

Cutting Medicare and Social Security will disproportionately hurt women. We can't let the Republicans do this. They refused to pass the ERA Amendment. They fought and ridiculed women's lib all the way. And now this. When will Republican women figure out what their Party is really about? It's a Stag Party at which women are not welcome.