I read Wednesday Martin's commentary in the New York Times last Sunday and thought the "glam moms" she studied made a great choice (and were also extremely lucky) ("Poor Little Rich Women," May 17)! For too long, women have worshipped at the altar of full-time, outside the home, demanding jobs. It's interesting that many women with "advanced degrees from prestigious universities" are using their education and talent exclusively at home and in the community.
Regarding the "bonus" some husbands give their wives that Susan Reimer (and Ms. Martin) sneer at ("NYC's glam moms get paid for performance," May 20), it's nothing more than what anyone would receive working for a progressive organization. What I find most attractive about this lifestyle is those marriages are true partnerships. What's wrong with that?
Furthermore, in her anthropological study, Ms. Martin never once discussed the personal incomes these women are receiving from trust funds or inheritance. Don't forget wealthy men usually marry wealthy women. Just how did these glam moms pay for all those expensive, advanced degrees, by the way?
Not very long ago, women stayed home and devoted their abilities to running a home, taking care of children and working for the good of the communities. It's alarming Ms. Martin experienced "culture shock" when she encountered this arrangement taking place on New York's Upper East Side. For a lot of women who've been in the workforce all their lives, struggling to keep a job and at the same time hoping to find some semblance of home life, these glam moms may have the right idea. Frankly, their marital, financial and cultural lifestyles sound pretty good to me!
Rosalind Ellis Heid, Baltimore