Against Happiness

Against Happiness

Women are less happy than we used to be. But given the state of the world, perhaps if we had a little more worry and a little less happy, we’d be better off.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

This just in: according to two new studies measuring the happiness index, women are less happy than we used to be and markedly more disgruntled than men. Speculation has been that this study confirms what most of my friends and I experience as the current state of postfeminist feminism. Between working and our responsibilities at home, not only are we trying to have it all but we find ourselves having to do it all, and we’re pissed off. True enough. But I believe the entire nature of this research is suspect and is asking the wrong question anyway. Why all this quantification of happiness? Is happiness a value that deserves so much attention and study?

What about those of us whose goal was never happiness to begin with? For the record, I hate happiness. I love melancholic novels, depressed poets and pessimistic prognosticators. I like sad songs and weepy movies. I’m a sentimental drunk. My idea of a good time is drinking a double espresso while reading Death in Venice. Venice is my idea of a rollicking-good-time town. I was never a shiny happy person, although I have been both shiny and happy at the same time (to achieve this I once performed an act that we have been informed never happens in Iran, or even in our own military for that matter). Happy meals, happy faces; don’t worry, be happy. Given the state of the world, perhaps if we had a little more worry and a little less happy, we’d be better off.

Furthermore, I don’t count “the ability to be happy” among the attributes I value–although there are many qualities I find laudable and even pleasurable. I admire the steadfastness of Aung San Suu Kyi, the prolificacy of Stephen King, the single-mindedness of the Dalai Lama, the insight of Susan Sontag, the rakishness of Clive Owen. And hey, I am in awe at the unfunniness of Dane Cook: it is so complete, it’s astonishing. But I can’t think of anyone who’s ever won a Nobel, a Pulitzer or even a booby prize for happiness.

That today’s women don’t find doing laundry and dusting particularly pleasurable pursuits shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone. I doubt these chores made my grandmother ecstatic, but a convincing argument can be made that she did feel satisfaction in the completion of the tasks because she believed she was contributing to the greater good of her family in post-Depression era America.

Is it any wonder we feel discontented when we’ve lost that powerful motivator–a sense of working toward a shared future? In this winner-take-all society, we toil for companies that don’t value us, for families we don’t get to spend enough time with to actually enjoy, in a country with an Administration that purports to value freedom but not our individual freedoms.

I don’t mean to be a killjoy. I like vegging out as much as anyone. In fact, one of my recent happinesses was sitting down on Sunday nights to watch The Sopranos, a series with, it’s worth noting, a central theme that bemoans the loss of belonging to something bigger than oneself, even if that something is a crime syndicate.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of this research is not the study itself but that the results were published on the front page of the business section of the New York Times. Surely this is no happy accident. Some savvy editor knows that advertisers eagerly await this kind of information so they can sell us products and services that promise to deliver a little happily ever after. Or maybe I’ve just been watching a little too much of AMC’s Mad Men, which is just the kind of downer entertainment I thoroughly enjoy.

Support independent journalism that does not fall in line

Even before February 28, the reasons for Donald Trump’s imploding approval rating were abundantly clear: untrammeled corruption and personal enrichment to the tune of billions of dollars during an affordability crisis, a foreign policy guided only by his own derelict sense of morality, and the deployment of a murderous campaign of occupation, detention, and deportation on American streets. 

Now an undeclared, unauthorized, unpopular, and unconstitutional war of aggression against Iran has spread like wildfire through the region and into Europe. A new “forever war”—with an ever-increasing likelihood of American troops on the ground—may very well be upon us.  

As we’ve seen over and over, this administration uses lies, misdirection, and attempts to flood the zone to justify its abuses of power at home and abroad. Just as Trump, Marco Rubio, and Pete Hegseth offer erratic and contradictory rationales for the attacks on Iran, the administration is also spreading the lie that the upcoming midterm elections are under threat from noncitizens on voter rolls. When these lies go unchecked, they become the basis for further authoritarian encroachment and war. 

In these dark times, independent journalism is uniquely able to uncover the falsehoods that threaten our republic—and civilians around the world—and shine a bright light on the truth. 

The Nation’s experienced team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers understands the scale of what we’re up against and the urgency with which we have to act. That’s why we’re publishing critical reporting and analysis of the war on Iran, ICE violence at home, new forms of voter suppression emerging in the courts, and much more. 

But this journalism is possible only with your support.

This March, The Nation needs to raise $50,000 to ensure that we have the resources for reporting and analysis that sets the record straight and empowers people of conscience to organize. Will you donate today?

Ad Policy
x