Musk's white privilege

By Shin Freedman The iconic image of young John F. Kennedy Jr. peeking out from beneath the Resolute Desk as his father, President John F.

Kennedy, worked in the Oval Office became a symbol of the 1960s — a decade filled with hope, ambition and the promise of a brighter future for America. Contrast that with a recent scene: Elon Musk, at age 53, bringing his four-year-old son to the Oval Office during an important governmental meeting. It was an odd sight.



What was this child doing there? Musk is not John F. Kennedy. Could he not find a babysitter? Surely, as the richest man in the world, he could afford a nanny.

This reminded me of when Sen. Tammy Duckworth brought her newborn daughter to Congress to celebrate the ruling that allowed a baby on the chamber floor. The child, bundled in a winter coat while indoors and picking his nose like any typical child, was certainly adorable.

But I couldn’t help but wonder — what was Musk trying to project with his public display? As a working parent, I recall times I struggled with child care, sometimes bringing my child to work, feeling guilt and anxiety about professional repercussions. Many working mothers face this reality daily, often unable to find and afford a babysitter last minute. But for Musk, that was certainly not the issue.

So, what was the reasoning behind this spectacle? One possibility is that Musk wanted to soften his image as a devoted father of 14. That is a large family, not to mention four ex-wives. But why bring only his four-year-old son — the one whose name many struggle to pronounce? Was he attempting to demonstrate work-life balance? Millions of families strive for this, often facing overwhelming obstacles.

Was Musk genuinely illustrating this challenge, or was it a carefully orchestrated stunt? Another explanation is that Musk, as head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) under Trump, wanted to make a statement. He theatrically wielded an electric chainsaw, symbolizing his drastic approach to cutting government inefficiencies — having already dismissed over 100,000 federal employees without due process. Could he have expected Trump to babysit his son while he conducted official business? Perhaps Musk assumed Trump wouldn’t refuse.

After all, Trump is no stranger to playing the showman. Musk has long expressed concerns about declining birth rates and has encouraged people to have more children. Perhaps this was his way of reinforcing that message.

But if that were the case, why not bring all 14 of his children? The more, the merrier in a potential Trump 2.0 administration. Beyond the spectacle, Musk’s behavior was disruptive.

During the event, he claimed he couldn’t hear journalists' questions because his son stuck a finger in his ear. It was a bizarre moment, further amplified by Musk lifting his child onto his shoulders — perhaps for better camera angles. Imagine the reaction if a female politician had done the same.

If a woman brought her toddler to a high-profile government event and became distracted, the public would likely question her competence. To my knowledge, no woman in American history has attempted such a stunt. The double standards are glaring.

Musk’s behavior was not just peculiar — it was a demonstration of privilege. The stark gender disparities in workplace flexibility were on full display. Until the 1970s, pregnant women were expected to resign because they couldn’t manage both work and motherhood.

Now, decades later, Musk enjoys a level of leniency and indulgence that working mothers are rarely afforded. Adding to the irony is that Musk’s usual attire consists of a black cap, and a sports jacket over a T-shirt — sometimes exposing his belly button. Recently, Trump and Vice President J.

D. Vance criticized Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy for his informal attire when meeting White House dignitaries — namely, themselves. Yet Musk, dressing casually, remains unchallenged.

Another double standard in action. Musk’s appearance in the Oval Office with his child was more than just an odd moment — it was a revealing display of privilege, hypocrisy and the deep-seated inequality that continues to persist. The repercussions of such behavior will linger far beyond the spectacle itself.

Was it a spectacle for the sake of being a spectacle? Or was it just an immature adult acting out without any other adults in the room willing to correct him — something characteristic of the current Trump administration? Shin Freedman ([email protected]) is an author, writer and educator..