Dooce has an interesting discussion going on at her site, which I added to (see comment #789) but of course I don’t really think she’s going to write BACK to, so I’m shifting the discussion over to this site. I’d like to know what my little audience thinks. The basic gist of the discussion is the stay-at-home mom route as a valid choice for educated women, whether it’s anti-feminist, and whatnot—see her post for more details. You are all educated, some of you are stay-at-home moms, some are work-at-home or out-of-the-home moms, some are not moms (or dads) yet, and some never plan to be parents. What I’m curious about is, are you doing what you really want to be doing? If you’re a parent, do you feel like you spend enough time with your kid(s)? What is “enough” time, anyway? If you’re primarily at home, do you feel it is by choice, or necessity? If you’re working in addition to caring for your kids, do you feel it is the “right” thing to do, or do you feel pressured (by society, family, whatever) to do something different? If you’re not a parent yet, what do you think you’ll do when you have a kid? If you never plan to be a parent, was that decision made in part because you wanted to focus on your career instead?
I’m just curious about this. Personally, I wasn’t cutting it as a stay-at-home mom, so I got a job. The nature of that job, however, allows me an enormous amount of freedom that most workers don’t have. I think true feminism means that you can choose to take whatever route you’d like, without fear of societal backlash. The reality is that there is an enormous amount of societal pressure to live to your full professional potential, and simultaneously enrich your kids to their full potential. Are those two things truly compatible? I see a lot of women who are trying to do it all, at great personal cost.
Exercising your choices of course requires a certain amount of economic and social mobility, which I’m not really authorized to comment on (what am I authorized to comment on, emergent medical technologies?), but maybe you are. Let’s hear about it.
Come on, comment, because if you don’t I’ll feel like a loser. And don't use any swear words, because my auntie reads this site.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Life with the Quistiltons
Followers
Blog Archive
-
▼
2006
(27)
-
▼
February
(6)
- Dooce has an interesting discussion going on at he...
- I added three new links in the ole' sidebar, there...
- Elmo is a just a red Grover.Yesterday the Wee came...
- To continue in the current vein of relative unimpo...
- Alrighty, here’s yet another meme (That’s what the...
- OK, so according to “What Free Time,” I am “tagged...
-
▼
February
(6)
17 comments:
I'm commenting, not because I have any great insights, but because I don't want you to feel like a loser, Linnie. Anyway, I think that I often stay away from this topic of conversation because I don't want to accidentally offend anyone - my sense is that this is a touchy subject for a lot of us - is this because, ostensibly, we have a choice, but we end up feeling defensive about whatever we choose because of the outside pressure (from society, family, etc. that you mentioned)? (Have I included too many commas in my comment? How long can my comments be anyway? I've never done this before...)
Enough meta-commenting! To answer some of your questions: as a mostly work-out-of-the-home mom, I feel really fortunate to be doing what I truly want to be doing (most of the time), but I also feel guilty that I don't spend enough time with my daughter - I'm pretty sure that I'm NOT enriching her to her fullest potential. Mostly I think that I impose the guilt on myself, that I don't feel pressure from anyone to do anything differently. So where does the guilt come from and does it mean that I "should" be doing something different?
Linnie, you KNEW I'd bite at this one, but being an employed-for-a-salary mom, I need to go do some work now ... stay tuned tonight for my own (note tongue firmly planted in cheek here) brilliant commentary. -JH
Heh heh, JH, such was my evil plan!
Well, I've been a stay-at-home mom, a work-at-home-with-ridiculously-low-hours mom, and now a working-out-of-home mom. I have to say that given the choice I would pick #1 or even #2 from the list. Even though I'm a teacher and therefore work "kid-friendly" hours, I still feel like my daughter gets shortchanged in the deal. I love teaching, but the best of my energy is given to other people's children, and that bums me out!
I heard a few rude comments when I first chose to stay home...along the lines of "what a waste of a college education" - but I don't see staying home to raise children as a waste at all! (Do we only want stupid people to be stay-at-home moms? What kind of message does that send?) I feel more guilt now that I'm working, though, than I ever did then...now, even though I love my daycare provider (Yay Grandma!) and the preschool teacher (Miss Kathy rocks!), it kills me that I brought a child into this world only to have her raised primarily by other people.
Maybe I'm just a control freak?
Of course, reading my comments might provoke some working moms to say in a huff, "Oh, so you think I'm a bad mother because I choose to have other people take care of my child during the day and I love going to work?" No! Everybody is different. My sister, for example, would shrivel up and die if she didn't have her work, but she has struck a nice balance between work and motherhood.
To those families with dual incomes, both in six figures, both with 60-hour work-weeks and frequent business trips, who live in McMansions and drive BMWs, though, I ask this: Why the %#$* did you even have kids? Seriously! As a teacher I am seeing this crop of "poor little rich kids" whose parents buy them everything but don't even KNOW them, and it is sad. I'd hate to think that this happens because of some feminist ideal (not that it would be so much better if crass materialism alone were to blame)...
And that's my two cents!
Hm. Interesting discussion. My theory is that there is no "right" way to do it. I think "traditional" ways evolved from eras past. (Ages ago, for instance, child rearing WAS the only women's job) But I think traditional roles evolved from the necessities of the time. Now we have lots of choices. My personal belief is that someone has to raise the kids. I'd prefer it to be one parent or the other (stay at home style). Finances being what they are, that might not be an option. In which case, you do what you can. I forsee continuing to work after having a kid (not committed to more than one yet) because I like my career. And because I have a lot of earning potential. And a LOT (did I mention a LOT?) of debt. I also anticipate feeling guilty for not being at home every moment I'm at work. I like the idea of a nanny, but I don't like the idea of paying one! I could see feeling badly I wasn't using my degree if I did decide to stay at home, but I don't think I would feel outside pressure...more just an experience of "Am I wasting a talent?" I'm not sure I'm being coherent...Eager to hear others' replies...
M
I feel that I'm venturing into semi-dangerous waters here, but I've just had a beer and am feeling impervious to shark attacks at the moment. So my two cents are:
I've been a SAHM for 4 years, and it's a choice that my husband and I agreed on from the beginning. I feel no desire to go back to the job I left (tenure track at a regional university), but I would have been happy to leave that particular job anyway. I don't have a great passion for "working" in general. I liked grad school, and being in the know, but don't feel I was accomplishing much with my degree anyway. I've learned to think of it as a tangible sign that I am teachable, which means that I can do whatever the hell I want. The hard part is deciding what that is. So since I don't know what I want to do with my life, staying home with the kids through a critical part of their lives seems like a logical default.
But I recognize that I'm in a default position and I feel a bit guilty about it sometimes. Like I'm supposed to relish every minute that I spend with my children because this time is so precious and delightful and marvelous and ...
OK excuse me, I had to go hurl there for a moment. Being all starry-eyed about the wonders of childhood is just not me. But if it makes them feel happy and well connected, and if our family can afford for me to be home for a few years, well then it is working for us.
Sorry, what was the question?
This is great, I love it. Continue! And welcome, ChemMom!
Just to throw something else out there, which was prompted by M's reference to ages past, don't you think it could be more "natural" to have our children raised by people other than us, exclusively, such as grandmothers and aunties and other members of our extended families? In some cultures (I'm thinking the Maori of New Zealand as an example here) it is traditional for children to be raised by the grandparents while the younger, more vigorous (though I think you should see my mom's arm muscles) parents go off to make a living. In some cultures (I have no ready example at hand, here), kids join up in groups once they reach a certain age, and are parented collectively by all the parents and extended family. We could think of our daycare providers and nannies as members of our extended families, helping to raise our children (except that we happen to pay them--but I'm certain that the members of extended families of "ages past" also received payment of some sort, such as protection or resources).
Then you could add that it's more natural and beneficial for kids to be in a group setting, rather than at home with just Mom or Dad, but that is getting off on even more of a tangent.
Comment on, I'm having fun!
OK, non-mom here straying into extremely unfamiliar territory, so please be kind (as Jenn noted above, any offense I may cause is purely accidental and stems from my own ignorance).
With that said, I think the real point here is that until *men* are lying awake at night agonizing over whether or not to go back to work, work out of the home, work reduced hours, etc., then true feminism has a long way to go.
In our office in the past two years, four of my co-workers have had kids -- three women and one man. And our boss (now, happily, ex-boss) refused to make any accommodations for any of them that involved working less than 40 hours a week. One good friend ended up quitting when she really didn't want to because she couldn't get approval to come in to the office one hour later each day. She even offered to be on-call on weekends (she's a photographer): no dice.
I think in 2006, the idea that you have to be physically in the office 40, 50, 60 hours a week to be productive and of worth to the company is becoming an increasingly quaint notion, for both women and men. Unfortunately, I think we still need a generation of managers to retire before we can all realize the potential of this transformation. Maybe early feminists *had* to begin with “we can do anything men can do, including kill ourselves at the office.” But modern feminism has to be about valuing “women’s work” equally so that both parents feel free to make the kinds of choices that work best for them.
Or course, if both parents are working at Wal-Mart or the local diner, than all this is pretty much a moot point.
The value of "women's work"--now THAT'S a good potential discussion, Goddess. I have to say that when I was "just" a mom, I never felt as much self-worth as I do now that I get a paycheck. And this was not coming from the Husband, who is wholeheartedly supportive of me and always referred to it as "our money," or from any outside pressure--it was coming from me. It's a fact that sucess in our society is closely tied to the amount of money a person brings in. Add to that the general nose-thumbing of our country toward the value of women's work--just check out other developed countries' maternity leave packages, if you don't believe me--and you end up with a whole lot of mamas who believe that what they're doing isn't as worthwhile as paid work. And what effect does that attitude have on us and our kids?
Man, I just can't stop yakking. But the cat just spilled a glass of water on the computer, so it may die soon (I can't believe it didn't right away) and render me speechless. The hazards of a home office, eh?
Thank you, Goddess, for bringing up the fact that MEN don't generally lay awake agonizing over this! And that isn't to blame any one individual man - it's purely a cultural phenomenon.
What many men I know DO agonize over is the fact that they'd love their significant others to stay home with the kids at least part-time, but the money just isn't there (note comment about working at WalMart).
Hoohboy, I'm back. I haven't been able to fully, adequately express my feelings on this issue despite 6.5 years of trying, but what the heck, it's not like I'm not busy or anything ...
Is the SAH choice a valid one for educated, feminist moms? Absolutely. It's not the one our family made; I went back to full-time, 9-to-5 work when DD was 4 months old, so I'm about as "traditionally" WOH as they get. But my brand of feminism is about helping individuals be individuals, rather than deciding across the board that all women, men, children, families, etc. must look and think and behave exactly alike. Strong families and good parents come in many different flavors, regardless of whether and how mom (or dad) earns a paycheck.
Where the feminist and frustrated grad student in me has trouble with this whole issue is that our choices *aren't* really as free as we might believe, and I think They (the patriarchy) have a strong interest in playing divide and conquer with all the ranks of educated women out there. As long as we buy into articles with inflammatory titles like "The Mommy Wars," or jump all over the latest study based on the little out-of-context bit that gets reported in the mainstream media, we're stuck just defending our own personal choices -- which means we conveniently *don't* spend much time talking about or agitating for the kinds of systemic changes that would improve the range and quality of options available to *all* moms and families. For example ...
* Why do so many women agonize over how to balance career and family -- when few people question that of course, it's possible for a man to be both a good worker and a good father?
* Why do many parents have to choose between challenging, fulfilling work that requires a 50-60 hour a week commitment on one hand, and work that's flexible/ part-time, but also routine, without benefits, and with little or no room for advancement on the other?
* Why don't more professional fields include a "pause" option? In other words, if I work in a field for a few years, but then take 5-7 years off to be home while my children are young (assuming I read journals, maintain a professional network, maybe even do a bit of part-time work or consulting here and there), why can't I pick up in that same field at roughly the same place I left off -- rather than, in many cases, paying a penalty for the time out of the workforce for the rest of my career?
* Why aren't there more high-quality, subsidized child care options available for low-income women who have to (or even choose to) work?
* Why do our courts and our Social Security system still consistently undervalue a non-working spouse's contributions to the family and society? We all hope our marriages will last till death do us part, and that death *won't* us part till we're old and gray -- but sometimes the unthinkable does happen, and far too often, the SAH spouse (usually mom) is left poor and stuck when it does.
* Why am I just now REALLY getting into this discussion when I'm way past late, and need to post and get back to work already?
-JH
Ah, yes. The work at home, stay at home, work out of the home controversy. Second only to breast feeding vs. bottle feeding as fodder for righteous indignation and Mommy guilt.
My life is hard to define...
I have 3 kids and some of the time I am "only" a stay at home Mom. I work in the theater world, so when certain projects come around, I work outside the home, usually in the evening when hubby is there. Other times, I'm doing tons of prep work at home, and consider myself attempting to work at home. Of these three, probably the staying at home makes me the happiest. Plus, there's less pressure when your degree is a BFA in theater, to produce a high income or risk feeling like you're wasting your education. However, I enjoy the theater work too, and would definately feel stagnant if I were doing none of it. And no matter WHAT I'm doing, I always feel guilty that I'm not spending enough time with my kids. Just the mere fact of having three kids means that none of them are getting enough individual attention, and they all let me know it at frequent intervals. I also know that, no matter what else I'm doing, my mind has a constant radar out for my kids...where they are, what they're doing, what they SHOULD be doing, even if I'm not physically with them.
And the following two statements are both accurate reflections of how I feel, even if they seem to be completely contradictory. 1) A parent should be the primary caregiver of their children. 2) I would never presume to tell anyone else the best way for them to raise their children. (Aside from certain common sense things, like don't drive around with them in your lap, paparazzi or no)
I'm enjoying everyone's comments! (Especially hearing that Melissa is implicitly "committing" to one child!)
I can't make any promises. And I can't promise I won't occasionally stick the kid in a cage...
Ha ha, J&M--the dog trainer I took Milo to said she used to put her daughter into a crate in the car so she wouldn't bounce all over the place...long before car seats, I'm guessing.
This has been a really great discussion. What I'm taking away from it is, we all just have to stick together and support one another in whatever choices we make. I know this is definitely a rarified group we've got here, since I don't have the drawing power of Dooce (over 1500 comments!), but it's nice to know I'm acquainted with a group of folks who realize the labels are not real or valid; we are all doing the best we can to get by. Hopefully our kids will reflect that.
So, I don't know if you've heard Storycorps on NPR, but this mornings' story was about a Mexican mother who was smuggled in to the US. She and her daughter were talking about their lives then. Her mother talked about how terrible she felt not being able to feed her daughter anything but beans - how she snuck the kids into the night cleaning jobs in various offices - how she felt that she had let her daughter down because she couldn't devote enough time to her. The daughter said that what she remembers most about her childhood was wearing footy pajamas, and sneaking from one desk to another looking fo office candy. And her final comment was that her mother is her biggest inspiration - that thinking about her mother working 2 jobs, going to school, and raising her made getting through college (for the daughter) much easier. She didn't remember a lack of attention, just thought of her mother as a superhero. Interesting...
I realize I'm really late, but I thought I'd put in a male point of view here (this is the male "half" of J&M). I don't tend to think of myself as progressive or radical or different, but I gather that my views are not stereotypically male. After reading a previous commment about "until *men* are lying awake at night agonizing over whether or not to go back to work, work out of the home, work reduced hours, etc., then true feminism has a long way to go", my immediate thought was "they don't? I do." I recently had the means and opportunity to take a year off of work. I tried to start my own business which went nowhere, so I'm back in the 9 to 5 grind, and I find myself assailed daily by the irritations of that kind of life. I think working the 9-5 grind bothers me more now as I now know what it's like to be what M called a "house husband". Basically put, I loved staying at home, cleaning, doing dishes, laundry, what have you. Give our situations, it would seem likely that I would be the SAHD (stay at home dad) as M has more earning potential than I.
I think my ideal situation would be to work out of the home as my own business part time, and being with the children the rest of the time. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of being what M calls yuppie-dinc's (young upwardly mobile dual income), but I do think I would rather ONE of us stay home with the kids than both of us be working. At this point in my life, I really do think there's more to happiness than money (although having a small bucket of money on standby can certainly help).
As for the "children being raised by an extended family" I certainly think that would work wonderfully. However, in this modern age of lightspeed communication and air travel, one's family is more likely now than ever to be spread out over the continent as is mine, making extended family daycare a practical impossibility. This may sound like a public announcement from Captian Obvious, but in those cultures where children are raised by extended families, those cultures have, as an integral part of their identity, the fact that families don't spread out. I think our culture doesn't put much emphasis on family/community (don't mean to sound like a creepy version of Dubbya here). As was previously mentioned, our work culture doesn't seem to give a damn about family or community. Doesn't matter if you're sick, you gottagotowork. Doesn't matter if you have family issues, you gottagotowork. Doesn't matter if your stressted, pregnant, if your spouse is pregnant, if you have car trouble, pet trouble, kid trouble, plumbing trouble, medical, cable tv, or dental trouble: ya gottagotowork. Our work culture has become an inflexible framework that doesn't allow for the health and well-being of it's workers.
As an example that angers me greatly, most employers in the US do not have paid maternity leave. Instead there are options to take unpaid (that's helpful how?) leave, or you may be able to qualify for short term disability. If that isn't an insight into how our culture thinks of families...now when you have a child your DISABLED? In Sweden, you get a full year off of paid maternity leave at %75 percent of your salary, and another 3 months after that at a predtermined flat rate. In Finland you get 105 days at %80. In france, you get 112-182 days at %100. In our strange land, you get 6 weeks...unpaid...if you're lucky. Not to mention all the other "off the record" issues that happen - your unofficial payment in prejudice for being a mommy.
And men are just not a part of this equation at all, at all. Most places don't have any policy for a man taking any kind of leave after a child is born. It would seem to make sense to be able to have some time off where one might be able to help out there mate who JUST GAVE BIRTH instead of having to head into work at 8am the next morn.
Well I've rambled enough, and I'm mostly incoherent. I apologise to all for my lateness in comment, and my rambling due to an illness/DayQuil combo.
J of J&M
I am late as always. IMO, the "mommy wars" are over-rated and just inflamed by the media. The issue should not be who is doing the best by their children - working moms or SAHMs - because in most cases the mom is doing what is best for her and her family be it for monetary or sanity reasons. If a mom needs to work b/c she needs that extra outlet then fine. But if a mom wishes to stay home and can afford it, no matter how much education she has had, that is just great too. Each made their choice. But I agree with Dooce, that it is the moms who have no choice, who are forced to go to work b/c of financial reasons even if they would rather stay home that are the real issue that needs to be addressed.
I became a SAHM be circumstance, not choice, but I then chose to continue staying home rather than return to work when the opportunity arose. And I am very lucky that my husband is 110% supportive of that decision. This is what is best for my family and I am grateful that I can stay home. Do I feel guilty about all that wasted education, no not really. I had a great education, a great career, I traveled. And I'll do it all again sometime down the road, but just not right now. And I am OK with that. I probably won't go back to work in my field (oil consulting) but do something more family friendly. And the fact that I do have a college and masters degree are what will afford me that luxury and flexibility.
Despite the fact that I am happy with my choice, I was a bit affronted when I updated my info for my college alumni directory and was told there was no SAHM category - my choice was to be a "homemaker" or "unemployed". Um, gee what choices. B/c I stay home by choice for my kids not for my home and I think that is one of the biggest differences between the 1950's "homemaker" who didn't have the choice and today's "SAHMs" who do - largely b/c the feminist movement did give them the choice. But again, the choice is only there for those who can afford it.
Post a Comment