Just had a baby? Welcome to the 1950s.

Iwannahurl

There was a thought-provoking article in the Guardian Weekend magazine on Saturday March 26. Call this progress?, by Rebecca Asher, a BBC radio producer.

It's on the Guardian website with the title Just had a baby? Welcome to the 1950s. "Rebecca Asher knew having children meant sacrifice. But why, she wondered, was the sacrifice all hers?"

Excerpt:

Abruptly, the severe challenges of new motherhood were brought home to me: the loss of autonomy and the self-abnegation were instant and absolute. The independence, sense of recognition and daily purpose that I'd been used to gave way to gruelling, unacknowledged servitude. My life became unrecognisable to me. The uncertainty I'd felt about having a child had vanished – I loved my son – but a new emotional complexity took its place: despite this love, I came to resent motherhood itself. The coexistence of these two apparently contradictory feelings defined my days.

Having had a busy and purposeful life, I now occupied a universe where, apart from the grindingly repetitive tasks centred on feeding and cleaning my child, activity existed in the main simply to fill the time. I went to a parent and baby group and found myself singing nursery rhymes with other grown women as our tiny children lay impassive on the floor. Used to mixing with women and men of all ages, circumstances and life stages, I now only ever seemed to be in the company of other new mothers. I vacillated between a desperate hunger for tips on encouraging my child to sleep and a head-pounding boredom with this narrow, baby-centric world. It felt as if I'd entered a bizarre female sect in which we novices nervously twittered about our infant deities.

Every day I was brought up sharp by the dismantling of my former life. En route to one of my time-filling activities, I would pass young women determinedly heading off to work, dressed immaculately and with the luxury of a solitary bus ride ahead of them. I was filled with envy.

Asher also has a website and has written her first book, Shattered: modern motherhood and the illusion of equality.

Excerpt:

Today women outperform men at school and university. They make a success of their early careers and enter into relationships on their own terms. So it might seem that equality is in the bag. But once they have children, their illusions are swiftly shattered. Becoming a mother is a tremendously rewarding experience, but for all the current talk of shared parenting, women still find themselves bearing primary responsibility for bringing up their children, to the detriment of everything else in their lives.

Fathers, conversely, are dragooned into the role of main earner, becoming semi-detached from their families. Both men and women put up too little resistance to this pressure, shying away from asking what is really best for themselves and their children. The consequences of this enduring inequality in the home reach far beyond individuals and into society as a whole. A radical new approach is needed if we want to raise our children fairly and happily.

Ranging from antenatal care and maternity leave, to work practices, relationship dynamics and beyond, Shattered exposes the inequalities perpetuated by the state, employers and the parenting industry and suggests imaginative ways forward to achieve more balanced and fulfilling lives.

So, is this another much-needed social analysis exposing the bitter truth about families and parenting, or a bitterly resentful feminist polemic starting with rage against the realities of biology?

Orion

Either way it's a Humanities discussion

Iwannahurl

Macros42 wrote: »

Either way it's a Humanities discussion

Why? It's about parenting?

Sleepy

It honestly sounds like she's bitter that she can't be a full-time carer whilst still working in her old job to be honest. Time-filling activities? Seriously? How many of us have time that we're trying to kill during the day? Most of us mere mortals are run ragged just getting the essentials done. Though, to be fair, having a step-son means I've never really had the experience of only having one child to mind. I'd have thought that you'd still spend their nap times either doing the endless laundry, cleaning the house or simply having a nap yourself to counter-act the zombie like state that only new parents can understand!

If she resents being a stay-at-home mother she can choose to go back to work and leave baby in childcare, she can let her husband be the full-time carer (and if he won't, tough, she chose him as a partner). Or, she can abandon her old career, stay at home with baby and write a book about how downtrodden she is.

Iwannahurl

Macros42 wrote: »

Either way it's a Humanities discussion

OK, just had a quick look at the Humanities charter.

This is not a forum I am familiar with. However, I understand the basic point about having a (non-AH) forum for having civilised discussion about issues. I had assumed Parenting was the obvious choice.

With luck any ensuing discussion here will actually involve parents.

Splendour

Iwannahurl wrote: »

T
Having had a busy and purposeful life...

Well I hope her child never gets to seeing this bit!

Orion

Because it's about the sociological aspect of parenting rather than parenting itself.

Mods: Move it back to Parenting if you wish. I suppose it is a grey-area thread.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Morag

I can relate to her experience, being a stay at home parent was never on my list of goals.
It unfortunately became a necessity after I had my second child.
It can be very isolating and demoralising to be at home doing everything, the parent and toddler groups were awful to attend and I never had much in common with any of the other adults there.

It didn't get much better when they went to school as it was a same subset of parents invovled with the school and when it turned out my son was on the autism spectrum there wasn't any child care available for me to return to work.

It used to be such drudgery was at least shared with neighbours so that there was a group of other people with whom you could talk with and take turns keeping an eye on each other's children but that is long gone.

If it were not for the internet and being able to get into discussion and debates with other adults, I fear to think what my mental state would have degraded into. Being a stay at home parent when you are used to doing and achieving more and effecting more people and interaction with more people can be hellish never ending limbo which leaves you drained phyically, mentally and emotionally.

It's hard feeling that you and your life is on pause while you wait for the children to be grown up enough so you can try and claw back your time and life for yourself.

Many women think they have more real choices then they actually have and then are very bitter when the life they find they are living is not what they expected.

I honestly feel when I had my kids I had an abortion of my career.

Fittle

I think her use of such high-falluting words as 'self-abnegation' (wtf is that) and 'unacknowledged servitude' ruins the article. The bottom line here is she's saying she found parenting pretty difficult - the change from your single life to becoming a parent is nothing anyone can explain and no amount of words from other parents about sleep depravation, the loss of 'who you were', the immediate change in your attitude to most things once the baby arrives can explain it to you, until you experience parenting yourself.

She should just have said she struggles with parenting sometimes, as most of us do:rolleyes:

metrovelvet

Honestly what I think it does is point out how feminism sold women down the river.

While it promised the fulfillment of dreams on the horizon, emancipation from the shackles of the kitchen and the nursery, it couldn't deliver. But dreaming is a a dangerous activity.

Motherhood puts you in the mommy club. IT only takes one child to do this. You go to a mommy baby group and all anyone talks about is nappies. Dont get me started on the national obsession with how your child sleeps. YOur identity is revolutionised and is someways you become invisible because every part of you outside of the caretaker becomes invisible.

I dont think much has changed to be honest. I watch Mad Men and everyone is astounded by the mores of yesterday, but that clever show is simply using the backdrop of yesterday to talk about today.

I totally agree that nothing has changed. It may even be worse.

wonderfulname

I watched this talk a while back and found it very interesting.

Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg looks at why a smaller percentage of women than men reach the top of their professions -- and offers 3 powerful pieces of advice to women aiming for the C-suite.

One of those is about having kids, or rather our perception of it, another is about grasping opportunities.

Its interesting to see a perspective looking at the flaws in the female psyche rather than blaming the feminists or the men. A man doesn't have to be the main earner in a household, if you felt like it you could just pipe up and say "well actually, I'd like to keep my career".

If you watch the video there is a point where she discusses how at the end of a lecture all the women put down their hands but the men still hound for answers. It works on a bigger scale, women tend to accept their lot in life far easier than men.

Much has changed in that there is no real reason as to why motherhood would change anything drastically anymore, yet it does for many. Personally I think its down to time, things will balance out in a few decades.

Morag

The man doesnt' have to be the main earner or the woman the stay at home parent, but often this happens due to the disparity in wages or just the skill sets the people involved have. I was always the one earning more money and I had more oppertunities career wise opening up to me but working 50 hour week and doing 90% of all the house work when there are 2 kids leads to a breakdown.

The skill sets is one area which I think is changing and boys are reared to cook and clean the same as girls in the family home and Dads are encouraged to be able to look after the kids and take on more of the hands on parenting.

wonderfulname

Why didn't your partner help out more?
Sorry I must mention I had a reverse upbringing to most, my mother was the bigger earner and my father had a housework friendly job so that's where the questioning is coming from in this post and the previous one.

Morag

Lack of confidence and competence, with a huge dollop of 'not seeing the mess' and a smattering of it being 'women's work'.
It is not unusual for this to happen to most women when they move in with a partner and esp once there are kids.

It's not the type of upbringing I had either, my dad was a stay at home Dad after he left the army, my brother was reared to be able to cook and clean, so it was a shock to me to find the many things he couldn't do or didn't feel comfortable doing or didn't see the need to be done.

And once you are a stay at home parent unless the other parent knows how much needs to be done and is aware of how much work it takes to keep the house and mind the kids then you don't get help and get told you are sitting on your arse all day, all the while you are envious of them being outside of the house and dealing with other adults and being at work and having a life.

Sleepy

metrovelvet wrote: »

Honestly what I think it does is point out how feminism sold women down the river.

I'm not so sure it's soley a female issue tbh, though I think the feminist movement may have helped engender more false hope in women than men.

Accepting harsh realities is something I've noticed our generation struggles with. Our parents and grandparents generations seem to have been more conditioned to accept their lot and just "got on" with things. Our generation seems to have much greater expectations of life, and not unsurprisingly so.

We've been educated more than any previous generation, have grown up in a country and time where grinding poverty and suffering are largely things of the past and are living at a time where technology has become incredibly advanced.

We seem to feel cheated by the current recession, unable to accept that taking out an unmanageable mortgage for a standard 3 bedroom home is a mistake we have to pay for and to feel positively downtrodden when financial or personal morality dictates the reality that one parent will have to be a home-maker.

Cat Melodeon

On a personal level, I read the article and felt absolutely zero level of identification with the author. Sure, modern life has pressures, many modern women feel that motherhood is incompatible with the professional adult identity they had pre-baby. But blaming this on feminism is a bit silly. My understanding of feminism is that it is about achieving gender equality and allowing women and men to hold equal status and enjoy equal opportunities within society. I'm not aware of feminism promising women everything and it certainly is something that is developing, it has not achieved it's goals by any measurement.

Yes, as women our roles have expanded and our status (at least for the middle and upwardly mobile classes) has improved, but in most societies there has been little change in the status of men. Women are encouraged into the workplace, why have men not been encouraged into the homeplace to an equal extent? Countries like Sweden are on the right track - extended parental leave that can be shared between partners is the norm and fathers can and do take their leave without it having a negative impact on their careers. Parenting is shared, and can be shared in any family to a greater or lesser extent. A practical discussion needs to be had between partners before ever a child is conceived. Who earns more? Whose career is at a more critical juncture? Who is more able to be flexible in working hours? Does one of the parents relish being the primary carer, or is it something that can be shared more equally. Who takes time off when the kid is sick? What happens if a child is disabled?

It is possible to hold the role of fulltime parent and still be whoever you were before. It is possible to work fulltime and still be a good parent. What matters is finding a system that works for your family unit and sticking to it consistently. It is pointless holding your family up for comparison with the yummy-mummies and overachievers who claim to have it all - you do not know the inner workings of their lives or know what resources they have access to.

Motherhood (and parenting in general) does mean compromise. You are adding a role with significant responsibilities to your portfolio of identities. It is much harder to be a parent than it is to be a daughter or a son or a sibling, or even an employee. Taking on that role means that you have to make room in other areas. It bugs me when this is spoken of as a sacrifice. My husband and I have 'sacrificed' being footloose and fancy free, we have 'sacrificed' extra money as we no longer can work overtime, I have 'sacrificed' certain career paths because I am happier working closer to home. These are not really sacrifices. I still work. I still engage in grown-up, non-baby-related conversations with friends. I have acquaintances who probably don't even know I have a child. I don't have MAMMY printed on my forehead. And I have created a new human being, this little person who is growing up to be the spit of me and his father but yet who is a completely new and independent little man. Even if there was a sacrifice to be made, it would be worth it.

I think the author is maybe still in the early baby days when it's all about nappies and feeding and the change is immense. I think some mothers do get too caught up in that and become utter baby-bores (I use boards to get rid of all my baby-related blurb so the rest of my life is fairly free of baby conversation). I think some couples don't share the responsibilities of parenting equally enough, or some people fail to see that the full-time aspect of parenting a young child is only a temporary aspect and life does go back to something approaching normality after a year or so. I understand that for parents with special needs children it is a much more difficult situation. But I believe it is possible to remain who you were before you had children, provided you clearly set out who that person is and create time for their continued existence.

I do think 'feminism' is unfairly blamed for promising all sorts when in fact all it ever set out to do was improve matters and create awareness that inequalities do exist. There is NO equality in society, anyone who believes there is is clearly deluded. Becoming a parent forces you to reassess who you are and where you are going and exposes all those structures in society that are causing inequality. If you think that all you had to do was go out and get a degree and compete for a job and that would be that, it is time to take the blinkers off. Society is not as unequal as it once was, but gender discrimination still exists, pay gaps still divide us, the class war is ongoing and the old boys networks are alive and kicking.

metrovelvet

Motherhood is an automatic demotion. Maybe this is imperceptible in Ireland.

Sleepy

Cat Melodeon wrote: »

There is NO equality in society, anyone who believes there is is clearly deluded. Becoming a parent forces you to reassess who you are and where you are going and exposes all those structures in society that are causing inequality. If you think that all you had to do was go out and get a degree and compete for a job and that would be that, it is time to take the blinkers off. Society is not as unequal as it once was, but gender discrimination still exists, pay gaps still divide us, the class war is ongoing and the old boys networks are alive and kicking.

I thanked your post before reading this paragraph

There shouldn't be equality in society. There should be equality of opportunity. Gender discrimination still exists in both directions albeit to far smaller degrees than it did in the past. Pay gaps that exist are hangovers from times past (i.e. men in their 50/60's earning fortunes whereas women of that generation were largely homemakers) or the result of personal choices regarding work/life balance or areas of interest for those of us in younger generations e.g. more female primary school teachers, nurses, more male IT workers. The old boys networks are dying out - the greatest bastion of an old boys network I can think of (kings inns) has turned out nearly a decade of predominantly female barristers.

Sleepy

metrovelvet wrote: »

Motherhood is an automatic demotion. Maybe this is imperceptible in Ireland.

Fatherhood has the same effect for any father who wants to see their children on a daily basis.

metrovelvet

Sleepy wrote: »

Fatherhood has the same effect for any father who wants to see their children on a daily basis.

It starts at obstetrics. You are a piece of breeding cattle.

metrovelvet

Sleepy wrote: »

I thanked your post before reading this paragraph

There shouldn't be equality in society. There should be equality of opportunity. Gender discrimination still exists in both directions albeit to far smaller degrees than it did in the past. Pay gaps that exist are hangovers from times past (i.e. men in their 50/60's earning fortunes whereas women of that generation were largely homemakers) or the result of personal choices regarding work/life balance or areas of interest for those of us in younger generations e.g. more female primary school teachers, nurses, more male IT workers. The old boys networks are dying out - the greatest bastion of an old boys network I can think of (kings inns) has turned out nearly a decade of predominantly female barristers.

Sorry but the Old Boys Networks are still there. Just look at the Moriarty Tribunal. No one is going to get prosecuted because they all know each other. Problem is this country is too small and these things should be held in Brussels by people outside of the old boys network.

Sorry for OT.

I think the OP is really an aside from the equal opportunity issue.

Sleepy

metrovelvet wrote: »

It starts at obstetrics. You are a piece of breeding cattle.

Ah, I thought you meant professionally. I think parenthood will have a negative impact on any devoted parents career. The few incredibly successful people I've met have all sacrificed their relationships with their children to one extent or another in order to attain that professional success.

metrovelvet wrote: »

Sorry but the Old Boys Networks are still there. Just look at the Moriarty Tribunal. No one is going to get prosecuted because they all know each other. Problem is this country is too small and these things should be held in Brussels by people outside of the old boys network.

Sorry for OT.

I think the OP is really an aside from the equal opportunity issue.

I think those old boy (and old-girl, don't forget Beverley Cooper Flynn) networks aren't particularly gender related, more reflective of an 'insider' culture.

Cat Melodeon

Sleepy wrote: »

There shouldn't be equality in society. There should be equality of opportunity. Gender discrimination still exists in both directions albeit to far smaller degrees than it did in the past. Pay gaps that exist are hangovers from times past (i.e. men in their 50/60's earning fortunes whereas women of that generation were largely homemakers) or the result of personal choices regarding work/life balance or areas of interest for those of us in younger generations e.g. more female primary school teachers, nurses, more male IT workers. The old boys networks are dying out - the greatest bastion of an old boys network I can think of (kings inns) has turned out nearly a decade of predominantly female barristers.

But what is equality of opportunity? Do you believe that if someone has ability and works hard that they have access to the same opportunities as everyone else? The notion of meritocracy is a deeply flawed one unless everyone starts out from the same starting point. The opportunities available to us depend for the most part on the accident of our birth - who our parents are, what they do, where they live, whether we are straight or gay, male or female, black, white, Traveller, whatever. Yes, there should be equality of opportunity but how can this be created without overhauling society itself?

And how can you say the old boys networks are dying out? The bulk of senior civil servants, politicians, professors, consultants, CEOs etc are men. Women may 'choose' jobs at lower levels but that is because there is no other real option - no universal (free) childcare, no encouragement at statutory level for men to assume equal responsibility for the everyday demands of parenting etc. Gender divisions continue in the education system - girls' schools often don't offer more technical subjects, boys are less likely to study Home Ec etc which has a knock-on effect to the careers school-leavers are likely to pursue.

metrovelvet

Also, if you have a couple, both with high functioning careers, the expectation is for the mother to make the career sacrifices, the peer pressure comes from family etc.

I also know a couple who divided everything "equally" housework, bills, etc, but if it was his turn to do the dishes, he's still leave the baby's stuff in the sink for her to do. LOL.

Orion

metrovelvet wrote: »

I also know a couple who divided everything "equally" housework, bills, etc, but if it was his turn to do the dishes, he's still leave the baby's stuff in the sink for her to do. LOL.

I resemble that remark

It works the other way too. If there's a nail to be hammered to hang a picture on or grass to be cut the expectation is that the man will do it. That's a societal thing and women are just as guilty as men in that regard.

Morag

Tbh if I am doing all the washing and cleaning the house and the toilet then he can fecking well do the 'mans work' and cut the grass and clean the windows and do the bin.

metrovelvet

Sharrow wrote: »

Tbh if I am doing all the washing and cleaning the house and the toilet then he can fecking well do the 'mans work' and cut the grass and clean the windows and do the bin.

In this house I do everything. Im the wife,the husband, the mother, the father, the maid, the cook, the assembler, the garbage putter outer, the toilet trainer.

But to be honest I do have to hire someone for some of the diy. Also because my male friends are as useless as I am at it.

Sleepy

Cat Melodeon wrote: »

But what is equality of opportunity? Do you believe that if someone has ability and works hard that they have access to the same opportunities as everyone else? The notion of meritocracy is a deeply flawed one unless everyone starts out from the same starting point. The opportunities available to us depend for the most part on the accident of our birth - who our parents are, what they do, where they live, whether we are straight or gay, male or female, black, white, Traveller, whatever. Yes, there should be equality of opportunity but how can this be created without overhauling society itself?

We're a bit O/T here but 100% inherritance tax, no private education prior to third level and at that point it's down to the parents I'm afraid.

And how can you say the old boys networks are dying out? The bulk of senior civil servants, politicians, professors, consultants, CEOs etc are men.

You left out the pre-fix "old". These are the hangovers I referred to. Most legal and medicine grads these days are women.

Women may 'choose' jobs at lower levels but that is because there is no other real option - no universal (free) childcare, no encouragement at statutory level for men to assume equal responsibility for the everyday demands of parenting etc. Gender divisions continue in the education system - girls' schools often don't offer more technical subjects, boys are less likely to study Home Ec etc which has a knock-on effect to the careers school-leavers are likely to pursue.

Universal free childcare is an unattainable goal in this country for at least the next decade. It's simply unaffordable.

The only statutory issues I can think of in relation to men assuming equal responsibilities towards childcare would be the antiquated system we have of maternity, rather than parental leave to be shared between the parents as suits (I'd personally recommend a minimum amount of this as mandatory each parent where possible). That and automatic guardianship for fathers and a default position of shared custody in the event of parental separation.

The education system is (like most of what we're discussing here) an entire thread unto itself. Single-sex vs. Co-ed is an issue I'm not sure I've taken a side on but all schools being co-ed would certainly have the advantage of equal access to classes (geography would then take over as the main impact on school sizes).

There's also, always the option of choosing to raise children with a man who's prepared to be the primary care giver? We do exist you know.

metrovelvet wrote: »

Also, if you have a couple, both with high functioning careers, the expectation is for the mother to make the career sacrifices, the peer pressure comes from family etc.

I also know a couple who divided everything "equally" housework, bills, etc, but if it was his turn to do the dishes, he's still leave the baby's stuff in the sink for her to do. LOL.

He's not a pilot in Aer Lingus is he? I know a couple where the mother won't allow the father to sterilise the bottles etc. because he couldn't possibly be trusted with that (despite being responsible for 100's of lives on a daily basis as a pilot).

If you have a couple who both have "high functioning careers" that want to keep working, realistically, they shouldn't be having a child. Should contraception fail, imho, at that point it becomes a negotiation between the parents to be as to who should be the primary care giver based on salary, opportunities for advancement, flexibility of career, degree of desire to be a primary child-carer etc.

Orion

Sharrow wrote: »

Tbh if I am doing all the washing and cleaning the house and the toilet then he can fecking well do the 'mans work' and cut the grass and clean the windows and do the bin.

But that's my point exactly. There no reason why all those jobs can't be shared. It's the concept of "mans work" and "womens work" that should be challenged.

Morag

Macros42 wrote: »

But that's my point exactly. There no reason why all those jobs can't be shared. It's the concept of "mans work" and "womens work" that should be challenged.

I can do the gardening and the DIY and outside jobs, there are times I have done when I get too frustrated at waiting for it to be done.

It has been challenged and I even got asked why I didn't do the bins and I said I would gladly swap cleaning the bathroom in exchange and was turned down.