"school snobbery"(584 Posts)
I think its hysterical that some people think that if you child doesnt attend a Grammar school or selective independent then theyre not academic. The level of school snobbery that goes on is quite bewildering sometimes.
People may lurk who are as you describe.
Okay, I could say lots of solicitors have big bottoms [dont know if they do, but they may do as they have to sit down a lot]. Is that offensive?
I think it's just indicative of a general theme of despising most people and their lives and choices, to be honest.
@libelulle I work in a (very) traditional profession. I have told you how I see more of my kids than most working women. It's not my fault you either disregard my posts or lack imagination.
That having said, had I had kids in my 20s it would have been a very different story. Because those were the years where I was establishing myself. And working very long hours. I had DD1 at (just) 31, which was the right time careerwise. But it's just luck it worked out that way (I got married at 30). And I have had some amazing luck in other ways in my career too, I think, although my closest colleagues say that is bollocks and you make your own luck. But I think I was at least fortunate to have the right boss at the right time, and to make a very bold career move (and bold really isn't very 'me') just after I'd had DS - it was complete thinking outside the box and I think my life now would be very different if I hadn't made that move.
I'm not disregarding your posts - you hadn't told me what profession you work in, so how am I to know it is traditional? And I never said it was impossible to see much of your kids and earn a high salary - I said that a lot of professions require high visibility and presence in the work environment. You said yourself you see your kids more than most working women - and I certainly hope you don't run a government department, a newspaper or a hospital ICU.
And by the by, is it obligatory to be rude to people if you earn a high salary? I may lack imagination but I hope I would never be so gratuitously unpleasant to anyone, online or otherwise.
I think repeatedly implying that someone is a liar and disregarding their posts (your repeated comments that you still don't see how women can earn > whatever without working ridiculous long hours and never seeing their children because you know 3 men who work long hours and never see their children) is a bit ruder than pointing out that you are refusing to look beyond your own direct experience then that shows a lack of imagination.
In this thread it's been implied that I am a liar, that I value only money, that I do a job that can't possibly be anything other than grind and boring, that I don't do anything of value to society........not all of those came from you but some of them did and I've read no apology, just the serial repetition that you don't see how it can possibly be done. That's a lack of imagination. It's not rude to point it out, it's accurate.
I didn't say I couldn't see how women earned lots of money and still saw their kids, I said that I couldn't see how it was possible in many traditional professions especially in the corporate world. Of course I know that some women must manage to earn a lot while working at home, why would they not? If you are very lucky and have a brilliant idea, you could set up a business bringing in heaps of cash with barely any work at all.
It is you who decided to disregard all my many caveats - for instance that bit where I said '*I'm not saying it's the only model*, but if you are talking about corporate life, then I'm very surprised indeed if that is not the more usual model'. Or indeed most of my last post about visibility in the work environment.
I think you are rather touchy. You know, we are not actually talking about you personally? Nowhere did I EVER say you were a liar, did a job that was a grind or wasn't of value to society. I did say that MANY high earners are indeed motivated by money, though I never said they were exclusively so.
And bollocks to 'I know 3 men who never see their kids'. Pretty much my entire extended social circle is made up of highly successful professionals - I'm talking at least 600 people, so a fairly reasonable sample! Issues with work-life balance and long hours at the office are the stock in trade of senior professional positions - are you really denying that? If you've solved it, that's great, but you're right in thinking that you haven't convinced me that your position is the norm. Perhaps you could have a chat with Louise Mensch and let her know what she was doing wrong?
In any case, what's so wrong with being motivated by money? I certainly would be, if I had that kind of earning power. Doesn't mean you aren't motivated by other things too.
The bottom line is that many people who love their work do see less of their children and also their spouse. In fact plenty like to mess around at work all day and then do a spurt of work at 5pm to avoid helping with bed time and dealing with screaming babies and a housewife (or husband) who is fed up to the back teeth coping at home. There are plenty of men and women who choose never to have children and hate them and that's fair enough too.
However the working parents I have known over the last 30 years in or connected to the city and in business do very much love and want to spend time with their children. I have often said on here that a few hours a day is usually my own limit and I don't apologise for that. I have spread loads of chidlren over a lot of years and I adore the time spent with them but a few hours a day is about for me the best including on holidays. I also need time alone in total silence thinking and reading. Many men and women are the same adn we are able to achieve a nidce balance of work, alone time and family and hobbies although that tends to come once children are over 5 and at an easier stage.
I agree with MA that things change over a career too. When you are at the bottom like my daughters you have much less power. People go on about stress on high paid managers but all the statistics show it is the man or woman on the factory production line with no power or on the no fixed hours contract who does not know where they will be from week to the next who have the higher levels of mental illness. Once you have money and power and say over your own destiny things are easier. That is why I want all of my children to pick some kind of work where ultimately you can own the business.
Okay, it seems that a certain poster does not mind general offensive facts.
How about lots of solicitors are unfit, how about lots of solicitors fear the law etc?
I think MN needs to change its policy.
I think I will bring it up with them at some stage.
Perhaps some posters will change slightly how they post. But I wont be holding my breath.
Join the discussion
Please login first.