Separatist Feminism - Thread Two

Well, no. Seeing your dc once a week or once a fornight wouldn't be my idea of fun either. But I seriously do not want to be a stay ay home parent; I would do it if I had no choice, but I don't think I would actively choose this role.
Before I met my current DP I was not fussed on children. I no real strong preference for being a mother, nor an opposition to the idea. My DP on the other had has always wanted children. He convinced me as it were and now I am glad he did. However, the whole childcare thing was carefully discussed first. I expressed my desire to continue working and general unwillingness to be a sahp and so did he. We decided to both work and avail ourselves of the free nursery places that the Mexican state awards (some) working mothers. Once my dc are at school we will have to pay for childminding, obviously. Even if I were to become a single mum I would like to continue this arrangement unless financially impossible. I wouldn't want to give up seeing my dc only on weekends; but then again I can imagine that neither would my DP so we would have to come to a better arrangement.
I think my unwillingness to be a sahp is also linked to the fact that here I have no family nor close friends with children and thus no option of availing upon babysitting and/or social meet ups with other parents and children. Here it's me or DP and the dc in the afternoons or holidays. It is relentless and extremely tiring looking after the dc when it is always up to me/DP to keep them busy and happy. I always love it when we go to DP's village or my home when my dc also get to play with other children and let me sit down for a cuppa every now and then. When I have been tbhe fulltime carer in holidays for 7 days (when DP was away for work for example) I have realised how hard it is to be a single mum and how much I admire people who are able/ready to do this on a continual basis.
I think what I am trying to say with all this waffle is that I can understand why divorced parents could be attracted to the seeing dc only at weekends type role, especially if they were ambivalent about having children in the first place. Plus that children having places to go and people to see who aren't their primary carer too.

Sorry I mean separatism where you stop doing the childcare role.

I just think most women wouldn't give that up voluntarily.

Hmmm

I can see the attraction of lving like the average divorced man.

It would be great.

But for me what would militate against it, is the notion that it wouldn't be best for my children and that they may suffer if I lived like that.

So that thought would ruin my enjoyment of the freedom and convenience and so I wouldn't be happy anyway.

I think that on the whole, women put their children's welfare first. And that alone would stop separatism from becoming a mass movement and would only ever be a luxury stop gap measure, like retreats for busy working people are.

Which makes it even more odd that there is so much hostility to it.

I think Kissass makes some very interesting points and I think in the main I agree: ie childbearing is a biologically imposed role on the female sex while childrearing is a socially imposed role on the female gender.

Thus in a post-patriarch world some women (like SaF, I think, but please correct me if I am misrepresenting you) want to take on the child-rearing responsabilties as primary carer whatever the circumstances; some women (who are in the position to choose) would be happy to see their partner do this (ie be a primary carer). Some women (eg me) are happy for (and are in the position to organise) primary care-giving divided between them and their partner as equally as best serves both their needs.

I feel the need to point out that this is not in anyway judgemental. As far as I am concerned none of the divisions are better than others. They are all simply possible.

Separatist feminism wasn't/isn't really about individuals feeling happier with their personal lifestyle choices; much more about rejecting the social system that drains women's energy into making men (and children) comfortable at the expense of women. All-women spaces have a different energy, not necessarily the inclusive supportive ideal we might hope for.

probably, but if we're discussing women separating themselves off, then it's worth thinking about.

tbh, a LOT of society seems to be divided into 'men' and 'women and children', so I like to think around what it would be like if it wasn't organized like that.

If it had been dh who had ivf treatment, followed by 9 months of hyperemesis, an emcs, mastitis, breast feeding, then a year of low immunity so getting every cough, cold etc. Where would his career be compared with mine?

In spite of going through all that, I still applied for promotions (even whilst on mat. leave) but didn't get them, so I'm thinking that if women were not biologically linked to reproduction, and not socially linked to childcare, then things would be very different.

the idea of being able to 'get away from it all', live somewhere that i just have to focus on me & take care of myself, not completely isolated, but basically living as a divorced man would do, is quite appealing. I could get so much more done than I do. I could invest in my career more, and not have to rush home after work etc etc. I could see dd a couple of times a week, and enjoy her company at those times.

I'm sure a lot of people would condemn a mother who did that, but it is assumed that men will act like this if their marriage ends.

Why?

which makes me wonder - there's this assumption that somehow 'mother love' is better/stronger than 'father love'.

really?

or are we just made to feel so guilty if we don't raise the kids, that almost every aspect of society is based around that idea - even in the courts, which should be as impartial as possible, it is assumed that the mother will have the main care for children, even when both parents work ft.

so, as someone with a pt job, why couldn't i be the one to leave the house, let dh raise dd, and i just support myself financially, with weekend visits from dd? dh earns enough to support himself & dd, including the cost of childcare etc.

i have a feeling that there would be a lot of resistance to this plan if i voiced it in rl

ok, i heard it on an interview many years ago with germaine greer. obviously it is not a practical solution, but i thought it was one of the things she'd said which raised much discussion - however i know next to nothing about this.

anyway, the idea (it's purely theoretical) is that if it was possible for babies to appear without a woman having to gestate & birth them then society would have a vvv different attitude towards the whole concept of child raising & how women fit into society.

sep fem seems to be a way that women could, potentially, step away from raising children & it would be interesting to see how society restructured itself if we didn't assume it was primarily the woman's job. the attitude towards women who don't raise their own kids, and how badly many men do the job when left to it (not in every case, but often enough), i see as just further examples of how the patriarchy is embedded within our thoughts.

apart from breast feeding, there is not one part of child rearing that a woman has biological expertise for and a man is unable to do. even the idea that women are better are multi-tasking is a)highly questionable, and b)thought to be a result of patriarchy down the centuries. So even that aspect, of being able to watch baby, help with homework, cook dinner & chat on the phone, is a fallacy, and men could use those skills if needed to.

The fact that there are plenty of men who can and do achieve these tasks, just shows how it doesn't have to be this way.

yet we still assume that women will be the ones raising the kids.

i dunno Kickass-[unless women stop being a birth parent......]
do you mean stop being the birth parent or stop being the parent with the number one responsibility ect?
a woman couldnt stop being the birth parent could she?as shes the one that gives birth!
surely by taking this away its another patriarchic notion?
anyway-even these days women who are not with theyre children are looked down on!

i notice that we are all assuming that women would still be the child carers, or at least predominantly.

i agree with the rad fem view that there will never be true equality unless women stop being the birth parent. because we go through pregnancy & childbirth, then provide the milk, we get tied to child caring. then this aspect of society is undervalued & the 'wife work' unpaid etc.

so, how would society function if women stopped caring for children? if there really was a separatist community who just decided to take care of themselves, put their work & interests first, maybe visited their kids once or twice a week & financially supported them?

now that's a scary thought for a lot of people.