Feeling a bit let down by 'the sisterhood'

There are layers of these things. If I see a parent smack a child which I believe is morally wrong and appalling even if within the law I always object. I see that as a moral duty. If a toddler is running down a busy road with no parent around and might be hurt I step in. If I hear a racist comment from a taxi driver I always point out that i disagree.

if someone is very fat or too thin or feeding a child ice cream I don't interfere as I do not regard that as so bad and the moral obligation to intervene is not there.

If women make sexist choices which damage other women and their children by choosing to give up work or go part time then there is a moral duty to point out their error in the hope of ensuring they take the better moral course of full time work. Similarly a non working mother who thinks nursery damages babies may feel they need to point out they believe (erroneously of course) that that is bad for children. They think it is much more important to say that than saying something ilke - you look fat in those jeans which most of us would never say to anyone as it is just hurtful and is not likely to help the person lose weight.

Thank you, Buffy, for putting it clearly :)

'Yes it works for them, we've been told again and again, but does it work for the baby? .. is it best? .. I just don't think so ... '

I know I've said this several times, teetering, and I have no problem with you voicing that opinion, but that isn't the issue on this thread. You could have the discussion on what's best for babies on a separate thread.

wow ... someone asked why I could think that way instead of telling me to fuck off .. thanks hope :)

I am thinking of the baby (not child, but baby) and the bond that can't be built by not being the main carer, my opinion is based completely on the baby, not the mother or father.

I don't automatically think the mother should give up her career to look after the baby, I think as a couple they could maybe work out it out together ... in this case they have, the baby is in full time care. Yes it works for them, we've been told again and again, but does it work for the baby? .. is it best? .. I just don't think so ...

What makes me feel I have the right to say that, what makes the people in RL say that to the OP? .. It's human nature to mish mash all our experiences and spit them out again, of course I don't think the OP is going to quit her job and go running to the nursery to care for her baby, tbh I don't care what she does .... I'm on a public forum, I've got a spare 5 mins and I'm killing it ... In RL those that say something to OP probably care?

And finally! ... they don't say anything to the hubby because they are sexist bastards

I agree that all women are entitled to their views but I don't agree that it's ok to force them on those who hold different ones when they are unsolicited and likely to upset or offend. And it seems like motherhood is unique in being open to the views or opinions of whoever fancies offering them .

Yes. Hope, you were quick to come back with a dismissal of my racist/disablist examples - I happen to disagree with your evaluation, but one thing at a time, eh. You didn't answer my example about criticism of your appearance, which is more of a direct correlation with Hoping's issue. It's a different take on the idea that women's personal choices are public property; anyone's free to revile women who do not match perceived acceptable standards.

As it goes, I am old enough and travelled enough to have lived in a culture where this was deemed acceptable - strangers came up to tell me off, quite viciously, for my skirt length, shoes and hair style. I'm pretty sure that women in Muslem countries today face such disapproval, too. It's all part of the 'ownership' or infantilisation of women: we cannot be trusted to know what's best for us; society's free to tell us off.

Wrt to the racism/disablism - again, I am old enough to recall those things being said, for real, by speakers who considered themselves perfectly normal & reasonable. Once more, it's a case of "society" speaking through the mouths of ordinary people ... dressing up what "society" wants (oppression & exclusion) as reasonable concern for others, ignoring their own views on what's best for them. "Society" wants women to fuck off out of the workplace and stay pregnant, to brutalise a complex argument. Teetering spoke for that "society".

Babies have only been raised by stay-at-home (kept) mothers since the 1950s. As others have pointed out, this is not 'normal' for humans. I've written essays on how & why it happened (post-war economics), and the actual question of whether it's better for babies isn't the issue here. What is an issue: Millions of women speak as though "society's" economic policies were the one true way, the natural order of things. Do you not find that worrying at all?

Yes, anyone attending a church or mosque will hear sections from the Bible and Koran every week lawfully spouted from the pulpits about the sins of sodom etc. In our free society you are allowed to say those things.

I am happy to endorse how you are doing things. Equality and fairness is bound to be better than sexist marriages with women doing more for children than men. There is plenty of research which says children do better where mothers work full time. Luckily we are allowed to voice views like that even if they hurt the feelings of someone with an opposite view.

I certainly think people need when they speak in real life to new parents they should be sensitive to people's feelings but if you hold a strong view like housewives damage children then I think you have a moral duty to make that comment. Similarly if you think nurseries damage children then you should also make that comment but of course as much to the father as the mother - it is sexism which is the pernicious snake in the grass here which means women are castigated and men virtually never.

The majority opinion on this thread was indeed that the OP should be further questioned and judged about her choices, but that is clearly not what is happening in RL, and that is what the OP wanted to clear up, no?

Why is it that a woman's parenting choices are fair game to other women to comment on and criticise at will?

So surely it is relevant for someone who is criticising the OP's choices to come on and explain why they think they can do that. Or is she only interested in hearing from those who think her choices are the right ones (or that it is her choice to make and shouldn't be commented on)?

Hope, she may well do. I don't think that has any bearing on Buffy's comment (or Buffy's comment any bearing on that).

This is interesting:
Buffy: OP asked feminists (not childcare arrangements experts, mind you), feminists why they thought that her work colleagues couldn't help but intervene.

Who is to say that eg teetering doesn't consider herself a feminist?

I suppose ultimately what I'm saying is that, particularly in this section of MN, I think it is more useful and interesting to vigorously question anyone who has a strongly held belief about women which is a)reflected in RL and b)is not what the general opinion on here is.

Saying "you need to mind your own business" is all well and good, but wouldn't it be much more interesting to find out "why do you think that, and why do you think you can comment on it to me?".
The OP could of course ask that of her colleagues, but seeing as she's brought it up on here, and seeing as there were at least a couple of posters who appeared to agree with her RL colleagues, it would have been the perfect opportunity to delve into the problem, rather than just tell them their comments are unwanted.

teetering, I wasn't rude and I certainly wasn't interfering. It's a chat forum and we can all contribute. It's not like having a face-to-face conversation and butting in.

What I object to about your posts is that you keep volunteering your opinion on the OP's decisions about childcare. I don't necessarily disagree with your opinions, and more to the point I know you are entitled to express them. The objection I have is that (as you know very well) the OP was NOT looking for opinions but for advice and support on how to handle the often unsolicited comments she is receiving from people about her childcare choices.

Sorry if that wasn't clear, the whole of that sentence referred to all decisions that parents make.

So, extreme example, if someone thought it was ok for their childcare arrangements to be leaving small child locked in room all day with bowl of water, then we would of course interfere.

It's a sliding scale of having an internal opinion which should not be voiced, to commenting aloud, to suggesting perhaps that might not be best, to interfering.

Most on this thread think that the OP's decision should not be commented on, yet clearly her colleagues in RL don't feel that at all.