Minor male entitlements

Well, I'm massively late to this thread, but here are my observations FWIW:

I live in a "nappy valley" and yes, I have suffered entitled behaviour from mums with buggys. But if this has happened, say, a dozen times, still doesn't compare with the thousands of times I've suffered armrest hogging, knees well out to the side, and aggressive pavement behaviour by mostly men. I am very little and I have had to learn two things: 1) to psychically take more space than my physical form, and 2) to gauge when I can do this without danger to myself (once, in the City of London, right round the corner from BoE, a guy in a suit rugby tackled my shoulder so hard he gave me a bruise, because I hadn't got out of his way, even though we were in a broad passage and there was no one else around).

At work, well, where do I start? I have learnt that I have to be really direct with requests, but at the same time I have to be seen to be "nice". I had one direct that thought himself above his station and was incredibly rude to me in public several times, and yet I was always encouraged to "solve our differences" rather than put him in his place. Eventually, he wrote in my annual manager review that "I'm too emotional". I've also learnt to smile graciously through gritted teeth every time I'm asked if I'm the receptionist or the secretary because, petite and blonde, what else would I be?

Having it all is just a sexist phrase used against women to keep them down and in the home or on flexible or part time working - the poisoned chalice which they accept at their own risk.

A balanced life for men and women is one with children and work in it. For most people when their children are under 5 life is very busy and very hard whether you work outside the home or not. The long term damage to women and families caused by women giving up a career path though can often last for 30 years after children are grown so it is in my view better to plough on as a man or woman working full time in those difficult years and take your jam tomorrow (the future riches both materially and in terms of personal satisfaction) which keeping a full time career going gives you.

Sorry, I don't know why I said "that's all". I think I was countering the lazy fucks who are all so tired after staring at a monitor and swapping pics of people running into stuff.

I've had a day...

tbh it's a bit more than being 'busy' isn't it? Engaged and developing, yes.

Pans, but busy is what 2 parents having it all means, that's all. PND is shit - my mum had it with my younger bro which kinda fucked things up for us.

And of course it won't sell. But why?

Busy? Well, dd's mum had severe PND, and had suffered from depression previously. so being 'busy' wasn't a choice? It meant doing basic stuff at the end of the day which hadn't been done in the course of the day. Two 'high-functioning' parents with one little one wasn't the situation.

But re mag feature... really would a mag feature with a wonder-dad sell to anyone? I'd doubt it. I don't think anyone would wish to read about a successful bloke who did the nappies, party bags, bathing, reading, and hair washing etc at all. But then I'm a big cynic.

But that's what it means! Busy. How can it not. Now, for those magazine features...

Did I 'have it all'? Possibly yes Crotch if I'm honest. Really, really fecking busy. Keeping dd happy and seen to, getting the basics re house/her done, getting worky stuff covered, chatting constantly to anyone even mildly interested and meeting new folk, so yes if 'having it all' equates to 'happiness'..yes you're right. But not knowing it at the time..

You see, I think you did have it all. Or all that it is possible to have whilst balancing everything you need to balance.

Has there ever been a "Have it all" magazine feature with a man demonstrating career and child involvement?

yes 'have it all' - ladened, isn't it? I simply meant both me and dd's mum wished to be around dd all of the time, but necessity meant it wasn't possible.

No one can have it all. I've never understood this term, nor why it's only ever applied to women.

Actually, I do. Because your average successful man has it all by dint of a wife actually doing stuff that means he has a family to appear in weekend mags and carry his name.

I think you were right first time Pan.

Me three TeWi. I used to do a four day week and it was perfect.

Part-time work - for both would be perfect.

It obv is a topic for debate, and the 'men as a class' issue is equally and obv pertinent. But certainly NAMALT and lots of us do get the value of being at home and don't, or at least didn't, get bored in a couple of hours by being with the little one/s and looking after the shopping/house/domestic tasks. As, like anything, it's really interesting IF you see it as interesting and worthwhile. I'd been role-modeled by a v long standing friend about this sort of thing. No, it wasn't a 'career' for either me or dd's mum. We had economic choices as we were both 'earners'.
But Greengrows apparent disdain for such things is slightly odd, to me at least, esp when I think she is a long time poster and was always a bit when I'd thought she was one of the very few women I have heard of who could have 'had it all.'

Me too TeWi.

This is rather sideways, but economically and socially I love the idea of limiting everyone to a 4 day working week. For families, there would be so many advantages. And for people who don't need to worry about childcare more time for a more relaxed work/life balance, you could allow studying on rest days so people who would like to change career or move up actually have time to do it.

Garlic, I think about this all the time. Really, men should be doing a much better job of running the world, given that they've bog all else to think about in the main.

As I've said before, that's where the real glass ceiling lies. In the home.

That's really true, Garlic. I did a full day at work, took my son swimming, came home and made supper, changed the beds and washed up - DP did a full day at work, played football, came home and ate supper, and is now flopping with DS in front of the telly. I have asked him to get the washing in off the line and put his bike in the shed. Not actually sure if either of these things will get done.

I think you do have to separate the being with your kids from the housework though. True, very few people enjoy doing the washing for the umpteenth time. But similarly very few people can afford to pay someone for that (whether one or both parents work). What a lot of people (of both sexes) find fulfilling is spending days with their children. So taking care of a chunk of housework because they are the ones at home is the 'price' some people pay for spending time with their kids.

It doesn't necessarily mean that they have been conned.

What many women would like is a world where they can work part time and spend some days with their kids and some at work. And, crucially, where the expectation would be that their partner would do the same.

It is relevant to the thread topic, I think. Looking at the early evening traffic today, I wondered how many of the women had groceries in the car/bus/train ... and how many of the men.
I wondered how many women, on opening their front door, would be met by a dog that's been walked & fed, kids already glaring at their homework with the little ones washed & pyjama-ed, and a partner who's done the shopping and planned the meal. We can guess how many men would!
I guessed that many women, arriving home with shopping, would go straight into the kitchen to start the dinner; I wondered how many of their partners also go straight from office exit to domestic duties.
Minor male entitlements aren't so minor when they mount up like that every day, are they?
And that's not even mentioning the women who have to do it all, while the fathers of their children go from office to pub and grab a takeaway.

I have not for a good few months discussed this topic but it's a crucial issue for women, isn't it? Are they conned into thinking staying home is wonderful in a sense as a tactic by men to keep them out of power or is being home a higher calling and men are the idiots to be clamouring to do the housework or whatever.

I think it is a legitimate topic to debate.

(I have never voluntarily name changed on line anywhere.)

Greengrow, I recognise your repetitive posts. No name change can change that.

You are not very good at listening