Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

The optional nature of men's lives

411 replies

cailindana · 24/01/2015 12:35

I was talking about this with DH recently and he agreed with much of what I said.

It strikes me that boys and men have very "optional" lives in comparison to girls and women and that this influences their whole approach to life. What I mean is, girls learn pretty early on that their choices will be restricted, that their options will be limited. From only being allowed to wear skirts and then told they mustn't show their knickers (thus removing the option to be active) to suddenly having to deal with periods and curtailing activities due to that, to then contending with the prospect of unwanted pregnancy and thus having restrictions on sexuality to then being told not to walk certain places not to do certain things for fear of being attacked and ultimately being told you "can't have it all" - ie choose work or children.

IMO, women (in general of course, not all) learn very quickly that there are consequences to things, that you can't always have what you want, that sometimes you just have to get on with it and face the fact that everything isn't perfect. I think that influences their approach to so many things in life from housework, to illness, to childrearing. Men on the other hand, always seem to have options open to them and I think that leads to a certain immaturity, a lack of acceptance that sometimes you can't have what you want. I think it has a bearing on how men approach things like fatherhood and the idea that now you don't have any choice but to knuckle down and accept your life is different - so many men seem to want to "opt out" and carry on as if nothing is different, thus leaving women to, as usual, take the hard road.

While I don't think it's right that women often end up carrying the burden I'm not sure it's necessarily a bad thing to have that maturity foisted on you. I think while women do lose out massively in the earlier years, especially when children are young, that maturity and that acceptance stands them in very good stead as they get older and ultimately they reap the rewards. I notice among older friends that women seem to come into their own in their 50s whereas men can't face that their options are now becoming limited and they no longer have the world open to them - hence mid-life crises etc. I think also because men expect options they tend to skirt on the edges of responsibility, never full accepting the hardship of, for example, parenthood, and thus ending up on the fringes as children get older and become true friends and companions. Thus women, who have been the stable guiding force in childhood, mucking in, organising, being the go-to person, reap the rewards of a close relationship with their adult children, whereas men, who focused on work, never really got their hands dirty with parenting, are now coming to retirement and the loss of that source of status but have not really jumped in with both feet in family life and so don't have that either. They are left with very little.

I am not saying the equality that exists is a good thing. What I'm saying I suppose is that while women look on enviously at men continuing their careers and never attending a parents' evening, they might do well to remember that the emotional toil and labour they put into their families is really and truly worth something. Jobs come and go, they give no love or longterm support. But children are for life, and being that person who always knows where the PE kit is is important, is special.

Men are missing out. They just don't realise that until it's too late.

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
cheminotte · 28/01/2015 17:02

Yonic - yes I completely agree. A month of sole charge should really give the other parent (ok, mostly dad) a real chance to understand what the role involves. This should be in addition to the 2 weeks paternity and hopefully the bigger companies can give enhanced pay. In companies I have worked were paternity leave is on full pay all the men take it.

cailindana · 28/01/2015 09:33

That's something I've struggled with Yops. I reached the end if my tether with DH, and I was seriously considering separation. Since that point DH has honestly faced up to his thinking, owned up to it and changed it. That takes character IMO. He isn't selfish but he has suffered from Mr Always Right Syndrome. It's served him well in some ways but it doesn't work in a relationship. He sees that. I still struggle to trust him but so far what I can see is genuine change.

OP posts:
Yops · 28/01/2015 08:43

Where do we draw the line between someone being conditioned, and them just being a selfish twat?

YonicScrewdriver · 28/01/2015 07:52

DWH, I would like to see a "use it or lose it" period of paternity leave as per some countries, where the 12 m leave can be split any way the couple chooses but the total leave becomes 13m if the man takes at least 1 m.

It's interesting that you think that's a "job" of feminism though. Isn't that perpetuating the perception that the "arrangement" of child caring is women's work, even if the campaign is related to men's activities?

cailindana · 28/01/2015 07:25

I agree, a lot of it is subconscious Apocalypse. One of the oddest things DH has said is that he truly believed childcare was automatically easier for me because I'm a woman. This was in spite of seeing with his own eyes how much I was struggling. All of the evidence right in front of him didn't override his conditioning.

OP posts:
ApocalypseThen · 28/01/2015 07:15

I don't think it's necessarily an active choice - there's an assumption that mam is there. I don't think it occurs to them that it's an active choice by the mother to be present any more than it did with their own mother.

I think you posted once about the responsibility of caring, cailin, and I think your point is relevant here too.

cailindana · 28/01/2015 06:50

I think many men, including my DH, resist being a full parent because of the inherent misogyny jn society that say boys can't have baby dolls or push a toy pram. Boys are taught from dah one that childcare is women's work and not for them. My own DH has said he unconsciously resisted being the organised parent as it felt 'wrong.' There's no point IMO in forcing men to take on responsibility - the underlying attitude must be tackled. And feminism does do that.

OP posts:
PuffinsAreFictitious · 28/01/2015 06:48

Anything else feminism should do for men?

Where on the list would you like us to put that?

DadWasHere · 28/01/2015 00:22

I'm talking about ones who simply opt out of being true parents. Who, like my DH, falsely use the treadmill excuse to escape responsibility.

What feminism should work toward is a model which presses men into more early bonding time with their infant child, meaning formalised paternal leave, or risk fostering the very thing women complain of latter, disengaged fathers. What’s more it should be actively pressed on new fathers, not simply offered, because if they get the idea its merely optional they will automatically resist it in their new 'father must provide' weighted head-space.

FloraFox · 27/01/2015 23:35

it's very clear that none of these women think that bringing some money in the house in their responsibility at all.

Are you talking about the women on that thread, TheFriar? I skimmed it and most of the responses were talking about generally not needing to work, not that their DH's were bringing in the money. Lots of talk of lottery wins.

I think if you ask the exact question to most men, the answers would be very similar.

cailindana · 27/01/2015 23:20

None of the optional dads I know fit that bill DWH, although I definitely know they do exist. My own dad has been unemployed most of his life, DH's dad had a 9-5 job, bf's dh works 8-4, my own DH's job involves some travelling but is extremely flexible - now that he's finally stepped up he takes every Friday afternoon off to do childcare so I can work - other friend's dh is unemployed and final optional dad also has a 9-5.
I feel very sorry for dads who are stuck on a career treadmill, missing out on their kids. They are as much a victim of the system as any woman. But I'm not talking about those dads - I'm talking about ones who simply opt out of being true parents. Who, like my DH, falsely use the treadmill excuse to escape responsibility.

OP posts:
DadWasHere · 27/01/2015 22:42

cailindana, it sounds terribly like you have only ever encountered men of my grandfathers ilk, which might be more currently relevant if I wasn’t now old enough to be a grandfather myself. Sure, your not kicking a dead horse yet but its OK to let it continue to die, and it is, because many men actually now want it to die. When my kids were little in my group of friends and workmates I saw both 'optional' dads and dads invested in their kids lives. But even back then far more common were dads who genuinely regretted not being able to be a bigger part in their young kids lives.

I am willing to bet that quite a fair number of your 'optional' dads did not start out that way but had 'dadhood' starved out of them. What I personally experienced was that commuting to and from work for up to four hours a day meant that the kids of fellow dads were asleep when they left in the morning and asleep when they returned home at night. All the dad had was a mobile phone call to his kids, if he could get reception, for five days a week. Tougher still before the age of mobiles. First one dad would call his kids and soon there was a cascade of dads doing the same, happy while they talked, grim faced when they hung up the phone.

That would have been me as well, but to get around that my wife got our kids to have an long nap in the afternoon so they could be awake when I came home. That, effectively, swapped the quality one on one time I could have with my wife after work for quality time I could have with my kids. So, instead of being the 'optional father', I had to try hard on weekends to make sure I was not the 'optional husband'.

TheFriar · 27/01/2015 20:49

For those who wonder if women don't get some benefits from a patriarcal organisation, have a look at this thread

THIS is the sort of benefits women are getting from the current arrangement.
Note too that none has said 'No I would always work because it's not fair on my DH to work whilst I do nothing/am a SAHM/do some voluntary work I like'.
Of course these roles DO have their importance but it's very clear that none of these women think that bringing some money in the house in their responsibility at all.
In that case, you can wonder if these women have any grounds to ask their DH/DP to do more HW/childrearing and take on these responsibilities in the same way than themselves.

Dervel · 27/01/2015 16:55

Frabjous can you imagine? As I said up thread I am livid with the demonisation of single women on benefits, seemingly related with their consuming of resources and misconception they aren't contributing. I am of the view that if you create a person, then take the trouble to nurture and teach that person, you have contributed that most crucial of things a society needs: a new member of it!

Again reiterating my earlier point people at the top end of of the financial sector produce nothing. Merely move money around and taking their cut in the process of course!!!

ApocalypseThen · 27/01/2015 16:51

I don't think he sees our relative careers that way. He works by default, I can choose what I want. So far, I don't think I've explained very well what a loaded choice it is for me.

PetulaGordino · 27/01/2015 16:50

yes it's a two-pronged thing. seeing the value in work (and people generally) that is not financially remunerated, and de-genderising types of work

YonicScrewdriver · 27/01/2015 16:49

I think ego is a bit simplistic - it's like it's not even on the horizon, like a parachute jump isn't on my horizon, I see others do it but I couldn't contemplate for myself.

BreakingDad77 · 27/01/2015 16:43

ApocalypseThen

Sorry but is his ego that big?, if one of you has topped out then surely the other should continue as the main breadwinner.

OFrabjousDay · 27/01/2015 16:39

SAHPs need to unionise :)

Dervel · 27/01/2015 16:34

I do think that what society presents as valuable is crucial. We don't as a whole value people, we value if anything what they are worth and what sort of wealth they can generate. If the status quo allows men to continue on as is, it's simply going to continue on by default.

Yet consider this though if every stay at home parent went on strike, said to the other parent "I'm taking the week off", it would become pretty fucking obvious, pretty fucking quickly how important the role was. More so if you factor in care of the elderly, disabled etc which tends to fall by default under women's purview.

Often the very idea of ethics, and virtues is an anathema to progression in certain, and unfortunately that is an aspect of the job some fathers take home with them...

ApocalypseThen · 27/01/2015 16:31

This is a discussion I'm having with my husband at the moment. We earn the same amount but it's taken me longer to get here and I've reached a level where my career is on an upward trajectory whereas he believes that he's at his maximum earning potential for his line of work.

However, the option of part time/career break is one that he's perfectly happy to consider for me if I choose that but even though I'd be happier with the reverse he will not consider it at all.

PenguinsandtheTantrumofDoom · 27/01/2015 16:13

Blistory- I think sometimes it is prejudice they are aware of too. They see and hear how their colleagues (and they? ) talk about part timers and they don't want to be that person.

Blistory · 27/01/2015 16:09

A lot of females in law, IME, find it difficult to progress beyond associate level. I think it's as a result of direct or indirect sexism on the part of both the employer and the partner/spouse.

I remain surprised at how many men simply won't entertain the thought of asking their employers. It's not a lack of us being positive - we positively support all our employees but still can't break through the barrier of persuading male employees that their career isn't prejudiced. I suspect it's because those male employees have their own prejudices that they may not even be aware of.

And Phaedra, I find it heartening that your Firm does well in this area but as a client who instructs many of the bigger players regularly, it isn't what I see when I give instructions. Plenty of female involvement at support level, associate level etc but less so at partner level and very little at senior partner level. Obviously your Firm is doing it differently so do you have any perspective on what it is that your Firm gets right ? Genuinely interested.

YonicScrewdriver · 27/01/2015 15:53

Phaedra, please. Someone says their experience is "very different to yours" and you jump to that being them saying that your experience is less credible or less worth mentioning.

No one is denying your experience, they are adding their own experiences.

Cailin, I think there's a lot of truth in your 1453 post.

BreakingDad, a friend of mine found the same. Bloody annoying and I agree it's a barrier.

FloraFox · 27/01/2015 15:48

It's not a generational thing BD, there has been 50/50 intake into law for 20+ years.

There are a lot of women lawyers working in-house., in the public sector and as professional support lawyers in firms. Some become SAHMs or leave to another career (legal recruitment has a lot of former lawyers). There are a lot of women working in the newish freelance agencies.