Motherhood and equality, what does Eutopia look like?

offred yes agree. If I had the decision to make again about whether to move back to the UK I wouldn't. We lived in the UK, then abroad for 4 years then back. Everything so much worse when we came back. And whether Brexit is the right thing or not long term (i think not but appreciate others think differently) I just don't think we can afford it short term - either in terms of finances nor in terms of the skilled immigrants we'll lose. And women and children of normal and lower incomes will lose out the most.

And by that I mean a time of rising demand and complexity of problems (caused by cuts and policy).

Basically all of our public services are collapsing, police, NHS, SC, schools, the CPS, the courts, HMRC, govt departments, LAs... they are just not functioning... Early intervention has been completely gone for a long time it is now just firefighting and scapegoating onto other services.

A lot of people don’t realise how bad it is because they only see the scandals as sound bites in newspapers and no-one mentions cuts...

I really dislike Alison Saunders but clearly and obviously the police are doing a shittier job of investigation with all the cuts and CPS and doing a shittier job of charging decisions and prosecutions with all the cuts.

Individuals are being sacrificed and scapegoated when the reality is this is happening because of cuts to services making it impossible to do even an adequate job like the doctor who was struck off essentially for a child dying as a result of her not being able to resist the pressure to agree to take on work that she should never have been asked to do in the first place (I think she should have been struck off but the cuts were ignored as one of the issues re why she was even there at the time).

It’s all a mess. I am quite frightened because women are more likely to be impacted by all of this because of motherhood in a variety of ways. But as ever women are not listened to when they speak about it because men in their ‘career’ enclaves by and large don’t even see it happening.

The loss of these things really does badly affect the functioning and accountability of the services and makes communities more disconnected, vulnerable and less resilient at the worst possible time.

Mums did volunteer peer support for breastfeeding, grans did Home start for struggling mums, a mixture of mums/grans befriending for the elderly, mainly male pensioners did reference/engagement groups, mums did roles in schools/maternity/parenting, a mix of male/female pensioners and students did CAB in my local authority while I was in the volunteer community and there was good support from paid staff that began being sharply cut.. All this stuff is being lost or ruined by cuts and policy at the same time the paid roles are being lost or ruined by cuts and policy and lots of these things were important community functions re scrutinising services and connecting services to service users so they work better.

I had a wry laugh about ‘the big society’ thing of cameron’s actually re all of this stuff about contributing other than waged work...

Do they just not understand reality (or are they in fact well aware of reality) and why people have been paid for some of these things that have been jobs up until then (because they are jobs)? That people have been doing ‘big society’ all by themselves invisibly for an age? Who is going to do ‘big society’ now women are being pushed into wage slavery? Is it going to just be people who used to be paid to do them now doing them for free? No, because those people have now become stigmatised benefits scroungers who have to be taught how to work by working for Tesco for free and starved and made homeless if they don’t get a letter advising them of an appointment. It’s really only pensioners that can do it now and many of the things were actually younger people helping pensioners.

The combination of the obsession with waged work, the state of the economy, the structure of the economy and the cuts means actually people are less able to do ‘big society’ stuff and communities are being destroyed.

Women who are child rearing are a major part of doing ‘big society’ stuff because we have brains that need stimulation and we need connection with the world in the isolation of modern ways of raising children. Lots of volunteer stuff I did had provision of childcare which has now gone with cuts.

Institutions that have had volunteer/community engagement stuff for a long time have had to stop doing it completely because they no longer have resources to administrate it. The ‘big society’ is in actual reality just a euphemism for ‘doing jobs that used to be waged but now we want you to do them for nothing’

I’d love to see everyone being paid for work they do and at the very least ‘volunteering’ becoming non-existent. There are serious problems with relying on volunteers (or often students) in roles that used to be or should be jobs.

Is the ‘big society’ something women are meant to ‘make sure they still keep up with’ just like kids/house/food/etc when they get a job? Is it something like national service but for pensioners? What even is it?

" after 30 for both women with and without kids the gender pay gap quickly gains pace in a woman’s 30s. "

Yep because you MIGHT have kids. I think?.

I was painted as aggressive ("pushy") for asking for a big pay increase last year but as my ceo had already interrogated me twice (since getting engaged / married & turning 30) about my baby plans I knew that I had to get the extra pay ahead of time as clearly I am at risk of suffering a hit afterwards.

Btw I got close to what I asked for. This brought me to (I think) approx the same level as a man doing the same role as me who i had already been outperforming for two years. But it was "pushy"

Bumpity

Why is it embarrassing? I think it’s great.

It’s funny isn’t it how personal anecdotes reflect what the statistics bear out. Like you Ineedacupoftea’ I earned more than my DH before having our first baby.

In the few years since then his career and salary have soared. I’m really happy with career too as I set up on my own, but on paper my salary looks a lot less than his. (I try to work as little as possible so I can remain the main minder for my two pre school kids but my rate of pay is better than when I was an employee)

The statistic I find most interesting/ depressing is that while salaries for both the sexes before 30 have some kind of parity, after 30 for both women with and without kids the gender pay gap quickly gains pace in a woman’s 30s.

I had always assumed it was a function of having kids / working less & bring discriminated against because of kids but no it’s literally just by being a woman that you will suffer a pay gap

I should have said the point about me and DH earning the same when we had DC1 is that at that point 50/50 childcare / work would have been possible. Now his salary has gone up loads and mine down we can't afford the financial hit. So, we're stuck in our roles when if we had a free choice I bet DH would jump at the chance of 50/50

I also think that if all the SAHP just stopped all the voluntary work they do then our society, schools etc would be even more stuffed than they are. Parent volunteers are filling the holes in teacher / TA provision at my local school & I bet that's a pattern up and down the country.

It is here. The preschool in our village just closed down because it had to be run by a committee made up of parents of attending children, and no one was willing or able to take that on any more. The primary school's PTA looks like it will be going the same way - they organise absolutely loads of events, including the village's annual firework display. It's a job in itself and people - let's face it, mums, mostly - just can't take that sort of commitment on these days. I certainly couldn't. I'm happy to help out but I cannot take on that level of responsibility, and raise my son, maintain my marriage and bring in income as a freelancer - I just can't.

On a very practical note: when Dh and I first had a child we earned the same. For us to go 50/50 we would have needed both companies to decide within the same timeframe if they would allow it, which as far as I know isn't a thing? Or is it? Do both parents have the right to apply for PT after becoming a parent and is there a set time for decisions?

It would also need both companies to be open to it, of course which us probably the bigger hurdle. I think they can just say 'no' with no comeback? Maybe that's the change that is needed in law - that the company should have to justify the decision to not allow pt during a child's preschool years.....

Would I have been adding more value to the world working in a sports shop (as before I was pregnant) or have the things I’ve done while being ‘just a SAHM’ actually contributed more?

Jumping back upthread but this is an important point, I think. The current focus seems to be to push parents to work - certainly there are only tax breaks for working not caring for your kids yourself - even when most surveys show that the majority of parents would prefer to stay at home given a choice (if they could get the same help by staying home).

In my situation, I would get no tax credits from working cos DH earns too much (though we still find it tough on his salary alone -SE housing costs) and the amount I'd need to earn to make working worthwhile at a family level is way above national average (i know there are other reasons to, I'm talking household finances). We're all experts in our own children, so why is the state willing to pay a less qualified person to look after the next generation rather than give the same tax breaks/ benefits to someone who is an expert? It doesn't make a lot of sense. The way things are you could literally get someone doing a badly paid childcare job rather than looking after their own children, just so they can get benefits / tax credits.

I also think that if all the SAHP just stopped all the voluntary work they do then our society, schools etc would be even more stuffed than they are. Parent volunteers are filling the holes in teacher / TA provision at my local school & I bet that's a pattern up and down the country.

If SAHP and all they do was valued more you'd see more men doing it or more 50/50 splits I think and this would benefit everyone.

It always grates on me that my mum lets my kids eat her food for example. I let them try things I am eating but I will not and never will allow them to look at my food as something they are entitled to. It is my food and it is for me. I’m not going to allow myself to become any more invisible as a person than being a mother already makes me even in small (neurotic) ways!

I’ve always wanted to reinforce to them that I am a person I guess and that it’s ok for them to feel bored or annoyed about me doing something I like but it’s not ok for them to stop me doing it because of being bored or annoyed.

(Mummy things include exhibitions I am interested in, political campaigning/meetings etc)

My mum says women used to be able to bring children to things much more often in the 80’s/90’s than they are ‘allowed to’ now but she also said sexism doesn’t exist anymore. I have been told I can’t have a depo shot or a dental check with my children and that is should ‘get childcare’ and she said she used breastfeed my brother while my sister was sitting on her lap and the Dentist was doing a filling. I don’t know how reliable she is though!

I remember thinking (when mine were small) an important part of socialising young children was to push myself to overcome feelings of discomfort about judgey people who thought children should not be at political meetings/restaurants/anywhere public and that whilst I’d take them out if badly behaved I must always go back in again to reinforce that bad behaviour wasn’t going to stop the boring thing (for them) that I was interested in. I’ve always balanced doing ‘mummy things’ with things they want to do and as I’ve mostly been a single mum there is no ‘staying at home’ re things that are the work of life like shopping.

Great thread.

I realised recently that my own little bit of furthering equality has been about normalising the presence of children in public places, including where there tend to be lots of men, a few women and no children.

To be clear, I don't mean insisting that little Tarquin should be allowed to play aeroplanes around the tables at La Gavroche, more that basically if I need to do something or go somewhere during the day when the DC aren't at school, they come with me. So they come to the sports club and sit quietly in the corner while I practise. They come to the supermarket with me. They came to get the flat tyre on the car changed. They came to the PTA meeting I had to attend at short notice.

Social expectations that children should be hidden away means that women are de facto hidden away. Bugger that.

It's Utopia, BTW

Exactly! It drives me crazy, the double standards. And your earlier posts about external pressures are spot on. Even with the best intentions in the world and a DH who "gets" feminist analysis of the way that things are structurally set up against women, and is willing to take an equal/greater career hit, I feel like we are wading through mud (with both our employers) trying to do the opposite of the well worn path of least resistance (and baby is not even born yet...). Despite both employers being "progressive" on paper wrt SPL etc.

Yy squirrel that is the couple I know who both work 3 days per week and don’t use childcare; woman is a registrar level psychiatrist in the nhs and man is an actor/comedian/nursery staff.

IMO it would be virtually unheard of for a man to reduce his hours from full time to part time in psychiatry (which is not easy to do even with sexist stereotypes re womanning when you have children) in order to enable a man to pursue work he enjoys but which is sporadic and very poorly paid and share childcare.

Yes the inequality in distribution of who has the "lead career" I consider a problem for women and feminist progress. I also agree that SAHM / WOHM isn't a "free choice" for women in current setup of society.

My point is that in my personal situation which is a rather privileged one I've still been shocked at how much I have to OVERcompensate to get "equality". And my DH is very much on board so it's not that he is an arse. There is SO much external pressure to confirm to rigid gender roles. I think it's just easier/ more comfortable for people / companies - doesn't make it right.

Obviously in a better setup of society you'd have regulation or other incentives to make men do their fair share (rather than requiring all women that be senior company executives or similar, and married to a man earning less, before they stand a chance of equality post kids!)

@Offred "I’m clumsily trying to make the point that women shouldn’t be dependent on agreements made with men prior to PG. "

Sorry I'm a bit behind on the thread. But yes - and the only way not to be (it seems, in the current setup of society) is that it's not enough to have equal careers / earning potential- you have to have significantly MORE of this than the man in order to offset the structural disadvantage of being female in this situation. All of our friends who have had the same jobs pre kids (eg both lawyers or both accountants) have had the woman step back post kids, not the man (maybe due to employer / relationship / both / other reasons, but not coincidence) .
I've agreed with my DH that he will take half the leave (ie 6 months SPL after my 6) but I'm only able to "enforce" (obviously he's on board but YKWIM!) that this happens because I make 3x his income. He could quit or get made redundant and it would still be okay. Not many couples are this way around (why?).