To think trotting around after your husband craps all over feminism

[Ishouldprobablywax]

I hate all this ruddy Sam-cam Sarah brown rubbish.
These women have careers for fucks sake..yet they trot about mugging like idiots to all and sundry.
I hate that were meant to be in an age of equality and yet these women are expected to run around after their darling hubbies to their jobs?!?
My dh is in public eye and I detest being asked why I'm not at his events cheering him on- I don't ask him to follow me round my office and hold my hand while I'm stapling and writing up reports.
Gah!

YABU

Both DH and I have successful careers, and are both feminists too.

DH's career is in the public eye and involves us living overseas. I'm currently taking 1-2 years off full-time work to be at home with dd (18 months), and hopefully conceive another child soon.

To people who don't know me, I look like I've given up my high-flying career (if I ever had one) to 'trot about mugging like an idiot' on DH's behalf. I do attend social events organised through his work, because they're fun, and a way of meeting people while overseas.

I am offended that people like you, Ishouldprobablywax, judge me on appearances and make such 'little housewife' presumptions.

This has lead to me having a small chip on my shoulder and frequently explaining to strangers that I do have a career on my own and am merely on a break for childcare, and that it is my choice and my good fortune we can afford to do so.

I can't bloody win can I.

I think attitudes like yours are patronising.

If my husband earned as much money as the PM does, I'd happily go along to public events and be supportive too. That would be my choice, which is what feminism is supposed to support.

prsuming these sentient , intelligent women are trotting around and mugging aimlessly is incredibly belittling

i think berating women for supporting their spouses is a bit of a low blow

DH works up to 14 hours a day, is it crapping all over feminism to make sure there's a meal waiting for him when he gets home?

op, yabu

as others have said, surely being able ot choose is a vital component of feminism, or is it jsut as long as you choose something that meets so agenda of approval

I too consider feminism the right to choose. DH supported me greatly in my former career, (I now do something else) not financially but in every other way. I do the same for him. I guess that makes us a couple of 'mugging idiots'. I kind of look at it as supporting each other.

YABU.

Both my and my husband have good qualifications, job prospects, his is more of a non-negotiable career though.

It sees him travel a lot, and I have a choice whether to upsticks and move with him or have a permanent base.

I follow him, it's his job, it's not a case of him quitting is all that easy, I knew that before I married him and had kids with him, so I chose the lifstyle I have now.

It works for us.

For me, it's not the supporting in itself that's the anti-feminist bit it's

fisrt, that in politics, you seem to need to be a family man to be leader, as though that said anything about your abilities to lead the country. (Whereas, as someone said earlier, if you're leading the country properly you probably haven't got time to put the washing on and pick the children up from school)

and second, it the lack of reciprocity. When DH 'trots along' to support me at work functions, people treat him as if he might be an interesting person himself.

When I trot along to his work things, his colleagues more or less pat me on the head and tell me to run along.

But (as other people have said) Feminism is about a woman's right to choose. Choose what is best for her, and her family. I'm a SAHM/housewife whatever you want to bloody call it. I haven't sold out far from it. And there's no bloody way anyone could accuse me of being the "little woman".

My DH works in a lowly paid job doing menial things. I don't have to be trotted out to be the little woman at social events. But if he did have a high powered job that required me to do it, then I would. As would he do the same for me if I had that type of job. We support each other, isn't that what being married to someone is about? I don't need someone to tell me I'm letting womankind down by being at home with my kids and supporting my husband!

JeanHunt interesting point about needing to be a family man/woman to get ahead in politics. I guess we vote for this because we do feel the need for leaders to recognise what the 'average' family go through in terms of working and raising kids etc. although in almost every way I wouldn't imagine many people would call the Camerons average. It seems contradictory that we expect our leaders to be 'like us' in the sense of having a family, when they are most completely not like us in a number of very important ways, particularly in this case in terms of affluence and level of privilege. Do we perhaps also vote aspirationally? We vote for the people who look/sound/feel most like we would like to be, rather than what we actually are?

Roll on the day where being the best person for the job (especially the 'top job') means just that, whether married with/without kids, single, gay, mixed race etc. (she says naively, as if this will ever happen!).

D

I would find it hard to argue that samcam is oppressed in any way. Her lifestyle looks quite peachy in many respects.
Th wife of the PM isn't elected, so should have no responsibilities to the public whatsoever. She should not be obliged to attend any functions or go on foreign trips. That is the PM's job and I hate that the spouses are judged on appearance, as if that is remotely relevant to the PM's ability to do a job. If the spouse wants to attend events, then fair enough, but I would prefer it to be actively discouraged. I hate seeing politicians wives trotted out for the cameras (even though I know they are doing it of their own free will to support their spouse) and wouldn't want to do it myself if I was a politicians wife.
I think family is private and I would have more respect for politicians if they kept their spouses out of it.

Sadly although spouses, family etc of politicians should be allowed to keep out of it our wonderful press would never leave them alone - think of the flak when one of the Blair children was found drunk in London. Sop rather than get panned by the press for what would be perfectly normal life, they almost have to turn into nullities. If I continued my job if my DH were in public life, he'd be crucified for my actions (which have nothing to do with him), even when they are not just perfectly legal but actually required by the law and the job, every 5 minutes. So what shall we do? Sort the press out or criticise the SamCams of the world?

I agree that the press shouldn't have carte blanche to trash the lives of people who have not deliberately sought publicity (I think that being married to a public figure shouldn't mean your life is open season to the press). The lines get blurred when people seek publicity for some things but want privacy for others. Children should be off limits, full stop.

I think that if a politician is lecturing us about how we live our lives/raise our DC, then it is fair for the press to be able to point out if said politician has failed to live up to this him/herself. (Thinking of John Major going on about a return to family values while shagging Edwina Currie).

People just have different expectations of politicians now, fed by the US and celebrity culture. Just being a good politician isn't enough - they have to show that they're a well-rounded person/family man/whatever. It wasn't an issue pre-Blair. Norma Major didn't do much, and Dennis just went straight for the whiskey at whatever gig they were at. But now people want to know about personality and people's private lives. So they pander to it because it gets them into office.

Delia, thanks for your comments - I hadn't actually realised that the FL could "lobby" in the way you described - like you I am uncomfortable with that. My view is - you want to influence Congress, then stand! Plenty of women do.

Like many others, I loathe the parading of "family" credentials. I have no interest in the domestic life of politicians (provided it is legal and so on), or unless it is in direct contradiction with a policy they are promoting or could be seen to be dishonest (like claiming accommodation from your landlord who is really your partner). The only exception I make for this is the PM who does have a role as a national ambassador and therefore if they have a spouse, it is reasonable to expect the spouse to attend a certain amount of events e.g. Olympic games, Remembrance Sunday etc.

Actually, there are lots of childless politicians - which is great, since around 30% of women now don't have kids, and am not sure of figures for men. Also there are plenty of women voters who do have kids but they have grown up so may not be so involved/concerned with issues such as Sure Start etc. Some examples of childless politicians include Peter Mandelson, Margaret Beckett, Teresa May, Anne Widdecombe, William Hague, Michael Portillo - I'm sure there are loads more. These examples have been Cabinet members, leaders of their Parties, Deputy PM's so it is certainly not a barrier to high office. As someone who is childless, I do get quite cross at times when there is an assumption that women's issues in politics are exclusively about maternity issues, but of course that is a whole other thread! Woman's hour on R4 is particularly bad for this.

"DH works up to 14 hours a day, is it crapping all over feminism to make sure there's a meal waiting for him when he gets home?"

No, it isn't! Feminism is surely about our right to choose. If I choose to be a 'housewife', am I letting the side down? DH and I made a carefully considered decision that having a parent at at home would be more important to DS than having the (minimal) extra income that I could provide.

My DH works ridiculously hard at a crap job for crap pay and he deals with this (mostly) like a saint. If I worked, it would not prevent him from having to take on horrible amounts of overtime or from dealing with the hassle that is an integral part of his job.