to find this article on motherhood inFURiating?

[BlooferLady]

Guardian writer in 'motherhood is hell' shock

Disclaimer: je suis TTCing. Erm, for a LONG time!

I didn't want children for years. YEARS! Was violently opposed to it And you know why? Because it looked like one long unending saga of drudgery, misery, isolation and loss of identity and self-respect (I have a large family and thus had the opportunity to observe its effects up close every 18 months or so).

We're TTCing now - hormones and a little wisdom took over, and I would very much like to be a mother. And yet here on MN and in the press I find my old terrors reinforced, and this article sums it all up. Everything I feared is true...

BUT IS IT? By the end of the article I wanted to slap the woman. She complains of her life dwindling to a miserable compressed world of perma-exhaustion, leaking breasts, nappy changes, never seeing her old friends, losing her sense of a professional life, only ever socialising with mothers and mother and toddler groups, bitterly envying women who still go to work, angry with her partner for not helping out round the house...

Someone PLEASE tell me it doesn't have to be like this. I wanted to yell at her, get out of the damn house and DO stuff you moaning bint! No-one MAKES you go to mother and toddler groups - put the creature in a sling and wander round the V&A! Let your partner do a bottle feed in the evening and go out for a boozy dinner! Do some work from home! MAKE your partner help out!

Surely there are people here on MN whose entire character isn't subsumed into the drudgery of being a mother? Who continue to be lively, interested in the larger world, engaged with their friends, interested in their career, happy in their relationships, still maintaining a sense of self and self-respect? For motherhood extends, informs, illuminates their life - doesn't effectively end it! Because if not, I don't want children. AIBU?!

well they simply must fight against it. It's why for over 20 years I've been saying enhanced maternity rights whilst women enjoy them ultimately do not always benefit women because they get shunted into part time work and never rise to the top. You could argue that nehanced maternity rights have paid a large part in ensuring women's lack of progress in career terms. They institutionalise sexism at the start.

What Skatergrrrl said. She is spot on.

And Xenia the most anti-feminist thing on here so far is you denigrating other women for enjoying their choices.

We disagree on those issues but we agree we want inequalities removed.

it is very very sexist to say I am "like a man" because I choose to work full time, because I like money and power and success. Those can be my fvalues, my sexs values. I can be a right(ish) wing capitalist feminist.

I am sure we can agree however that women should also seek to ensure no sexism at home and that although of course men are responsible for their actions women also have duties to other women not to reinforce sexist patterns. Maternity leave pays 6 weeks at 90^% pay at very very low rates os £116 a week or whatever it is. It is not something most people on reasonable salaries can afford to live on anyway so in a sense it's a total red herring. it's not a childcare solution really unless the woman is unsucessful and earns the minimum wage or married someone who will keep her in splendid glorified prostitution and housewifery for life.

Well I simply can't recognise the society she describes, in that case, because my husband (who is our child's father) recognises parenting as important (duh - he is one) and he doesn't have any more power in this relationship than I do.

The writer of the article described a situation in which both she and her husband automatically defaulted to a 1950s style marriage without even questioning themselves; if he didn't notice that was making his wife unhappy, it was incumbent on her to say so.

It has been asserted that the problem the writer of that article has is one of society's making - and it isn't. It's one of her making and her partner's, just as the fact I don't have that problem is because of how we choose to manage our marriage. I don't dispute that the majority of women do the majority of the childcare - many of them want to. But if there are women unhappy with that, such as the writer of the article, it's not the right response to throw up their hands and blame society. They need to look at the person lying in bed next to them and challenge them.

Just because a job is difficult doesn't mean it isn't worth doing.
Motherhood, like any task, has its dull times and its hard slog. Once you take that on board the whole thing falls into perspective. It's not a bit like the Sunday supplements IME. Did the author have a happy childhood? Did her mother resent the workload? Maybe she should ponder on that one.

I agree that divorce is the right solution to living with a man like this. Because its the sexism of the man concerned causing the misery, not society.

Yes. I am not a socialist and I don't think we can go round always blaming others for our problems. We need more self help and that begins on the micro level the first time the sexist man expects you to be c ooking hims meal and not vice versa on the very first few dates and extends every time you accept you are female therefore you are the one knowing how to work the washing machine. i agree with Georgi - the womn in the article is at fault.

I get sick of journalists writing about their sexist husbands' What is so pathetic about these women that they tolerate it? Do they think they are so lucky to have snared a man in the nick of time who will tolerate them when theyr' 37 and desperate for a child? Did they have sexist mothers? What is it with them which makes them accept the sexist at home? No one forces you tod o more than a man at home. It's not impossible to dump the baby and todller on the man on Saturday and say I'll be back in 3 hours to breastfeed and then back 2 hours after. Enjoy your day. These men won't collapse. They have arms.

If all these women are wanting equality, I'd like to know how many would really sign up for a genuinely split "ma/paternity leave". Chop chop toots, back to the office at 12 weeks, hubby's taking over for the next 16 weeks. IMO many women don't want to be anywhere but with the baby, but at the same time are calling foul when they're treated like "housewives". Marie Antoinette would be delighted - and as Xenia states, only those with wealthy partners are able to enjoy SMP - presumably enough to chuck a 20 at a cleaner? Some will just never be happy and will never find a solution to any problem.

it is like that,and baby groups are excruciatingly dull.formerly bright and articulate women reduced to singing wind the bobbin up and blabbering about feeding. i couldnt wait to get back to work,have a stimulating conversation that wasn't baby centered and feel like me again

Women give away far too much responsibility for how their domestic sphere shapes up.

Why do all the work and seethe because someone else doesn't do it with you? I don't understand this. I married a man whose mother did all the housework/childcare etc but I made it clear that I wouldn't want this type of household for myself. So we don't have one.

I work 3 days, yes, while dh works 5.. that reflects (broadly) societal inequalities in society's perception of the value of the work we do (I am an NHS worker, he is in the private sector working in construction), which means that financially for now this makes the most sense. However, I am doing an MSc alongside my work which means I work weekends and evenings when dh takes over the childcare responsibility. Could it be more equal? Yeah, I guess so.. We'd both rather have taken on a four day week but the bills dictated otherwise, but it works for us.

It works not only because dh is willing but because I do not undermine him as a parent. I don't think there's anything I do or have done that he can't do as well as me (except giving birth and breastfeeding ;)). I see so many friends who will talk about their husband being useless in their presence in the same breath as complaining about them not doing more.

What I most hate about articles like these is the implication that the "mothering" stuff is by necessity dull, worthless drudgery: something to be "listened to politely" while the working parent tells tales of real value. If you think that way about life, then I can imagine that you would find motherhood a bit of a bore and wish you could be working in the "real" world of power and work etc. I think if dh and I won the lottery we would never work again but just spend time making more babies and enjoying spending time with them. Sadly that's unlikely!

That's the point. I did want that because it worked for me and us that I took 2 weeks off But isn't it interseting that perhaps what I earn now over 25 years on from baby number 1 might be entirely determined by lack of maternity rights and marrying someone who earned less? Baby 1 - not been employed 2 years so in those days no maternity rights or not full ones. Baby 2 I'd changed jobs so none then either. baby 3 - i was hired 5 months pregnant (with 2 children under 4) none again. last two I worked for myself. So because of that no career sacrifice, no shorter hours, no part time and relative wealth in my 40s sufficient to fund 5 sets of school university fees etc etc.

I am not saying we should revoke our rather ungenerous 6 weeks at 90% pay and some women will save up over 10 years so when they have their firt baby they can afford to be home or they are used to living on about £100 a week anyway so the £116 or whatever SMP is for 6 months is not too different from their wage but for many that is not so.

I do want women though to consider that he otion of returnign to work is not wrong and can work very well for many families and is not a bad thing in any way. it's another option if you're grappling with what will always be a difficult situation.

Xenia will you please stop insisting that childcare is dull and that those who choose to do it are either weak or dullards! A day with a toddler has its fair share of mindless tasks but to my mind is full of fascinating moments. Their brilliant use of language - often utterly poetic - the delight in tiny things that in turn makes you look again. Ok all cliches maybe but PLEASE just because you find the daily grind dull, it doesn't mean that I am a mug for opting for it myself.

I'm not saying clearing up sick is fascinating, but if you think full time childcare is just that then you haven't done enough of it. I have 2 degrees (one from Oxford - only relevant because you keep insinuating my choice is a 'stupid' one), opted out of a very well paid job because - shock, horror - I decided life wasn't all about status or pay. We all make different choices and, as has been said many times before, that is true feminism: the right of women to choose.

yes but funny how they usually choose to be the muggins at home shooting their career to pieces whilst men have it made in an easier life making the "choice" to outsource the dull stuff.

I love being with small children but only for about 2 - 3 hours a day at most. I suspect many parents feel the same.

Though Xenia still hasn't explained why she asserts that people who are not very well paid have made a poor "choice" and why she thinks careers and wealth are everything to do with choice and success and nothing to do luck, ability and opportunity. If you are amongst the lower ability at school, try hard, but still fail exams, and come from a background where no one has ever made it out of the village/estate then you are never going to be amongst the very well paid and therefore able to afford for others to do your housework, unless you win some money.

This is however another thread for another day.