AIBU to think that I CAN have it all?

[TransatlanticCityGirl]

I was watching The Wright Stuff Extra the other day and once again, the whole "it's just not possible to have it all" topic came up again. Oh Lord....

This debate often leads me to wonder:

Just what exactly do these women define as "having it all"? Have they set their standards to an impossibly high level? And then and only then will they be happy?

How come men never worry about "having it all"? Do they think they already have it? Do they not want it? Or simply that would they rather just watch telly rather than think about it?

I personally think I CAN have it all, and while it may not be a walk in the park, it is not impossible and it doesn't even take an exceptional kind of woman to achieve it either. And in much the same way as money earned is far more rewarding that money won, achieving a happy well-rounded life will be far more rewarding that taking an easier route, e.g. sacrificing either my career or the family I want.

I believe that I can and will have it all. And in fact, I believe I already have it (although I do plan on taking it to the next level when I am ready). There is nothing more at this particular point in my life that I would want. I have an amazing husband, a daughter who brings me joy, a successful career, a lovely home, financial security, good friends and a recipe for the bestest cupcakes ever.

So what's the big deal? Why am I always hearing other women on TV complaining that you just can't have it all?

I agree, it depends on what you want to deem having "it all"

I dont have it all, whatever "it" is but I have a good life - a nice husband, a lovely DS, great job, a lovely home and a place abroad, lots of nice friends and loads of hobbies.......however, I am crap at cooking and my cupcakes would be bloody revolting. One of my good friends thoug does cook brilliant cupcakes (is that you op?) and so I dont miss out :)

I am a glass half full kinda gal, so tend to have a good outlook on life and I reckon thats half the battle!

Ok a lot of you have attacked iliketherain but Xenia you are being really offensive to housewives. OK so you don't want to be one but can't you respect the choices others make? As many people have said, different things make different people happy. I think 'having it all' is a really stupid expression, it sounds so selfish and self centred. Finding a good work life balance is a better way of looking at it I think.

agree bugster

The expression getting back to the topic is used by sexists to keep women down. That's the bo ttom line. No one ever apples to men. It's used a a device to suggest if you want to work and be successful at it you need your ovaries removed. However if you have a penis then there is absolutely no problem in having children and working. That is the wrong in the way the phrase is used.

In fact plenty of human beings of both genders love their work and their families and most people the world over work and have families.

As for what is this "it" If the it is housework and childre care and no work in your life then I am more than happy to forgo the "it". If the it simply means you can earn a lot and have al ovely life with children, even as many as the 5 I have, then that it the it which I have and I am no more lucky to have it than any man is.

Some people are very inadequate and can hardly manage the proverbial piss up in a brewery and find it hard to manage organising their baby and their home. Others can manage all sort sof things at once. Some particularly inadequate women like to suggest it's impossbile to have breasts and work full time and have a family simply because they have failed at that. It makes them feel warm and good when they can say it is impossbile to be female and work and have a family because they failed at it. Others (most o fus ) realise it's not a sex issue and plenty have more than enough competence to work have children pick a non sexist man, divide things farily and home work earn and have a nice life.

(They started it. If they cannot stand the heat they should get out of their kitchens and ideally into a board room.)

I have it all in that I have everything I want (could use a bit more money but since I don't want to work more to achieve that I can't complain!). I work 16 hours a week, have 2 kids now at full time school, keep a clean and tidy house, have a great social life and am happy.

It depends what you call 'having it all'? Why does it have to include a full time job? Not everyone wants that.

I suppose "having it all" means having a really successful career (which few people end up with anyway), a happy marriage and a good family life. Of course you do see plenty of high-profile men in that position, in that they have very successful careers, and the good family life is taken care of by their wives. So if they have to fly from London to Berlin at 7am at a moment's notice for an important meeting, they usually have a wife who will take care of the kids for them. For women, it tends to be a very different situation. For a start, if they have a successful career, they're usually married to a man who also has a successful career, so the kids tend to end up spending their time with a nanny rather than a parent. This whole business of "having it all" only works if you have a spouse who will fulfill childcare responsibilities. Otherwise, you end up sacrificing either your career or your kids, and it seems to me there's no point pretending otherwise. I'll always remember reading an article by the journalist Yvonne Ridley saying she'd decided she ought to take a holiday with her then eight-year old daughter (who was in boarding school), as she didn't know who her daughter's best friend was or what her favourite colour was. I thought that was quite sad.

FFS Xenia I've been nodding along with you for a good few posts but you had to go and spoil it, didntcha?

I wonder what having it all is for children?

It doesn't have to include a full time job. How many of you with a full time job can honestly say that it is so wonderful and fulfilling all the time? If it is then you are very luckybut I don't think there are that many jobs like that. I think you have to accept that if you allocate most of your hours to working outside the home, chances are your reltionship with your children will be different from how it would have been otherwise. I'm not saying it has to be bad, but i have the example of my own mother. She was a 100 per cent career woman and i went to may grandparents after school. The great thing about that was that I was really close to my grandparents. But although I have the greatest respect for my mother, I have never been close to her. I always thought 'she is so brave and hard working, she did worked so hard foe us'. but now she is retired and has very little interest in her grandchildren, I have come to accept that she just doesn't like children very much, much like it doesn't seem that you do Xenia. Which is why I am somewhat baffled that you have 5 of them?

This women-wanting-it-all nonsense is just bollocks. Some men want to have children and families just as much as some women do. Unfortunately men can't bear children so women are still seen by the Daily Mail most of society as the ones who choose to have the children, choose to work, choose to have a social life, choose to have material things.

Everybody wants some or all of these things to varying degrees, not just bloody women.

This is a complete non-conversation.

Xenia - what I said to Iliketherain cuts both ways. Your comment about the IQ of housewives was just as rude and banal as hers. Trying to score points off an individual poster by ridiculing a choice that many others also make is like throwing a fist full of stones at someone and not caring who else you hit.

Ahhhhh, AIBU. Where you can start with a thoughtful OP ending in a positive and uplifting note and move directly into bashing over sexism, women-against-women commentary and some your-happiness-makes-me-sick railing. You gotta love this place.

I think I have it all, or everything I want anyway. A successful career, that now I do 4 days p/w but will go back FT when the youngest is in school. A great DH who also works PT so we can share the childcare and household jobs (I haven't had to do the cleaning since DD1 was born...hooray ) great family support so GPs look after DCs when we work and no childcare cost. Enough money, not loads but I never have to worry about it. 2 wonderful, beautiful DDs and a house I love.

I don't think I could have managed it when I was younger though, I have been with DH since I was 22 but didn't have DCs until I was 35, as I decided to get my career established first.

I also think it depends on your outlook, if you are a grass is greener person you will never have it all. Some people would think we don't have it all, but is everything I want.

Would also like a dog though, but DH is allergic....does that mean I don't have it all?

Oh course you can't have it ALL.
You can't be in 2 places at once. And there simply isn't enough hours in the day.
but you can be happy with 'Your LOT'. Thats the difference.
You can't hold down an amazing CEO job, enjoy enterataining clients in Dubai, have Pippa's ass after your 4 hrs in the gym, nails and hair and wardrobe to die for, whilst doing a full time mum role, school runs, helping out on school trips, making mud patties , splashing in puddles in the rain, after 40 verses of 'the wheels on the bus', and still present dh with a beef-en-croute, with a croqembouche to follow, for dinner, whilst stood in your suspenders, asking him if he'd like a quick BJ as an aperifit.
It just doesn't work that way. What is this 'having it all,' of which you speak ?

What about women who aren't as clever as you Xenia? (I don't mean ME of course )

I mean the ones who are of average intelligence, who got a few GCSE's, enough to get a nice job at, say, an insurance brokers. A good job, good money for a single girl, more than her mum and dad ever earned so that made her parents really proud. But not in the same category as a high-powered city lawyer earning 10 x what her husband did. When that young woman wants to have children and finds that a childminder costs 95% of her salary on returning to work - should she really beat herself up for not trying to be as successful as Xenia? Because she tried her level best, and actually did very well, considering her IQ of 100 and her bog-standard family background.

A lot of people - male AND female - just couldn't do what you did with your career. Because, most people ARE average. That's what average means - what most people are. (Actually that's the median, isn't it? But hopefully you see my point.)

I like your posts and always find them thought-provoking. But the one thing that always puzzles me is the glaring contradiction you always seem to end up broadcasting, which is:

a) why doesn't every woman do what I did?

combined with

b) I am more organised/clever than other women

Why don't you get it that b) is the answer to a) ?

@ wilsonfrickett.

Hackmum I find it quite offensive of you to suggest that any couple where both have successful careers are sacrificing their kids in some way. Dh and I both have successful careers and as we waited until we were both at the top of our profession and earning well before having kids it has allowed us to outsource the grunt work part of running a home - cleaning, ironing, gardening, odd jobs etc - as we have the money to pay for it. Also in this day and age there are these lovely new fangled things called blackberries which mean that I don't have to physically be in the office to be working. I can also log my work phone on at home and connect to my work network with a click of a button. Why is all this important? Well it means we have a family breakfast every morning and because I work from home 2 days a week, I only miss 6 mealtimes out of 21 in the week. My PA organises my diary so that it is clear to all and sundry that I have to be home to do bedtime every night. All in all women can be successful in the workplace and be "present" mothers.

Do I have it all? My answer is sort of but not a categoric yes or no. Dh and I have very fulfilling and lucrative careers which means we are mortgage free and have lots of material things and we have a happy home life with each other and our kids. however while we don't sacrifice our children, what we do sacrifice is ourselves and like many others with a baby and a toddler, we don't feel we have enough down time, "me" time or time with our friends. So nope, don't think we do have it "all" but I am happy with the choices I have made.

But, oblomov, that is my life!
haha.
Women can and do have it all, all the time!
So do men.
I agree with whoever said it is more an attitude than reality that determines if you feel you have it all. I'm sort of between being a (in all honesty not very good) housewife, and doing a bit of work here and there.
For me I have it all now and am happy, just as I had it all 4 years ago but was unhappy. I have less money, but do more stuff.
the can they have it all? debate is a bit of a red herring.

I'm a mum at the school gates and I'm not dumb in any way, and I resent it enormously when high flying career mums assume I have nothing of interest to say. I haven't chosen their route , and they haven't chosen mine. Fine. None of us can have it all - something always has to give. Once you get you get your head round that and are happy with the route you've chosen, then you can get on with life. But don't make the mistake of thinking you can have it all, because something is always missing out!

Xenia,
I agree that the "having it all" phrase is only applied to women, it somehow suggests that women need to learn their place. No-one ever looks at david Cameron and says "how does he do it, married, three children, and a high flying career", yet if he was a woman we would hear this. Its the same thing when a female war reporter was asked about her children, yet the male ones are not. Lets face it no-one refers to women who work full-time as cleaners for minimum wage whilst having children as having it all, it is only women who have more traditionally male careers that people have issues with.

It is down to not having children with a sexist tosser. If you spend your time trying to fit childcare around your job, asking for flexi-time, going part-time, whilst the father does not even consider that for a moment, then of course you are not going to be able to manage. neither would he if you acted that way either. It is about the mother and father supporting each other.
However, it is about choice, and a couple working things out together. Childcare is an extremely difficult job (to give you an idea of how some nannie sget paid , one of my friends working in Europe, got four hundred a week, a city centre flat, all bills paid for, a food allowance etc, so probably earnt more than most solicitors), and if a couple together decide that it is better for them to have one parent stay at home, or work part-time then there is nothing wrong with that. I certainly have no less respect for a woman who stays at home, than a woman who is a pilot. I suspect women who do have issues like this are insecure in themselves.To me having it all is about having choice.

How come men never worry about "having it all"

Really, really good point. Men are expected to 'have it all' because it honeslt is a lot easier for them. Think about all the male celebrities with children. Do the magazines goad them for being bad fathers because of their busy jobs?

Actually I'd be interested to know what kind of career Xenia has?

Hackmum, this posting seems to me utterly OTT. I have two dcs, a lovely husband (25th anniversary this year) and a fairly enviable job (not massively well-paid, but apparently in the top 10% of earnings). I know my children pretty well - though I like holidays with them. Dd has never had a nanny or childcarer; DH and I coxed and boxed her care. I did have a nanny for a while with ds and hated it - goodbye nanny. But your mileage may vary. every happy family is happy in its own way - Tolstoy is wrong about that.

Don't be discouraged, OP. You're right that you can and should have it all - though I dislike the grabby phrase. Yes, I do bits of work form 6 am and into the night, and always work bits of Saturdays and Sundays, but I also always have time for family time every day, even if it's only mealtime/s.

Oh, and we make all our own bread and also make cupcakes - though I hate them, frankly, and prefer to make a proper pound cake, orange, ideally.

Kelly is right.
Every time this issue is debated in the press it's a knife into women because it makes those managing fine think hey loads of people are sayign if you happen to be female you cannot work and have children but if you're male you can. How weird and sexist is that?

Miriam gonzalez who earns a lot more than her husband Nick Clegg was asked about having it all and I can't remember her answer but it was good and probably along the lines of why ask me that and not a man?

Housewievs obviously have to think that if other women work they are "sacrificing their child" but in fact chidlren benefit hugely from growing up in a family where they see both parents, have a good income coming into the home and see women working. It's win win for children.

No working mot hers or fathers I know choose to see little of their children or send them to board at 7 or have 24/7 nannies. That is just not how you are if you love someone. You want to maximise your time with them. However you balance it. 24/7 working and children boarding is at one extreme. Baby sleeping and attached to you 24/7 and then home schooling from age 5 - 18 is at the other extreme.

Hmm, it all depends on what 'having it all' means. Hopefully its being happy at home and professionally and that doing your best is good enough. Luck is a factor for many, for example growing up in care is a harder start than with 2 loving supportive parents who continue to support you in adult life. Having a child with SEN or a parent to care for makes life much more complicated and sometimes no amount of money will enable you to have it all.

As an aside I won't go and see that film because I read the book and it was depressing sexist saddle.

Housewievs obviously have to think that if other women work they are "sacrificing their child"

Do they? How strange that such an obvious thought has not entered my conscious mind.

I suppose I'm technically not a housewife - I teach music and work (unpaid) for my husband's new venture - but I was for years.

My IQ is higher than average.

Just FYI.