To take exception to the term 'mumtitlement'?

[MerchantofVenice]

I'm sure many people have spotted this rather insidious word popping up on recent threads. Personally I find it unpleasant and misogynistic. Depresses me that a number of people immediately piped up about how much they 'loved' the term as soon as it was coined. Bleurrgh.

Why do we hate mums so much?? If someone's being unreasonably demanding, then that's one thing... But to try and link selfish behaviour to 'being a mum'... Wtf?

I get the idea that there is this general feeling that mums are marching around being all 'entitled' and, you know, trying to carry on their lives without apologising for being alive. This desperate need to belittle the whole of mumkind every time one mum gets something a bit wrong is so bloody annoying! Ok, if someone is a twat, call them out on it... But using a term like 'mumtitled' is confrontational to all mums - as if twatishness is peculiar to them...

A lot of the time, the issues seem to be about what women 'should' be doing - should they be going there, should they be breastfeeding there, should they just clear out of the way with their offensive offspring so that more important people can get on with their lives in peace? Pisses me right off.

Anyone else?

I could understand everyone falling over each other to slag off mums if this were, say, chauvinisttwats.com or similar....but it's, you know, mumsnet...

I think that's the wrong perspective - it's not about one upmanship. The formative years of children are a priority.

Can you not see how "it's not about one upmanship" is directly contradictory to "the formative years of children are a priority"?

No

Adults are on a par with one-another. One upmanship makes sense.
Children are minors. They are vulnerable, cannot compete with adults, they must be prioritised differently. They/their needs cannot be relevantly entered into one upmanship with grown adults.Obvs.

I think that's the wrong perspective - it's not about one upmanship.

And I think that's the wrong perspective. Why should she be expected to put other people's children before what she would personally want to do with her partner on a universal holiday which is not solely for children, however much you personally think it is?

Seriously, why should she be remotely interested in what other people are doing for their Christmas Day? She books time off, it's fairly administered, she takes her turn and she gets it. And why is it any business of yours what she is doing and with who?

I'm out - there is no hope Merchantof Venice as so many people are determined this should be a matter of picking sides, and women with children are apparently to be put into a group and told they are Mumtitled unless they scrabble frantically to assert that they fucking hate other females with children and identify with men and childless women and want to be in "their gang" and would never, ever take Christmas off, in fact they make a point of always working Christmas and never booking holiday in the school holidays or asking for part time hours just to prove... something...

It shouldn't be about sides.

People have all sorts of reasons to want or need leave. Workplaces should have an annual leave system that is open and transparent with enough flexibility to cope with emergencies or situations where people absolutely have to have certain dates or else they will have to resign... Part time working requests can be put in by anyone and there are laws about considering them (though some employers are arses about it) and anyone can request any hours they want before signing their contract, regardless of reasons, and the employer can say yes or no or meet half way.

This thread is just ridiculous stone throwing and people trying to settle old scores with the ghosts of absent colleagues though and I am out.

Bye, Schwabi,

Nobody actually said most of that rant, of course.

Hi venus
My beef is only with sneering comments made about mothers insisting on being with their kids at xmas as being selfish/mumtitled/whatevs. If she wants to hang her stocking, etc, fine. Locums etc can cover it.

Sorry to see you go Schwab

If she wants to hang her stocking, etc, fine. Locums etc can cover it.

She's said they can't. Or didn't you read that post? And I rather think you're making "sneering comments" about feeling sorry for grown men being alone and "hanging stockings" etc.

Seriously, who are you to judge what people want to do with their Christmas?

I'm not sneering about what grown adults want, unless they want me to prioritise them over my concerns for children in their formative years. ....
I don't get the conflation between 'mum doing what is best for her kids' with 'selfish person doing whatever she wants out of a sense of entitlement '..

It is probably better for society as a whole if all adults prioritise children's wellbeing at a social level and not their own hedonism and meeting their own needs. That has precious little to do with whether people have children or not but the society makes children's issues women's issues and makes women a homogenous and non-privileged group.

(And Christmas is a red herring I suspect as most irritation with women being mothers in the workforce relates on a general level to issues around flexible working, taking time off to care for dependants or elderly relatives or leaving work on time in a culture that tends to view work as being more important than anything domestic because Money is our God).

I get that there can be issues surrounding leave at work - and, of course, with working mothers being in the workplace, some of those issues are going to relate to childcare. I sense that the solution for some of the mum-haters on here would be to keep all the mothers at home...

Surely, if you have a sensible system in place, then no one gets unfairly prioritised? Of course, if someone has an unreasonable strop about it, then they are just an arse - not some special mum-arse.

The very fact that this work issue has taken over this thread about a misogynistic term actually proves that mumtitlement is just another symptom of our sexist society. I tried pointing this out upthread, but it was conveniently annoyed by the mum-haters. Allow me to try again:

If issues about childcare are causing problems at work, and then that problem causes cries of 'mumtitlement' but, crucially, NOT 'dadtitlement', then can we not see that the issue is that women are being asked to be all things to all men, and being berated and ridiculed when this is not possible?

To put in another way, I'm sure the fathers in the workplace value their partner's ability to care for their joint children. They want the mother of their children to do this. As a society, in fact, surely we want mothers to care for their children - to be there when they're ill etc. And those same fathers will be in the workplace with other mothers - will they understand when one of those mothers needs a bit of flexibility, or will they think 'It's fine for my wife to have flexible working hours to care for MY children, whilst I am busy being important at work, but other families must suck it up'???

So, it's society's issue, not just a 'mum problem'... and yet we heap all the blame on women, again. Brilliant. Well done to all the misogynists on this thread for reminding us of this.

it doesn't tarnish all Mums though does it? Just the wanky twatty ones who display entitled behaviour

Exactly this ^ WorraLiberty.

Like my friend with Fibro who walks with a walker, who on a particular bad day was made to feel like absolute shit on a very narrow walkway because she didn't move out of the way quick enough for a lady with a pram.

Of course, most Mums aren't like that, however some are, and i think Mums like that are the reason the phrase was coined. I'm a Mum of two who used to push a double buggy around and I don't object to the term mumtitled, and yes I would use the term dadtitled too. The only time i came across an entitled Dad though was at a very boring select country affair thing.

Op,
If you are going to set yourself up as an arbiter of language then it might be an idea to take a little more care over your own.

I am not taking lectures on misogyny from someone who describes women as 'bitchy'; particularly not when their reaction, on having it pointed out to them, is to lie low for a day then pop back as if it hadn't happened.

I wouldn't bother replying - there is nothing you can say that will make me take you seriously.

Same goes for you, Squirrel - I'm not wasting my time on posters who don't know the difference between debate and personal jibe.

Final thought: when one poster after another has the same story to tell, then it might be worth listening to what they have to say, even when you are sure you know better than they do.

MerchantofVenice

I think that it doesn't matter how many people tell you that they see it as an expression discussing entitled mothers, you're determined to see it as some form of sexism, be it from men or women. For once, I would love to see someone find something offensive but not blame it on "just another symptom of our misogynistic society". Not everything bad in your life can be blamed on patriarchal constructs.

The primary carer, whoever it may be, may need a different or less demanding professional role to allow for child care. For a year and a half, that was my husband. He worked part time for 6 months before taking a year off work as he couldn't balance his dadtitlement with professionalism so decided the best thing to do was take a sabbatical. He returned to work when our eldest was 2.

You seem to have a real chip on your shoulder. Single?

Interesting you would use "chip on your shoulder" and "single" in the same sentence, enter. Do you think women's opinions are defined by their relationship to others or that their marital status is a reflection of the validity of their views? How odd!

Your last line is really shitty enteryourpassword. Was there any need? OP is hardly the only person who thinks this squawking of 'entitlement', aimed solely at mothers, is horrible.

And yes, I've induced a man to fuck me on a regular basis so I guess in your eyes I'm allowed to have an opinion about this.

password in the interests of even handedness, my point about the difference between debate and personal jibe applies to you too.

Whatever I think of the op's arguments, her marital status is totally irrelevant.

Anyway I think this thread has hit rock bottom now. Have a nice day, everyone.

Yes, sorry OP. It sounded very different in my head. I had to finish my post very quickly as my meeting was about to start and didn't read it back to make sure it said what I wanted it to.

I wasn't talking about marital status per se, just the fact that she seems to feel that everything that she feels is negative (in this thread) must be done:

by men

by women but because of men

With such negative views, I couldn't see how she could put up being with one of them, or with a woman considering how she sees them as "bitchy".

How is wanting to spend Christmas Day with your partner at home "hedonism", fusion? How ridiculous. Children don't "need" to have particular family members with them on that day any more than adults do. What about elderly parents etc? Why should they spend the day alone? And parents don't have any more right to have the day off, so if they (or anyone else) want it off every year without fail (which is a luxury) I suggest they find an employer who closes down on the day.

And no I'm not a childhater. And FWIW I don't think the OP is U, I don't like the term, it's not helpful and its sexist. But other people on the thread ABU.

Op I don’t believe you 'set yourself up as an arbiter of language' at all. You spoke out about it and drew attention to the misogyny in the language. flo is using a silencing tactic here. First falsly suggesting you set yourself up as 'arbiter'of misogynist language, then on the basis of this false characterisation, suggesting you must be above reproach in the area of misogynist language to be entitled to speak on the matter as an 'arbiter'.
Having set you up with this false character s/he is thinly disguising the personal jibe of 'hypocrite' at you as a silencing tactic, so as not to engage with what you are actually saying.
And this comment here is extremely personal:
"I am not taking lectures on misogyny from someone who describes women as 'bitchy'; particularly not when their reaction, on having it pointed out to them, is to lie low for a day then pop back as if it hadn't happened."

And to you flo you say: "Same goes for you, Squirrel - I'm not wasting my time on posters who don't know the difference between debate and personal jibe", the thing you accuse the OP of above since your tactics against the OP are entirely personal.

It's unfortunate that you are hypocritical about making personal jibes when you feel so strongly that personal jibe and hypocrisy mean a person isn't worth engaging with or listening to

venus "Children don't "need" to have particular family members with them on that day any more than adults do."
Totally disagree with you here. Adults are big enough to look after themselves.
"What about elderly parents etc?" obviously including the vulnerable is important. So perhaps working age adults need the ideal xmas the least, then vulnerable adults, but children need it the most- they take priority. Their experiences and memories are forming them as people much more profoundly than consequent memories and experiences form adults.

Having said that, I think it is wrong for an organisation to pit employees against each other around xmas leave like this. If bank/agency/locum staff isn't an option, perhaps having a more diverse workforce with Muslims, Hindus etc, will allow us all to cover all the religious festivals without anyone being compromised in the ways described in the thread. It is the system, the organisation, the management at fault - not the employees that are put into this humiliating squabble for scraps of leave entitlement - something that clearly brings out the worst in all involved - such as their latent misogyny, (and coining words like 'mumtitled' to describe colleagues they now view as opponents).

Children do not take priority over equally vulnerable adults.