Women have babies or careers

[moutonfou]

Just read this in a Guardian article (written by a man):

'Women are now as likely to be childless as to have three children. As social norms shift, a childfree lifestyle has become increasingly attractive, with career taking centre-stage for many thirtysomethings.'

AIBU to be so frustrated that this narrative is still hanging around like bad breath: i.e. that there are only two forms of existence for women, 'having kids' or 'focusing on career'?

It feels so reductive. Things like happiness/fulfilment, self-exploration, hobbies and goals, travel/discovery, relationships, and personal preferences all seem to get forgotten. Women are apparently only ever either a) maintaining an iron grip on the corporate ladder whilst panicking about their ticking clock or b) raising kids, having thus achieved their main purpose and having no remaining goals in life (sarcasm alert)

AIBU to think we are so much more than this?

Not saying it wasn't more challenging but I have managed to work my way from entry level job when I found out I was pregnant seven years ago to managment, having another child along the way. I work flexible hours, four days a week. I don't want to work five, but wouldn't even if I hadn't had kids as after cancer in my 20s feel there is more to life than work. I am lucky though that I really enjoy my job and have parents nearby that can help one day a week with childcare. But I do "have it all" if that just means having kids and a job. Ok house isn't always tidy. Obviously have very little (or no) leisure time to myself but that's ok as I love spending as much non work time as possible with them!

It's always the mum who will be called out of work if the kid is ill or hurt, it's always the mum who will be expected to use her leave from work to spend time with the kids, and it's always mum who will be expected to go with the kids to medical appointments and school appointments and so on.

Not in my house! DH and I both have good careers. I only agreed to children relatively young (short of 30 for me) if he accepted that he would have to do his fair share here and perhaps more because he can get to our DDs much quicker than I can. He did, gladly.

Likewise! Hiphop it doesn't have to be like that. It certainly isn't in my household.

You can have both just like men and many do.

However for many a child is an excuse to not work, many are happy to live off their husbands or the state. In turn the children grow up believing men have to go to work and women don't.

We fight for equality but we will never be seen as equals in the workplace as too many never return, go back on less hours etc.

I have 3 children and work full time. I am planning on another one in a few years. I still want to work and see no reason why I can't.

These articles never seem to want to explore the possibility that people don't want to have children because it's not all it's cracked up to be. Now people have an actual choice on the matter and, lo and behold, it's losing popularity. (Personally I find the child part good but our increasingly child-unfriendly culture to be a massive drag.)

Nothing to do with careers, just that childrearing seems, as time goes on and we as a culture become more aware of the opportunities the world presents, a less attractive way to spend the best years of your life.

AvoidingCallenetics, I've met the DH on multiple occasions. He's lovely on a personal level, but there's no question at all that she's a lot brighter than him.

That's not to say he's objectively speaking unintelligent. But my line of work is highly competitive to get into to start with (and smarts matter plenty in that process), and she easily outsmarts most of us who work there. I have no idea what her IQ is but I'd easily put her in the 145-155 range if I had to guesstimate.

In a nutshell: it's not particularly hard to be outsmarted by her, and he very obviously is by a lot.

I think it goes further than joint responsibility though. I would like to think a lot of men would be happy to SAH nowadays if their partner was the higher earner (or had the potential to be or preferred to be in work). I know my DH certainly would have been happy to be a SAHD.

For me, it's more that I dont want to work ft while my children are little. I can't further my career without being ft so I've effectively chosen my children over my career. There's nothing that could be put in place that would change that choice I've had to make.

I agree on the joint responsibility point cowbag. My DH probably would have taken shared parental leave with DD1. He is the higher earner, but we'd have managed.

The thing that stopped us was that he'd have only got SMP, even though a woman in his job would have been on full pay. My field of work means I have the knowledge and skills to have challenged this, but didn't because it would have taken time away from our family.

Someone did challenge this practice and won. Their company decided that they would reduce maternity pay in response . It is this kind of practice which forces people to choose.

To be clear, it was not my DH's company who reduced their Mat pay. They have done the right thing in response to the case I've mentioned. Otherwise, I think he might have reconsidered his employment choices, lovely man that he is.

I would like to think a lot of men would be happy to SAH nowadays if their partner was the higher earner (or had the potential to be or preferred to be in work).

Don't the stats say that women out-earn men until their 30's? Which would mean that women are the higher earner in many cases and yet it's mostly the woman who takes on the caring responsibilities.

This is why we need radical feminism. We're trying to chip away at a male dominated, male built system that has men at work and women at home, and all we can do is run ourselves ragged trying to fit everything in. Women are expected to accept either /or career/ children whilst men cheerfully assume from the youngest age that what is classed for women as 'having it all' will be theirs as standard. This system benefits men at the expense of women. We need a different system - a recognition that both parents are equally responsible for the child, flexi time, compressed hours, working from home, affordable child care, 2 part time salaries instead of one full time. There's loads of things we can try, but we have to push for it and get over the narrative that is always the woman who will have to do sick days and medical appointments etc. That really doesn't require a uterus. Men need to step up and take responsibility for the children they help create. Pregnancy and breast feeding only lasts so long, after that they run out of excuses.

I would like to be a feminist, but apparently I can't because I like to dress my DPs in pink and have a thing for glitter .

I digress.

Erm..DDs!

Isn't feminism about choice though?
I didn't really want shared care as suggested, but I wanted to be the primary carer. I didn't want to use a nursery full time either. It's now I would like more options, as my children grow up, not when they were little.

Sounds easy to say it should affect dad as much as mum. However, there are several reasons that just wasn't the case practically for my family. These are probably not unusual.
With breastfed babies I would have found it exceedingly difficult to go back to work much before they were a year old (ok, could have switched to formula- but that's another compromise I wouldn't have been happy with). Also, DH earns a lot more than me (partly due to being several years older so having been qualified for longer) so sharing maternity leave didn't make financial sense for us.

Eugh I get bored of this narrative too.

My DH and I have 2.5 year old DD who we had when we were both 28. People thought we were both bonkers but she's likely to be only DC. I had 2 months out of work after DD was born and DH was SAHD for 8 months then DD went and continues to go to CM 4 days a week with half day each of us on Fri. DH was between jobs and working PT lecturing contracts so we made enough to survive but valued flexibility and freedom to work and be there for DD's early years.

It's a hard strugglt balancing everything but we BOTH gave and take, and had the luxury of having flexible employees (he's an academic and I work in HE sector) so I can choose when I start/finish work, and work from home regularly with no issues usually from employer. THIS is what makes it work. Working somewhere that values your hard work and doesn't treat family as a hindrance is key (my line manager is male with young family and most big bosses have families but not the female big bosses).

Because I have to be flexible I'm more likely to pick up the laptop after DD goes to bed or the weekend to check in and finish things up. I work in creative role so work always on mind. I've been more productive than before DD, hands down!

Now I'm looking at management roles and DH has moved up from post doc to lecturer. More faith in employees, flexibility and a change of attitude is key. I hate places twitch the negative environment that they have to see people at their desk to know they are working.

It's not perfect, exasperating and busy. But I would have felt dreadful giving it up. Come on, even places like McKinsey can do it, it's not new.

YANBU - I'm fed up of the whole narrative and the obsession with it being one or the other. It's so cut and dry, which life is rarely.

I am 30. Have a PhD and a good career. Took time at to have kids and be a sahm until the youngest was 3 and old enough to not need me all day. Now back at work. I don't see the issues here?

Why is she a lot brighter than him? Because she puts 'could have' and he puts 'could of?'

Many people have different shades and different levels of being intelligent you know.

And some people sound more intelligent because they baffle people with bullshit - and others are not able to do that, so come across as 'less bright.' They are often not.

I agree with the people saying that women are always the ones that get the shit end of the stick, because they are the ones who have the babies.

Most of the women I know have kids AND work.
Take 6 months off for maternity and carry on.
Get a nanny or other childcare.

Isn't feminism about choice though?

Feminism is about the liberation of women. From shit like having to choose between a career or a family, whilst men get to have both no questions asked. Once we have achieved this then you are perfectly free to choose to be a primary carer. The wonderful thing about a feminist utopia is that child care will be valued and respected the way it deserves to be and you won't have to worry about loss of financial independence etc because the laws would recognise your input to the family and actually follow up on child maintenance.

The thing is, there's no point in replacing a system that doesn't work with another ironclad system that doesn't work. Flexitime and equal parenting wouldn't be mandatory but they would be encouraged and made easier. You could still buck the norms and be a dedicated career woman or a full time mum, but for everyone who wanted both - it would be the accepted norm, like it already is for men.

It's all very utilitarian though, in its radical form, isn't it? Greatest good for the greatest number.

I understand people putting their families first.

I dont think its a false narative, you do have to choose to a certain extent. It's not possible to have everything all at the same time. I actually see it as more of a positive. For men, the expectation is that they'll be working for their whole life until they retire. For us women we get a wider variety of choice, to work full time, to go on maternity leave, to become a sahm, work part time etc. And im glad of that. Obviously there are men who are sahp and other variations, but not the norm.

You could have a career at the same time as a family though. Now. It's perfectly possible. However I wouldn't want to have the family time that DH gets. So when I say I can't do both - I don't mean have a career whilst someone else is looking after the children. I can't be in two places at once.
I'm not even sure I want the utopia of equal shares as the norm as to then step outside the norm would be awkward and difficult. (And I would wish to as DH is better working and I'm better organising the house!)

I think it also depends on whether you have a job or career. I consider mine a job.