So where does it go wrong for women?

[Falalalafishfingers]

I'm sure this has been asked a 1009 times!
Read so many times in threads that it makes more sense for woman to give up work/ cut hours as dh/dp earns so much more. This suggests that men are already earning more pre-children?
So where does it go wrong? My guess is university.

And boys aren't dealing with hormones too?

I understood that it was the falling oestrogen levels post menopause that lead to the feisty older woman. The levels are rising in teens.
Testosterone would make boys more ?adventurous ?adversarial

But let's be honest. Most women don't want to do jobs where they get dirt under their fingernails and get covered in grease etc.

I don't think that's true at all. I think that they just aren't given the opportunity. I went to an all girl's school. If you weren't academic you were expected to do hairdressing, health and social care or tourism.

There just wasn't the opportunity to do brickwork, carpentry, become an electrician or any other more traditionally male dominated non academic subjects.

You could do physics at A-Level, but few did choosing to do Biology instead (probably because it fits better into more "female" subjects and jobs).

I think the problem is possibly that they are reticent about working in an all male environment and don't see anyone like them doing it.

It’s simple biology. Women carry and birth babies, breastfeed them, have a very strong and valid instinct to be the main carer. Personally I have chosen to focus on being a mother and I am very happy. I can’t help but feel sorry for women that feel pressured or get validation to focus on their careers at the expense of being mothers...end up spread to thin and very stressed and unhappy. The downside is relying on others for income (your partner or the state) while you raise your child plus the judgement in a society that does not value motherhood.

@CrispySock

It’s simple biology. Women carry and birth babies, breastfeed them, have a very strong and valid instinct to be the main carer. Personally I have chosen to focus on being a mother and I am very happy. I can’t help but feel sorry for women that feel pressured or get validation to focus on their careers at the expense of being mothers...end up spread to thin and very stressed and unhappy. The downside is relying on others for income (your partner or the state) while you raise your child plus the judgement in a society that does not value motherhood.

that's bollocks. You are still a mother if you work. If your career is important to you. You don't have a career at the expense of being a mother ffs.

@CrispySock

It’s simple biology. Women carry and birth babies, breastfeed them, have a very strong and valid instinct to be the main carer. Personally I have chosen to focus on being a mother and I am very happy. I can’t help but feel sorry for women that feel pressured or get validation to focus on their careers at the expense of being mothers...end up spread to thin and very stressed and unhappy. The downside is relying on others for income (your partner or the state) while you raise your child plus the judgement in a society that does not value motherhood.

Please don't feel sorry for me... I don't feel pressured to get "validation" from my career: I work because a) I enjoy it b) I want my own money and for my financial security not to be dependent on how much some bloke fancies me and appreciates how I wash his socks and c) I want my daughter to think she can do anything she wants.

My having a job doesn't mean I can't "focus on being a mother": being a mother and having a job aren't mutually exclusive.

If you want not to work then crack on but don't kid yourself it has anything to do with your "biology".

@PinkyParrot

I think the problem is possibly that they are reticent about working in an all male environment and don't see anyone like them doing it.

Why is this though? You're suggesting it's biology when that's not the case.

We are taught from birth how society expects us to behave based on our gender.
We are taught which jobs are appropriate for girls and boys and this is apparent from age 4.

These then influence our decisions around hobbies, subjects and careers as it's very difficult to go against societal expectations.

There is some research that shows when choosing a job people factor in three things:

Is the job 'sex appropriate' i.e is it a girls job or boys job?

Am I interested in the job and can I do it?

How does society view the job?

If someone need to compromise the last the they will compromise on is the sec appropriateness of a job. Meaning people will choose a job that is suitable for their gender over a job they are actually interested in.
That's socialisation at play.

Having spent years working as a careers adviser and researching and writing about career development I can tell you this is true.

It applies to men to in some circumstances- you just need to read the treads on male nursery nurses to see that!

I can’t help but feel sorry for women that feel pressured or get validation to focus on their careers at the expense of being mothers...end up spread to thin and very stressed and unhappy.

Don't feel sorry for me. I have the best of both worlds! I love being a mum and I love my career. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Just because I have a career doesn't mean I'm neglecting being a parent.
Nobody ever says this sort of shit to men.

@CrispySock are you missing the massive slice of irony in your post where you complain about being judged and not valued for being a SAHM while feeling sorry for women who are mothers and work?

@CrispySock

It’s simple biology. Women carry and birth babies, breastfeed them, have a very strong and valid instinct to be the main carer. Personally I have chosen to focus on being a mother and I am very happy. I can’t help but feel sorry for women that feel pressured or get validation to focus on their careers at the expense of being mothers...end up spread to thin and very stressed and unhappy. The downside is relying on others for income (your partner or the state) while you raise your child plus the judgement in a society that does not value motherhood.

I feel sorry for people who make up nonsense to make themselves feel better at the expense of other women.

Of you feel so unfulfilled by your life choices that you end up saying silly stuff like this, you're just embarrassing yourself. Be happy with yourself or do something about it, but once you start dismissing massive swathes of the population, it only shows your limitations, not theirs.

It's also unusually self-aggrandising.

What will you do when your children have left home? Bask in their reflected glory for the next few decades?

On the men front. Actually people do say this shit to men. When my DH chose to do a stint abroad when the babies were young - not one male friend didnt opine at great lenghth about the sacrifice he was making and how he must miss his family so much. How hard it must be for him. How terrible. Lots of 'i couldnt do it'. How he would burn out. On and on.

@MillieEpple

On the men front. Actually people do say this shit to men. When my DH chose to do a stint abroad when the babies were young - not one male friend didnt opine at great lenghth about the sacrifice he was making and how he must miss his family so much. How hard it must be for him. How terrible. Lots of 'i couldnt do it'. How he would burn out. On and on.

That's quite rare though.

When we had DS me and DH worked at the same place. When I returned full time I got loads of comments about how awful it was that I'd had to return full time. It was neither of those things.
Not one person told DH how awful it was that he was working full time.
As part of my research I've interviewed lots of women about this topic and they've told me similar things.

@SueEllenMishke

Families work best when one partner takes on the main caregiver and one earns. It is usually the woman who is the caregiver because usually that’s what the woman wants. The fact she has to pause (and often compromise) her career and earnings is a result of that

I fundamentally disagree with this.

Families work best when both parents take on equal caring roles.
You are also massively (or just ignoring) the role of societal expectations and stereotypes and influence they have on the roles we play at home and at work and the choices we make.

Of course there are Societal implications but I would argue that biological implications for women eclipse anything society does for most.

Only when the first baby arrives.

Please don't feel sorry for me... I don't feel pressured to get "validation" from my career: I work because a) I enjoy it b) I want my own money and for my financial security not to be dependent on how much some bloke fancies me and appreciates how I wash his socks and c) I want my daughter to think she can do anything she wants

Absolutely. Point c is hugely underrated. I think it’s also important to not underestimate the impact we can have on our sons as working mothers. If they see a successful, happy working Mum as part of a happy home they will be less focused on finding a stepford wife who will stay home, raise the kids and have a cocktail waiting and dinner on the table when they get home every evening.

@GreenlandTheMovie actually, it’s not silly. I think you will actually find that a huge proportion of the mothers in this country feel like this. I wanted to me a mum. Didn’t want to work when I had hound kids. The pressure and guilt I felt to get a job and contribute money wise was unreal. We were not hard up and could manage money wise but I had literally dozens and dozens of people asking me ‘what will you do’ and ‘when are you going to work’ from the time my first baby was 1. When the last started school it got even worse and for a while I actually avoided other mums at the school run because I just got so fed up of validating myself time and time again. What’s wrong with wanting to be a mum 100% of the time your kids are around? I wanted to be there every day of their pre school lives, at every assembly, every drop off, every pick up. I wanted to be there for them every day after school to take them to clubs and put them to bed, kiss them goodnight and read a story.
Being a mum is now seen the low of the low. A nothing job. Something someone else can do just as well as you. Something that can be outsourced at any time and have no effect whatsoever on the kids. It’s incredibly insulting and actually goes agains human evolution and development of our species for the past millennia.

Families work best when one partner takes on the main caregiver and one earns.
It is usually the woman who is the caregiver because usually that’s what the woman wants. The fact she has to pause (and often compromise) her career and earnings is a result of that

Totally disagree with this. When one partner ceases to earn money (usually the woman), they make themselves frighteningly dependent on the other partner. This is first and foremost a financial issue and women who don't have their own money are at significant risk, but that isn't the end of it.

It means one partner is in a weaker position in the family structure. It means this person has to limit themselves in all sorts of fundamental ways in order not to irritate or anger the partner who controls the purse strings.

I'm not someone who doesn't believe being a SAHM can't be fulfilling. Personally I wouldn't want to stop work but I can understand how focusing on your children could be very rewarding for a few years and I think there are some arguments about the value of having a parent at home. But the whole imbalance which is created within the marriage by having one partner dependent on the other is ultimately pretty toxic. Ultimately its just not worth it for anyone: its precarious for the non-working partner but its not great for the breadwinner either because of the degree of pressure on them.

I strongly believe having both partners take some responsibility for their economic destiny enhances the whole marriage and the family. Not necessarily at all times: I can totally see why it makes sense for some women (or men) to take a step back from the workforce when looking after multiple small children or to work part time etc.

But over the course of a lifelong marriage (and we could be talking about 50-60 years) it is not desirable for one person to be so totally reliant on the other.

@SueEllenMishke Have you interviewed lots of men too - it sounds really interesting research area. I love research.

Im not doubting lots of women have the experience of being told it must be awful and i think you are right that FT normal hours for men wouldnt get comment.
But i think you'd be surprised what men say to each other when they go beyond normal ft work - things like oil rigs, merchant navy, armed forces, travelling sales. Not that they shouldnt do it, but certainly acknowledging the sacrifice/hardship of it.

Something that has affected me is when my gradfarher was in a nursing home i used to chat to all the residents and they would try and impart their lifes lesson. The men consistently said they wished they had spent more time with their families when young and the women mainly said they wished they had done more things for themselves and not subsumed into their family. It was quite sad as their biggest regrets sort of link.

Of course there are Societal implications but I would argue that biological implications for women eclipse anything society does for most.

I'll have to respectfully disagree on this.

I feel that it is largely both biological and societal. When our babies are young we have a strong biological urge and need to feed them and look after them, but as they get older there is less of a need to do this. Unfortunately, this then leads to society expecting us to always be the main caregiver, and the main caregiver to our extended family as well.

With these expectations women find it hard to do it all, and a lot of them ultimately make the decision to not work because of it. I think the solution is to recognise that there is a need for mothers of young babies to look after them. There is also a need for mothers to have a smooth transition back into work, and an expectation from all that the dad needs to step in and do the work as well.

It's a more nuanced issue than I have laid out, but for the sake of one comment that was the best summary I could come up with.

[quote MillieEpple]@SueEllenMishke Have you interviewed lots of men too - it sounds really interesting research area. I love research.

Im not doubting lots of women have the experience of being told it must be awful and i think you are right that FT normal hours for men wouldnt get comment.
But i think you'd be surprised what men say to each other when they go beyond normal ft work - things like oil rigs, merchant navy, armed forces, travelling sales. Not that they shouldnt do it, but certainly acknowledging the sacrifice/hardship of it.

Something that has affected me is when my gradfarher was in a nursing home i used to chat to all the residents and they would try and impart their lifes lesson. The men consistently said they wished they had spent more time with their families when young and the women mainly said they wished they had done more things for themselves and not subsumed into their family. It was quite sad as their biggest regrets sort of link.[/quote]
I'm a university academic and I teach, research and write about career development.
One of my areas of research is women's career development so for my research I have interviewed more women.
However, i do speak to men and have worked on projects to encourage men into non traditional careers too.

Men are absolutely subject to societal expectations as well and those are very different to the expectations placed on women.

@thepeopleversuswork

*Families work best when one partner takes on the main caregiver and one earns. It is usually the woman who is the caregiver because usually that’s what the woman wants. The fact she has to pause (and often compromise) her career and earnings is a result of that*

Totally disagree with this. When one partner ceases to earn money (usually the woman), they make themselves frighteningly dependent on the other partner. This is first and foremost a financial issue and women who don't have their own money are at significant risk, but that isn't the end of it.

It means one partner is in a weaker position in the family structure. It means this person has to limit themselves in all sorts of fundamental ways in order not to irritate or anger the partner who controls the purse strings.

I'm not someone who doesn't believe being a SAHM can't be fulfilling. Personally I wouldn't want to stop work but I can understand how focusing on your children could be very rewarding for a few years and I think there are some arguments about the value of having a parent at home. But the whole imbalance which is created within the marriage by having one partner dependent on the other is ultimately pretty toxic. Ultimately its just not worth it for anyone: its precarious for the non-working partner but its not great for the breadwinner either because of the degree of pressure on them.

I strongly believe having both partners take some responsibility for their economic destiny enhances the whole marriage and the family. Not necessarily at all times: I can totally see why it makes sense for some women (or men) to take a step back from the workforce when looking after multiple small children or to work part time etc.

But over the course of a lifelong marriage (and we could be talking about 50-60 years) it is not desirable for one person to be so totally reliant on the other.

Agreed but the vast majority of couples I know, the woman scales back at least for a while to be the main carer? Just because she earns less, they does not mean she is necessarily reliant or less or there is a power balance in favour of the man? Actually, for most people I know, the power balance is fairly balanced or in favour of the woman dispite her not earning as much! What needs to change is seeing ‘being a full time mum’ as being worthless. My DH sees caring for the children as crucial and extremely valuable. Just as valuable as all the income he earns

@Littlewhitedove2 but my mum was a mum 100% of the time, even when she was at work she was still my mum. Is a dad only a dad when he gets home from work? It was my dad who read the stories, because he wanted to, and I loved the close relationship I got with my dad by him being as much the main carer as my mum, lots of men want to be hands on parents and involved with their children, why shouldn’t they get to be?

I don’t think being a mum can be outsourced, you either are one or not, but childcare can be outsourced and I don’t think being in childcare did have any negative impact on me, I was very happy, did well in school and really close to my parents. I also gained from having amazing role models showing me that men can do childcare and housework, can enjoy raising their children, and that women can have a fulfilling career and still be a great parent, I really value that.

I also think it’s quite harmful to say there’s something biologically about a woman that means she wants to stay at home with her children. It could be very upsetting to women who don’t enjoy being with their children all day every day and who prefer to work, as it suggests there is something biologically wrong with them.

Moreover, all the stuff about how our species has developed etc, even if I was to agree that “it’s always been that way” is a good reason to do something (which I don’t), my understanding is that in the distant past a whole community would bring up the children and children would often be left with older relatives so their mothers could do other things, so childcare by someone other than the mother isn’t something new.

Littlewhitedove2

"Just because she earns less, they does not mean she is necessarily reliant or less or there is a power balance in favour of the man? Actually, for most people I know, the power balance is fairly balanced or in favour of the woman dispite her not earning as much!
What needs to change is seeing ‘being a full time mum’ as being worthless. My DH sees caring for the children as crucial and extremely valuable. Just as valuable as all the income he earns."

This is a bit of a straw man argument: whenever someone points out that women are vulnerable if they don't have income someone argues that the role of a SAHM is critical and its all about valuing the role of the mum.

No-one's denying the value of someone who cares for children within the home. The point is that this "value" is defined by the person paying for it, for better or worse. If your DH values the role you play in bringing up his children that's great and clearly means he is a good and supportive husband. Good for you. But what if he wasn't?

Having some economic independence provides a degree of insurance against a man randomly waking up one morning and deciding that because he doesn't fancy you any more the cost/benefit analysis of him supporting you to care for his children isn't worth it any more. Or that he decides that because he is the breadwinner he has the right to decide to stop paying for a private school which you want your kids to attend. You may think this sounds hard and cynical but it happens in a significant amount of marriages.

Having a degree of financial independence doesn't just protect you against these things, it protects him from the sense of being on an endless treadmill of working to provide. It also protects the children from the possibility that they will be thrown into poverty because their dad suddenly decides its not worth the grief any more.

It just shifts the centre of gravity away from it being up to the non-working partner to be constantly having to please the working partner. If you are lucky enough to have a DH or partner who intrinsically values this without questioning it then great but a lot of women don't. Why wouldn't you want to protect yourself?