Why is society so unsupportive of high-achieving 'power mums'?

[KateMumsnet]

Nigel Farage has hurled himself into the debate about equality at work with a typically thoughtful, modern and nuanced view: City women with families are "worth less" than their male counterparts. UKIP-madness-as-usual, you think. Until you look at polling data which reveals what society really thinks about women in senior roles - and are forced to wonder whether his comments are smarter than they first look.

At a Jericho Chambers debate last week, chaired by Zoe Williams of the Guardian, the research company Populus shared a resoundingly miserable take on public views of women in top-level jobs.

Of the 2,000 people they asked, very nearly half think that our society has suffered as more women have worked out of the home. A whopping 57% agreed that 'when it comes to the work-life balance, women can't have it all, however much they may want it'.

So while many of us blithely assume that everyone sane wants broadly equal numbers of women and men at senior levels of business and government, we may not be right - especially if the women in question happen to have children.

A year ago, fed up with a corporate world of retro alpha men, I set out to interview some ‘power mums’ and ‘power dads’ about the choices they've made to get their senior jobs, for Management Today. I was looking for potential role models - but it wasn't that straightforward. Yes, the mums do generally love their jobs. But they also work long hours, miss their kids, feel quite stressed a lot of the time, feel judged at the school gate and judged at work - and most concede that they are surviving rather than thriving.

In contrast, the dads feel no social censure, express few regrets and are free from the racing mental ticker-tape of things they must remember (‘online shop, wash PE kit, plan birthday party, book haircuts, cancel swimming….’) which even the women with the most help keep on a loop. Unlike one of the dads, none of the mums has yet confessed to inventing breakfast meetings to escape the chaos of Cheerio throwing.

The response to the publication of those interviews has, if anything, been even more striking - particularly the judgement cast upon the female high-fliers by other women. On Facebook, a woman commented on a power mum with four children and a long commute: "She may be powerful but she is no mother"; an ambitious 20-something friend said: "when I read that they only see their kids two nights a week, I think 'shame on you' - and then I hate myself for thinking it".

In our frank debate last week, the self-confessed 'enlightened' CEO of Costcutter Supermarkets Group, Darcy Wilson-Rymer, was brutal on the business realities of the subject. Four-day weeks don't work - because women end up doing five days for 20% less pay, and then getting frustrated and doing something else. Job shares can work, but are not ideal at the most senior levels.

After the debate, a woman who read about it sent us an infuriated email, arguing that we were missing the point: "it's actually NOT about the Power Mums who have made it in their careers by getting up at 5am, working out, working a 10-hour day, getting back late feeling guilty and employing loads of staff to help them through. Its about the average professional woman who can work maybe 20 to 30 hours a week but who doesn't want power or even career progression”.

Which is of course brilliant for everyone it suits. But - news flash for Mr Farage - some women do want equality and power and progression. Even some who have had a baby, or two or three. And if the men work 70 hours a week and the women half that, it won't happen. Find me a FTSE-100 CEO who works 30 hours, and surely we'll find an exquisitely wrapped carriage clock ticking under their PA's desk.

We can spend all the time we like dissecting equality and discrimination, childcare options and our hours culture - but until society puts quality of life and families on a more equal footing with business needs, this is just how it is.

So until that time - unless we agree with Nigel Farage and his mates - we need to be supportive of the women who are making the sacrifices to get to the top, and ensure that those women are heard. If they are not, what hope do we have that our daughters will face less stark choices?

The high-flying power roles come with high salaries which can be used to buy support.

wordfactory - I agree that we need women in all those positions, and not just women, but mothers.

However, I am more in favour of the "role reversal" model of power mum family life (awful English but you know what I mean) than the "dual power career" model.

The point is not that 'power mums' need more support than other mothers, but that they should not be more disadvantaged in their career because they are parents than 'power dads'.

I think that generally children of high earners pull through somehow (sarcastic emoticon). However, as a woman I don't want to live in a society where women don't become politicians/judges/surgeons/board members because they have children while fathers steam on regardless.

Bonsoir I see no reason why Dads shouldn't SAH. And indeed, it is definitely getting more and more common.

But not all men will want to of course. Or if they do, not in the traditional way many SAHMs model.

And the reality is that many highly demanding positions actually don't pay that much. Coupled with them being too often London-centric, it becomes far less doable to have a one income family. Especially if one wants to have a reasonable existence.

Another issue with 'role reversal' over 'dual power couples' is that many high achieving women, for whatever reason, end up with high achieving men who don't want to stay home and look after the kids. So it's not an option for many 'power mums' to have a household with reversed roles.

It's not the same in reverse, many high achieving men marry women who are happy to stay home.

I don't feel a lack of support. I just feel constant praise. I feel the praise is sexist as it is equally as due to men who do well and work full time so there is sexism within the praise.

When those of us who work full time talk about 50/50 we mean he does as much at home as we do. That probably means we use a nanny or childminder or nursery when we are at work and at home he is as likely to be picking lice out the children's hair and clearing up the baby's sick as we are.

Of course we need women in 'power roles' but generally they are well paid and able to buy in help.

Contrast that with many working families who are both working long hours in lower paid jobs, childcare sucking up cash, no nanny/cleaner.

I know many women in this situation.

Why does a high flying power mum need my support? They have clearly had the opportunity, through genes, upbringing, luck and hard work, to make choices that others don't have. They have the finances to outsource the household work and childcare that many have to do alongside full time work. And they can also, more than likely, pay for luxuries that make life so much more pleasant.
I don't judge, much less despise these women, but I reserve my support for those in more challenging, less choice fuelled lives.

My issue with power couples is that they are sometimes or often power trip couples. And I am not particularly happy about a society where too many positions of authority and power are held by power trip couples who frequent other power trip couples and, IME, live in a very particular prism that has little bearing on most people's reality.

Paintyfingers - I agree. When I talk to my power mum friends about things to do with the family/children, their question is always "where can I buy that [service]" or "whom can I outsource that to". The mindset is never that they should think of doing anything themselves.

If the discussion keeps reverting back to women not supporting other women (for whatever reason - earnings power, choosing to SAHM/WOHM, etc, ) we are missing the key point, that across all spectrums of working life, regardless of income and regardless of what 'help' people have (and everyone has to has some help, to enable them go to work, unless they are lucky enough to cover it between the two parents, but that I think is rare) women are still the default when it comes to responsibility for domestic issues and children.

When I talk to my power mum friends about things to do with the family/children, their question is always "where can I buy that [service]" or "whom can I outsource that to". The mindset is never that they should think of doing anything themselves.

But what is wrong with that? DH and I both work part-time so we don't fit the 'power parent' stereotype but we have 3 kids and can afford good quality childcare and a cleaner. We are currently considering outsourcing laundry. And so what? We employ our cleaners though an agency that guarantees 16h minimum (so they get working families tax credit, paid holidays and sick leave), we use a nursery that encourages the personal development of its staff (so they don't have a high turnover of staff, in fact they have several teachers on their staff who say doing wrap around care at nursery is much better than teaching in school, they do all the fun things that teachers should do but can't).

What is wrong with paying other people for services (unless you are a communist)? No-one worries about outsourcing when in a work situation (my work wouldn't exist if other companies didn't outsource the work we specialise at), so why is it an issue at home? The upper class have always outsourced household services, it's one of the privileges of money. And in the west we are all so rich we can delegate a lot of household services to machines (dishwashers, washing machines, microwaves and vacuum cleaners being the main ones). I assume you don't think it's a problem putting someone out of a job by using a washing machine rather than employing a cleaner?

"The main reason there aren't more 'power mums' is that at the moment that isn't what over 80% of mothers say they want - as over 80% say they don't want to work full time."

This. And as to why society at large is not more supportive of power mums, it surely has much to do with the vast majority not viewing them as a role model they wish to emulate.

There is nothing wrong with outsourcing! You are missing the point that was made earlier - that power couples aren't sharing housework/childcare because they are outsourcing it.

quite, bumble.

Instead of pr about the failures of power mums, let's see a butt load of pr about the successes of domestic dads, exhorting more men to equalise the gaping inequality in the current domestic scale of responsibility.

Ignore the women. Write about the men. For a change. Please.

I'd like to know how many of the power mums and power dads interviewed by Armstrong had a (non-working, stay at home) spouse providing the backdrop that enabled them to reach the pinnacle of their careers.

I'm willing to bet the power dads had sah wives, and the power mums didn't have say husbands.

I would also like to know to what extent the contradictory feelings experienced by the mums interviewed were caused by gendered norms and gendered cultural expectations, that are only reinforced by this 'article'.

Quit with the agreeing with Nigel Farage, and start smashing up more than one gendered norm, please. We know women can work. I want it to be proved and accepted that men can parent. Equally. Or in a prime parenting role that accepts the woman as the breadwinner. Not as a 'Ono, how novel, it works for so and so', but to an extent that it is part of the normal family life. So that the school gates are equally populated by both genders. So that schools call dad at work to pick up the sick kid. So that fathers take the day off to mop up puke. And that no one bats an eyelid.

Quit the focus on women, and get the men under the spotlight. Why aren't they pulling their weight?

spectacular speaks so much sense.

I work in a male dominated industry. The women who do well are those without children or who work all hours and someone else deals with the kids.

I work 4 days a week. I've been told to go for promotion but am resisting as it will mean working full time.

And for what?

I was touched by an article I read a few months ago in the guardian - top ten regrets of the dying. Not one person on their death bed wished they'd worked more or spent more time away from the family. It was quite the opposite.

I want a balance. I do not want my life to become about work and squeezing a bit of family time in between.

women are still the default when it comes to responsibility for domestic issues and children.

Well yes - but the op is about 'power mums' ie: specifically about women who are high earners.

Yet this is a problem fir women across the economic spectrum. And at least power mums can afford a nanny etc

May I drop back in again? Just pointing out that the majority of me don't make it into being high powered. Most men are somewhere around the middle. Or lower. Only certain men, a percentage achieve high power. A larger percentage than women but these articles give an impression that everyone has high powered roles. That you achieved nothing by being middle or lower. That by 30 your dead if not almost CEO.

Then add woman to the mix and obvs it gets worse. Just please don't be deluded that it's easy to get these roles if you're male. The other thing is the higher you get the more able to delegate you are. I've worked for some very powerful men who did in actuality very little. In terms of actual work, letters, planning, theirs became more about talking not doing.

Tbh whilst working would be nice. I cannot fathom wanting to be that high. It's just not worth anything but the £ and then, well, no one dies wishing they spent more time at work.

I see people are making up statistics to support ill thought out points.tsk tsk

The official ONS data shows The age of the child and the relationship status of the mother are important factors in if they are in work or not.

For lone mothers whose youngest child was aged up to three, 39% were in work, compared with 65% of couples with children in the youngest age group

For mothers whose youngest child was at primary school age, between four and ten, employment rates were higher at 74% for those in a couple and 61% for those who were a lone parents

The majority women work,fact

Yes, most women work and always have done . My grandmother worked in the 30s (widowed). Her mother worked. My fathers aunts worked - one as a nursing sister in Wapping in the 1920s, the other two had a shop. The generations before had very hard working women but on their farms, spinning, sewing, making goods to sell and all the other stuff you do on farms.

I suppose it depends what a power mother means as to what help they might have or power men for that matter. If you just mean a full time working couple in London where both earn say £100k - £500k I would still call them a reasonably power couple and I am certain one of them rushes home each day to see the children, sort out the school bags, pick the nits from the hair. Most of us who live those lives want that contact with the children even if we have a nanny to give them their dinner at 5pm or whatever.

As for what women and men regret as they die I don't think that saying is true for everyone - that all workers wish they hadn't worked. Plenty have good relationships with family and work full time, male and female. Many when dying actually wish they had more money as how you die in the UK can depend on income - is it at home wtih wonderful full time care in a warm comfortable home with big pension and bringing in nursing staff as you want or are you the woman who never worked and has no pension(husband run off) who is dying in poverty? As said above most women work and they therefore like men like that balance of work plus family. Of course some people don't want children at all and that is a perfectly legitimate choice too.

The main point for me on the thread is just to say no one has ever been negative about the fact I work and am reasonably successful. I suppose I grew up in a feminist home and would never have married someone who wasn't a feminist and the only comments I get about what I've "achieved" are positive. No one has ever suggested my children have suffered because I or their father work full time.

Women make up a third of UK managers

Part of Women in the Labour Market, 2013 Release
Released: 25 September 2013

Full report - Women in the labour market

% of women in managerial roles higher than Germany, Spain and Italy but lower than France

The proportion of women among the UK’s managers was 34.8% in October-December 2012, slightly higher than the European Union average of 33.5%.

The percentage of managers that were women was slightly lower than the UK figure in the larger economies of Spain (31%), Germany (29%), and Italy (24%) but it was greater in France (39%). Across the European Union as a whole, women were most prominent within the managerial occupation group in Latvia (45%) and Lithuania (41%). The country where women were least prominent as managers was Cyprus (16%).