In The Times today: Blind feminism has hurt our children

[twelveyeargap]

Blind feminism has hurt our children

I do remember the years from about 3-5 because I was at home with a very angry, depressed woman (my mother) who would have been better off anywhere but at home- as she frequently told me.

For some women staying at home just doesn't work and that's why we need committed carers. It's just difficult to find them.

I totally agree with you that there isn't enough affordable childcare, hopefully one day the Politicians will actually recognise this & stop talking about bloody road congestion!

LOL Droile.

I'm taking a sabbatical from this thread, it's turned barking.

I think some of the bitterness and despair felt by some SAHMs is when the 'at-home' part of it literally translates as stuck indoors all day with small children, with no access to adult company or conversation and no break from dealing with the LOs. It is deeply, deeply psychologically unhealthy to live your life entirely for the benefit of another person: whether or not you are employed and paid, every adult needs to do something that's just for and about themselves.

But really, Knobhed Oliver James notwithstanding, the majority of people grow up reasonable OK whatever their early years were like.

Oh God why does being a SAHM translate as "living your life entirely for the benefit of another person". Lots of SAHMs are SAHMs because a) they can afford it and b) they enjoy it. And they're living their lives for themselves.

Why am I letting myself be drawn in again?

I know a lot of SAHMs with full time nannies and they certainly get more than enough time to be themselves.

But on the interesting issue - we present a role model to our children whether it's the cult which has the girls in headscarves baking aged 5 who marry off at 6, the traditional indian family model, the 1950s housewife stuff circa 2007 Mumsnet or both parents working or both parents not working and on IS from choice even or brought up in a commune etc etc.... That role modelling influences the children a lot, just as they are influenced if they're beaten every day, burnt, abandoned etc.

Sadly girls have indoctrination on a massive scale today that their role is to cut their bodies into a shape men prefer, concentrate on wedding and makeup, that their looks are the most important thing etc. Working mothers can try to present a model which counter balances that but it's hard. One may need to go somewhere like parts of Scandinavia where there is less sexism. Anyway my oldest has got the job she wanted today so may be my influence has worked a little. Or shoudl I be preferring instead that she had a rich boy friend to breed with?

Xenia...Congratulations to your Daughter!

Because all of us SAHM are sitting around all day telling our daughters that its only looks that matter, since we are so shallow and all. Oh Please.

Why is it that only working mothers can 'try to present a model which counter balances it?' Why can't all mothers present a good model, whether they work in the home, out of it or both? Why do you see no dignity and worth in SAHPARENTING? Are you down on men when they do it, or is just women who shouldn't? I think there is dignity and worth in all three states of being (SAH, working f/t, working p/t) whether the person who does it has a willy or not. It's how you do it that matters.

Don't you know that SAHM's just model watching Trisha and eating muffins, Droile?

scottish thistle you demonstrate v little understanding of early years development. shocking given your job.\

droile couldn't agree more with your last few posts

In answer to your question, Droile - yes, Xenia is just as down on men when they SAHP - she was extremely rude to me on a thread when I asked her that same question - made some offensive comments about how my DH stays at home "rearranging my knicker drawer"!

(It's Dinosaur, btw - may be seeing you on Saturday, after all!)

'Sadly girls have indoctrination on a massive scale today that their role is to cut their bodies into a shape men prefer, concentrate on wedding and makeup, that their looks are the most important thing etc. '

Hey, it worked for Heather Mills McCartney.

She'll have more of a fortune than either you and I can ever hope to materialise, all for hitching her cart to a star for a few years.

Work smarter, not harder .

I feel sorry for those who can't remember being under 5. I can and it was a fabulous brain state.

'Or shoudl I be preferring instead that she had a rich boy friend to breed with? '

If she had the looks and personality to pull it off, why not? Play to your strengths! Why is that any less enterprising than being a workaholic?

I'm not taking the mick this time, I geniunely don't see where workaholism = virtue, especially if not necessary.

'If you as a woman think it really is best for a mother to be there most of the time with under 5s you are wrong to suggest to a girl that she should do otherwise. You can't have it both ways. You either believe it or you don't. If you're not sure then of course you might present both views.'

Hmmm. Well my mum was at home until my youngest brother went to secondary school. She wasn't, and still isn't, ambitious in the career sense. I still went to university, moved to London to work, continued to pursue a career up north blah blah. When I had ds1 I fully intended to go back to work - when it came to it, I lasted a few weeks before I quit. Neither of my parents made any comment about my decision to go back to work having had a baby - whatever they believed. Every decision was up to me.

Children of SAHM's don't necessarily grow up to think that the only thing for a woman to do in life is washing, ironing and childcare.

I'm a SAHM, have a freelance career, volunteer in the classroom at school and am a member of the PTA committee - my mother would never have done all of those things but it hasn't stopped me doing it. We are different people - and I've been encouraged and supported to do whatever I've wanted to do in life.

One thing I am glad about is that my Mum was at home when I was little. I used to love coming home from school at the end of the day to see my Mum and I loved spending the holidays at home playing in the garden with my brothers and my friends. Seeing kids trudge off to after school club and holiday club, childminders and nurseries really saddens me and it's not what I want for my children.

Great Dinosaur!

And what it actually all boils down to is choice isn't it?

Oh expat - I do love you!!

expat. agreed. i would go further and suggest that workaholism is an addiction as bad as any other.

Thanks Sophable. The eggshells are hurting my feet though.

Yes. A ex-friend used to give people printouts of all her shifts so that we all knew how busy she was. When she went into property, she gave anyone who would listen a profit & loss breakdown at all opportunities.

You're getting off my point. In societies where women don't work and just cook rice and provide sex and child care daughters tend to follow that model. People were saying below they want to be an influence on their children which is one reason they stay at home to be more of an influence. The model and influence you then give is women stay at home and men work. Now you might bring up girls to be career girls as the occasional entilightend Saudi or Taliban mother might do but it's not likely. That's fine.

In another household the parents go out to work, enjoy their careers and the children want to emulate them.

I didn't actually say either model was right but that whatever values you try to instil in the children by example etc they are likely to follow.

As for men at home of course they should be rearranging the knicker draw. I have spent ages over the years sorting out draws. Just because a man is a man doesn't mean he won't rearrange drawers when he's home. If he didn't rearrange the knicker draw I'd suggest he wasn't taking on the full job properly.

(workaholism whatever that means is no worse than workingmotheritis 24/7 with children - either way you give your children a model)

This has predictably turned into a my-way-is-better-than-yours dialogue.

So SAHMs feel less valued by society for their work and have people suggesting that they live in the dark ages (and that they will perpetuate this dangerous state of affairs with their female offspring's unwillingness and inability to work outside the home)

So WAHMs feel less valued by society for their role as mothers and have people suggesting that their children are neglected and will spend their adulthood engaged in years of therapy (although they will be keen to get jobs and work thanks to mummy's example)

BOTH ARE BLATANTLY RIDICULOUS PERSPECTIVES IN MY OPINION. And please don't quote statistics at me because I have a very low opinion of statisticians.

This debate will, no doubt, rage on and on, but I think the more interesting question that the OJ article considers (albeit superficially) is the question of government policy (male or female - who really cares?) dictating that both parents ought to work outside the home - rather than considering ways to ensure both parents have the option to be at home with their children some of the time if that is what they would like to do (and if my dh is an example of this he would have loved the chance to have more paternity leave). I personally wonder if the whole issue of making two (normally middle class) parents feel that they both HAVE to work outside of the home even when baby is young is just great for enhancing employment statistics while not really dealing with all the issues surrounding unemployment in really deprived areas? But I am a cynic.

'I didn't actually say either model was right but that whatever values you try to instil in the children by example etc they are likely to follow.'

How about the model that I/my DH chose to be a SAHP (I'm not, btw, but not by choice) and we value that choice as the team we are. And that we support whatever choice they make as well, be it to work, stay at home, be a golddigger or footballer or even not have any children at all?

How about the model that personal happiness is more important than using your life to hammer home a point?

Why is this a less valid role model?