Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Rachel Johnson and Motherhood

244 replies

Judy1234 · 13/01/2008 10:57

It is boring being at home. It's unremitting domestic toil so most mothers of under 5s now work and I am glad I worked full time when we had 3 under 5. RJ says in today's Sunday Times she was at home with 3 children under 5. More fool her I say. Why not instead ditch your guilt, get wonderful childcare for your children and have the best of all worlds she says men have secured in the last 50 years - success at work and time with the family. That's the way to go not to feel you have to be there as drudge and chief cook and bottle washer for 5 years with no gains for anyone. The only way we survived having 3 children under 5 and avoided the problem that does not speak its name or whatever RJ refers to Betty F calling it was by us both working happily and having the amount of child care and cleaning we could comfortably tolerate.

"Many congratulations to the alabaster beauty Nicole Kidman, who is due to hear the patter of tiny feet in July. Celebrity ?baby joy?, as it is invariably termed, always spreads the love around, and the so-called friends have duly announced that ?Nic and Keith [Urban] are riding the clouds? while Nicole?s publicist is confining herself to a press release that describes the gravid couple as ?thrilled?.

I?m as pleased as you are, and possibly even more pleased than Katie Holmes, who is married to Kidman?s ex, Tom Cruise, claims to be about it. But I have to admit to feeling that the predictable gush over one elderly primigravida, who happens to be an internationally worshipped movie star with bags of fairy dust and the world at her feet, threatens, as these occasions do, to obscure the less sparkly reality of early motherhood for many women, women whose lives cannot so gracefully gloss over the harsh truth that 40 is not the best time to start a baby; that most companies are structured around men with stay-at-home wives in mind; and that being at home all day in sole charge of babies and small children can be tiring, repetitive, isolating and indescribably dull.

When I had three children under four, I never knew how to answer when child-free friends called and asked, ?How are you?? So I would trill, ?Fine! Great!?

But in fact I felt exhausted all the time, to the point of delirium, and for about five years my proudest achievement was the time I managed to make a trip to the chemist without a double buggy, nappy bag and toddler ? and didn?t forget my wallet. But I never had postnatal depression, and in that sense and many others I recognise I was blessed. For the day after the Kidman-Urban announcement we learnt of Heather Finkill, 30, the newly delivered mother of two-week-old twins, Lacey and Isobel. Mrs Finkill left her Hampshire house at 7am and walked in front of a lorry on the northbound carriageway of the M3.

Her death is desperately sad and sounds like an extreme case. But actually such stories aren?t all that uncommon. Suicide is the leading cause of death in young mothers. One in five women, according to the charity Perinatal Illness UK, suffers from some form of postnatal depression. Even now. In fact, make that, especially now.

In 1963 Betty Friedan defined, in The Feminine Mystique, the feeling of frustrated, morale-sapping dread that many ? especially educated ? women feel at the onset of domesticity, housewifery and motherhood. She called it ?the problem with no name?.

In the 1970s Spare Rib, the feminist magazine, was inundated by manuscripts from women confessing to their loneliness and shame that they did not find motherhood the idyllic scenario that it was cracked up to be.

But in 2008, even though we have the equal pay act and flexitime and supposedly bags of paternal involvement, even though we have Harriet Harperson insisting that ?it must be the cultural norm for both mothers and fathers to work flexibly so they can balance earning a living while bringing up their children?, mums are still depressed. More than ever, it appears, if the one-in-five figure is right.

I hesitate to put this theory forward, but I will anyway. I think that what lies behind this sorority of suffering is that nothing has come along to make motherhood any easier since the dawn of feminism, and lots has come along to make it harder.

As well as the demands of pregnancy, childbirth and small children, women are now expected to work when they?re expecting and beyond. And when they?ve produced the next generation, they discover to their dismay that they have just taken on a second profession. They will be responsible for everything their child does, annually audited, and to blame for it.

Meanwhile their husbands have inexplicably declined the tempting new-Labour offers of flexitime and paid paternity leave to share parental duties. Studies show that while fathers evince genuine desire to be involved in their children?s lives, they make poorer primary carers for sons, think that spaghetti hoops three times a day can?t be wrong and have herd immunity to mess.

They want family time and intimacy with their children but are understandably reluctant to extend this involvement so it risks annoying the boss or involves being made to hand-wash the Weenee pouch pants.

?Fathers are fine with a day out but they are reluctant to take on the menial everyday tasks like the laundry, and studies show that they want to have the status of a job and paid work and to be able, on top of that, to come home to spend time with their children,? Dr Esther Dermott told me. A sociologist who specialises in ?contemporary fatherhood? at Bristol University, she is the author of the father-son study. ?The fact that new fathers don?t reduce their working hours also means that the burden of childcare is much more likely to fall on the mother, rather than being shared,? she said.

Mmm. If I hear the expert correctly, what she said is that, in modern society, it?s men who are validating themselves in the workplace, continuing their careers and returning home to the fragrant, pyjamaed children, to the hot supper. Not women. If that is the case, it turns out that the past 40 years have resulted not in mothers having it all, but fathers.

Well, what can I say? Well done, chaps. "

OP posts:
mrsruffallo · 14/01/2008 22:42

Quattro- please tell me that post about polish was a joke

rantinghousewife · 14/01/2008 22:43
RubyRioja · 14/01/2008 22:43

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Quattrocento · 14/01/2008 22:44

well it might have been a little tongue-in-cheek

PaulaYatesBiggestFan · 14/01/2008 22:44

i find xenias pro - private school comments narrow minde at best

at worst they seem to dominate every thread she is on

notice she refrained from the real league tables thread

mrsruffallo · 14/01/2008 22:49

Agree Paula

Judy1234 · 15/01/2008 09:05

I didn't see it. There are some very dubious Gov league tables at the moment. We all know the real leading schools as do employers. If left wing Governments and parents want to con themselves that in the socialist republic of UK 2008 XYZ dire comp gets the best As in needlework go on delude yourselves but employers and the best universities know the real truth behind the damn lies and statistics.......

OP posts:
LoveAngel · 15/01/2008 10:11

Your world view is incredibly narrow, Xenia. Sometimes you remind me of that cook woman - what's her face? - ummm...Fanny Craddock, that's it! Making these ghastly sweeping pronouncements on how things just are and what is obviously the right way to live your life. Obviously. Except it's not obvious. And you have yet to persuade me with a single one of your (snobbery loaded) arguments that my life is over and my career irreversibly damaged because I chose to stay at home with my child while he was a baby/toddler.

GColdtimer · 15/01/2008 10:24

Xenia, I found it quite ironic that you talk of others as being deluded. Generally, I don't find that many peoples lives are as perfect as you make yours out to be, like some modern day incarnation of The Waltons.

You actually do yourself a disservice as sometimes you make the odd going point. However, for one, I just cannot get beyond your patronising and supercilious manner. Do you just do it for kicks or are you like this in real life?

morningpaper · 15/01/2008 10:26

See I find this odd

Xenia makes a few contentious points

And gets 100 posts of personal insults

Why IS that?

Judy1234 · 15/01/2008 10:26

I have never once said my life is perfect. The things that make things hard for people like death and illness, divorce etc are the same whatever you earn and I've had a reasonable amount of those things in the last 4 years, probably more than most.

OP posts:
GColdtimer · 15/01/2008 10:29

But then forgive me if I am missing something here, but I don't see much empathy. When you say that people are within their rights to do as they wish, you say it in such a manner that is fairly contemptuous (which is why you provoke such a fierce reaction from people). Perhaps you don't mean to come across that way, but that is why I say you do yourself a disservice.

chrissnow · 15/01/2008 10:33

I've chosen to stay at home to bring up my dd's until school age. I've chosen to work nights to make up the money 'shortfall'. When the girls go to school I will choose to return to work and will probably choose my career path then. I will succeed at it in just the same way I have succeeded at a SAHM. We all make choices. Sometimes the choices are limited to like it or lump it, sometimes the choices are sprung on us at short notice.
I am happy with my choices. I am not bored (or any more bored than I was pen pushing), I am not a slave and neither me or my life is dull. I am also happy for those whose choices have differed vastly to mine.

Domesticgodless · 15/01/2008 10:44

agree MP, the personal insults Xenia receives for her perfectly valid views (not that anyone has to actually agree with them) are quite shocking imho.

The only thing is that feeling sorry for her seems impossible, her posts give off a Thatcher-like aura of impermeability (which may of course be why she attracts so much hate i the first place). Good for her!

Domesticgodless · 15/01/2008 10:45

I remember in a thread last year sometime, someone openly told her she should not have had 5 children if she couldn't be bothered to stay home with them or something like that. And she responded with perfect grace, calm and aplomb. I was stunned.

margoandjerry · 15/01/2008 11:13

I find I often agree with Xenia and she does seem to attract flak when she is clearly just wanting to put forward the view that work can be very, very good for women.

I am delighted for anyone to be a SAHM but I often feel when I read threads about people struggling with depression and boredom and a sense of being overwhelmed that sometimes women who stay at home are hating it but have pledged to do it for reasons linked with their sense of what womanhood is. It's quite visceral for many, it seems to me.

When that happens, I always think it's a shame and I'd love for those women to have the freedom I have to go to work and be a mum as well. I appreciate it's not always easy - childcare costs can be prohibitive and some jobs are not as fulfilling as others. But for women to be tied into a drudgery that they hate is terrible.

If you love it then fine. If you don't love it, Xenia's posts will ring a bell.

LoveAngel · 15/01/2008 12:11

Oh come, come now. Xenia knows how to rub people up the wrong way and she doesn't make any attempt to phrase her posts in a sensitive manner. She is deliberately provocative, and thus she provokes strong feeling and inevitably a bit of scrapping - as is pretty obviously her intention. She's fair game.

What I don't like about Xenia's posts is that they perpetuate this ridiculous SAHM vs WOHM myth. In actual fact, many women take some time out from their careers to bring up their children, and most of those women return to work at some point (most by the time their children are nursery or school age). Not many women are languishing at home for years and years baking pies (unless they are very very rich)

I just cannot get my head around the way she paints women who take some time out to bring up their kids as deluded, unpoliticised 1950s housewives. It's ridiculous.

Domesticgodless · 15/01/2008 12:24

Is it really 'fair game' to attack someone personally because they have 'rubbed people up the wrong way'?

To some extent MN has got to be about debate hasn't it- and she certainly knows how to get one going (albeit a somewhat limited one!)

LoveAngel · 15/01/2008 12:38

Where's the 'debate' from Xenia, though? As far as I can see, her posts are a repetitive loop of 'See, I told you I was right! See, look! Blah-de-blah from the Telegraph says so...' The thing is, I agree with her essential point that working has huge benefits for mothers, I just find her delivery offensive. I compared her to Fanny Craddock in (semi) jest...in the past she has said much, much worse of 'SAHMs' in all seriousness.

Judy1234 · 15/01/2008 12:44

I know most women do a combination of work and stay at home over their adult lives. I think some shoot themselves in the foot by doing that because they suffer huge detriment when they have certain careers which their men conveniently don't suffer from and I am not sure the gains of being bored rigid at home and having less money really justify that sacrifice.

Indeed few men these days leave school or university and work for the same employer until they're 65. The old kind of loyalty the boss/company showed to you and you to them has gone and people are responsible for themselves and their careers which is all to the good. In career terms it is usually not beneficial to stay in the same job.

What I would hate to see though is working parents at home because they've bought into a myth that children under 5 suffer if both parents work when the parents would in fact rather work.

In fact I am working at home today. We have had people from Radio 4 here for 2 days making a play. Being at home is fun sometimes and tomorrow I fly abroad. I certainly don't even myself live some sort of normal corporate life in any sense.

OP posts:
exbatt · 15/01/2008 12:53

Sometimes the gains of being bored rigid or stressed at work and having more money don't really justify that sacrifice. And I would hate to see more parents working outside the home because they've bought into the myth that that's the best thing for everyone, if they would in fact rather stay at home, for some time at least.

It's not as black and white as you paint it.

Judy1234 · 15/01/2008 13:02

But it's rare you see a press article saying parents may be happier working longer hours and many parents don't want to be home 24/7 and that children can benefit from 2 working parents. That view is just never painted so I try to paint it whenever I can just to right the balance against the 95% anti working parents propaganda that you see.

OP posts:
themildmanneredjanitor · 15/01/2008 13:14

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LoveAngel · 15/01/2008 13:15

I agree, Xenia. Nobody should stay at home when they would much rather be working. I cannot see the sense in any woman leading a dull, frustrating, limited life 'for the sake of her children'. However, the reality of SAHM-dom is much the same as the reality of working life for most women (and men). There are huge benefits and some drawbacks. There are massive rewards and then there are days you wonder what on earth you are doing. We all make these decisions on balance, don't we? We think about what we gain and what we lose from a situation (by 'we' I mean our families - us, our kids, our husbands) and we act accordingly.

I agree - long term SAHM-dom is a different kind of sacrifice, and I for one wouldn't want to 'never work again'. But my choice - to stay at home with my son for a couple of years - although a sacrifice, isn't anything like the choice that a woman who says 'I want to be a housewife for the rest of my life' is making. That's the point I think you fail to grasp in a lot of your posts. I'm not going to pretend that taking a career break can have an adverse effect on a woman's career it wasn't the case for me, but I know I was lucky). However, the benefits to both parent and child and to the wider family can really outweigh that.

The fact that it is widely expected (by men, women, employers, the law) that it's the mother who takes leave to care for her children, rather than the father; or the fact that taking even the statutory maternity leave, let alone a longer break from work, almost always has some disadvantages for women once they return to work- these inequalities won't be solved by beating women who are at home with their children with a big fat patronising bitch stick.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again - a change in employment law and practice, more flexible ways of working for men and women, and a change in where we as a society place the 'burden of childcare' (and how we value that 'burden' - which is, after all, an amazing time and privilege for many parents/carers)...these are the things we should be debating and campaigning for (NOT wasting our time 'debating' a non-existent divide between women.)

exbatt · 15/01/2008 13:15

Again, we must live in different worlds because increasingly I see it the other way round - more and more pressure on both parents to work and masses of propaganda against women who stay at home, devaluing their status etc.

So much for choices for women.