Teenage girls should be prepared not to expect it all

[BecauseImWorthIt]

here

This has made me really angry.

Where is the education for boys? Why are our future citizens (female only) being told that babies/childcare are their responsibility only, whereas their male counterparts can, clearly, expect to have it all?

quite custardo- working class women have always worked because they had to. Imho this is now extending to the middle class anyway.

Yes, the illusion of choice

it is an illusion...

What upsets me most about the thread is the assumption by most people that you can't "have it all" without killing yourself. There's nothing bad about telling girls that they don't HAVE to have it all (and that it can be tough) but what's wrong with encouraging them to try at least?

I work F/T, have one DS and am pg with number 2. I love my job and I worked bloody hard to get where I am. I make time for my DS and he is a happy little thing. It works. I am not killing myself. I'd encourage any daughter of mine to do the same if she wanted.

I have very mixed feelings abut this one.

On the one hand I tell DD she can do whatever she sets her mind to in life and that she should feel no limits based on her sex...and yet the reality can often be very far from that.

I worry I'm selling her a pup. And yet I don't want to set out all the possible difficulties because that might just put her off from trying. Difficult balance.

I really don't understand the problem here. It is fine to tell our daughters that the world is their oyster and they can do whatever they want - the message that the speech is trying to get across is that they may not be able to achieve everything simultaneously.

Fine, have a high-flying career in a multinational and children. Just be aware that you won't always be home to give your children a good night kiss (let alone bath them, cook a home cooked supper and read them stories in bed). Be an international arbitration lawyer married to a management consultant and live on the other side of the world from your family. But if you want to have DCs as well, something in your lives (be it career or relationship) might have to give...

I think the problem is that no similar message is being given to boys. The assumption therefore is that family is not and should not be a priority for them (because the girls they will marry will take care of all that for them), and that family is and should be a woman's priority.

A speech like this reinforces employers' attitudes that women in the workplace are more concerned with family than their male counterparts and therefore less committed to their work.

And the underlying message is also a problem -- that this is the way it is and there's no way it can be changed, that girls, and only girls, will just have to adjust their expectations.

Of course, the root of the whole thing is that, so far in human history, there has not been a way for a stable or semi-stable society to function that doesn;t involve a designated class of people to do the shitwork. This class of people is labelled by the shitwork-avoiding class group as somehow 'naturally' more suited to the shitwork, whether that's couched in terms of sacred specialness or inherent inferiority.
At present, the balance is being redressed slowly but surely, but of course the propaganda for the retaining of the 'old ways' isn;t going to give up just yet.

I think the point is that you shouldn't feel guilty if you can't "have it all". A lot of women (myself included) found that we couldn't work full time when we had children because everything else in our lives fell apart. Raised as (and by)a feminist, it was very, very, very, hard for me to admit that I wasn't happy and that I wanted to be a SAHM. (I haven't been able to yet for financial reasons and have had to go to part time instead) Furthermore, it used to pain me to admit that I liked cooking and deocorating my house. I felt guilty to the cause for doing it!

If you can do it all, more power to ya. If you can't, because it's your personal choice that makes you happy, you shouldn't feel you have to.

'She said: "There is an unprecedented pressure on girls and more women are going back to work early after having children now. It can all work fine, until their child is ill."'

Last time my daughter was too ill for nursery, her dad took time off as it made more sense. Who says only mothers can look after ill children?

The speech isn't being given to teenage girls, BIWI. It is being given to their headteachers.

If the headteachers decide to disseminate this information to them, there are many ways of doing it. I'm sure many teachers already have pitch the balance between ambition and change of heart very well.

I liked this article. I wish someone had said this to me when I was busy fighting my way up the career, not admitting I wanted to have a family, not admitting I liked children etcetera.

I'd like to think that the Boys School Association Heads (is there such a thing?) get a similar "think of your responsibilities, work life balance, family life" kind of talk too but somehow doubt it. Anyone want to prove me wrong?

i wouldn't consider looking after my dc shitwork......but like i said.....never really understood feminism...

But daftpunk you yourself said earlier "why would men want to spend their time changing nappies or pushing a pram" implying it was beneath men or only suitable for women.

alot of women don't want to spend their time doing that either.....yet they have the baby and then expect someone else to look after it....

not sure my dh wanted 4 children...his attitude was...if want children you have as many as we can afford....but it will be you looking after them....i'm not changing nappies.

Daftpunk - why would you want to have children with someone who so obviously doesnt want the responsibilities?

Daftpunk: shitwork includes (literally) wiping up shit, it also includes all the endless daily drudgeries of housework, cleaning, shopping, etc that no one really likes doing but which has to be done. It's not just childcare; childless women used to be (and sometiems still are) expected to do more of the shitwork than men because somehow not having a penise makes women more adapted to doing all the caretaking and servicing.

WW...his responsibility is to provide us with as much money as we need...he has always earnt good money...we have everything we need and want...i've never had to work..

he is the provider...i look after his kids and cook...that's how he likes it..

he is a bit sexist ...

SGB;..i know...but someone has to do it..

at he is a bit sexist. If it works for you daftpunk and you are happy then who are we to criticise. So few of us manage to find a balance that works for our children and makes us happy.

I would worry about the message I was sending to my children if my dh/dp made it obvious that he thought it was man's work to go out and provide and a woman's job to stay at home.

".i look after his kids and cook...that's how he likes it.."

daftpunk, I am a bit sad for you even though you are happy. Especially wondering about using the term "his kids".

"SGB;..i know...but someone has to do it.." -- well this is the crux of the issue, really. Who is that someone?

What happens when the kids go?Who are you?

And will you have a pension, daftpunk?

I think the old adage 'why have children if you don't want to look after them yourself' (hinted at by DP further down) should be firmly applied to men as well.

Why should women have to justify delegating childcare to others when men do not?

a pension.....?
er, no...i wont have one...never given it a thought...

can i have one if i'm not working..?