Feminism and me

[morningpaper]

After spending the first three decades of my life being a raving feminist, I can't help wonder WTF? when it comes to being a mum.

Basically my skills (in order of usage) are: cleaning for DP and DD, cooking for DP and DD, washing for DP and DD, Microsoft network technician (0% of time).

After an exhausting days cleaning/cooking/ washing, once I've settled into bed to read my (imported) copy of MS. magazine, I wonder what's the point? What useful lesson has feminism really taught me?

I noticed at a recent gathering of mummy-friends that I was the only 'Ms.' and when I commented on this (may have been a tad drunk) all my (intelligent) friends said things like "Well I like people knowing I'm married!" and it made me feel VERY depressed to think I was raising a daughter for ... what kind of future? Probably the same as mine - cooking, cleaning, and washing - all while being (of course) very enlightened and feminist about the whole thing.

Does anyone else worry about this... or am I letting the post-election blues get to me?!?

For example, many professional women, such as teachers were absolutely forbidden to work once they married. they were simply fired. That's not so long ago either.

Finally - people who realise that women, especially working class women have always worked as well as running 'taking-care' of the home and families.

Read the cleaner article posted by Scummymummy - it definitely clarifies why I feel bad about employing a cleaner.

Accountants/plumbers/electricians we use because we are buying their SKILLS, cleaners we employ because we are buying their TIME, which is by implication cheaper than ours and available to us because they are lower down the socio-economic scale. Basically, my time is worth more than their time. I have something BETTER to do with my time than what 'she' is doing. And I don't like the message it sends out to children - we pay someone to clear up after us, because we can afford to do so. We have money and we pay for this woman to clean up after us. It's such a purely capitalist transaction, being played out in our own lounge among our own scattered Rice Krispies.

DP and I are also from working-class stock - I think we therefore empathise more with the cleaner (stuck in a lower class, doing a job she would not choose if she had better education/opportunities) and recoil against becoming part of the middle-class 'servant' employing culture.

(This isn't meant as a criticism of those who employ cleaners - just as an explanation of my discomfort with the idea!)

I've not read all this thread but have skimmed it. I completely agree with Caligula on how we're forced to accommodate (usually very uncomfortably) a 'work' model which really doesn't work for anyone who wants something more in their life than their job. (And actually I think it's men who could be saying a lot more to their bosses 'I have to go home NOW' rather than complaining that their work doesn't permit this - hello, boys, how do you think women managed it?)

What I would also say is that the whole women-still-do-housework bit is not a demonstration that feminism has failed us. I think it's a very clear demonstration that feminism hasn't gone far enough. Housework isn't my job just because I'm a Laydee. Yes, I notice the mess more because I've been brought up to notice it whereas DP was brought up not to. But hell, he was brought up unable to cook a meal either. He seems to manage that with startling competence these days.

I'm kind of caught in the middle here too. On the one hand I totally agree with aloha and co that feminism has bought real and important changes for many women, particularly better off, well-educated, white women in the West. But I'm also extremely glad Custardo raised the issue of possible class-based differences in women's perceptions of feminism. Ultimately, I think that considering feminist thought in isolation, overlooking class, poverty, culture and ethnicity, can give a very skewed and simplistic picture in some ways. Context is everything in terms of how far feminist thought and action has been incorporated into women's lives, IME.

And also how it's been incorporated into men's lives. I think one of the main things it's done, is to change expectations, quite widely, across all classes and both sexes (in the West.) Which doesn't mean it's changed actual practice. Large numbers of men and women, although they have the expectation that they will be equal re housework, find that in practice the equality doesn't pan out, particularly when children come along and change the balance of economic power in the relationship. (Could that gap in expectation and practice be contributing to the divorce rate?) And I think MI's point about women noticing and being bothered by mess more, possibly because they've been trained to, is right. Which makes me think I'd better rush off and play a "spot the mess" game with my DS!

Morningpaper I do understand exactly what you mean about employing a cleaner and would have the same uncomfortable reservations myself.
However, I wouldn?t have any such qualms about employing a cleaner if I were in different circumstances e.g. if I were recuperating from an operation/had the responsibility of caring for an elderly or ill relative living with me/ had newborn twins. Why is that I wonder? Is it because all those generations of conditioning still leave me wringing with the feeling that my first responsibility is as a dutiful homemaker despite working outside the home and earning as much money as my dh?
I worked as a chambermaid once when I was a student (and thoroughly enjoyed it ? not all cleaners wish they were in the boardroom) and have to disagree about cleaning not being a ?skill?. And after seeing the pigs ear my dh and my children (including dd) make out of cleaning almost anything I would say that the skills of an efficient and eagle-eyed cleaner be they male or female are worthy of a lot of respect NVQ or no NVQ.

I've read through this whole thread with a great deal of interest. One thought that sprang to mind - are we in danger of raising a generation of children that thinks that the only work worth doing is paid work?

Trouble is "paid" work pays the bills.

Stickynote: I think perhaps WE are the generation that thinks that paid work is the only work worth doing. My problem is a massive mortgage - the only way of getting a house big enough to raise a family in. So when I have free time, I really prefer/need to be doing WORK during those hours.

From my experience, charities and voluntary groups are finding it harder and harder to find young people willing to do unpaid work. Particularly now that 'mums' tend to work, instead of being 'kept' at home and running churches/social groups as my mother's generation did.

(Having said that, I am involved with two local charities - am not completely money-driven...)

Children of this generation are no different than we were when it comes to recognising the value of money and wanting some small financial incentive (bribe) for errands run.
'Work' doesn't feel like 'work' when you aren't being paid for it. It feels either like drudgery if you don't enjoy it, or like some great meal to enjoy getting your self stuck into if you do.
That's why we have great smelling all in one washing powder/fabric conditioners - so we can 'enjoy' our unpaid work.

I'm a Ms too morningpaper and I Get Looks when I point it out (when I'm getting forms filled in etc). Also consider myself a feminist but am horrified to realise that a lot of my friends don't. Will read the rest of this thread now, have only read your first post but wanted to respond.

If you are a Mrs you are taking your husbands name. If you are a Ms you are (most likely) using your fathers name which your mother adopted as the 'family' name. what's the difference?

Mrs X would be my MIL. I spent 25 years as hmb before I got married. This is who I am. It has nothing to do with bucking a patriarchy. Why should I have to change my name, part of who I am, when I married? DH fell in love with hmb (poor sap ), he didn't think that I should change either. To my mind feminism is about choice. If you want to change your name, great, I didn't.

after thinking long and hard I still think I am an equalist ie all people are equal I hope I instill this in dd as society seems to be moving more and more towards increased patriachy. The values espoused in teh media adn teh general portryer of women seem to be going backwards towards women as dolls or trophy's or skivies

I find it really disheartening at times reading on mumsnet where there seem to be a lot of families in which the man does very little and the woman begrudgingly gets on with it.
Maybe I'm different because my dh went to boarding school from a young age so didnt see a typical household as he was growing up.
I cant imagine living with someone who thought housework was my domain more than theirs and who had to be persuaded to look after their own kids.

We run a fairly equal household. I couldn't honestly say that it is 50;50, but it is damn close.

Mrs v Ms is not primarily to do with surname as I understand it, leglebegle. It is to do with whether you wish your marital status to be known and, potentially, judged by others. Essentially your title denoted whether you were a good/chattel of your father or your husband at one time, as you suggest, and the residue of this injustice still remains in the status judgements that many people continue to make based on whether women are married. Men, as Mr both before and after marriage, do not face this problem and the suggestion is that women adopting Ms would put them on an equal footing. Surnames are, as you say, another minefield in themselves!

the way i understand it teachers have in industrial times always been considered middle class - hence the being fired to fulfil a male utopia.

i dont know much about the service industry - although considered working class by definition - i dont know why they had to leave work, whilst other sections of the working class didn't. my great grandmother worked in the service industry and popped 4 kids out of wedlock and farmed them out to be fostered, before marrying later in life. but did carry on working to support her children ( who she had to pay for.)

the point is i am sure that perhaps the middle classes now have a choice whereas they were forced to stay at home before.

I've always thought Ms was silly. Why didn't the English just do what everyone else on the continent did, and just adopt Mrs? In Germany you're Frau, in France your're Madame, In Italy you're Signora, etc., if you are a grown up. You'd only use the "Miss" form for a child (very similar to the use of "Master" in English, which has become obsolete for anyone except little boys) or if you are being a) rude or b)ironic. That way, all adult women are Mrs X and no-one knows if you're married or not. No one has assumptions about your political opinions either, unlike with Ms.

I'm sure that historian mumnsnetters will correct me, but I think that in the past Mrs was used by older unmaried women. I do know that the cook in a grand household would be Mrs regardless of their marital status.

Excellent thread!

I think Custardo has a very good point about class etc - "the right to work outside the home" was only an issue for the well-off. It wasn't and isn't a choice for some of us.

To me, feminism is about changing attitudes and IME (and judging by this thread, in lots of people's experience) there is a long way to go. Why do so many working women (of all classes) do more housework/childcare than their partners? Why are there so few women in top positions in industry/politics/whatever? Some women have equal relationships now, but not all.

Anyway, Morningpaper: lol at the shiney sink before bed! Mine is never shiney - maybe I should have a word with dh about that?

custardo, you are right of ourse - I was referring to herb growing women, and fully accept that working class women have never had a choice between a career and staying at home, they just had (have) to get on with both jobs. Doesn't make it right for either group of women

Custardo - you are right re the poor choices available to workign class women. It is sad that the progress made for and by the middle classes hasn't been matched by the working classes.

Not just in macro terms but in micro ways. E.g. as a senior management person I can pretty much work in a way which allows me to factor in my children's needs - as long as the job gets done they live with it.

Many of the secretaries have NO CHOICE at all. They are less likely to be able to negotiate any form of flexible working arrangements and often have to work overtime at short notice. If they don't then they worry they will lose their jobs!
So not only do they lose out by HAVING to work they lose out again by not having any control over HOW they work. I suspect the two are linked. I can walk in and say 'I'm leaving early today its the children;s concert' if they don't like it I'd go anyway and tell them to stuff their job, because I can! If you are reliant on your wages to put food on the table then you would be in a much weaker position. And the bas*s that make it worse are the very ones who drone on about the importance of being their for thier children. The make it impossible for their staff to do the same. (And many of the worst of these are women)!

And why I employ a cleaner and other help and feel no guilt! My granny cleaned for a lady for 25 years - if she had not done this she would have been unable to put food on the table for her children. The lady was a fantastic employer - my mother and her family had toys at christmas, decent clothes and plenty food at Christmas time because of her benevolence. I reward the people who work for me well - not just in wages but in random bonuses, nice gifts and most importantly of all RESPECT. They are doing something well, and take pride in what they do - and I value the contribution they make to my life. They are also very very nice people! Without the money I pay to them life would be a struggle.

Should preview - appauling writing and 'their' should be there!