Motherhood, Feminism, Econony - discuss!

[kneedeepinthedirtylaundry]

Wrote this to a friend today (poor woman!). What do you all think of this issue?

"Also part of this issue is economy. I understand what you said in your text about breastfeeding, mothering, etc, being part of what has traditionally kept women at home, and therefore, away from economic independence ? forced to rely on men to survive, and therefore, motherhood itself can be seen as a misogynistic institution, as deeply anti-feminist, as it denies women the freedom they should have as a right.

But for many years now, long before I became a mother incidentally, I have had a growing feeling that this feminist attitude is immature, because it denies women the freedom to be mothers, which is OUR BILOGICAL DESTINY, so not something we should deny if we don?t want to. It?s like saying a person who has an inborn artistic talent, and really wants to paint, must work at tescos! Most women want to be mothers, are compelled to experience motherhood. I?m not saying that they all should, just that most women do want this. Those that do should be able to fulfill their biological destiny responsibly, but they do not have the freedom to be able to do so without a man (or at least a lesbian money-earning partner!) because of the MALE-BIASED system of economy in which we live.

Women should be able to survive AND raise their children. In an economic system, they cannot do so independently. The system is anti-female, and ?feminists? that devalue NATURAL FEMALE ATTRIBUTES because of these constraints of the system (encourage women to be independent workers rather than dependant mothers), even if they do so in the name of economic independence are, in my humble opinion, misguided, because they are colluding with an inherently anti-female system by trying to work within it. Its like asking black people to work within and accept a system which is set up for whites, and in which their natural state (the colour of their skin) puts them at a disadvantage. We would never expect black people to accept those terms (or think that it would be non-rascist to do so), yet we expect mothers to accept having to work within a system that is stacked up against them. How can you care for a sick child when your boss will think you are shit for not being at the office? How can you breastfeed a 3-year-old if you want to, but your boss wants to know why you can?t go for a week-long business trip once a month. In this situation, no boss would favour a female mother employee over a male, even if she were better at her job, because her role as mother would cost the company some of its profit.

ALL OF THAT is anti-feminist in my thinking.

I don?t think all women want to or should be mothers, just that the ones that don?t generally have it easier in terms of (economic) survival than those that do, and this is wrong. Also, all that immature 1960s feminism, while it made great strides for women, has greatly served to devalue the role of mother IN WOMEN?S EYES AS WELL AS MEN?S, and that, to me, is deeply misogynistic, given our physiology and natural desire in most cases to have children."

the point of that was that proper human rights, whether for women or men, and profitability, and not possible under the same roof.

I dont think china will ever introduce labour laws, I think when they overtake the US as superpower we will look back fondly on the days when the US were world leaders

There was an item on the news (well, Breakfast) this morning about the lack of Poles coming to the UK and how this will have a negative impact on business.

Interestingly, though, outsourcing has brought feminism to other countries. I know a couple of call centre workers in Bangalore, doing jobs we would hate, who are educated, well paid and excited by their possibilities in life.

Maybe globalisation is making it more difficult to advance feminism? or maybe when industrialisation progresses in the less developed world women there will also question capitalist values? Though this has had some negative effects, the taliban had a lot of female support in rural areas of Afganistan as women felt safer and felt extreme religion supported family

i wish i had the time to worry about it

I agree - the idea that your life is only meaningful if you are working for a wage while your children are looked after by someone else working for a wage is a complete cooption of feminism by capitalism. It totally devalues women's contribution to society and aspirations. Kneedeep, have you read Anne Manne's 'Motherhood'(books.google.com.au/books?id=KHdpcmuXB_oC)? It's australian so I don't know if you can get it easily in uk but I think you would like it.

Wonderstuff and Kneedeep you aren't the only ones I promise. I get really frustrated with the fact that pretty much all of my friends aren't interested in politics (whether they have kids or not) and that if you mention feminism they start to look all scared.

Unfortunately intelligence seems to have become deeply unfashionable in the Heat magazine culture. If I ever have a daughter I will go spare if she gravitates towards that trash.

I have a 6 month old daughter and its my hope that she is able to escape the celeb culture ideals, but I fear she is already having an image of femininity that I disagree with projected on her, I was at baby massage this week and someone commented that she wasn't being very feminine as she lay on her back,legs spread blowing rasberrys, fgs she is 6 months old!!! It was in jest I think, but really

Morning Wonderstuff - yes I can see how that might have annoyed you. Whilst I agree totally that we project masculinity/femininity onto kids I can't help feeling that some differences are just hardwired in for most people. My parents tried hard not to project onto me and as soon as I hit a certain age I was nicking my Mums high heels and tottering round the house. I can't help thinking that the urge to mother and nuture is similarly programmed and therefore the admittedly lovely sounding idea of men and women both working part time and sharing child care just won't fly. Thoughts?

To some extent I agree with you, but its a dangerous argument isnt it? And however hard you try as a parent to not project pink on a girl society will influence her. I dont think that the urge to nurture is exclusivly female, but women do on the whole seem happier in this role than men. On the whole black people seem to be better at winning sprint races than white, but would not be true to say that the urge to run fast is programmed into black people iyswim. I think that family isnt seen as important in male capitalist society, but 'men' aren't the problem, lack of 'female' family values is the issue, women and men need to work together to redress the balance

The urge to nuture certainly isn't exclusively confined to women and I think your logic is spot on (and very well argued actually). I have always supported the idea that men need to be more supported in their efforts to shoulder greater child rearing responsibilities and to be fair I think there has been a lot of progress in this area although still a lot more to be done. My dh leaves work early one day a week to collect ds from nursey and I think five years ago he'd have had a hell of a job getting that one through.

The problem then arises that people without children feel that they are getting a raw deal.........

Perhaps women do feel the urge to nurture more strongly, but I don't think that makes the idea of men as carers any less tenable, particularly if in a 'job share' with the kids' mother.

I don't feel the urge to wash the dishes that strongly, but if I want to live in a decent house I have to do this. I think the argument is that basic with parenting.

Yes, things are improving with men, but not at all to the point where there is any equality between the sexes. For example, Pennypops comment about DH leaving work early one day a week to collect kids, but presumably this means you do it the other 4 days.

Of course, this is obviously what works in your situation, but I find it strange when some women are so grateful to men for 'helping out' with their own kids. it shouldn't be helping, it should be expected - in my opinion.

Sorry if this sounds rude, I've been up since 5! I think we're on the same lines.

We need to see children as an important part of society, as a society we have a responsibility to them, if we want there parents to contribute to the economy, we need to also allow them to raise there children. Family at the centre of society, rather than work

We can't just wait around for 'men to be better supported' all parents need to be given means to work and raise children, women will always do the lions share, but until we give men and women equal rights women, and parenthood will be second class to wage earning, i don't know how we achieve this? I think maybe there are some european models that work better than ours

IMO men need to get used to the idea that they may have to stick their necks out at work and request/demand conditions which mean they can do their share of parenting. Women have had to do that, many of us have compromised our careers so we are involved in our children's lives. Why can't men too?

my DP does work part time and flexibly and does half the childcare/pick-ups/drop-offs/sick days. It has affected his pay and progression. Just as it affects many women's pay and progression too when we do it.

"But do you not think that a woman, poor or rich, will be feeling something more than just the day-to-day stuff when holding a newborn in her arms?"

OK. Not read all the posts. Got to page 2 I think...

But if you beleive we are just female animals I think you are attributing too much emotional uplift to this. For animals the love of offspring is much more basic than that. It is the overwhelming need to ensure that the little bundle of your genes in your arms survives to adulthood. I think there is nothing more 'day to day' than that. And if that means you need to work to earn money then so be it! I think you are in danger or making motherhood out to be some kind of saintly, ever so special, vocation. A bit Victorian and sentimental for my taste

I worked full time and bfed all my DCs. So one does not preclude the other.

And FWIW I do think that motherhood was a very useful tool for keeping women in their place for millenia. Having babies was a long hard grind, risky to health short and long-term, when there was little medicine and uncertain nutrition. And without contraception it happened often and without control. Barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen. Much better for women - kept them out of the way of the serious stuff of life.

Of course we should be able to have babies and revel in it if that is our impulse. But we don't all want to make it our life goal.

But orm does that mean motherhood and feminism arent compatable? I agree it is possible to bf and work, but very difficult, I am unemployed but need to find work because mortgage on tiny flat needs to be paid and dont feel i can ask employers to give me time and space to express so will have to mix feed my lo and i would much rather bf, i'm angry i dont have a choice

And for many many generations our 'biological destiny' was more often than not to die in childbirth, or to watch our children die as infants. Or to die of smallpox. Or malnutrition. Biological destiny my arse!

And what about the beleif that most societies held dear that women didn't need education because they were going to marry and have babies. And being 'sold' on the marriage market as baby-making machines. I think there is an argument for saying that liberation women from their 'biological destiny' has been a damned good thing.

I agree with you Orm, but can we have a version of feminism that accepts motherhood, it seems that in choosing to be a mother i have chosen to be second class and I feel that isnt acceptable

I don't think mothers are second class citizens. I agree that it isn't easy to work and have children and that needs addressing, as do attitides to mothers in the workplace.But you don't do that be elevating motherhood to some special status. In fact that is self-defeating.

Can I ask a question without being shot down in this? Assuming that men and women were treated absolutely equally at work in terms of flexibility/ pay/ terms etc. and childcare (and whatever else was necessary)was in place to enable this, would women want to go back to work as much as men?

I ask this not to be flamed, but because, for example in my case, DW (whilst very successful at work) only works four days a week because she really can't bear to be away from DD for a full week. We could afford childcare for that extra day and her work would be thrilled to have her back five days a week but she absolutely doesn't want to. I've also got a couple of female friends in similar positions. Is there some intrinsic element that makes women want to spend time with their children more than guys.

Again, rather not be flamed here, just genuinely curious (especially in the context of this debate).

I think biological determinism is a dangerous route, I think many women want to spend more time with lo, poss. due to bonding in first few months, but some want to work full time and thats fine too, men are also very capable of caring for children

Whether male or female we have very little choices when it comes to gaining a succesful work life balance. In an ideal world society would recognise the importance of family life and support and encourage this with flexible working for either/both parents.

In the Uk we have some of the longest working hours in Europe and whilst most companies pay lip service to flexible working in practice they make it very difficult as it is just not as profitable.

I'm sure that many men would love to work part time and share the childcare but most men are not prepared to sacrifice their career prospects in order to do this and due to the inequlity in pay, it is generally the man who is the main earner so it makes more financial sense for the women to make this sacrifice.

cestlavie, according to Catherine Hakim's research most women do not want to work fulltime, at least when their children are young (www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/02/06/1044498913134.html). I know this applies to me - I want to work, I want to have a career, but not until my youngest child is at least 3 (and I may revise that upwards).

I agree that there is a danger of biological determinism or idealising motherhood, but that doesn't have to be the case. Most women have smallish families these days - they don't devote their whole lives to childbearing and raising. But for the few years they are looking after children, why shouldn't it be valued as much as earning money?

tryingtoleave: thanks, that's an interesting piece, although it suggests that she has a fair amount of critics as well. As it also says, even an empirical debate in this area tends to get emotive.

snechie: I agree, an ideal society would recognise the importance of family and life and enable flexible working for both parents. The question is at what point along this line does the country become unable to fund itself? If everyone chose to work part time, surely GDP would fall (unless productivity went up massively).