Parenting a boy is a feminist minefield!

[MadameBoolala]

I am a feminist.

I have one child, a 4 year old boy, and mainly post in conception as we have been ttc number 2 for 2 years without success now. However I am venturing onto these boards as I feel negatively judged today by someone, and my parenting is being called into question.

I won't have time to post again until I come back from work tonight- but I'm wondering aloud today if it's easier to be a feminist and a parent of a girl...

yes, sAf, and it's an example of how dressing your DD in a particular way restricts their behaviour.

If you put your daughter in something sparkly-and-fragile or a skirt without leggings or whatever, you restrict their movement. Either YOU are screeching "don't do that, you'll ruin your clothes!" or their clothes physically prevent them for doing what they want to do, OR both - they internalize that the behaviour expected of them is passivity.

urgh. I rarely wear skirts now, and it's at least 60% because of being hectored to 'sit like a lady' as a girl. I was busy doing stuff and didn't want to have to think about clothes!

another example of why dressing up for the fun of clothing is fun, but wearing clothes that prevent you acting like a kid is gender policing.

yep, i always want to shake people who put their little girls in white tights to go to the park then spend the whole time telling them they're going to get dirty, don't go on the slide, no don't sit down etc. ffs! they're not dollies.

Y'know, after reading that, I am so relieved that my friends are feminists - even if I feel the judging is a bit off kilter at the moment!

However - I remember when he was a toddler and I heard myself saying (when admonishing him for bashing a toddler mate who was a girl) 'you have to be gentle with girls they don't like being hit'. I realised straight away and apologised to my mate who was about to go purple, and we went onto have a discussion about how sometimes you say things that you thought you'd never say, have to analyse where they come from, and then choose an alternative.

madame my son is really, really big for his age, and I spend a lot of time saying "gently! Gently!" - cos frankly, who does like being hit? no one I know!

it's funny how that stuff just comes out, doesn't it?

my phrase is 'use your gentle hands' which i have used with all 5 of mine at toddler stage!

re buying disney dress, i got ds3 the fairy dress, not tinkerbell, her friend, the one that wears the purple dress, vidia? i think she is called as he loved the tinkerbell movies and had grown out of his tinkerbell costume that was a bday present, he wears them over shorts or a pair of jeans and its def about dressing up, i didnt buy it for any feminist reason, jsut because he wanted it. the thread i did in aibu (now deleted) was interesting actually there was a reasonable amount of support, but lots saying no he i 7, he is a boy its not ok, yet a 7 yr old girl in a spiderman costume would be fine i would bet!

my dd wears pinafores and some skirts, with leggings or tights, cute but always practical for her crawling/walking/climbing etc. she also wears her brothers old clothes as well :)

I have to take slight issue with blackcurrents' comment If you put your daughter in something sparkly-and-fragile or a skirt without leggings or whatever, you restrict their movement.

I agree with that, but as a parent you don't always have the choice, as I discovered yesterday when DD (2yo) insisted on wearing a party dress, even though me and DH routinely dress her in leggings and tops. I hasten to add, we've never actually bought her dresses, but plenty have been given to her as presents and/or hand-me-downs. Anyway, for me it was a battle not worth fighting, so I acquiesced and compromised by putting leggings on underneath (although DD would have preferred tights, but she let me have my way with that one). Personally, I'm not bothered if the dress gets dirty or whatever, although I would be concerned if it actually constituted a dangerous restriction to her play (in fact, it kept getting hitched up, so it tended to be out of the way anyway!)

What I'm saying is, with the best will in the world, children will sometimes make their own feelings very clear about what they want to wear and you either have a big fight about it, which isn't usually worth it IMO, or you just grit your teeth and let them get on with it.

I suppose I could just get rid of all the dresses she's been given, but I can't quite bring myself to do that as once in a while, it's rather nice to see her in a dress...

I'm very sad to hear about girls being hassled/discouraged when it comes to playing with boys. I have a few friends with boys of DD's age and they love DD getting together with their DSs to play (as do I). I can't get my head around the attitude that somehow it's wrong How ridiculous.

What I'm saying is, with the best will in the world, children will sometimes make their own feelings very clear about what they want to wear and you either have a big fight about it, which isn't usually worth it IMO, or you just grit your teeth and let them get on with it.

And a good thing too. They do have their own views!

My girls wore practical clothes, did lots of climbing then as they got older riding, skiing and all sorts of stuff, Duke of Edinburgh awards and you cannot do that easily dressed in a burkha or high heels. Certainly parents need to be careful what they say.

I have had no feminist problems with bringing up my sons though. I don't see why it's difficult. They have had a role model of both parents working full time. The youngest always point out at home when the school has said something sexist eg that women cook (the brother cooks for them). As long as you dont' have a housewife at home and share all domestic tasks boys will grow up knowing that is the norm. It must be much harder if your domestic set up is man earns lots of money and does nothing at home, woman cleans and irons and earns not a penny.

I really don't see why Xenia. There can't be anything better than having a parent at home when young. Plenty of men choose to be the one at home, while the mother works. It is unimportant-attitudes are what counts.

well i stay at home as me working is not compatible with dps shifts (in social work) but when it comes to some handywork around the house its me that does it, ie bleed and fix the radiators and boiler as dp just doesnt have a clue, he changes lightbulbs as he is tall and can reach without standing on a chair, but i do it if he isnt here. equally fixing punctures, changing tyres on a bike etc i can and do do myself.

the boys have a climbing frame in the garden, wooden one we had to cut the wood to size and build it, i helped with that, i built the trampoline when it arrived, i put ds4's bike together when it arrived etc. they see me doing plenty like that and despite dps long hours when at home he cooks, does laundry, hoovers, is very hands on with the kids etc so they see us both fulfilling equal roles around the home, there is certainly no default that i do everything and dp does nothing, it simply wouldnt happen and all the boys help out as well (and so will dd when she is older) as i want my kids to know what is involved in running a house, the will help cook, clean etc i want them to have these basic life skills for when they leave home and i am certainly not running round after them doing everything!

I want to be the one to look after my child/ren while they're tiny, although I don't have a problem with other mums preferring/needing to work outside the home. But I like the fact that feminism (among other things, including our family circumstances) means I have that choice and I hope my DD will feel able to choose freely if/when she faces the same situation.

Being a positive role model isn't just about proving women can work outside the home to earn money Xenia, there's a lot more to it than that. Besides, my DD has other close female relatives/friends whom she sees a lot who are businesswomen, so those role models are still provided for her. That's undoubtedly true of other LOs whose mums are their primary carer.

Anyway, not wanting to derail the thread into a SAHM/WOHM debate, but felt the point should be made. There's more than one way to skin a cat, as they say.

IC why did you make that choice and not the children's father? Why do you say you want the choice for your daughter and by implication not a son? Did your mother work full time when you were a child?

Most of how children turn out is their example. It's the same with some sexist men too - they only had a housewife mother so their example is women serve and men earn. We only break that pattern when women work full time. It's an important feminist issue and financial independence, money and power being at the heart of it and no reliance on male earnings.

yes so if for example you only model the importance of materialism and status grabbing then you'll get status obsessed materialistic kids.

not everyone has the same values and personally i believe there is a hell of a lot more to raising feminist friendly children and happy, whole beings than proving woopy doo you can earn money.

I don't have status materialist children. However my piont as if it home mummy does all the coking and cleaning and serves daddy and daddy goes out to work then the children of both sexes no matter what other examples they see are going to think that is how things are. There is therefore a political and moral imperative on women to achieve and work full time and ensure at least half the dross domestic stuff is done by their other half.

Also such a shame that these lovely dovey let's spend our time cleaning and doing childcare households is virtually always muggins mummy wielding the duster and shooting her career to pieces whilst daddy gets to make no such sacrifice, a model which is sexist to the core.

You can have a mother that stays at home and a father who irons, cooks, sews on buttons etc.
I am hugely grateful that I was the one who could stay at home. I have never known why paid employment defines you as a person.

some people could not give a flying fuck about their careers.

also not working does not have to equate to being a housewife and serving daddy like a slave. you always seem to want to paint any woman who doesn't work as some enslaved drudge, tbh it reeks of misogyny as well as not gelling with me because i don't see someone's worth dependent on their paid labour.

there is no moral imperative for women to work full time, or on anyone for that matter.

Xenia my DH was entirely willing to be the SAHP, but I was EBF (and wanted to continue that for as long as I could) and I wanted to be the primary carer while DC are tiny. Do my wishes not count for anything? I actually do some work from home, as it happens and this is an area I want to build on further. There is no necessity for a mother to work outside the home to earn money just to prove a point that she can. I was not sacrificing any career opportunities as it happened (I was having a career break when I got pregnant, mainly because I'd had enough of it!)

I don't know where you got the implication that I somehow feel my son shouldn't have a choice of being a SAHP or WOHP - if I actually had a DS, I would hope he wouldn't feel confined by perceived gender roles either.

And incidentally, DH is very domesticated, so DD sees him doing the cleaning/laundry/vacuuming/cooking all the time. Not to mention sharing the childcare when he's home (he always bathes her and gets her ready for bed, for example).

Your way works for you and your family, but it is not the only way to live a life in a gender-positive fashion.

I agree Inmaculada

One of the reasons I am a radical feminist, as opposed to a liberal one, is because I can't see any way the current system can encourage female roles any different to those we already see. It seems you are either forced to be a SAHM or a secondary earner, or you take on the traditionally male role and become the breadwinner leaving someone else to fulfil the role of primary carer even when your DC are very small.

I don't think enough importance is attached on feelings like IC's. I don't think there is anything weak about that. I think that is normal for more women than it isn't TBH. And why should something that is so normal mean kissing goodbye to your career prospects sometimes for the rest of your life? Why?

I returned to work after 8 weeks. I was BF-ing. I expressed. It was absolutely sheer bloody hell. I spent my entire time pretty much permanently hooked up to a bloody breast pump. At one point I remember working on the laptop in the early hours with the sodding pump attached to me because I had no choice if I wanted to stay on top of deadlines and still have enough EBM. Admittedly this might have been easier had I not had twins, but the principle remains the same for many women. Why should BF-ing be so opposed to the current working dynamic? It's because working practices were set up by men, for men, and haven't updated adequately to reflect the number of mothers in the workplace. We only see it as impossible/unrealistic/uneconomic to change this because we're so used to the way things are.

I'm a single mother, so my DS has no live-in male role model to set him a good example. Despite that, at age 5 he doesn't need reminding to flush the toilet, shut the lid and wash his hands, he puts his dirty clothes in the washing basket without being asked, he washes up voluntarily and tidies away toys before getting something new out (though I do have to remind him about that ) and he loves helping me cook. He has a toy doll and wears nail varnish. He also plays football, enjoys riding his bike in the woods and seems to share a love of power tools with his mother.

I have no patience for the 'men are confused because tehy don't know what role is expected of them in this day and age'. How hard is it to understand that you just need to treat women with the same respect as men, pull your weight around the house so that you are making your partner's life easier rather than creating more work for her, and otherwise just be the best person you can be.

I couldn't agree more, sunshine.

Interesting point you make about male role models. A number of my friends who are mums are lesbians and (as it happens) they all have male children. And indeed, one of my best (straight) pals has a DS (now 20) who she raised on her own from when he was a baby. In every case, their boys are really lovely, well-brought up, well-adjusted, well-rounded chaps. I think there's a lot of unnecessary bleating about the need for "male role models" to keep boys on the straight and narrow. I think it's more important boys (like girls) have positive role models to look up to, but the gender of those role models is of secondary importance.

I completely agree with you IC

There is a lot of complete twaddle spoken about male role models. IME positive male role models are only needed as a foil to the negative ones. So, for example, if a child is growing up seeing most of the males in his social circle beating up women, dealing drugs or being on the dole, then some positive male role models can show him that this isn't an inevitable way for young men to be. However, if he grows up without one he can still do fine if his mother is able to provide a good home-life and a value set that isn't sexist.

I don't think enough regard is given to the fact that all these absent father families that the politicians like to use as 'evidence' that more fathers and better male role models are needed, tend to come from socio-economic groups where poverty and poor educational attainment are the norm. It doesn't mean that the problem is the absence of the father (which is a symptom rather than a cause), it means that the problem is due to poverty and lack of education. And it completely ignores the fact that in many cases losing the father was the best possible thing that could have happened to the child.

I started this thread with the thought in my head (brought on by my feeling very defensive about the remarks of a friend) that it would be easier to bring up a daughter with approval from other feminists than it is a son. But I'm realising that it's some of the things that my DS does with his Dad's blessing and encouragement that I was feeling defensive about. I'm talking about some (not all) of his toys and the fact that they enjoy geeky super-hero stuff together (X-men included though- see up thread - and DH was reading Promethea this morning and explaining some of it to DS - yay!). If I was bringing him up my own I doubt he'd be exposed to as much of that stuff yet.

I challenge and discuss with my husband the things can concern me and he listens and makes changes accordingly - when he agrees, we're not in a dictatorship here. I hope this is enough. Time will tell.

It seems you are either forced to be a SAHM or a secondary earner,

We are not all forced? I was lucky enough to be able to choose it. I have always been secondary earner-it doesn't bother me.
I was a widow with a baby DS and he did need male role models-he actively looked for them. He had plenty of women in his life-men added an extra and different dimension. At 3 yrs old he wanted a father-I think it unfair to tell a 3 yr old not to be so silly and he didn't want one!

I think the difference exotic is between a boy "needing" a male role model and wanting one. It's fair enough if your DS wanted an father figure in his life. What we are questioning is whether it's necessary.

MadameB I reckon the fact that you question such things and discuss it with your DH - and that he respects what you say - is incredibly important and worthwhile. I suspect a lot of families don't give a moment's thought to those issues which can be so formative (and in some cases, damaging) to a child.

exotic what I meant by forced was that you have to choose between one or the other. There is no third way - where, for example, you can take the time you need to breastfeed for however long you want to without it having such a long-term detrimental effect on your future earning potential - which I think there should be. I am the last feminist you will find denigrating the choice to be a SAHM. It's a role I feel to be chronically undervalued.

As for positive male role models - do I think they are desirable and important? Yes, of course I do. Do I think they are necessary in order to raise a successful, happy, pro-feminist male child? Not always.