Had it up to HERE with "having it all"? Please come and help Viv Groskop with her Mumsnet Academy Family and Feminism course

[VivGroskop]

Hello. I'm Viv Groskop and I've been asked by the Mumsnet Academy to run their Family and Feminism course. [MASSIVELY UNSUBTLE PLUG - THEY ARE THE BEST KIND OF PLUGS]

And I need your help.

The idea of having enough of hearing the phrase "having it all" will inform much of the content of the course (currently under INTENSE preparation).

In connection with this bugbear, one particular thing is driving me mad. Can we please solve an argument between me and an old friend (ex-friend?) inspired by me FINALLY reading Anne-Marie Slaughter's piece in The Atlantic in its entirety. Which was probably a mistake. It's the 15,000 word article about (Not) Having It All: why she gave up her job to actually do another full-time job but closer to home because she felt like she was missing out on her two (teenage) sons and/or letting them down. Two weeks after publication this piece has now had over 1.3 million clicks and is one of their most popular pieces ever.

Loved a lot of what Slaughter said and found the whole thing fascinating (although it has taken me about three weeks to read it) but I don't agree with her final analysis. She says women are basically "nurturing and caring". And she implies that in order to be feminine you have to be the nurturer, you can't just go out to work and leave your children at home.

Slaughter claims that (a) if mothers don't give in to their nurturing instinct that they will be unhappy and (b) men are not able to give children the same kind of care. Or at least that's how I read it.

My friend who gave up a job she didn't like very much to be a stay-at-home mum says Slaughter is RIGHT and that this is why most women give up work or cut back on work -- because they can't reconcile the pull between home and work and they want to be in charge of everything at home and not give it up to a man.

I say she is WRONG. Most women do not try to work in Hillary Clinton's office whilst their husband and children are living in a completely different city (as Slaughter did). Most women recognise that life is about compromise and they work hard at finding a way to feel OK about the choices they have made. Most women do not feel de-feminised by their partner doing childcare, instead they are glad of it.

Having thought about it rather too much I am now worried, however, that my friend is RIGHT. And possibly a lot of women do feel that if they work (or work too much) they are not being nurturing or caring enough? Or something? By the way, my friend has not read the article and refuses to because it is too long. Here I see her point. But I am also thinking of getting her a place on the Mumsnet Academy course as a birthday "present" just to annoy her.

[Metabilis3]

@fruity I have never said that I support not taking maternity leave. I took all the maternity leave I could with each of my 3 kids, sadly for Dd2 that was pretty damn little as I was working in NY at the time. However I think that your 'tears of exhaustion' exercise in hyperbole has the potential to be far more damaging to women wanting to be taken seriously in the workplace. And remember - you may have the choice as to whether you work or not, other women don't have that luxury, and for them to have the opinions of those they may be working with regarding the ability of mothers in general to cope with work fatally influenced by another woman's overly dramatic self justification for contemplating jacking it all in is a bit unfair, don't you think? Work, don't work, if you have the economic power to have the choice then use it as you want and don't let Nyone tell you what to do. But don't piss on other people's lawns with your valedictory speech. That's just rude. And completely unnecessary.

[Metabilis3]

@fruiity As a feminist, I am just so fucking disappointed that buying into the patriarchy and aping traditionally male behaviour is held up as the ideal career model. Like it or not, you will never see more women in higher status jobs at higher levels until the work culture changes

Yep. I wasn't imagining it. Although obviously I'm pleased to see you backtrack somewhat.

I'm happy to undermine you for as long as you spout nonsense about women minimizing the amount of time they spend with their children or outsourcing their childcare or aping male behaviour. I don't do any of those things, neither do my female colleagues (the aren't enough of us but we do exist) and to be honest the constant sniping at us from people like you is worse than the casual sexism we facprompt days of our working lives. Because that's unthinking whereas your attempt to push your narrative is not unthinking.

[Metabilis3]

Bloomin auto correct. That would be face most days of our working lives

[summerflower]

@summerflower You are perpetuating the narratives that seek to dissuade women from aspiring to anything other than mediocrity.

[fruitybread]

Wow. I try and describe how I feel, in my life and situation over the last couple of years since my DS was born - as honestly as I can, including feelings that are still unresolved -

And because it doesn't suit your views and narratives, you call it an 'exercise in hyperbole' and 'an overly dramatic self justification for jacking it all in'. Wow.

Not only that, but apparently all potential employers and co-workers will read this thread and be influenced by what I say such that they doubt a woman's ability to do their job.

(I have no idea what all your pissing on lawns stuff is about, sorry)

For the record - I don't have the ability to 'jack it all in' from a financial POV. I do, almost entirely because I have been successful and earned well the last few years, have the ability to take some time off work and live off my savings. What or how I would do when I couldn't do that anymore, I don't know. I don't know if I would be able to scale down my work, be part time, effectively - it's not really that sort of profession. I don't know either if I would find work after taking a few years off, or if the job would have moved in without me. Maybe I would have to look for alternative work. I just don't know.

I don't deserve to be characterised as an 'overly dramatic' woman with independent means. I am neither. I have been ill and exhausted while trying to do a very demanding full time job with a baby. I don't enjoy the fact it's been so hard. I have feelings of guilt and shame that I haven't coped with it better.

and here you are metabilis, not only refusing to believe me, and accusing me of hyperbole, but trying to silence me as well.

This is not the way forward.

[Metabilis3]

But it is perfectly possible to advance as quickly as men and get further than men while not working ridiculous hours all the time, and working flexibly, in some professions at least. To present it as a binary 'work long hours or progress more slowly/less far' choice is to tacitly suggest to women that actually, perhaps aspiring for the very top isn't for them. And going on the slower track will be fine. Of course, it is fine for most people (it would have been fine for me, I didn't have any kind of big career plan) so that's why we don't feel so bad about the whole thing....but we should. Please don't make statements about long hours culture/flexible working unless you have personally researched recent conditions in every industry or every employer in your own industry/profession. I know that not everybody is able to influence their T&Cs as much as I have been able to, but I know other women (and men) working for other employers in my profession and other professions who have been able to do so, so I do know it can happen. And if it can happen a few times, it can happen more often. We need to concentrate on the positives, not the negative naysaying things that happen.

[fruitybread]

metabilis - what are you talking about? Your post of 23:34 made no sense, I'm sorry. I think you might be confusing several different posters.

summerflower, yes, I see what you mean. I think part of the problem is that family friendly' work practices (which is largely what I meant by changing the work culture at a high level) is seen as somehow 'softer' and less 'proper' than a traditionally male career path. I see it as a more radical solution to work-life balance (and you make a good point, it's not just for women with young children) - but you've already been accused of 'perpetuating narratives that seek to dissuade women from aspiring to anything other than mediocrity'!

[Metabilis3]

@fruity I do want to silence you from saying that women like me outsource our childcare practically frm birth, and from saying that we 'ape men'. Damn right. I also want you to be able to do whatever it is that you want to do, without let or hindrance. All I ask of you is that you stop bad mouthing what I do, and that you don't by accident give those who would seek to do women down in the workplace amunition to help them do that, along the 'women cant cope with working and kids' lines? I don't think that's such a huge ask is it?

Although I disagree very emphatically with much that you have posted and the manner in which you have posted it, I haven't made any comments either about your working practices, your interaction with your children or your childcare arrangements. Because in fact, those things are irrelevant.

[Metabilis3]

@fruity I am not confusing anyone. I quoted you directly then spoke to that quote. I'm sorry if you don't like what you said originally but I didn't like it either.

[fruitybread]

metabilis - I am being HONEST about my situation and my job and my profession. It doesn't matter whether you believe it or like it, or whatever. Don't try and silence my by telling me we need to 'concentrate on the positives'. You tell your story, I'll tell mine, and I do not need permission from you or anyone else to do that.

I do work in a job with a long hours culture and a macho attitude towards workload and deadline. I am pretty well qualified to talk about it, I've been doing it a while and doing pretty well at it, thanks. On those terms. Which now no longer suit me because my life has changed.

If you work in a job where you can get to a very high level with flexible working and spending a lot of time with your family, then good for you. Seriously. You will note I am doing you the courtesy of believing you and not taking a pop at you because your experience is different from mine.

[Metabilis3]

Family friendly work practices are not seen as 'less proper' in many 'traditional' professions, and for many employers. I know my employer isn't the only employer in the world, and I know my profession isn't the only profession either, but I have worked in enough places and know enough people who work for other organizations, in sometimes other professions, to know that things are changing all over the place. I'm not saying nothing needs to change - plenty needs to change. But one of the things that needs to change is the naysaying from women, the muttering in corners about how bad everything always is and the complete denial of reality when those of us who have a different experience speak up. My experiences don't negate yours but equally, yours don't negate mine.

[Metabilis3]

@fruity well, you already 'took a pop at me' when you claimed I was aping make behaviour and outsourcing all my childcare. By all means tell your story. But leave out the inaccurate judgey bits about other people.

[fruitybread]

Eh? you mean when I said 'as a feminist, I am just so fucking disappointed that buying into the patriarchy and aping traditionally male behaviour is held up as the ideal career model. Like it or not you will never see more women in higher status jobs at higher levels until the work culture changes.'

You mean that one? I meant every damn word of it and I'll be proud to say it again.

I think we should be looking at radical work solutions wherever we can - not just because of family life, although that's a biggie, but because we are in a recession and have high unemployment. And in case you haven't noticed, we have the ticking time bomb of an increasingly ageing and dependent population in the UK. If we don't look seriously at flexible working, part time working in higher status professions, career breaks and structured re-entry into careers, then a lot of people are going to be in serious trouble.

If you can only read that giving people ammunition to do women down in the workplace, along the 'women can't cope with working and kids' line, as you put it, I just can't help you.

[Metabilis3]

A lot of people are going to be in serious trouble. Especially the ones who can't read. I have said several times on this thread that to my knowledge the things you are calling for are already being introduced, and that I personally am benefitting from some of those family friendly measures (without losing my high flying(!) badge). But you prefer to ignore this and carry on saying how dreadful everything is while having snide digs at women 'outsourcing' their childcare.

[fruitybread]

metabilis - I don't think I've used the word 'outsourcing' at all.

I do recall you saying that women who took time off work for family reasons were playing into the hands of people who thought women couldn't hack having a family and a career. That their actions 'had consequences' for us all. And Our Daughters. That doesn't sound like someone who wants more family friendly working arrangements!

I should have walked away from this thread a little while back. I've stayed because, I realise now, I am pretty desperate to talk about the issues affecting me as a working mother with a demanding career. This thread isn't the place for me to do it.

Thanks rushinrachel and summer for your thoughts.

[Metabilis3]

@fruity you are right you didn't use the word outsource, that was Bellecurve. Apologies. You instead referred to women having 'someone else look after their child for most or all of her life' and 'presumably feeding formula from birth'. That sounds like 'outsourcing' to me but with a clunkier description (and of course with a little did about feeding thrown in). FYI I EBF all 3 of my children for 18 months each. They never had one sip of formula.

If you read what I wrote I said your narrative might have consequences. I said I completely supported anyone doing whatever they wanted. My concern is with the narrative that is provided to 'explain' that. As I said - work, don't work, if you are lucky enough to have the choice, it's yours and yours alone to take. But think about your valedictory speech. That's all.

[handbagCrab]

I took it that fruity was commenting on the yahoo CEO not taking any mat leave at all rather than another attempt to start up sahm/wohm.

I was casually informed by my colleague who was restructured into my role whilst I was on mat leave that as she is not planning to start a family for a while she can stay late and devote her time to her career. Cheers for that love! We're not high fliers though although we're both successful. Well I thought I was anyway until my brain was obviously removed along with my placenta.

I dunno, asking 100k+ family women how they do it is like asking Kate Moss how she stays so supermodelish. Is it inspirational and illuminating or is holding up a standard unattainable for the vast majority disheartening?

[Snog]

Handbagcrab good points you raise.
We need female representation at all levels but even with 50% of women at the top, most of us will not be so we should focus too on the experiences of mid and lower fliers.

I think we need structural change to reduce standard working hours for both sexes, and equal rights in the workplace for men and women, parents and nonparents alike. Including mat/Pat leave.

Chipping at the choices of other women right now is largely a distraction . women in positions of real power are rarely incentivised to change the status quo by virtue of which they achieved these positions and it is unrealistic to expect it.

[Metabilis3]

@snog I know several 'high flying' (by the definition above) women who have been involved in making changes to the status quo both in their own firms and in the wider profession. None of us have real day to day power like CEOs do but we all have influence and in demanding the sort of deal we wanted (flexible working, that sort of thing) we have helped to normalise such practices for men and women. I think we have possibly created a new glass ceiling for ourselves though - maybe. But someone will smash it, if not us then the people coming along next. Life in my profession for a woman is radicslly different (better) than it was 20 years ago. Radically better. That's a Good Thing.

[BrandyAlexander]

I think the attitude of women at the top has changed. If you can call a "generation" a 10 year span, I remember being really disappointed that the females in senior positions did very little for junior women, when I started working. Those are the women in their 50s now. Got there the hard way in a patriachal workplace and just expected everyone to do the same. The next generation (mid 40s onwards now) weren't quite as cold but again did little. I am in the third generation of female leaders (so in my 30s) and ime there is now a real change happening. I and others in my generation are doing much more to help future generations come through and I see those women who have been around longer now doing more now than they ever did. Things like the 30% club are a fantastic thing and will slowly make a change in corporate world. I think the pace of change is faster over the last few years than anything I have seen in the previous 10 years. Do I think that by the time I retire there will be 50/50 leaderhship in corporate Britain? No (which is sad) but I think we will be a damn sight closer than we are now. That can only be good for all working women whether they are low/mid/high flyers. The problem with carping at high flyers is that it doesn't recognise that those women are in the position to deliver real changes, just as much (and even more so) than (mostly men) Parliment.

[VivGroskop]

Woah! Calm down everyone! I'm not sure anyone here is saying there is an "ideal woman" or "an ideal for women". What's important is that people get to do what they want to do as individuals and not have to follow some pre-defined model. It's fine for Yahoo CEO to do what she wants (take no maternity leave) just as it's fine for other women to not work at all or take all their maternity entitlement. It's a fact that assumptions will be made about both their positions re Yahoo CEO they will think "she is bitch-man-type who only thinks about her career and is not proper feminist" and re stay-at-home mothers they will think "yes, good, they are doing what is right and natural." In fact all these women are just doing whatever is right for them. I don't think someone like Marissa Mayer has been "brainwashed by the patriarchy" there will always be a (minority) group of women who want to work instead of taking maternity leave -- why trash them? We don't need to hold them up as the ideal either, but it's good to point out, "Look, not everyone wants do the same thing and that does not necessarily make them evil!"

The remedy came up at the beginning at the thread and has now resurfaced: more involvement of men in family life, more work/life balance at work generally (although I recognise that this is a recessional nightmare and it's going to be hard to safeguard the changes that came in in the last decade), more men demanding family-friendly hours. Ah it's all so simple... JOKE

[summerflower]

But one of the things that needs to change is the naysaying from women, the muttering in corners about how bad everything always is and the complete denial of reality when those of us who have a different experience speak up. My experiences don't negate yours but equally, yours don't negate mine.

[ssd]

agree with summerflower

success at work depends on your circumstances as much as your brain

I read all of the article and agreed with most of it

But the one thing that I found myself shaking my head to was at the beginning, the writer said she worked away from home mon-fri then spent most of the weekend doing catch up chores, as well as trying to have family time. She also said her teenaged boy had hardly spoke to her and was bunking off school/homework......and I thought duh, how can such an intelligent woman not recognise her teenager might be a bit miffed he hardly sees his mum and is a bit angry/sad about that? Maybe someone at her level has more brains than common sense, I don't know, but surely an idiot could work that one out (not that I'm saying the writer here is an idiot)

[kickassangel]

last night I was out with a group of my 'girlfriends' (I live in US so that's the word used). Completely unprompted by me we were swapping stories of couples where the woman said 'if we split up, you're taking the kids'.
Some of the anecdotes were more light hearted than others, but in every single one the men had a complete about-face on their position (ie they suddenly started doing more housework or being more generous with sharing their salary etc.)

Which, imo, shows how much men do realise that they get an easier ride when women are doing all the 'wifework' and they are able to focus on their careers.

Another point is that I do think society is structured to give greater economic recognition to typically male jobs, and female ones are rewarded less. Which means that whenever a hetero couple think about one of them working less in order to have more time at home, then it's almost inevitable that women are the ones who take the career break.

So, on a macro level, society is skewed to favor the men staying in the workplace, and then on a family level, it is all too easy for women to be taken for granted and their roles undervalued. It really does require that we stand up and fight for equality - it isn't going to arrive by us hoping it will get here.

[BelleCurve]

Viv, I don't understand your point. If the course is "Feminism and the Family", why are you dismissing feminist analysis of patriarchial influences.

Or is this the "every choice is a feminist choice" version? Fact is - women are still have to make choices (and be judged for them) that men don't even consider.

This is a structural issue.