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.

[mantlepiece]

I think women can bleat all they like about "having it all" but until men change there will be no change.

I think feminists in the 70's missed prioritising the main thing that would enable equality in the home. Bringing up their boys differently.

I married in the late 70's to a man who had everything done for him, I changed that. I have had 4 sons and made sure that they went out into the world able to make a meal, iron a shirt and clean a toilet. I made sure they respected women.
I am a SAHM because I want to be and think it is a valuable role in society. I now care for grandchildren PT to enable DIL to work as they want to do that, and DS fulfil their share of the household tasks.
Just because I am a SAHM I felt it important not to fall into the role of nursemaid to them all, My DH had a demanding career involving a lot of travel, but when he was home he would fall straight into the role of co parent. That is because I made it quite clear that my role was as hard and demanding as his.

Looking back at the women around me working or not, I see that many of them felt it was easier to do things themselves rather than challenge stereotypes. Another thing that bothered me greatly was that mothers put their children on pedestals and were horrified at the thought of a child setting a table. Sometimes I see adult women in their 20's baffled by basic housekeeping never mind the men!
Maybe our next generation will revert to the 19th century model and have a live in housekeeper to deal with the domestics and the children.

There is no easy answer to this age old dilemma, basic biology puts paid to that.
Also what suits one family will never suit another. But mothers if you want your daughters to have a chance at an equal adult relationship, TRAIN YOUR SONS!!!

[LadyInDisguise]

Can not agree more with mantlepiece.

MIL priority was that he would be able to do all HW and taught him men should that too. She hates the fact her DH didn't (and doesn't) do a thing in the house. She failed at challenging that stereotype but train her son very well!
The difference is clear compared to some stories I hear on here....

[kickassangel]

If the article is claiming that women are the ones to give up work due to a natural nurturing element that men don't have, even when they have the same kind of pay and job demands as a man, I don't agree. I think we are made to feel that way by how society raises us. By the time we have kids it's so deeply ingrained that we feel we ought to be doing everything at home. If we then give up work to stay home the stress is removed and we suddenly think that it's our nurturing nature that made us feel that way.

Obviously there are some women who do find raising kids fulfilling and delightful, but I suspect there are men who do to, but they get pushed out of that opportunity.

[kickassangel]

Btw, I would love to have more time to focus on my career and have a sahm wife to do all the 1950s wifey stuff. I figure I need to earn more and buy in those services

[BelleCurve]

This is a really interesting discussion and something I feel quite passionately about.

A lot of the discussion has related (quite rightly) to changing men's attitudes and choices so that tasks can be split more equally between heterosexual couples. However, this ignores the large number of women who are not in a traditional couple scenario for whatever reason.

Personally, I am now a lone parent working a very male-dominated industry. Like many others on the thread, I get by, I juggle, I work extremely efficiently/effectively, I appreciate the support I get from my mum for occasional overnight travel, I pay for full-time childcare and it all goes into meltdown when DS is ill.

My Ex, does none of this. He works whichever anti-social shifts he like without a thought for childcare - although this was the same whilst we were together.

I have recently turned down a job which would require frequent short-haul travel. It would probably have been a significant pay increase, and yes, I am ambitious - but my work-life balance is so finely balanced that I can't take the chance that it doesn't work out.

At the moment, too much of women's economic freedom is still determined by their choice of mate - either whether he will be good enough provider, or whether he will choose to be supportive enough to her career out of the goodness of his heart. This is not liberation.

[Nigglenaggle]

Well I feel I do have it all. I work full time (condensed hours, a four day week) and my fella is part time and the main carer for our son. I think it doesnt always come as naturally to men as to (some) women but he is doing a great job, and I can relax at work knowing my son is with his Daddy not a hired carer. My job is more important to me than ever (Ill be honest I was never that bothered about working before) and I still get to care for our son at weekends. I guess the thing we dont have is a super-high family income but luckily I have a job that allows us to live comfortably, if not extravagantly. Agree with everything CMOT said above. We have had to cut back a little (well alot) on seeing our friends and hobbies, but still do enough of each to feel we do 'have it all'. It was hard for me to go back to work as early as I did (after 2mths) due to my 'nuturing instinct' (read hormones) but Im used to it now and dont feel Im missing out. In fact just the opposite as I feel I concentrate more on family life now than when I was at home all the time and it was a bit stressful. Love my life.

[LittleCatZ]

mantlepiece please start a blog to share your wisdom on raising boys!
I'm very interested in the perspective of how we raise our DCs - I have 2 DSs but I think the messages we give girls are just as important.

Like many on here I struggle to juggle. I have a great DH who works around the DSs and helps a lot other than having a very high dirt tolerance DH respects my need for a job I find interesting and we all appreciate the economic contribution this brings.

DH seems so well trained because MIL let him bring up his brother (some of his childhood stories make or and she tells it very differently but he definitely had a lot more responsibility - at a young age - for a much younger sibling than I feel is fair). DH also went to boarding school when his Dad was in the forces. DH doesn't have much respect for his mother tbh but luckily he treats me and all women with respect - which I think is thanks to his Dad.

As my sons grow I hope to train them well in being active members of the household, with responsibilities and respect for women. I often feel guilty for working more than school hours (I do manage the school run a couple of days a week) and I only hope that longer term seeing me work as well as their Dad will be a positive thing for their future relationships.

[LittleCatZ]

Back to the questions Viv raises - yes I do feel pulled in all directions but if I'm really honest with myself, I think I'd drive us all crazy if I did not work. I could see myself turning the children into a 'project' and obsessing about every detail and being a bit of a martyr. A supportive and available partner is so important for me.

I lost my own Mum long before I married and had my sons, my Mum was a SAHM until my youngest sibling was in school - I think this was a financial necessity as we're a bigger than average family, I didn't really know nurseries or even child minders existed until I needed them - and my Dad says my Mum really wanted to go out to work again. I'm not sure how much my mothering mirrors hers or how much our mothers influence us (either to emulate or rebel against). I guess MIL's example at least makes me feel I'm more interested/involved/available with my children than some mothers, which does help me reconcile my lifestyle.

[rushingrachel]

BelleCurve, bravo to you for all you manage. I am in awe of lone working parents.

PS for the record staying home is not easy and it's not a cop out. I can say honestly that 1 mealtime in 3 I seem to land up with 2 kids screaming and my home cooked food on the floor wondering how this happened and what I wouldn't give to be in the peace and quiet behind my desk. It's hard work.

[avenueone]

Belleburve - I too am another lone parent - and every word you say could have been written by me.
I have often though that whilst some, (not mine) ex partners pay maintenance this does not go anywhere near compensating for what we loose out on preventing career / earning and social opportunities.
I love being with my DS and I have learned to adapt and not go to the gym, the pub.. the foreign work trips (as you I go every know and again thanks to my mum) but that doesn't make it right. We are WAY off this ever changing - but I hope one day it is.. I keep thinking can I sue him on a human rights issue set a case presidence??

[fedup2012]

The work ethic thing that kickassangel mentioned is interesting. Previously we supported our husbands while we looked after children. It meant they were probably capable of working a lot harder and being more productive and crucially they were paid enough to keep the whole family fed and housed.

However with a mortgage based on two incomes but only one income actually coming in, we end up in a situation where we are forced to work and there is no choice.

The whole Me time thing is completely beyond my comprehension. I don't want me time. The moment I had my children I want to share my life with them, not have special time alone to pamper my eyebrows.

[nooka]

I haven't read the article because I think it would irritate me no end. I can't stand the 'women nurture and men hunt' paradigm, I suppose essentially because that's not me or my dh. Is he not a 'man' for enjoying staying home with our children and am I not a 'mother' because I really don't enjoy that at all? Of course not, we are two individuals with our own preferences (not to say that our choices are entirely free of influence from society, family and friends). I'm happy to say that we are not stereotypically masculine/feminine, but that's about a social construct in my opinion, one that I am very thankful that feminism broke open, at least a little bit.

To be honest I think that part of it is simply that having children isn't that easy. It requires all sorts of compromises, and at times is very very hard (for me the babies and toddlers phase was pretty hellish, for others it might be a different stage). I'd say that I have the typical father role and I enjoy that. I like to be able to stay late if I need or travel without having to worry about home and children, and dh is very supportive of my career (de does directly benefit from it after all!). I don't feel that this compromises my relationship with my children, perhaps because I have always felt closer to my father and very much saw him as my role model.

[BelleCurve]

Avenueone - count me in, I'm all up for a class action against the patriarchy!

See, this is where I had my radfem awakening. Women of my peer group felt that we had all the options that men had. Good education, good career just the added benefit of wearing high heels, right?

This all works well if you act like a quasi-man, laugh at the sexist jokes and work hard/play hard. The minute you want to do something that only women do, say become a mother, the whole of patriarchy's expectations come crashing down on you.

Yes, ok they say, you can still work. But you will be judged on your children's behaviour, your appearance and your (un)tidy house as well. And if your partner leaves, well you should have just chosen better/put up with bad behaviour. After all, its your choice!

The problem is, men are still setting the criteria for success. And guess what? The criteria for women are even tougher. Why do I need to wear high heels to look "professional" - do my spreadsheets care?

Well, the bosses and clients are still overwhelmingly male. Or women who feel they have "sacrificed" having it all, so you should suffer too.

I am in favour of boardroom quotas (unusually), not because I think that it will overly benefit the women in the quota but because if enough women are the bosses and clients, some of them will have to be mothers too and that's when things will start to change.

PS - the quota I am advocating is not this poxy 20% "keep the little women quiet". I want 86% female control of everything for 20 years. After all, they had 2000 years- so it is our turn!

[handbagCrab]

There's an article on the guardian at the moment about women being discriminated against through pregnancy and motherhood. I am ashamed to say I am a statistic in this case. I'm reevaluating my life, trying to find value for myself away from my career but it's hard as it is doesn't fit how I've lived my life up to this point.

I can see why women may console themselves that they are better than men at bringing up children and being more nurturing as it gives them a feeling of having some power and influence in an area of life. Having it all is hard logistically. It then becomes impossible of the system is actively discriminating against you because you chose to have children. But as it presented as choices it can then be blamed on the individual if they feel or others think they don't measure up because we all could have made different choices that would have had the better outcome. As it's that simple, obviously!

[fedup2012]

Viv - here's another take on the Compleat Woman stroppybrunette.wordpress.com/2012/02/09/trying-and-failing-to-be-the-compleat-woman/ or is that yours?

There was a documentary based on this book (I think - Shirley Hughes and Mary Warnock were in it). It might have been an updated version of the book. I'd love to see it again because it was looking at their views many years later and with hindsight. It was probably on BBC4 (TV).

[fedup2012]

stroppybrunette.wordpress.com/2012/02/09/trying-and-failing-to-be-the-compleat-woman/

here.

[kickassangel]

Having read that article, I wonder how many high flying men would meet the criteria. Married to the mother of their children for 25 years and have 3 or more kids.

Since the book was first written, divorce rates have gone up, family sizes have gone down, and people are getting married later.

How much this is linked to women achieving more in the work place is debatable, but I do think that house prices rising has had a tremendous effect on individuals and society as a whole.

I also wonder why 3 children was the criteria. Of course each child increases the amount of work to be done, but as soon as you have one child, someone has to leave work on time to collect them from child car, or take a day off when they are ill, or not go on a business trip etc etc. it's the first child that is the life changing one and has the greatest impact.

[myredshoes]

Having it all is really doing it all but kidding ourselves it's ok to make one too many sacrifices. Be wise. Choose the battles you can win. Feeling like the outsider in the playground and the workplace is no fun for anyone. I'm about to make a life changing decision to walk away from a highly pressurised job that I used to love into a no-man's land and it's as scary as hell. Theories are great but it's the practical experience that really tests the woman you are.

[Snog]

Agree that the criteria of 3 kids, 25 year marriage and high flying career is highly dubious - it implies that all of these are prerequisites of "success".

Personally I don't view having a 25 year marriage as a measure of success, or for that matter having what is considered to be a "highflying career", or for that matter having 3 kids. I have one child and in no way consider that to be a failure or partial achievement.

Similarly I am not married and have no wish to be. I have a partner of 15 years standing but I will not consider this to be in any way a failure if I happen to move on from this relationship in the next 10 years.
I think that a fulfilling a worthwhile working life does not always equate to a "high flying career".

[kickassangel]

Yes. Those criteria were very much of the 80s.

Let's face it, only a minority of the population can ever have a high flying career. The majority of is are lucky to get a job we like. That goes for men as well as women.

I think that goals which more of us can relate to would be

1. Able to raise our kids in a happy and healthy environment.
2. Have a job which provides enough money to support us, and give us some pride/satisfaction.
3. Being able to maintain positive loving relationships.

While I think it's interesting to see how the highly successful people have managed to attain their goals, for the majority of us it's our daily lives and struggles that count the most.

Even though the pinnacle of my career (before giving it up to follow dh's job move) was running a dept within a secondary school. Hardly high flying, but still demanding and required a lot of juggling to do that and have a young child.

[avenueone]

My ex left when I was preggers and turned up in an aggressive manner a month ago (7 years later), threatening all sorts. He is on benefits so it costs nothing to take me through the court system for months for the fun of it. If he does it will cost me a fortune unless I represent myself (and I mean about £10k), so I may as well put money to better use and counter it with a law suit as I mentioned above. I work in the media so could gain some interest and see what the world thinks.

[JugglingWithTangentialOranges]

Yes I agree kickass - they did seem quite dated - So, good to think we've made some progress in how we see things (as women/ feminists ?) since the 80's.

I like your 3 goals much better - and I also agree that for many of us a top priority will relate to raising our children as well as we can/ to give them what they need

• emotionally as much as materially.
  

The old ones linked to originally seemed much more about impressing other people, rather than deciding for yourself what is most important to you - and going for that

[whothefuckputthebuntingup]

I think my head is going to explode with thinking through all of the dimensions and layers of this thread!

I'm going to split it into the things I know and the things I don't really understand.

The things I know ....
I work FT in a different city to where my DH and 4DSs live. I'm a management consultant with my own business. My DH works FT too. I can only do it because my DH does what needs doing when I'm not here and because our mothers help out if he has to go away. We have after school provision and a nursery and a cleaner. We eat well and balanced but baking isn't a daily monthly event . We don't own an iron.

I hate being away and feel that, whilst the boys are getting all the support they need to thrive from a great male role model, there are some things they miss out on because I'm away. For example, I'm better at discussing issues with them and helping them plan for the future (as in looking beyond the next 24 hours).

I, personally, find it chips a bit of my soul away each week. It is a lifestyle that is turning me into a husk of the woman I used to be.

I am only going to do this for another 12 months. Then I'm going to stop doing it all the time. I'm hoping that I'll be able to use my skills in a more productive way - I'm going to try to have it all by training to a teaching assistant and coaching in a secondary school for a year, then will go back and run piece of corporate work for 9-18 months. And repeat until I get bored doing that. So I will attempt to have it all, by having it at different times.

The reason I choose now to do this is teenage years are approaching fast. They will be off on their own adventures soon, the mistakes they could make will start to have longer term consequence and I want them to see that success can be measured in lots of ways.

PS i have already decided I don't want to be on a company board so don't feel this choice is going impede my ability to achieve my potential in this respect.

Things I don't know ...
Does every woman in my position feel like me? Would a man in my position feel the same? Am I really trying to have it all or am I just working through life making decisions on what's best for me and the lovely men in my life? What would I do if I had a daughter? Would I be able to opt back in to the corporate life at the top if I wanted to later? Do I care about later because I'm making a choice for now? Are my things I'm better at at home because of my life skills or because I'm a woman? Are the standards I choose to judge my own success down to society, my gender or my life experience?

Perhaps I should do some more reading on feminism and the family.

[whothefuckputthebuntingup]

Ooooooo Juggling, you have just answered my last question. There has been progress and it is acceptable to have your own goals, achieve them and be happy in yourself and that's enough.

Thanks

[JugglingWithTangentialOranges]

If I helped at all, I'm very pleased bunting

I pass the credit back up thread to kickass