"Women are naturally better parents" - Please help me articulate why this is sexist!

[MrsMangoBiscuit]

Mainly a lurker over here, but I'm starting this thread in the hopes you can help. Someone I work with (a nice someone, by no means a jerk!) came out with "Well I think women just make better parents. It's genetic, that's why women have looked after the children for thousands of years." He doesn't think that means that women shouldn't work. When quizzed, he takes the very reasonable view that each family should do what's best for them. He thinks that men who make natural parents are a tiny lucky minority and not the norm.

He means the "women make better/make natural parents" thing as a compliment. Thing is, it's not. It's sexist, and I'm really stuggling to put into concise words, why it is. Help!

I have tried arguing the point with him, but always seem to get stuck. I won't go into it all here or this post will be an essay, I just didn't want to drip feed.

StickyProblem good point about the primary carer. I'm interested to see what happens over the next 6 months as I'm now the working parent (albeit freelance so sometimes at home) while my partner takes 6 months paternity leave. We're doing a sort of 'handover' fortnight while we both get used to our new roles. I'm curious to see what happens to our parenting styles when he's spent more time in the day with our son than me. And whether I can let go and be more chilled about stuff with him.without

The term "better" is subjective and "parenting" comprises a wide range of skills and attributes. Because males and females perform different biological functions in relation to conception, gestation, birth and the neonatal period and probably longer if breastfeeding doesn't mean necessarily that either parent will automatically be better at parenting over the whole life of the child.

I think your colleague's assertion is simply a "received wisdom" that is too often taken at face value, just because it tends to be emeshed in tradition. It's a belief that can be used to absolve male parents from responsibilities, leaving women feeling obliged to do all the key parenting tasks. Conversely, it can be a belief used to marginalise male parents from child rearing as well as make women parents feel resentful of their loss of self if others see them subsumed into the identity of "mother."

So, imho, it's a very limited and very limiting belief for women, men and children. But, I think it is perpetuated because it makes folks feel safe, stable, mom and apple pie and all that. But, just as underlying many other beliefs and practices seen as "the norm," there can be an unsavoury side.

In the case of women having a "natural aptitude" for parenting, yes, it is a sexist belief, or at least one of the many beliefs that contribute to the marginalisation and control of women as a class. But, like most such things, the belief is also damaging to men, and of course children!

I'd be inclined to say to your colleague. I simply disagree with you and either leave it at that, or say that you don't believe it is helpful to anyone to pigeonhole people into roles that they don't fit because it can create alot of unhappiness, or somesuch.

This is a fascinating discussion for me, as DH and I have already both had prolonged periods of being very much the primary carer for our DS (nearly 3).

I would say that overall I agree with AThingInYourLife that

'mothers are more important to small babies and also that men and women make equally good parents.'

I carried DS in my womb for 9 months, and then breastfed him for over a year - this created an intense physical (and emotional) bond that was unique to our relationship. I was then the primary carer up until DS was 2. Then DH was a SAHD for nearly a year.

Things I have discovered during this time include:

We are both capable of being equally good parents and (beyond the baby stage) being equally important to DS
We both have our strengths as parents - DH is undoubtedly better at some things than me, and visa versa
Once I let go of being in control sharing the childcare and the 'primary' carer role is brilliant
BUT the bond I had forged with DS meant that personally I was unhappy working FT away from him - I wanted to share the childcare, rather than handing it over completely to DH

Now I'm on maternity leave (pregnant with DC2) and will be off for a year. DH is going back to work and we are swopping again. We both agree that it is good for me to be the primary carer for this first year with DC2. But our long term goal is to both work flexibly/PT if possible so that we can both be around for our DC.

Oh, and I am still the cautious one, and was throughout DH being a SAHD. So I don't necessarily agree with StickyProblem that the primary carer is always more cautious. DH is still the very fun, adventurous parent, and I am the very cuddly one! BUT we are both concerned about TV watching, vegetables etc etc - and, I have to say, that is great!

there is also a difference here no one has mentioned yet.

to be a hands-on dad is part of the way society is changing, it's new, even cool.

for a women to look after the kids is just the same old story, nothing new there. and society will judge them whether they go back to work or stay at home.( actually people have such fixed ideas about the right and wrong way to bring up kids you going to get critisism from some people whatever you do) .
i got laughed at for useing an over the shoulder baby-carrier thing, but some of my male freinds are still in the stone age and it was water off a ducks back to me.

as an aside, not wanting to derail, there was an interesting artical on 5 lives menshour about lone guys bringing up children. one guy had 2 or 3 daughters around early teens , he said that women he new would grab his daughters and whisk them somewhere quiet to tell them about periods, as though it was something he couldnt possibly have done himself allready. consequently his daughters( who had no female role model in the house) thought that all women were obsessed with menstruation.

beach
my OH is the cautious one and i'm much more likley to let them spread their wings, with me the eldest has learnt to shower himself where she still takes him in the shower with her. and stuff like letting them cycling around the block by themselves we disagree about.

OH is way better at creative stuff, they like that, where as i will play the rough and tumble and take them outside alot.

it's hard for OH to let go of controll, she is getting better at it though.

The word "better" is not helpful. Irrespective of sex, I think there are stages in childhood that one or the other parent my feel more comfortable with.

For example, I had no preconceived notions of which parent is "better" before I had my children but after they were born I found that I was decidedly not a baby person - I was never quite sure what babies were "for" so to speak.My husband was super at soothing and generally dealing with babies. I was bored witless (though of course I desperately tried not to let that influence me and as neither child is a sociopath I think it worked OK!)

But the moment the babies became toddlers and learned to say "no" and generally be a pain in the arse it was a revelation to me: "hello little person I thought" and we were up and running. My husband was not quite so woohoo about them as I was at that point.

Once we reached early childhood and through teens I'd say we were about even in parenting.

I think it's just a personality thing personally.

(And as for the 50% thing - actually Mum does contribute a bit more - mitochondrial DNA comes from Mum .)

does your colleague have children? If not, he may change his mind when he does and discovers his own relationship with them. If yes, that's a little sad but presumably his conditioning.

That's sad, kim - assuming you are a reasonable person who is perfectly capable of looking after you own child.

on face value it sounds anti-dads, but IMO it is actually more anti-mums! what a lot of pressure to be told you should NATURALLY be the better parent
I wasn't a natural parent at all, I think that people who are had young siblings or nieces or nephews or close friends who had babies first before they did! I didn't and I wasn't naturally anything - had to learn as I went along with DH

this sort of statement must be awful for someone with PND to read!

You sound lovely, kim, and I'm sure your ds is a very lucky boy to have such a kind, self-deprecating Daddy. dh and I used to joke about ds being 'dressed by Dad' if I got home from being away somewhere to find ds wearing a complete hotchpotch of clothes that didn't go together or were unsuitable for the weather or something. Dh learned, over time - choosing clothes just wasn't something that had ever figured as important to him, but he got it in the end (and ds has been old enough to express VERY strong preferences for a couple of years now). Thing is, there are things where dh is better than me - teaching ds how to swim, play chess and ride a bike, for instance - and things where I'm just more naturally inclined to work them out or be able to do or teach. We complement each other and ds gets something from both of us.

That's a very good point, cherie. I did feel as if some things came more naturally to me than dh - scanning the environment for potential hazards, for instance. But I had far more experience of small children than dh. And what applies to us doesn't apply to everyone else - there are probably plenty of Dads who take to fathering like a duck to water, and plenty of Mums who struggle. IMO Very small babies do really need their Mothers more - all that time in the womb does matter and breastfeeding builds a very strong physical and emotional bond (although that's not to say bottlefed babies are less close to their Mummies). But after the first few months, I think each parent is important, often in different ways because they are different people, but important nonetheless.

"scanning the environment for potential hazards" I hear that one!, it is shocking what hazards DH just DOESN'T SEE!

but he is more natural then me in many other ways, and it took me a long time to find my feet as a mother, so I do find the statement offensive and potentially upsetting to women as well as men, because I found it unhelpful when people told me "you're his mum, you know best" (No I don't, please tell me what to do I'm a bit lost here!), and "follow your instincts" (what instincts, I don't have any, am I lacking in a way other mothers aren't?).

I don't think I'm the only mother for whom parenting is more a learnt skill then a natural gift!

IMO the types of people who would make this statement are either:

• know it all mothers who are critical and un-supportive of other women who they deem to not be doing as fabulously as them, and quite openly criticise other women

and

• men who don't want to bother trying to learn it too

Very true, Cherie. (The whole post - one of the hazards dh 'just didn't see' was putting rat poison at the back of a base unit cupboard in the kitchen. I had no idea the previous owners had left rat poison - and they certainly hadn't put it in a kitchen cupboard - and only discovered this when I turned round from washing up to find toddler ds with blue grains in his mouth... dh was in deep, deep shit for that one. Thankfully no harm done but good grief, I got a few extra grey hairs that day.)

I think this sort of comment, as well intentioned and inoffensive as it is,

' IMO Very small babies do really need their Mothers more - all that time in the womb does matter and breastfeeding builds a very strong physical and emotional bond (although that's not to say bottlefed babies are less close to their Mummies'

Is what makes some new mothers feel inadequate.
My children's mother struggled to breast-feed, and the pressure was put on that she should and that motherhood should be natural to her caused her a lot of upset.

yeah I can see that too Huansagain, but it's too a lesser extent as it's more logical and reasonable enough, but it was the kind of thing that would have made me a bit teary

my BFing experience was a physical bond only, it hindered bonding for us personally, I felt bad about HATING it so much, and felt worse when I was told how close it should make me feel to DS when I just wanted him to GET THE F OFF ME AND STOP HURTING ME DRAINING ME OF ALL ENERGY!
DH got to bond with the baby while I was BFing because I'ld hand him over after a feed to nurse my damaged nipples, I'ld practically chuck the baby at him! and then DH got the nice sleepy bonding cuddles...

My bond with DS developed over time, I'ld say DH's bond with DS was more love at first sight. Describing motherhood as something that's always natural and instinctive and instant sort of isolates ones like me from the club in a way?

I'ld say the OP statement would irritate DH but not affect him deeply, whereas it was the kind of thing that postnatally would have had me in tears about how bad I was at the "job" because I didn't feel it came naturally at all

I honestly believe that its more nurture then nature, its just that most of the natural instinct led mums aren't conscious of all the baby rearing they witnessed before having their own when they say how natural it all comes? Might be wrong on that but that's what I tell myself. I had almost zero exposure to mothers of small babies before having my own, was never that close to any new mothers before I was one

I've been guilty of this. I always say to my mum that women just seem to instinctively KNOW what to check, what to say, what to do, what to look for...I am only going by my personal experiences in that my sisters (4 of them) and my mum, and me, and my female friends with children, have ALL been the 'primary carers', and bloody good at it too. My husband even admits that, although he LOVES our children, he doesn't have my way with them.

It's funny....I always thought I was being on the side of women when I said this, but this thread has given me a lot of food for thought.

I don't take it as a compliment, because half of that sentence is missing. "Women make better parents, so stop asking men to do it"

miloben, with so many close females around you, do you think that actually you have learnt some of your mothering "nature" from either observing them or being supported by them?

Are you sure you'ld be as confident if you didn't have them around?

Sounds like a great set up BTW, I'm envious!, I'm an only child and an immigrant so no sibling rearing was observed, and there were no aunties or mum around to help or to go through it first etc

Colditz

Sorry Huan, I did say bottlefeeding didn't make you a lesser Mother. I do think human evolution has created a physical bond between mothers and babies in most cases - however, every baby and mother is different and what goes generally for the species does not necessarily apply individually. We don't live in a natural world where we behave as apes but in a highly artificial world where we've fecked about with our circadian rhythms and pretty much everything else. I'm sure you are right about experience counting for an awful lot - in traditional tribal communities every new Mother has experience of caring for babies long before she has her own firstborn.

This thread is really interesting because it's one thing I can't make my mind up about. My feminist side looks at all the socialization crap girls get to be good mothers: from gendered toys to the constant praising of "nurturing" behaviour which wouldn'tget praised in boys.

But my own personal experience tells me that I was far more attuned to DS's needs than XH. As a baby DS would shift an inch in his sleep and I would feel it! And XH wouldn't think about safety things in the same intense (probably somewhat manic) way I did.

But then OTOH again I've witnessed plenty of mothers who are horrid to their DC so if there is a maternal gene they've certainly missed it.

I do agree with People though that being a SAHD is seen as pretty heroic by women who are just expected to do all that on a daily basis. I always remember that scene in Friends when Bruce Willis announces that he looked after his DD all by himself and became instantly attractive to the women!

I definitely don't agree with the often expressed view that IF women are good at nuturing THEN men are good at maths, engineering etc. It's not a logical follow on and quite possible that women could be good at both.

Ime- Sahds are seen as a bit wimpy. Not by me obviously.

And I as a father who has a typically mother-type role I am seen as a bit flakey at work.

If you miss a couple of meetings to go to sports day or whatever you're a great dad. If you regularly are inflexible and have to take time off over years you're seen as a bit of a pain.