the ideal society / culture in which to be a mother?

[curryeater]

I follow a few Mormon Mommy blogs like this:
lovetaza.com/

I also woh full time and argue passionately that women need and deserve full material status in society with equivalent freedoms to men.

I am confused about the tension between two theoretical positions and would like to work out if there could ever be a practical - real life - synthesis of them, in a form that would be a society that is perfect for mothers.

Position a: motherhood is glorious and should be supported for what it is, rather than demanding that mothers do other things at the same time, like earn money, as if motherhood were some kind of "not really a job" type thing. It is best done by intelligent, supported, healthy, creative women who are honoured for what they do. And that means we don't have to ask them to do anything else. Society should channel its resources into them. Breastfeeding is exhausting, home made food and beautiful homes are very demanding of those who make them, and they are enormous gifts to children, families, and wider society. [downsides in practice, if not in theory: women who don't become mothers are scorned; women who want to do other things are not allowed to, or are only accorded second class status; women do not have independent access to money and are basically stuck with a man like a possession, no matter what, which is an abusers' charter]

Position b: women, including mothers, are full complete rounded human beings with the same faculties and rights as men. they can and should take full part in all of human life including varied, interesting, and financially rewarding work. Having children is just one of the things they might do and does not define them. [downsides in practice if not in theory: exhaustion, because mothering is actually a full time job even with help; down playing maternal achievements and lowering status of mothers relative to male indexes of external success; a sense of individual isolation, that if it is not working it is your fault, and it should all be possible; short cuts like formula and ready meals become necessities instead of options, because maternal resources are scarce]

I suppose I like blogs like Taza because I like that she makes mothering look glamorous and aspirational, as opposed to the use of "mumsy" in a fasion sense as being second class and ugly (which I loathe). But it is all firmly grounded within a conservative Mormon ethos in which the woman's place is in the home, and it makes my teeth itch.

So what would an ideal society for mothers look like? Because you can't have position a unless supported by society; which then becomes compulsion. but position b is so lonely and hard sometimes. And I worry that I am honestly not doing mothering as well as I could if I had nothing else to to.

Thoughts?

[curryeater]

Scottishmummy, you are misunderstanding me if you think I want to go back to some horrible iconised-mother-ideal thing. The problem I have is that we seem to have two polarised positions available: one that discounts and is sceptical and disrespectful of mothering; and one that is as you describe and is disrespectful of mothers who aren't mothers, and also is used as window dressing to throw flowers to those who are carefully kept away from proper material rewards for their work. I thought I had made my dissatisfaction with that position clear in the OP. I note your anger towards it and I see where it is coming from but I think if we allow that anger to push us into throwing an idea of honoured motherhood away, we lose a lot, for ourselves.

I do not believe that the resolution of this polarity is some sort of middle ground because that is just a weakened position of both, a worst of both worlds, all the work and none of the glory, the privilege of doing everything while fixedly smiling in apparent delight at your "joint parenthood" as people congratulate your partner on doing the odd hands turn and we must pretend it is is equal equal equal, as desperate as Dorothy clicking her heels together, and we must not admit the truth.

More a radical synthesis. I am trying to think what that might look like.

I note the conflation of motherhood with homemaking is a leap of logic - good point - a few notes on that:

mothering of small takes place in the home, and it is part of the self respect of the craftsman to keep the tools of the trade and the workshop in good nick. .

It is acceptable apparently to take pleasure in, and note, all these skills exercised for money - a beautiful hotel, stylish and with friendly intuitive service; a restaurant with wonderful food and a lovely environment. This is what we dream of when we imagine going on holiday, if money was no object. Places where we can eat well and feel calm; where our children are safe and are treated in a friendly way; where we sleep well in nice sheets; where there is always something interesting to do. So we can dream of that, if we are saying we will pay for it? So why do we not respect that as an aspiration for making a place where our children will live their lives? I do aspire to creating that space, as a place where my children will feel comfortable and free, and no one is going to pay me for it, why should they, but goddammit surely we can admit that trying to do that is doing something good? Again, in case anyone is missing it, I do not imply that someone who nurtures their children in other ways instead is not as good. I am saying, I want to do this, and I think it is ok to be proud if it if I can

[mignonette]

The concept of Ideal is a significant part of the problem for many Women I feel.

I also dislike how people who choose not to have children are seen as a deviation from the norm. As far as my own adult children are concerned I have emphasised that the decision to have a child should only be made if they cannot bear to be without children. It needs to be more of an opt in decision as opposed to opt out. This almost certainly has its roots in the Judaic-Christian-Muslim view of marriage as for the procreation of children as opposed to procreation of family life which may or may not include having your own children.

A rich contribution to society is not synonymous with child rearing and until this is recognised (by parents especially), we'll remain a long way off any kind of equality for the sexes because it enshrines parenthood and specifically Motherhood with a vocational air. And whenever we talk vocation, inequality and lack of recognition tends to result.

[peteypiranha]

Curry- Until I came on here I assumed most men did this yes. Obviously its not true but I would say a man not doing his fair share is not the norm.

[peteypiranha]

I will add most threads on here are from where one parent stays at home if you were brought up with both parents working then both doing fair share is the norm ime.

[badguider]

Curry - I sort of get what you're saying after your last post where you say: "I do not imply that someone who nurtures their children in other ways instead is not as good. I am saying, I want to do this, and I think it is ok to be proud if it if I can"

But the problem is by asking about 'ideals' in society and culture you WERE implying that your version of nurturing/mothering is 'ideal'...

I see now you might mean how would an ideal society/culture give YOU the choice to be the mother YOU want to be, while also letting people like me be the very different 'mother' I want to be in my family where parenting is shared and housekeeping is a low priority... ???

[LandaMc]

Just want to chip in... I think that the idea that men and women can be equally good at parenting a newborn is sexist. Bear with me. After childbirth a mother is physically and mentally attuned to her baby in a way that the father simply is not. For example, studies have shown that (if breastfeeding and cosleeping) the mother's sleep cycle adapts to match the baby, and the baby often imitate its mother's breathing, using her as a breathing 'pacemaker'. Videos of cosleeping mothers show that Mothers also look after the baby while the mother is sleeping, eg adjust the baby's position / blankets. The research shows that fathers simply don't have those instincts or that close link to a newborn. This is biological fact. More generally I found caring for a newborn completely natural and instinctive, while my husband was lovely and enthusiastic but nowhere near as competent - not noticing baby's temperature, accidentally scaring baby, etc etc.

Mothering is called mothering for a reason. We're evolved to do it well. The idea that to say women make better mothers than men is like saying men make better engineers is bizarre. Engineering is a learned profession. Mothering is founded in the close biological link between the baby and the body it came from. Fathering is an important but very different role and becomes more important when the child is around 6-7.

In our culture we're still adjusting to the feminist revolution (yay) that explained to the world that women are as good as men. But to use equality as a reason to diminish and ignore a mother's unique parenting role is in my opinion anti-women and sexist. Whether men are any good at cleaning is a totally different issue!

Of course as the baby grows older the father can learn to be (nearly!) as good as mum at childcare, and of course there are exceptions with some mums not being very in tune with their instincts and some dads being particularly sensitive, but in general it's bizarre to suggest that parenting should be exactly equal. This diminishes the mother's unique contribution early on.

Going back to Curryeater's question - perhaps an ideal society for mums would see life as having a series of chapters and being a mum would be a noble and tough, but optional, life chapter during which she would totally focus on the child for say 5 years. Some UK companies offer a 5 year career break for family and I thought that a good approach.

What makes me really sad at the moment is the fact that instead of women having achieved more freedom by having the option to return to work, every woman I know wanted to spend at least 3 years being a full time mum, but (with 1 exception) felt forced by circumstance and culture to go back to work within the first year. So a nasty side effect of efforts toward equality has ended up separating a lot of mothers from babies... So sad.

[badguider]

LandaMc - you go from talking about mothering 'newborns' to talking about fathering children age 6 or 7... there's a LOT of time between those two...

I agree that a mother has a unique role with a 'newborn' but I would class a 'newborn' to be under 3months old... and I believe a father can be playing an equal parenting role by 6months (IF both parents choose that).

[peteypiranha]

I obviously have a weird dh then he was just as competent from the off with both ours.

[peteypiranha]

Notgoodnotbad- I have never been to anything where the women are running around after the men washing up, cooking, cleaning or drinking beer. What kind of doormat would stand for that?

[curryeater]

badguider - spot on, I am not talking about the ideal mother, but the ideal supportive matrix for all mothers

Peteypiranha, I don't get the impression that most people on here are in wohp / sahp relationships. On the contrary, I think there are a lot of wohms on here who talk just like sahps when they are talking about mothering, because they do so much of it relative to their partners (as well as the o.h. job). Someone on a thread about teething or cooking for fussy eaters doesn't put their bit in starting with "As an accountant, I find...." and perhaps they are assumed to be sahps if that is what you expect to see.

I bet if you interview the wohp partners of the sahms, and ask them what they think about their lives, I bet you will hear a lot of dissatisfaction. They will say: a lot of pressure; it's hard work; my boss controls my destiny; I can never work to my own rhythm; an awareness of constant competition makes me feel insecure and stressed; I work hard and don't seem to make all that much money; etc etc. I don't think that life holds all the answers, for men or women, any more than simpering over cupcakes. I aspire to more.

Interesting post, LandaMc

[peteypiranha]

I was brought up by a mum and dad that both worked. My dad cooks, cleans, can look after any amount of babies, children on his own and take them out places as he does all the time with babies and children in the family. He taught me to read, write, ride a bike, swim etc. Hes attuned to all my problems and interests even now Im an adult. I then went out and met a dh who is just like him.

[UptoapointLordCopper]

LandaMc Can you link to the research please? I have never found myself to be "attuned" to my babies, whatever that means. I do remember, though, at a baby massage group, the leader told us a story about a father who cared for the newborn baby while the mother went back to work fairly early. He woke up just before the baby started to cry in the night. Even in my hey day I didn't manage to be quite so attuned. (Faulty maternal instinct. Somebody forgot to install it.)

[UptoapointLordCopper]

Just a quick unscientific poll:

Those who felt quite attuned to their newborn babies - have you had any experience before with other people's babies?

I'm only asking because when DS1 was born that was quite literally the first time ever I held a baby. I took the everything-is-written-down-somewhere approach which I use for almost everything and just read up on it and learned as I go along.

[NiceTabard]

I had not had much in the way of experience with other people's babies.

I did not feel "naturally attuned" to mine, and am not sure what that means. I did suffer peri-natal anxiety and depression with both of mine. So clearly my "naturally evolved" response was to go off my rocker the moment the pg hormones kicked in.

DH has from day 1 been more instinctively good with the babies, more patient, much more "maternal". These days they are a bit bigger and he bakes with them and so on. I don't know how much prior experience he had had with babies.

Your point that "mothering" may be a learnt skill is a good one I think. Girls are encouraged to learn and practice this skill from the get-go in a way that boys are not.

Of course I was the only one who could BF, and did so, but when feeding was done I happily handed the baby for DH to hold and coo over while I went off and did something else!

[NiceTabard]

"perhaps an ideal society for mums would see life as having a series of chapters and being a mum would be a noble and tough, but optional, life chapter during which she would totally focus on the child for say 5 years."

But for many female parents that is their idea of hell, and for many male parents that is their idea of heaven.

Around here there is not this huge gender division with WOH / SAH roles. There are loads of men on the school run, loads of male grandparents, and at nurseries and preschools too. My boss at work has just taken a 6 month sabbatical to be with his new baby during it's formative early months, and after that is going part time for another 6 months. Great that he is able to do this, I think. And not surprising that he wants to.

[scottishmummy]

I used nursery from 6mth old.it wasnt sad,it wasnt separation.it was safe and adequate
It's neither sad nor separating that I had the choice and wanted to return ft.it is enriching and positive
Essentually this seems it boil down to woman know your place eg mothering/childcare

[MiniTheMinx]

Is there something wrong with mothering and childcare? from what I see, the "something wrong" is very much the way in which these roles have been undermined and de-valued.

If the greatest economic reward were made available to mothering, then the greatest social value would be attached to it.

[LeBFG]

I agree with Landa. It is sexist to not fully appreciate the special place of women in early years. Of course, saying that women are more in tune with their babies on here will only engender a lot of 'not in my experience' replies but that's only to be expected. For example, I live in France where childcare is heavily subsidised. Great. Except that every SINGLE new mother I know has gone back to work less than 4 months after giving birth and a great many after 2 months. Talking to some of my friends, there is a notion that if the mother is fit to work, she should do so...like a social contribution, except I believe this is at the expense of the family.

Having siad that, I don't believe it is contradictory to say I would love to see much more male contribution in childcare. I firmly believe men are not as useless as some like to make out - I sometimes see this as agressive women forcing men off their patch (does this make sense?). Was is Sinead O'Conner that employs male-only nannies? I think this is a good idea. Perhaps we need positive employment measures to get more men into traditional female care roles? (just an idea, for me though I hate +ve discrimination full-stop).

[LurcioLovesFrankie]

Tabard - are you and I the same person? I love DS, but found early motherhood overwhelming and, if truth be know, very dull. I find being out at work more interesting than childcare. And I was always in awe of my Dad's baby-nurturing ability and patience (obviously, with children already, I don't know if it came naturally to him or was due to years of practice). I realise that's not so for all mothers; I have friends who loved/love being full time with their children. But I'm not one of them. Doesn't make me a lesser person (or them, for that matter), just different.

What I'd like is more acceptance that actually work doesn't need to involve 60 hour weeks (I'm v. lucky in that respect), and furthermore that 60 hour weeks aren't even about productivity (plenty of evidence to suggest that after 40 hours you're spending more time correcting mistakes made due to tiredness rather than getting more done), they're about a patriarchal pissing-up-the-wall contest designed to marginalise women and men who want a sensible life-work balance. And more support for part timers, and more encouragement for men to go part time. And respect for whoever does the childcare. I agree that this is more likely statistically speaking to be women than men, and completely agree that this is likely to explain its low status. But it's important not to draw the wrong message from this - that there's some sort of normative ideal where women should have a 5 year space for child nurturing, but that's ok so long as we value it, even though that's not what some women want, or (at the other extreme) that every family should be forced to have the man and woman take 50-50 responsibility for childcare, even if that doesn't suit their particular set up.

[scottishmummy]

Attach greatest economic reward to mothering?what does that mean-remuneration?
I actually despise phrase mothering,its clintons cards sentimentality,and as construct flawed
Mothering presumes attitude/behaviour different from parenting.i don't associate myself with mothering

It's that sentimentality that both stereotypes and excludes women
Excludes from certain roles by assumption mothering is all encompassing.and by default there assumption if mothering is attitude and behaviour those skills best suited to certain jobs eg caring,child,teacher. Mothering attitude/behaviour isn't associated with finance,science so potentially excluding women as we are presumed to be good at mothering

[Dervel]

Just to chime in with a little science, men who are exposed to infants will experience elevated levels of prolactin (a hormone that in avian and mammal populations encourages parental behaviour). Fathers with higher prolactin levels are more responsive to babies which creates a positive reinforcement loop. Dads who live closely and are involved with their children become more biologically prepared, and more willing to care for them.

I do not raise this to wade in on the apparent "sexism" of believing men and women can make equally good parents, because quite frankly I don't think what I raised above supports either side of that debate. When looked at objectively. I DO however believe that children will always benefit from both Mums and Dads being as involved as possible in their nurturing/care/protection, because in an ideal situation both parents are involved = child benefits.

I do feel it is dangerous to rely on the view (even should it prove correct). That Mum's are more important, and thus Fathers roles should be viewed as secondary, as you then end up with a whopping case of observation bias. Fewer males will be involved in early stage care, prolactin levels do not elevate, and the desire to nurture and be involved diminishes leading to confirmation of the view men are bad at it, and so the cycle continues. Gender roles remain firmly entrenched and nothing changes.

However please don't read this to assume an agenda on my part to diminish women in any way. It is my belief we should act complimentary with one another not in an adversarial fashion. My conclusion which I admit is very much biased with what is merely hypothesis on my part (at this stage), is that we're not supposed to chain up one human being to be the exclusive caregiver to a family's children. Child rearing is a group activity which we as social animals are supposed to support and assist one another in doing. The mere fact that at least 10-15% of women suffer PND tells me that we as a society are failing to support them.

It beggars belief to me that although parenting is probably the single most significant role one will have in life, it is viewed as undesirable grunt work. Seen as applying the brakes to an individuals life rather than a significant addition (which granted when viewed exclusively from a career perspective it often is, but that is not the only yardstick with which to measure human success). When people find themselves in the regrettable single parent bracket they are viewed as a drain, rather than people getting on with the vital task of raising the next generation of doctors, soldiers, taxpayers etc.

My proposal is to encourage men to be as involved as early as possible in their children's lives. Not in opposition or to marginalize motherhood in any way, but in support of and in partnership with mothers. Maybe if more men made their decisions with thought of their children front and center in their minds we would see this ideal culture/society within which to be a mother flourish.

[betterthanever]

The OP's original question focussed on an ideal society in which to be a Mother. Surley what one mother' may see as idea,l another may not and so I guess a flexible and tolerant society would be the one for me. The government policies that are needed would be ones that allowed flexibility, the costs involved are a whole other issue.<br /> I agree with all those who have said that the role of a parent should be given more credence and not seen as a sideline activity. Being a good parent is hard and how children are brought up has a big impact on society.The conversation has brought in the different roles of parenting which I agree was not what the original post was about but is a natural progression as where there is a mother there is also usually a father unless they are deceeced. <br /> I agree that if the father has not been involved from the beginning whatever the science, it would make it more difficult to have the same role' moving on. Not every couple want to share the role of parenting but some do. The ideal society for a mother who shares the parenting role and the ideal society for a mother who does not would I think be very different.
Tollerance and an attempt to understand the different challenges, likes and dislike of others I feel should be prominent in the ideal society.

The bottom line for me I guess is, that if it is possible to have an ideal society for a mother it would be one that understands the role of one mother differs from role of another and I feel the most important thing for any mother is to be happy with her life and that transfers to her DC. Concentrating only on the DC's happiness and neglecting her own for example would not be the ideal and vice versa.

The OP was just talking about Mothers but I see think that also applies to the role of fathers. I guess the problems come in relationships/parenting if both are aspiring to achieve thier own happiness and that of thier DC but there are clashes as the happiness of one brings upset to others.

[scottishmummy]

Yes new fathers do get elevated prolactin,lowered testosterone immediate after birth
These hormonal changes return to Normal level@ 6 month after birth
The male hormones don't remain changed