Motherhood is a trap. Marriage is a bad deal. Feminist Corinne Maier on learning to be selfish

[IwantToRetire]

The French feminist provocateur’s ‘indecent’ insistence that women should prioritise themselves is jubilantly liberating

#MeFirst! A Manifesto For Female Selfishness has managed to work up even the famously laissez-faire French, with critics branding it “indecent” and “a mockery of devoted mothers”, and commenders heralding it “liberating” and “jubilatory”.

Maier is telling women to be “negligent, casual and lazy”, to “minimise the time you devote to others” – including “elderly family members” – to give up “trying to maximise your child’s potential” and “escape the role your mothers were trapped into playing”.

In #MeFirst!, she questions why, despite having worked through so many waves of feminism that no one knows where we are anymore, little girls still aren’t being taught “to get their claws out” in verbal terms: “How to have your say in a hostile environment, how to speak at length without being interrupted, how to take the lead in a group.”

“Remember that empathy,” Maier “is just one of the supposed ‘caring’ qualities we’ve had projected onto us. Qualities that happen to be very convenient for men.”

the chapters on husbands in #MeFirst!, the ones that point out how beneficial marriage is for men, and how detrimental it is for women on every level – right down to life expectancy.

Just some quotes from quite a long interveiw - see https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/corinne-maier-feminism-motherhood-marriage-selfish-women/

Full article can also be read at https://archive.ph/B1LmG

Perhaps there's an element of tongue-in-cheek but it says:

When publicising No Kid the writer admitted that there were times when “I regret having children”, and today she refuses to soften this, insisting: “I really did find raising children appalling. The accumulation of all the tasks and responsibilities – it was just appalling. So for me it was a progressive realisation that there was a big problem here for women, and that things had to change.”

It also says her husband lives 1000km away so it's not as if she is in a traditional marriage.

Sums it up nicely the marriage bit. There was a live version by Gary and Vera Aspey which is worth seeking out found it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=jSSAmY_1SQw&embeds_referring_euri=https%3A%2F%2Fdavidprosser1.wordpress.com%2F&feature=emb_imp_woyt

Marriage actually lowers a woman’s life expectancy, but increases a man.

Really, compared to parenting and cohabiting without the useful contract?

Does any logical thinker really believe that living with a man and having his children and doing his housework is all fine and dandy, but then suddenly signing a bit of paper strips years off your life?

No. The legality of marriage itself is not the problem.

The problem is, many young women don't understand this so they say "we're choosing not to get married because I'm a feminist" and take on all the costs and risks anyway.

That oft-misused statistic isn't comparing like with like.

Cohabiting with a man, having his children - yes, all things that age a woman compared to being single and child free. Doesn't take a genius, we all know it and see it in the mirror.

But that stat was created when women rarely did that unmarried. Now it's actually the norm to have kids before getting married.

I strongly doubt that women who are cohabiting and having kids, without getting married, are living the life of Riley and drinking from the fountain of youth, compared to those of us who are doing so while married.

I'm actually chuckling to myself. It's the ring on my finger that's ruined my pelvic floor, not being pregnant twice.

Totally agree that when we talk about "married" we should be talking about women who are cohabiting with a male partner and kids. The marriage contract is not the problem.

It seems like more and more women are rejecting this model which is why we have such a rapidly declining birth rate. It's fascinating reading about places like South Korea where the expectations of mothers are even worse than here and so women are choosing to stay single and/or child free.

I think your response is very telling! There are other options available for women other than a- get married or b- accept all the trappings of marriage without a wedding ring! There c - stay single!

And that doesn’t include women who earn more than their partners and get stung in a divorce ( like me!) even though you’ve been main breadwinner AND done the lion’s share of childcare.

I don’t think the writer is suggesting don’t get married, but keep all the shit bits of marriage. It’s the whole thing she says is shit.

And when I say marriage is a trap- so is living with a man in a long term relationship.

my recommendation is stay single.

But... it's what I said in my first comment that you quoted in the first place. That you shouldn't do the other shit bits without getting married.

Sure, stay single and don't have kids. But the fact remains 80% of women (in the uk, I don't have the stats for elsewhere rn), have at least one child in their lifetime.

So your neat little solution works for the 20% of women.

That's not a feminism that works for the majority of women.

It's just a statistical fact that many, indeed most, women want to and do have children.

I have equal respect for women who don't want to, that's fine.

But when women have children, and then have an awful experience, it's not feminist to say "well what do you expect, having children ages you, just don't do it then".

It's impractical, unhelpful feminism.

Well actually that neat little solution would’ve worked for me and I have kids!

In Half of all marriages, women earn the same or more than their husband, so marriage is beneficial to half of all married women.

Divorce was actually a god send for me! My ex does 50/50 with kids and I have more free time than any other married woman with kids I know.

I don’t even think we are disagreeing @Mumoftwo1312 but I’m saying it isn’t a binary choice. Not all women are the same, or in the same circumstances because we are first and foremost human beings with different needs, goals and aspirations.

I don’t think any one way of doing things should get the feminist stamp of approval- isn’t feminism about having choice?

I think we can both agree that each woman has to look at their now personal situation and weigh up whether the legal status marriage is beneficial.

but we also have to look at the cultural assumptions behind marriage. It doesn’t work for women and the lines need to re drawn.

In Half of all marriages, women earn the same or more than their husband, so marriage is beneficial to half of all married women.

The stats don't back this up at all, particularly not after kids. I think you need to Google "gender pay gap".

Being a mpther was the best thing I ever did. I am so sick of motherhood constantly being downgraded and kicked.

Motherhood is sacred work. The PROBLEM is that the patriarchy devalues it. We women shouldn't be doing the work of patriarchy.

Mothers are the last line of defence for children. Without mothers, there is no human race.

Motherhood, supported by society is glorious.

I'm so utterly sick of this crap.

Great post. I like the notion that this type of feminism is ideological and not practical.

I too am utterly sick of the role of motherhood having been chipped away at almost entirely in terms of it's value.

There's a paradox here. If looking after children is so unimportant then why is childcare a structured & viable career?

Which stats?

I just googled that question ( I’m not doing peer reviewed research for a mumsnet discussion) and the answer was 50% of women earn more or the same as their husbands. Only 16 % of women are main breadwinners out of that though.

and the pay differential between couples will be different from the general gender pay gap.

for example, a couple who both went to uni and had professional jobs are more likely to be in similar high paying jobs.

picture might be very different in a more ‘traditional’ marriage. I reckon the gap will be much higher for a working class couple. A man who is a plumber will be coining it in, but his partner who has similar level of education but works in a traditionally female role will be earning much less.

which comes back to my point that there are lots of different situations. Women don’t always earn less than their partners so marriage will not be the best option for every woman. So marriage is not the ‘feminist’ approved best course of action.

why can’t you just accept that? I’m not saying there isn’t a gender pay gap, but statistics don’t show individual situations.

in my group of school friends ( all professional) half the women earn the same as their husbands. A couple earn more than their husbands, a couple earn less. So two Out of 8 would benefit from marriage.

All of them moan about taking on the lion’s share of emotional labour. And as the divorced one with 50/50 care of kids, I have more free time than all of them.

marriage is about more than just the legal protection. I even wonder if the ones earning less think the legal protection is worth the cost of all the extra work they have to do.

I'm on another thread at the moment ( the 15 minute shower one) where women are referring to a sahm as a freeloader, who contributes nothing to her household because she hasn't been in paid employment. This included the daughter, who was the OP. Everything else she's provided for her family has been completely dismissed because it wasn't financial. It's a shame that raising one's own children full time is seen as so unimportant compared to bringing in money to buy them more stuff!
So there's a huge issue amongst women, thinking that caring for our own children has no value, and even from some of our own dc. I suppose it does make you wonder why women bother putting in so much effort.
Maybe it is easier and better to put yourself first and let everyone else sink or swim. Except, most mothers would never ever want to do that. So nature has us in an eternal 'gotcha', that doesn't seem to apply to men,

I'm a great believer in marriage if a woman is going to be a sahm or work pt and not give full focus to her own career. I'm less in favour of it for women who are the higher earner/have their own assets, because these women will likely also do all the thinking and organising for the kids on top.

I do have dd who really struggles to assert herself or take up space. She's 16 and I'm hoping her confidence will grow - she's constantly trying to make me be less obtrusive, quieter, more accommodating. I'm not particularly loud but I do stand my ground and take up space. I don't know why she is the way she is, given that I've tried to set an example of a woman not being drowned out by louder men. So there is a problem here where women don't always feel as entitled as men.

No! Women don't need to be more like men. Men need to be more like women and take on caring responsibilities and stop thinking about just themselves. In a decent society at least.

My main gripe with what the interviewer says is writer's ideas is that for young girls to get ahead they need to learn to be more aggressive / assertive.

I agree one of DH colleges' female not British more forthright nationality went for a promotion was knocked back not enough experience they employed a man less educated and with no experience - then acted surprised when she left. Then top bosses did whole lot of media thing about how women need to push themselves forward more.

I do agree with Mumoftwo1312 though ab out marriage unless a women is one substantial assets and especially if she plans to have kids marriage offers some protection and it does a disservices to young women not to point this out.

I do think motherhood is undervalued by some feminists - as if women wanting to be mothers are somehow wrong in wanting or choosing that.

So, how to make men feel the "need" to be more like women? That's the question.

Once you have children, though, you have a duty to make having children work. I get the feeling that in order to be "free" the author of the piece had to make sacrifices and surrender other things...namely being as much of a figure in the life of her children. She said she had joint custody, didn't she?

I agree with much of this.
Mother-centred feminism will certainly benefit all women, including those who are not mothers. It seems other «types» of feminism often forget the immense value being a woman and a mother has. It is something to be treasured, not scoffed at.
If it is scoffed at, mind you. Sometimes it is just forgotten.

I am not just a smaller man. My needs as a woman are in some cases different from that of a man. Equal, not identical.

Without motherhood I probably would not be as rabid a feminist as I currently am.

Mother-centred feminism will certainly benefit all women, including those who are not mothers. How, please? As a woman who is not a mother and will not be a mother, I am sceptical. My view is a lot of initiatives claiming to be 'pro mothers', 'pro family' (couched as the same thing), and sometimes even 'pro women (in the sense of recognising women as carers in the family)' amounted essentially to policies that were 'anti women', in that they rendered it easier for employers to prioritise males as workers and contributed to women being poorer than men in society.

I'm a child free woman and I would advocate for mother-centred feminism. I don't think it will particularly improve my life but I think it's one of the most important things for women as a group. However, I really don't see how we're going to achieve this until women start asserting themselves. Men aren't just going to hand over certain privileges. The government isn't going to create motherhood-friendly policies out of the kindness of their hearts. We have so much power as a sex and we're not using it. I think Maier is correct to say that we need radical push back or nothing will change.

Me too. I “get my claws out” at the idea that I would have been better off single, and shouldn’t have married my favorite person and created my other two favorite people.

The government isn't going to create motherhood-friendly policies out of the kindness of their hearts

True, but I'm hopeful that we'll see a move in the right direction now that the birth rate is plummeting so low, and mainstream politics is finally realising the damage this is causing to our economy.