The working mom backlash continues
It's been a while since I've even touched on the subject of living and (usually) loving my life as a working mom, but a New York Times article I read on Friday touched off a rage inside of me that I'm finding it difficult to quell.
The article starts out by profiling a former business development executive who gave it all up to be a stay-at-home mom to her three daughters. To drive home the point that she's no longer in the fast lane, she's pictured in dowdy jeans, sneakers, and a shapeless maroon t-shirt with a toddler on her hip.
The article describes her as "pining to go back to work, but (she) has not figured out how to mesh work with caring for her three daughters."
"Most of us thought we would work and have kids, at least that was what we were brought up thinking we would do — no problem," she told the paper. "But really we were kind of duped. None of us realized how hard it is."
Oh yeah - and who do you blame for duping you? This kind of victim mentality sets my teeth on edge.
Yeah, after I gave birth to my twins in 2000, I had to hustle to figure out daycare arrangements, didn't count on how many days I'd need to leave work due to a sick baby, and could never have imagined how difficult it would be to disentangle myself from a crying child at 7:30 a.m. Monday morning or how impossible it would be to stay vertical at 3 p.m. when I had been awake since 4 a.m. that morning with one or more sleep-resistant toddlers.
But I stuck it out, and I found a new job that launched a great career, and I don't feel I'm cheating my children - or cheating myself - by staying in the game.
I wonder how many of these women who opt out of the workforce will wake up one day thinking her world is just fine, only to find her spouse has run off with another woman? How many of them will lose the skills and brain-sharpening instincts that only a career can offer? How many will put all of their energy into child-rearing and then wonder when the last one goes off to college, what she is supposed to do next?
Is the next generation of young girls doomed to become 1950s housewives? Not if I have any say about it. I want my daughters to rule the world - not the roost.
Yes, it's important to raise happy, secure children. Yes, if I had but world enough and time (and a trust fund or two), I probably would have stayed home for at least the first two years of their lives.
But - and this is crucial -- I truly believe that we need more, not less mothers in the workforce. For the good of our economy, and our children.
My mother worked as a teacher for most of her life, and I was so proud that she had students who obviously adored and admired her. Even when I was an authority-defying teenager who showed her no mercy, I understood on a gut level that she was more than just my mother, and had intrinsic worth outside of that role.
Most women I know have too much to offer the world to confine it to just their children. There are cancer cures to be found, great novels to be written, and great companies to be created and run that may never exist if more and more women take the path of least resistance and just stay home.
Which isn't to say that all women need to work outside the home to fulfill themselves and their destinies. Of course there will be, and always should be, many stay-at-home mothers and fathers. I'm not advocating that every woman march out into the workforce.
But the insidious message behind this article - that unless and until the government or companies themselves help women solve the problem of raising children and having a career, they should stay home to raise their kids - frightens me.
Men destined for greatness don't let obstacles stand in their path. Or wait for someone to make their path easier. And women shouldn't, either. Even if sometimes that means putting themselves and their needs before their children.
Yes, balancing motherhood and work is hard, sometimes heartbreakingly hard. But the rewards can be immense.
For all of us.
The article starts out by profiling a former business development executive who gave it all up to be a stay-at-home mom to her three daughters. To drive home the point that she's no longer in the fast lane, she's pictured in dowdy jeans, sneakers, and a shapeless maroon t-shirt with a toddler on her hip.
The article describes her as "pining to go back to work, but (she) has not figured out how to mesh work with caring for her three daughters."
"Most of us thought we would work and have kids, at least that was what we were brought up thinking we would do — no problem," she told the paper. "But really we were kind of duped. None of us realized how hard it is."
Oh yeah - and who do you blame for duping you? This kind of victim mentality sets my teeth on edge.
Yeah, after I gave birth to my twins in 2000, I had to hustle to figure out daycare arrangements, didn't count on how many days I'd need to leave work due to a sick baby, and could never have imagined how difficult it would be to disentangle myself from a crying child at 7:30 a.m. Monday morning or how impossible it would be to stay vertical at 3 p.m. when I had been awake since 4 a.m. that morning with one or more sleep-resistant toddlers.
But I stuck it out, and I found a new job that launched a great career, and I don't feel I'm cheating my children - or cheating myself - by staying in the game.
I wonder how many of these women who opt out of the workforce will wake up one day thinking her world is just fine, only to find her spouse has run off with another woman? How many of them will lose the skills and brain-sharpening instincts that only a career can offer? How many will put all of their energy into child-rearing and then wonder when the last one goes off to college, what she is supposed to do next?
Is the next generation of young girls doomed to become 1950s housewives? Not if I have any say about it. I want my daughters to rule the world - not the roost.
Yes, it's important to raise happy, secure children. Yes, if I had but world enough and time (and a trust fund or two), I probably would have stayed home for at least the first two years of their lives.
But - and this is crucial -- I truly believe that we need more, not less mothers in the workforce. For the good of our economy, and our children.
My mother worked as a teacher for most of her life, and I was so proud that she had students who obviously adored and admired her. Even when I was an authority-defying teenager who showed her no mercy, I understood on a gut level that she was more than just my mother, and had intrinsic worth outside of that role.
Most women I know have too much to offer the world to confine it to just their children. There are cancer cures to be found, great novels to be written, and great companies to be created and run that may never exist if more and more women take the path of least resistance and just stay home.
Which isn't to say that all women need to work outside the home to fulfill themselves and their destinies. Of course there will be, and always should be, many stay-at-home mothers and fathers. I'm not advocating that every woman march out into the workforce.
But the insidious message behind this article - that unless and until the government or companies themselves help women solve the problem of raising children and having a career, they should stay home to raise their kids - frightens me.
Men destined for greatness don't let obstacles stand in their path. Or wait for someone to make their path easier. And women shouldn't, either. Even if sometimes that means putting themselves and their needs before their children.
Yes, balancing motherhood and work is hard, sometimes heartbreakingly hard. But the rewards can be immense.
For all of us.
posted by workinmom at 10:30 PM
12 Comments:
Amen, sister! I am in total agreement with you on this. I worked my ass off to get where I am in my career, and yes, it is hard to balance family life and work life--for both me and my spouse. But I don't think he wakes up ever thinking, 'maybe I should just quit,' largely because the media is not constantly feeding him images that make him question his choices.
Thank you for your article today! I have a 22 mo old and one on the way and work full time. I can't tell you how many times my mother-in-law has asked me - "you're still working?!?!"
I have a great career that benefits my entire community. If I didn't do what I do, it would make a difference. I don't punch a clock every day, dreading my job. I do it because I love it and I am a better mother for it.
At this time, I can't afford not to work, but in the future, I probably could quit...will I? I don't know.
With support, like your blog, it is easier for a working mom to take on the unique challenges that we face. Thanks for your messages!
KP - thanks for your post. We happily working mothers need to know there are others out there like us.
This anti-working mother backlash is i insidious and it feels good to have a forum like a blog to write about it.
Congrats on the upcoming addition to y our family...and I hope you post here again....
Tracey, I usually agree with you, but today I take some exception. When a mother who stays at home with her kids sees them grow up to be whatever they become, I hope she can say to herself, "Job well done," NOT "What have I been doing with myself all this time?"
While I am at work, someone is parenting my children. Honestly, there are days when they do it better than I, and vice versa. In the end, I think they will be successful people, but that doesn't just happen. It happens because someone ELSE is working their ass off doing the same thing I'd be doing if I were home.
I don't feel guilty for being at work, but I do now realize what my value was being at home before. And I'd no more discount the time I spent with them (if I had chosen to be a SAHM) when they fly away than if I'd spent 18 years at a career that ended after that much time.
I don't mean to suggest kids from one kind of family or another do better in the end. It's so much more complicated than that. But I did sense in your blog a discounting of what it means to stay home with your children, and I've got to call you on that. That's working your ass off too, and with no evaluation, no paycheck, no pat on the back.
I've now gotten the "Oh, you work?" vibe from other moms, and I have to think it comes from insecurity about what they're doing. I give you enormous credit for doing what you have to for your family, and doing what you love. Your girls have a wonderful role model!
Sarah,
I do not discount stay at home parenting as worthless. Far from it. I know that SAHMs work harder and with less accolades than most working moms. And I agree that any SAHM can look at their children when they've grown up and feel they've done a great job in raising them.
What I fear is that many women are losing themselves and their own identities when they choose to stay at home and mother their children full time.
The generation before me fought an all-out battle so that women could have more than just the satisfaction of raising their children...if that's what they want and need to fulfill themselves.
I'm sure there are many women who don't need to work outside the home to self-actualize and I do not look down on them or condemn them in any way.
What I do fear is that a growing number of women will be so afraid of the possible negative effects that working outside the home might have on their children that they squelch their own dreams and goals to try to ward off anything bad happening to their children.
And in my opinion, that's a slippery slope and could end up harming these mothers...and their children much more than working outside the home would have.
I knew this post might cause some friction, and I appreciate your honesty and forthrightness.
T
Tracey, I found your article to be really well thought out and articulate. I was interested in your point of view, because it differs so drastically from my own.
However, I can't relate at all to the woman quoted in the NYTimes article either.
I think, for myself, there is no where else of more value to myself or my family, then right here at home. Having said that, I also cannot imagine allowing being a MOM to be my only self-definition. Not that one needs any more than that because for so many it IS enough, just not enough for me.
I love being home even though I gave up a lucrative and powerful career at the Director level of a large company to stay at home with my twins. I loved my job and miss it from time to time. But being home has FREED me to pursue other interests that lay dormant and that called for release.
So while I'm a SAHM, I'm hardly letting my brain atrophy in the whirlwind of little-boy-activity. My brain is having a field day with all the possibilities that are mine in the years ahead.
I think how a woman takes her role - whether it be as a WOHM or a SAHM - is really the issue at hand. I hope when my boys are wild teenagers that they will see in me, like you did with your mom, so much more then just a mom, but will know that first and for most I am always, always, their MOM.
~ ali
Ali,
You made some great points in your post - thanks for expanding my horizon.
I worried a bit that my post might be misinterpreted as a screed against SAHMs, and I'm glad you understood where I was coming from.
This is such a hot button issue, and I felt the need to respond to that awful article.
T
Keely,
Whoa - I realized this post might be controversial and I had hoped I made it clear in my post that I am not condemning SAHMs. I am in awe of SAHMs, have tremendous respect for SAHMs and tried to make it clear in my post that I understand this role is right for many women.
The bone I'm picking is with the New York Times article's tone about working mothers, and how they portray women who loved their careers, worked hard to achieve at them, and then dropped out to become SAHMs because they couldn't find a balance between work and home life.
I'm not concerned about the many wonderful mothers like you who choose to stay at home or work part time to achieve their own balance, but I am concerned about women who end up sublimating and submerging their goals, dreams and aspirations because newspaper articles and mother in laws and guilt tells them that their children are more important than their own needs.
And the point in my piece was not that the husbands of SAHMs are more likely to leave their wives, but that if they do, many SAHMs will be placed in the position of depending on child support or struggling to find a job in a workforce they've been out of for many years. If my husband left me tomorrow, I can rely on my career to support my family. And that is precisely the reason many women in the 1970s started careers, so they wouldn't be so dependent on the men in their lives.
My comments about taking the path of least resistance were directed only to women who want to work and have a career but choose to opt out and stay home. And I stand by my statement. These women are clearly not following their dreams and goals because, yes, it's easier to stay home. And I think that many of them will live to regret it.
I am not trying to create a war here, just viscerally responding to an article I read which I think does a disservice to all women.
T
Tracey ... as a SAHM about to re-enter the work force I have to disagree as well. I have seen the rewards of being home with my 3. I have been very active in their lives - at school, activities. They will tell you I work - I volunteer in many places so they have many experiences. I appreciate your point of view but beg to differ. I have made a wonderful contribution by staying home for nearly 5 years. I'm going back to work - for a paycheck - because we need the money and I need different challenges. If I could stay home for the next 13 years I would, just not in the picture for us!
Wow, I just finished reading all of the comments. I didn't find your post harsh. I think if we are comfortable with our decisions in life wether it is working or staying home then it is okay.
Well, truth be told I like working. Even when I was a SAHM, I still ran a Jazzercise business and Yoga! I love my babes more then the air I breathe. Raising our children is the hardest job we will ever have. But I am proud of myself for what I have accomplished. Where I am in the corporate ladder.
For me, having a person come to my house and watch my kids has made a huge difference. I don't feel like someone else is raising them. I do feel that they are secure and happy.
By the way, any article in which a person blames someone else for their problems bothers the stuffing out of me!
I can totally see how as a working mother, you would (in a way) be offended by that article you read. Maybe the gal in the article made it sound like it's not fair for her or her kids that she have a career. Obviously that gal was dealing with her own issues, but her issues aren't the same as everyone else's issues.
I must add my opinions on working moms vs. SAHMs.
It's a decision each family must make.
I absolutlely applaud both sides of the story.
There are situations where mothers MUST work to meet the financial demands of the household. Some people want a certain lifestlye...they work because??? They want to afford a big house, big vacations, a big car, fancy clothes. But to have that lifestyle the mom must go to work, have a career, grasp a desire to be successful and ahcieve it, and put babies in daycare or afterschool care. That's what they want out of life. That's great. It's their life. Perfect for them. I'm not going to say they are wrong for that. So what if the kids are in someone else's care? As long as it is good nurturing healthy care.
On the flipside there are people like me. I have an accounting degree and always wanted to be a career woman. But after my first child was born (the month after I graduated college) I realized my career could wait. Maybe until Caleb started school. Maybe until ??? But I wanted to be home. Now I have 2 boys under age 4. I choose to be home. We are sacrificing having a new car, we don't go on vacations, we don't wear fancy clothes, we eat sandwhiches and other boring stuff...BUT those things are replaceable ...the time I get to spend with my boys is NOT. It was a tough decision to make...putting a career and success aside.
It's all about what we feel is our individual purpose in life. Aside from the fact that some mothers may choose to work in order to have more income for a spendy lifestyle....maybe those mothers are NEEDED where they are....teachers, doctors, lawyers, chefs, counselors, nurses, etc. They work because that's where they are NEEDED in this world.
As for me...I feel I'm more needed at home. Thankfully within the past year I have found a new career I can manage by working at home. Now THAT's TOUGH too. It takes a massive amount of multi-tasking to care for kids and work a business at the same time. Someone needs to hit more on the subject of their thoughts on WAHMs. Why do I work at home? To have the best of both worlds. To be there for my kids but to find a place in society where I can help others and make an impact on lives.
For now ...I wouldn't have it any other way.
You sound guilty to me. Daycare is the pits for kids and all moms know it.
Men divorce career women, not stay at home wives. Check divorce stats if you have doubts.
Post a Comment
<< Home