Letters to the Editor
-
SAHM debate -- a new perspective
I did not opt-out, but have found myself a SAHM. I had my own boutique and the very poor timing of getting pregnant during the development of it, then again 15 mos. after the birth of my first. Call me stupid, etc for allowing that to happen--yes, but preventing it would have been quite complicated. The boutique closed almost exactly 1 year ago.
My husband of 4 years had been making comments about not wanting to be teaching his child to play ball when he was 60. (We were both 34.) He also took to making nasty remarks after a few cocktails about my possibly not wanting children, etc. The reality was that I didn't want them right then; little did I know that I would be pregnant 1 month after going off the pill. Said husband is very much the passive-agressive type, so these comments meant he felt quite strongly about the issue (otherwise nothing would have been said).
My kids are currently 3 years old and almost 2, I am just starting to see glimpses of feeling sane and okay with the situation. I view it as a temporary situation, once we move to a larger city that offers more opportunities in my field I will resume my career. I cannot wait for this. I feel that I perform my job of SAHM worse than any job I've ever had, and that makes me feel like perpetual shit. Yes, I'm on anti-depressants. I was a better mother when I was working and fully appreciated all time with my children, rather than simply trying to survive that time. While the store was open & my husband worked too, we paid nearly $21,000 for one year of full-time daycare for 2 kids.
My husband is a great father and does plenty to help out, but it rarely seems to be enough--he's not around enough. It's very hard to not resent him because he can never understand what pregnancies 'do to you' nor can he get the total loss of self and feeling like all you've become is an unappreciated maid, chauffeur and accountant. He'll never get it and that will always piss me off.
I love my kids and I hope they'll be better off for my staying at home with them. But I often wonder if a balance of time with me and time with another caregiver would have been better some/much of the time. My husband has a job where he leaves at 6 am & often is not home until after the kids are in bed. This makes for a very long week most of the time.
Sex is something I can't imagine being interested in at this point, beyond the fantasy/escape level of with a celeb or high school boyfriend. (Though I do need to get myself a rabbit.) Resentment has made sex into an issue where I would like all of my gripes to be handlded perfectly, then I could be into it. Of course one of these gripes is my husband needing to lose 20 lbs. (I'm the one who's had 2 kids, not him.)
This all sounds very sad & pathetic, I know. But like I said, it's temporary (hoping that move takes place within the next year).
-
the 2 are not mutually exclusive
I don't think anyone disses the other until one group starts claiming superiority. If all the different people in the world could acknowledge that there are many differnt approaches to life and what works for one doesn't work for another, we'd be OK!
but soon enough, one group starts claiming superiority over another and then we get trouble. It could be Christians saying they're better people than athiests, or SAHMs saying they give their children a better life than working moms or .... on and on. The fact is, each family knows what works best for them and what is possible given their circumstances.
But it is NOT true that SAHMs are better mothers than working moms.
SAHMs did not exclusively make the better choice. SAHMs are not the only moms who "put family first." It's condescending and wrong. SAHMs say that being a good mom and working are mutually exculsive, but that is wrong. we can work and be good mothers. When the SAHMs stop saying that working and being a good mother are mutually exculsive, we'll shut up and go about our lives as we should, granting the same courtesey to them.
-
Is it a job or a hobby?
Could someone help me with this? If a job is something we absolutely need in order to pay bills and eat (not a choice), then how can parenting be a "job"??? It's more like a hobby - and one can survive without it, right?? It's basically an excuse to feel important. I'm always amused by women who are exhausted from parenting and whine about how it is such a tough job.
-
Bigger Fish to Fry
I consider myself a feminist and I have a tendency to get up in arms when I'm told that I am biologically programed to raise children. However, I really don't feel all that threatened by Total 180.
It seems to me that Total 180's biggest crime is mediocre writing. Uniting readers through hollow stereotypes (i.e., husbands are clueless about housework, girlfriends are the only people that understand) is something that women's magazines have been guilty of since their inception. My reaction to Total 180 is the same as it would be to an article in Cosmo lamenting the approach of bathing suit season or Redbook telling me how great chocolate is for PMS:
What the hell are you talking about? You must not really want me to pay attention or you'd be saying something intelligent.
Do I think Total 180 is damaging to feminist ideals? Not nearly as damaging as the magazine that tells me it's my biological duty to love shoe shopping.
-
Feminism, misunderstood, yet again
Ms. Traister is right to be frightened and disappointed by Magazines like Total 180! and the women who claim only the value added to life is with children. The magazine, which I've seen, and the women involved display an alarming ignorance that makes me doubt they are doing their kids any favors.
Have any of the women producing this magazine taken a history course? To turn to the 1950's! Is it the clothing that appeals? The laugh track of Leave It To Beaver? The House Unamerican Activities Committee?
The good old, idealized 1950's, when blacks had their own water fountains, when married couples on TV had to have twin beds, when women weren't allowed to have their own credit or own property, when birth control was illegal, when women were routinely and legally paid less for the same work as men and, oh yes, rape was a misdemeanor and a wife legally could not be raped by her husband, even if they had separated or were divorced as long as she wasn't the property of another husband. It wasn't women staying at home that changed these things; it wasn't their kids; it was the women themselves.
Childbearing is not a miracle. Child rearing is a time consuming task when the kids are little, but come on, at some point they do take care of themselves. After all, that is the goal of parenthood.
It is a convenient myth that children are better served by stay-at-home moms. Human beings evolved within a mutually supportive community of shared childcare and eldercare which encouraged exploration and challenged the young to learn for themselves, not the undivided attention of a single parent. I cannot help but suspect that the definition of motherhood is linked to identity as a mom, a role which comes complete with status, security and big power in a very small, self-defined world.
Women who crave children often make a deal with the devil, dismissing adult relationships in favor of focusing on their children. Thereby teaching those children, especially the boys, that they are the center of the universe, that women live to serve, that women live to make things for others, not to make something for or of themselves. Creating a life for others is never as interesting or as challenging as creating a life for yourself.
Feminism is about placing work in a political context. Women who stay at home work, but as long as that work is considered an exception to the work force rather than a condition of it, the choices around parenthood are limited ones. Feminism is an examination of how power is related to gender. Power is still related to gender, men have it, women don't because men make more money - more money for their time and more money overall - and money moves civilization. Men are also making the decisions that affect women's lives because men are in the position at work and in politics to do so.
How many women will evaluate the constitutionality of abortion laws? One. How much power will she have? None.
As for humor, these women need to read more. Jean Kerr wrote about domestic matters within a social context. She realized the limitations of parenthood when she found herself unable to have an adult conversation when out with associates of her husband, theater critic Walter Kerr. Jane Austen wrote only about domestic life because it was what she was allowed to write about. That she did it with a sense of sarcasm and irony, tinged with anger and wit is what makes her a great writer. Austen is read by high school girls, not high school boys.