<p>These all sound like murmurings from the third circle. What the women’s “movement” accomplished is a mere jostling of mirrors. Only a few women (and men) have made strides of any meaningful participation. If you choose to live in Hell, you suffer the consequences, and your lack of insight is just so much “bhaaaing” on the way to the slaughter. Contrary to the underlying assumption, the corporation may be the way of the animals but it is not the target at which we aim. Cowardice looks the same in slacks or a dress, and the only way out of this place is by personally undertaking an education not necessarilly housed in ivy bearing limestone and, most assuredly, not in corporate glass. Talkin’ 'bout a revolution, folks; and you’ve lost your sight along with your youth.</p>
<p>Precollegemom, I have always worked, but many of the stay-at-home moms in my community are deeply involved in organizing and running food pantries, soup kitchens, and educational groups, not to mention going to the state capital to lobby the government to change unjust laws. Meanwhile, I know quite a few two-career couples whose lives revolve around the big boat and car and house and private school. I don’t think it’s fair to stereotype people either way.</p>
<p>“it won’t happen if women stay home.” </p>
<p>In response to this comment, I don’t think a change in the culture of work to one that is more family friendly is dependent on women staying in the workforce consistently throughout their working life. I’m also not sure there are enough jobs nor quality daycare to support that idea. And don’t men in positions of power bear some responsibility in creating a culture that is conducive to raising a family. Haven’t we seen hours spent at work increase in the last twenty years? Changes are slow and messy and flexibility that is available to some is not available to others - so a choice has to be made.</p>
<p>I’ve mentioned before that I became briefly but deeply depressed a few months after my first child left home. I finally realized that it was because my self identity had become “Mom” and that identity was disappearing. I’ve been a career person since college, and like many of our generation, delayed marriage and having children. And they spent their toddlerhoods in day care. But at some point–despite the fact that I’ve never let up, career-wise–my career surreptitiously stopped being the central aspect of my self identity, and Mom replaced it. If I were walking through a crowded mall, I’d be more likely to react to someone shouting “MOM!” than I would be to my own name.</p>
<p>My kids benefited greatly from very good day care situations, IMO. I don’t regret it for their sakes, at all. But I can understand how a young woman of Miss Liu’s generation might have the foresight to come up with a plan to <em>try</em> to have it all. Or most of it, anyway–I’m sure she’s aware that it’s much tougher to make partner in a law firm if you want to do the Mom thing too.</p>
<p>Edit: At the risk of starting a fight in this very interesting thread–which I don’t want to do–I would urge Liz and others to re-read what Larry Summers said about this in the infamous speech that gave lady MIT profs the vapors. Skip the testing stuff. He spoke quite eloquently on this subject we’re discussing here.</p>
<p>Driver,
I did read Larry Summers speech but I don’t recall the details enough to understand why you are referring directly to me. Please be a little more direct.</p>
<p>Liz,
I just meant that Summers addressed what you said on this particular topic.
Forget it. I shouldn’t have brought it up. I don’t want this to become another Summers thread.</p>
<p>Thanks driver. I like this thread to and really appreciate everyone’s openess about their individual experiences.</p>
<p>Thought provoking comments from various sides of the issue. My two bits is the plainly obvious fact that our mobile society has not given us all the convenience that we hoped for. The commuting life is basically horrendous. Just read the NYT stories of this past summer about life in subdivisions that are miles away from schools, grocery stores and soccer or little league practice.</p>
<p>And yes, there is a reason why women leave the law and business professions, and that has been thoughtfully discussed here. But remember that this is also true of many young males. Sometimes the economic rewards pale compared to the joy and struggles of the family.</p>
<p>Numbers matter. It would have been hard for me to argue that meetings should be scheduled at different times; the whole group would have had to change its practices to accommodate a single individual. It was much easier when several younger colleagues (both men and women, btw) argued that they needed to pick up their kids from daycare and could not hang around until 6:30 or later.</p>
<p>My H works in a small company full of hotshots from top schools, all unmarried. They don’t seem to mind that the boss calls a meeting at 5:45. The one person with a young child minds awfully but feels too much in the minority to object.</p>
<p>I agree that each family situation is different and each child presents a different set of challenges. What bothered me was the a priori decision-making.</p>
<p>On the subject of daycare:
I can’t say whether my kids were better off or not being in daycare since the age of 2.5 months (I certainly was better off!). We deliberately chose a day care center that had plenty of parking so we could slooooowly peel our kids away from the friends and activities they did not want to leave behind every day. The experience does not live in their memory as one of deprivation.</p>
<p>I take back what I said about Summers addressing the issue “eloquently.” 
But he did address it, and that’s what made me think of it (my near-total recall only lasts about 6 months these days, but it’s still going). Anyone who wants a Summers fight should go here instead, though: <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=34534&page=1&pp=20&highlight=summers[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=34534&page=1&pp=20&highlight=summers</a>
Let’s keep this thread on topic, and I apologize for introducing a potential flashpoint.
</p>
<p>Driver, re the quote above, I’m not sure whether society is “right” is a question too many people are asking, although I’m glad you brought it up. There seem to be enough people willing to live that kind of life that if others don’t want to, well, then, that’s their privilege. In my state it was considered a big deal when it was made illegal for a medical resident to work more than 80 hours a week! 80 hours! Wow, that’s a real slacker’s schedule. I hope I can go somewhere else when I get sick…</p>
<p>In my view, the only way the situation is going to change is if both men and women refuse to work such long hours. </p>
<p>One bright spot lately: Princeton recently changed its tenure procedure to accommodate parents. <a href=“http://prince-web1.princeton.edu/archives/2005/09/15/news/13075.shtml[/url]”>http://prince-web1.princeton.edu/archives/2005/09/15/news/13075.shtml</a></p>
<p>re: “remaking the work place”: emphatic yes!! </p>
<p>I have had better success than many at working off and on throughout my kids lives (a couple of big non work chunks but mostly working) mostly because I am self-employed and always have been. Stopping and starting and setting my own hours, plus making excellent $$, were my main priorities in job choices. This focus actually came from my laziness and avarice, not smart maternal pre-planning, but it luckily and unexpectedly it worked well once babies came; I had the right kind of job.</p>
<p>re: future moms “taking spots” at elite Unis-- WOW that is OFFENSIVE. </p>
<p>Human beings have a right to educate themselves to their fullest potential and to use that education in any way they choose. This statement smacks of saying a mom’s job is just a low skill assembly line worker job, she doesn’t need an education. IMHO we need deep thinkers and informed reasoners all throughout society and especially as parents. In out country there need to be poets and contemplatives, social innovators, artists, June Cleavers; not every important role in life is salaried!!</p>
<p>re: the OP’s quoted line: I think that young lady is darn lucky that her mom is blunt and that she was not fed the same line that I was, " You can do anything, honey, be the president, be an astronaut." etc etc. I was socialized by both my parents to become my FATHER. They meant well, but there was NEVER a mention of the mothering role and how it can be so powerfully attractive and so worth one’s time. My point is, they were so busy liberating me that I was <strong>completely</strong> misinformed–and when I had babies I was THROWN by the desire to quit all paid employment and groove on my kids 24/7. I felt like a weirdo. </p>
<p>As noted above I was lazy. I did not listen to my parents and had ZERO desire to be a high powered atty or biz person (their dream) so through dumb luck I managed to stumble onto a motherhood-compatible path! But had I not been lucky I would have found myself completely blindsided by parenthood and with no flexibility.</p>
<p>All such wonderful, thoughtful, and insightful comments. Now I know why I’ve been addicted to CC for a few years!</p>
<p>Some thoughts:</p>
<p>I did post this on the other thread, but, as I look at a pile of work, a pile of debt, and realize that this is all on top of an engineering degree, it just makes me furious that anyone would look at my lack of male private parts and assume that I’m just doing this for a few years.</p>
<p>Maybe after those sweeties go to law school and get some experience in life, they might understand that there is a lot of value to having a mom who works… both for the mom’s sanity (who wants to spend all day doing nothing but baby talk? adults conversation is healthy!) and for being a good role model for their kids.</p>
<p>That whole thing about women who want to stay at home being “sexy” just ticks me off. Maybe I’m spoiled by my guy friends, who equate sexiness with intelligence, toughness, and ambition. Oh, but wait… having dated a lot, I can tell you that most men find “smart, but not as smart as me” to be the ultimate turn-on. Ugh. Welcome to 1953. Where’s my poodle skirt?</p>
<p>Marite - you are a wonderful role model for women in my generation. Keep the anecdotes, thoughts, and advice coming. </p>
<p>I cannot recall who said it, but it was said beautifully a few months (or a year?) ago: Women take 10-15 years off and then blithely assumed that their law, medicine, or business degrees would ensure them easy re-entry into the work place, only to find that they cannot find a job. I wonder if these Yale sweeties will see that happening to other women in time to re-consider their decisions.</p>
<p>My dad raised me. He took me bra shopping when I was in seventh grade. He went to every single track meet I had. He encouraged me more than I pushed myself in engineering. He also works 60 hour weeks. Does anyone realize that you can be a well-adjusted child by having a loving, involved parent, regardless of gender? I was always the last kid to be picked up from day-care - sure, might have been nice to have the stay-at-home parent thing, but it’s not necessary. IMO, the fact that my parents are emotionally “there” for me is far more important than whether or not they have French toast waiting for me on the kitchen table in the morning. </p>
<p>I do think that long hours are a de facto way of ensuring that women are not going to be in those jobs - even if they don’t have kids, women tend to take a more wholesome view of the matter and realize that working 100 hours a week is no way to live. Women in the workplace might help to change that… as will women who encourage their husbands to be truly involved with their kids.</p>
<p>Thanks, aries.</p>
<p>For all her very traditional views on some gender roles, my mother also was the one to push me to get a Ph.D. and she could not understand women not working. She’d done so all her life. She’d had to; my father was not able to provide for many years at a stretch (very long story).
I was not raised to believe that I could have it all and that I could be whatever I wanted to be without making some adjustments and compromises. I chose a field where I thought I could combine motherhood and a career without losing my sanity. You’ll be amused to learn that my lawyer brother could not understand my lack of ambition.</p>
<p>As you can probably gather from my screen name, I am employed as a church music director. My original degree, however, is a master’s in something completely different. I had my “dream job” and, when financially able to do so, left that job for another…full-time motherhood. I was fortunate and blessed to be able to do so (not without financial sacrifice…but with untold rewards).</p>
<p>I was not bored…I was constantly challenged. I was also often very busy taking other people’s kids various places and fulfilling various roles in the community that I was glad to do when others did not have the time. If I sound self-aggrandizing, I apologize. I just hate to hear those that chose to be full-time moms put down as un-interesting, un-fulfilled, unintelligent, etc. Each must chose according to their circumstances and temperament. </p>
<p>BTW, if I had continued in the field in which I was trained, I would never have held my present position. And would have missed many, many blessings. I just sent my last child off to college and am now happily pursuing a brand new career…I am not paid a stellar salary, but am quite content, nonetheless.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That was the line in the article that annoyed me. Methinks the guys were applauding being let off the hook, as far as their future wives’ expectations of what a husband’s responsible for. I sure hope the women see through this as a bit self-serving.</p>
<p>The feminist movement, in my opinion, was about getting more choices for women. Therefore, I would not condemn any woman’s choice. As long as it really is her choice – that she really wants to be a stay at home mom – rather than the choice she is forced to make because her partner is not willing to be a full partner.</p>
<p>I went to part time after the first kid was born and thereafter only worked full time for a few years, when the job was very flexible. We were able to do that because we made a decision to buy a house we could afford on one salary. This decision enabled my husband to work part time and go back for a PhD at one point, and enabled me to keep up a career while still spending time with the kids. What worries me is that, given the housing market, I doubt very much my kids will have the same option. They may have no choice but to have two full time salaries in order to live in a community they want.</p>
<p>The women my age who I know (late 40’s and early 50’s) either work part time (mostly doctors or family businesses) or not at all…The few who work full time don’t do it for any sort of fulfillment, but because they have to. If they won the lottery they’d quit in a heartbeat.Their mentality about working at this point is “been there, done that” like they’d really like to spend more time with family, hobbies, etc. I quit working when my first was born and never looked back. Some of the more driven at home mothers put that energy that they used on Wall St. into their communities and the kids’ schools. What’s wrong with that?</p>
<p>Nothing at all is wrong with that, dke. Their communities and schools are lucky to have them.</p>
<p>Nothing wrong with wanting to spend more time with family, hobbies, etc… But it seems like a luxury for women that is not available to men. If My brother is working in an economically precarious environment. The strain it has put on him and on his marriage is tremendous because he is the sole breadwinner. His wife gets too few commissions to make a contribution to the household finances. My H has been laid off a few times. I was mightily glad to be employed when that happened.</p>
<p>My H and I have really done a lot of tag-teaming because both of us are self employed. ON PURPOSE I married a true partner who enjoys parenting, enjoys cooking & is great at both those jobs. When he is busy with paid work, I step in to the breach at home. When I am busy he steps in. When we are both busy, our kids step in or we hire someone. </p>
<p>When his job fell through the floor I went back to work, so Marite, yes, your point is very important. My return to paid employment was from necessity not desire but it is sure nice for a spouse to have help with breadwinning when help is needed. </p>
<p>My advice to aries & her generation: You won’t know how you feel about dropping off a 2 month old till you do it. Not all babies are the same, and some are much more clingy. Try to keep all options as open as possible till the time comes. Keep nimble if on the mommy track, and think ahead. There are many jobs one can do that are lucrative & where a 10 year absence from paid employment = no problem. (Why do you think so many women are in Real Estate?)</p>
<p>I am still essentially a lazy person whos likes to take naps, play tennis, and read. If there was no $60K of tuition bills to pay even before the electiricty and the mortgage, I would LOVE to be an unpaid poet and I would love to hang out with my kids more. I would play tennis every day & buy all farmer’s market food. I would uncork the wine at 3:30. I would take a year in Italy. </p>
<p>I am SO not connected, identity wise, to my employment. Never have been. I am just a pragmatist who likes to be able to buy the things I deem important, like a great education for my children, and likes to sleep well at night with no wolf at the door. </p>
<p>That is why I don’t like the notion that full-time moms are less interesting, plugged in, etc. If I was not working IMHO I would be equally interesting; also thinner, better rested, better read, more relaxed, & I’d be having more fun. Why not if you can?</p>