<p>“Firefighting might be exciting and all, but it isn’t exactly rocket science. Caring for kids (well) takes more skill and education.”</p>
<p>I wouldn’t underestimate what it takes to be a firefighter. Similar skills to those who are police officers, and similar skills to those in the military.</p>
<p>So, here’s the politically incorrect thing: Does caring for kids (well) take education? I mean, there are a HECK of lot of people who are wonderful, great mothers, who aren’t necessarily “educated” (in the fancy elite sense of the word) but who are loving, kind and good people. The same thing could be said for people who serve as caregivers to elderly people. They don’t have to be rocket scientists to do a really good job. </p>
<p>I’m not sure what you mean. Was my comment sexist? I could easily amend it to say that there are wonderful, terrific, awesome fathers, and it doesn’t require education to be that way.</p>
<p>I was fortunate enough to be raised by my grandfather at one point, and he was the most outstanding grandfather on the planet, though he wasn’t “educated,” had a blue collar background, and was an unexceptional student. But he was kind and loving and fun and made me feel special. </p>
<p>Pizzagirl isn’t being sexist. If anything, she’s rejecting classism. You may want your pre-K teachers to have a degree because there is an educational component, but a child-minder? Do most suburban nannies have college degrees?</p>
<p>Well I think police and military extend over more complex skill sets than firefighter, which is a rather limited occupation. Just as a homemaker who is raising Ivy league kids has more complex skills than a simple child minder. </p>
<p>My nanny / housekeeper is of Polish origin. She happens to have a college degree and was an elementary school teacher in her native land, but that’s really not why I hired her. I hired her because she was good, competent, caring and loving, and a hard worker. Those traits can be independent of education.</p>
<p>I have fancy-schmancy degrees and a fancy-schmancy job but those characteristics don’t make me a better <em>mother</em> than the mother down the block who “only” went to community college and didn’t have a fancy career. The characteristics of being a good <em>mother</em> don’t seem to have all that much to do with <em>educational attainment.</em> (Ditto for father, of course, but I’m just talking about mother here.)</p>
<p>Of course I’m not talking about abject stupidity here (what, the baby doesn’t go in the microwave?) but once you’ve gotten to that point, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to love somebody or to care for them well. It just takes a loving personality. </p>
<p>We have socialized all traditional men’s roles in this country, and we have left all traditional female roles to be figured out by each individual woman. The sexism is so baked into the system that we make assumptions about how we want to pay for things that have very little to do with the truth of how we live today.</p>
<p>As you can see from the census data I linked above, nearly forty percent of all children under 18 live in a single parent household, mainly with their mother. The largest percentage of those living below the poverty level in this country are single women with children.</p>
<p>Single mothers are limited in their career and job options, and they are further limited by the lack of ubiquitiously available childcare. This should be a feminist issue. It should be the number one feminist issue.</p>
<p>The fact that it is not contributes significantly to the fact that so many see feminism as the domain of the wealthy upper SES white woman. True feminism is not about those of us who have every opportunity already. It is about getting it to the point where all women have every opportunity.</p>
<p>“Just as a homemaker who is raising Ivy league kids has more complex skills than a simple child minder.”</p>
<p>Well, then, it must be super-duper easy to raise a special needs child (Down syndrome), as one of my closest friends did until she passed away 2 years ago. I’ll be sure to let her family know that. It was certainly all bon-bons and truffles.</p>
<p>The skills needed to be a good parent are the same skills whether the child is bound for the Ivy League or state flagship or community college or the military or manual labor. And the value of being a good parent is the same. Parents whose kids go to elite schools aren’t better <em>parents</em> or better <em>people</em> than parents whose kids don’t; they haven’t raised kids who are more inherently valuable as <em>people</em> since everyone has intrinsic human dignity and worth which isn’t dependent on their IQ score or SAT points. It is not a competition, and shame on you for suggesting otherwise. </p>
<p>Does it? Plenty of less-“skilled,” less-educated people are great parents who care well for their kids.</p>
<p>And I think, unwittingly, this is part of the problem in terms of respect.</p>
<p>We have highly educated people deciding to stay home with their kids, and we give them credit for being “better” at it simply because they have a degree in anthropology or biology or whatever.</p>
<p>We have (generally less-educated) women working at childcare facilities, entrusted with the care and well-being of the kids of highly educated WOTH parents. </p>
<p>The highly educated WOTH parents among us somehow manage to do in evenings and weekends much of what SAHPs do during the work day. And we too occasionally have days where we are home with our kids, or home without them. To call it anything other than a luxury in most of the situations we are discussing here is disingenuous, in my opinion. Not much “parenting” gets done when the kids are at school.</p>
<p>There is no such thing as “Ivy League kids.” Yes, a good education, supportive environment, good nutrition and access to enriching opportunities can give kids an edge in college admissions and in life, but those things do not happen because of some “skills” the parents have. And anyway, if this were true, we’d see a difference in outcomes between kids of educated parents who work full time outside the home, and those who have a parent home from birth to age 18. </p>
<p>" Really? If you say this about the person who becomes a sub-in of sort for working parents to the tune of 40-50 hours a week - likely more than 60+% of the waking hours of their children - than what are you saying about those homemakers/SAHP who stay home to do what the day care worker does? Shouldn’t our standard be that child care workers (if they can “stand” the job - wow - there is another hit on parenting!) WILL provide a good educational and emotional experience if we put our kids in their hands for all those hours?"</p>
<p>Have you never been to a childcare center? Why would you compare that to a homemaker/SAHP’s life? The parent is only taking care of their own child. Many childcare centers are seriously overcrowded, with the harried workers rarely staying for long periods of time. Way too many children to take care of, they are not spending large amounts of quality time with children. That’s why people have a hard time “standing” the job, could you stand to spend all day taking care of too many children at one time? Sure, there are better places, but they cost far more money. And I seriously doubt that the average childcare worker at the overcrowded centers who are getting minimum wage, have been required to have a strong educational background. It is a grueling job. For people who can find low density childcare centers (and don’t have to pay through the nose to do so), they are very fortunate.</p>
<p>And I agree with PG, you don’t have to be well educated to do a good job raising a child. Many of us have parents or grandparents with little education, who we think were very loving and did a fine job. My masters degree/engineering degree didn’t help me a bit while raising my kids. And yes, there were many hours when all I did was babysit, not spend every minute teaching them things. Having them play with their little friends, letting them watch tv, taking them with me to do chores, babysitting.</p>
<p>“Single mothers are limited in their career and job options, and they are further limited by the lack of ubiquitiously available childcare. This should be a feminist issue. It should be the number one feminist issue.”</p>
<p>I don’t disagree that the lack of high quality childcare is a big issue - and I agree that the fact that women like you and me can hire nannies and deal with it personally doesn’t mean that the issue is “solved” for those who aren’t higher SES. I’m not sure why you’re painting me as sexist, though. </p>
<p>“Women can’t even get hired as firefighters. They can get hired as childcare workers.”</p>
<p>Let’s take a woman who for whatever reason, doesn’t have the skills that are rewarded in the workplace. Maybe she has only a high school degree, and was an unexceptional student. She doesn’t have a particular passion for any given career area. But she is a nice, kind, hardworking person who takes her responsibilities seriously and is good with children. She could be a good SAHM, right? So why couldn’t she also be a good childcare provider? Plenty of women fit this description.</p>