WHEN THE POLITICAL GETS PERSONAL - UPDATED

I have been thinking and talking about the problem of career vs. motherhood in our society and career vs. the socialization of girls since I was just a tiny tot.  But one thing that I find incredibly difficult about this topic is that people are bound to get defensive about their personal choices.  I have never personally been too successful at dealing with this issue when I talk to others. And then I find myself watching my words and censoring my opinions because I am so, so worried about offending women who have made different life choices than I have.  Ack.

Feminists critique the expectation that it should always be the woman who bears the brunt of the child rearing duties-- but then the women who have made career sacrifices in order to stay home pipe up and say, “But I am glad that this is how I am spending my life.”  Feminists want to get to the root of why fewer women than men tend to aspire to certain types of positions, like high-level political positions, or law firm partnerships, or other such “professionally powerful positions.”  But then other women say, “Well, I don’t want to be a senator or a law firm partner, but my aspirations are valid, too.”  And then there are other woman who say, “Hey, I am just struggling each day to put food on the table.  What are you doing for me?” 

I find this incredibly frustrating because it hampers the examination of societal forces that may hold our daughters back from exercising their natural talents to the fullest extent possible in whatever sphere suits them.  We’re not saying that no woman should ever make a career sacrifice for the sake of her children.  We’re not saying that every woman is duty bound to be on the fast track to conventional prestige.  We’re not saying that we should ignore inequities faced by women who are not worrying about getting a place in the boardroom because they are struggling just to survive.  But I think it’s worth questioning the assumptions that we and our culture make about our role in every facet of society.  We should question why it is still generally assumed that career vs. parenting is primarily a “women’s issue.” We should question why women law students are more likely than men to say they don’t want “powerful” positions.  We should examine the forces that keep fewer women than men from running for the Senate or becoming CEO or getting a research fellowship in physics at a top-flight university. 

My mother is my role model in this regard.  Her life was a conventional female life for her generation.  She was a secretary until she got married, at which time it was simply expected that she quit her job. She truly relished being a homemaker and she was an incredibly attentive mother.  But my mother was extremely clear-eyed about the forces that led her to this role.  She was very critical of her upbringing and the socialization and expectations that went along with that.  Even though my mother was happy to be a stay-at-home-mother, she always recognized the injustice of forcing women into one cookie-cutter role and the injustice of the fact that she herself never had much of an opportunity to question whether that role was right for her.  She was always willing  to think about and critique the limitations placed on women’s roles in society and the extent to which her own life was shaped by those limitations. 

That’s what we feminists are trying to do. We are certainly not trying to devalue the choices you have made.  We are certainly not here to tell every woman that she has to pursue a particular “feminist appropriate lifestyle.”  You are not a bad feminist if you are staying home with your children.  You are not a bad feminist if you have jumped off the career fast track.  Indeed, if we can create a society in which the expectations of parenting and of power fall equally on men and women, then we can be sure that those of us who choose full-time parenting or who choose full-time career or who choose something else altogether have done so in a truly voluntary way, free from the societal norms that tend to force certain roles on one gender or another. 

UPDATE:  This post at Feministe on Betty Friedan touches a bit on what I am saying, especially this bit:

In her criticisms, [Friedan] is often perceived to have attacked the housewife herself — anti-feminists will toss out Friedan quotes about housework being suited for the simple-minded and boring as “proof” that Friedan believes stay-at-home moms to be stupid. But I’m not sure that was her point. Housework is boring and repetitive. It isn’t stimulating. Most people do not enjoy it. But it still has to get done. Recognizing that it sucks, and that it’s pretty unfair to hold up members of a particular gender as failures if they don’t enjoy it, isn’t the same thing as disparaging the people who, out of necessity, do it. Criticizing the system is not the same as criticizing the individuals who do their best to operate within that system.

I also don’t buy the idea that Friedan’s work and the feminist movement were bad for stay-at-home women, or that they constructed the stay-at-home woman as a negative thing. If anything, the fact that staying at home is now much more a choice than it was 50 years ago confers a good deal of value onto it — women who are staying home are doing it because they want to, not because they’re mandated to do so. They see it as a viable lifestyle choice, and one that they want for themselves. That breeds an understanding of staying home as one in a series of valid life choices, as opposed to something that, by virtue of having a vagina, some second-class citizens are simply expected to do. Of course, how much of this “choice” is actually made freely is debatable, but it’s certainly much more of a choice, for many more women, than it was before.

Comments

[L.]

I think your last sentence says it all. I am at home with our kids now because I know I can return to a decent job in my field even if I do this for a while -- my husband doesn`t have that confidence. Men he knows who took paternity leave were joked about, laughed at, and not promoted, so guess what my husband will never do.

[Ally]

It's interesting looking at the choices that were open to our mothers - and to me, choice is what being a feminist is about. Having the right to choose. My mother is seventy this year and is adamant that she is NOT a feminist. However, because in the mid-1950's she had supportive (and quite well-off) parents, she could go to college, learn to farm and then go on to run her own horticultural business.

When I try to explain what feminism means to me - ie, largely being about having choices - she can't see it. I think it's because, because of her personal circumstances, she always DID have the right to choose. So she can't imagine that there might be women out there, who don't.

Just thinking aloud, really. Good post.

[Sara]

Great post. Now why do I get the feeling that this isn't the last time you'll have to explain all of this?

Last night, I saw Kate O'Beirne on CSPAN, pushing her evolutionary psychology bullshit, and after having enough and flipping the channel, I couldn't help but think that it's too late for her anyway. Women are in the workforce, and we're not giving it up any time soon. I agree that there still are some attitudes that could use adjusting, and that women are unfairly assumed to be primary caregivers, but I at least take satisfaction that we've made what appears to be permanent progress.

[Cecily]

Good post. I have been all over the map with career and parenting. 90% by choice. I am a midwife (a very traditional feminine role, however another time I can go on about midwifery and nursing as a feminist career.) With my first child I chose to go to college,loved it and hated it. I refused to slip into a forced role. I started out with plans to get an MBA and be a CEO then moved to pre-med. With my second I stayed home for 18 mos, loved it and hated it. I chose to go back to work part time. With my 3rd child I managed to balance working enough to fulfill myself and being with the kids enough to fulfill myself and them. What I really learned with my second child was how much choice we have and how much we do not. I can choose to do anything I want so long as I have enough money to pay rent. I chose to go to medical school and drop out to be a midwife (had a financially supportive partner to pay my rent while I went to school and apprenticed). I was raised to be a doctor (my father was a doctor and I was the smart one so it was expected that I do something respectable). No boundaries, perhaps. I was fortunate.

However there is a financial aspect to all of this. My partner worked full time, made good money and financially supported the family. I was financially dependent on him at that time. I could never go out at that point and get a job that paid that much unless I went back to school.I was also not willing to give up my comfortable lifestyle.

While I was home full time with my daughter, I read Adrienne Rich's book, Of Woman Born. I love her. For those of you who haven't read it and are in the throws of motherhood it's empowering. I give this book to my friends. Other books that address some of this are: Redefining Motherhood:Changing Identities and Patterns by Abbey & O'Reilly and for fun, The Mother Trip by Ariel Gore.

Cecily

[The Happy Feminist]

Oh, I think being a midwife has to be a terrific profession. I don't know much about it or about having babies but I got a real sense of the feminist aspect of the profession when I read the novel, Midwives by Chris Bohjalian, which I highly recommend.

[Chris T.]

I would add that while feminists as you point out should try to be sensitive in affirming the life choices of all women, a little guilt is not inappropriate when it comes to the life choices of men.

I've always considered myself a feminist, but I also used to be quite pushy with my partner in terms of our shared plans, career choices, etc. And I wasn't pulling my weight with things around the house, either, which de facto limits choices. It took some tough love to recognize that.

Men need to be aware of how their own perceived freedom in making career and life plans impacts their family and loved ones. There are definitely significant benefits--when both of you are working, picking up your share of the chores means a more comfortable home, more frequent home-cooked meals, more choices for your partner, and you get to share in both the joys and frustrations of domestic life. Opening those choices up, and having everyone shoulder the difficult burdens, have very positive consequences.

[Nicole Black]

See, here's the thing, HF. I take issue with your assertion that to leave a career in the law is a "sacrifice." The relevant definition of "sacrifice" is (from the Webster Merriam online dictionary): destruction or surrender of something for the sake of something else b : something given up or lost .

I didn't "sacrifice" my career. I didn't give up or destroy my career for my family. I chose to opt out of a lifestyle that I once viewed as desireable, but ultimately decided was just the opposite of what I wanted. I left because it wasn't what I wanted to do for the rest of my life. My priorites changed, even before I had my kids.

I am empowered. I have an education, extensive and varied legal experience, and I can do whatever I want to do. What I chose to do 2 years ago was to take a brief hiatus from the legal field. It wasn't a sacrifice--it was a well thought out choice. My career is not over. I'm already back into it.

I made a *choice*. And I made that choice because it was what was best for *me*--not feminism, not our country, not a cause, but for me. My decision was just that--my decision. It was a personal decision. *I* made it for me.

I do agree wholeheartedly with this language from the end of your post: "If anything, the fact that staying at home is now much more a choice than it was 50 years ago confers a good deal of value onto it — women who are staying home are doing it because they want to, not because they’re mandated to do so."

Had I been forced by society to stay at home and have kids at an early age, I truly think I'd have gone crazy by now. But, since I made that decision after obtaining an advanced degree, traveling, and pursuing jobs that I thought were my "dream" jobs, I am far more comfortable with my choice and am far more content with my life as a whole.

[Staircase Witch]

I actually kind of like housework. In reasonable doses. It gives me a chance to rest my brain.

But what mostly appears to have happened in the last forty or so years is that women now have the career AND the children AND the house to take care of. Some of us have husbands who are good about dividing the labor--without simply "helping out now and then" while patting themselves on the back for being such sports--but I don't think we've reached a point where that's the norm. So I can certainly understand why some women who are not Martha Stewart fans or natural kindergarten teachers (my mother wasn't!) might opt out of trying to juggle all that, and I'm not going to fault them for it, although there is a definite downside.

I think the infighting is where we trip up. It's the men, stupid! Why, instead of searching our souls about whether Maureen Dowd or Sylvia Ann Hewlett is right, aren't we turning outward and demanding to know why they can't meet us halfway, why *their* vocations are so important that we're the ones stuck being the household managers and secretaries and cooks and caregivers? Blaming men doesn't help, but letting them sit back and watch the catfight--that's the mistake we're making. People like Kate O'Beirne simply need to be ignored.

[AndiF]

Nicole, here's a definition from the Oxford English Dictionary that is much more in align with what I think HF is getting at: the act of giving up something values for the sake of something else more important or worthy. This may not have describe what you did but I certainly have known a lot of women who put aside careers that they found valuable for something they found more valuable, being at home for their child. To not call their decision a sacrifice is to deny the self-debate and struggle they went through to reach that decision.

[The Happy Feminist]

Right, AndiF's definition is definitely closer to what I'm getting at. I can understand Nicole viewing the word "sacrifice" as having a negative connotation, but I don't think I said leaving a career is ALWAYS a sacrifice for everyone. I know tons of people of both sexes who would LOVE to stop practicing law, for example.

The ideas presented in this blog are not meant to be a commentary on anyone's life. The whole point of my post is that feminists are NOT telling you that you have to make career/parenting choices because they are best for feminism or some other cause. The fact that I say "Gee, it's too bad that women are less likely to pursue a law firm partnership than men," doesn't mean that I am saying "It's too bad that Nicole Black isn't currently pursuing a law firm partnership." What I am saying is that there are many women out there (not necesarily Nicole Black) who would want to pursue law firm partnerships but for societal mores, socialization and other constraints that prevent them from doing so. I want to be able to talk in broader terms about what's going on in society at large without people taking it personally.