How far should we "Lean In?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whichever way you lean, you need to find the right balance for you. That will vary from person to person. Which is why books like "Lean In" are idiotic. There is no one-size-fits-all.

If you're LEANING, how can you be BALANCED?
Duh.

That's easy. You balance by one parent leaning in and the other leaning out. Simple physics and mathematics.

In all seriousness, I don't think there's a perfect universal formula to achieving work/family balance. I lean in because DH had job failures, so now he leans out. Sometimes I envy his freedom to work less and have more time at home. Sometimes I know he envies me because I have a higher profile and better paying job. Sometimes I envy the extra closeness he has with our kids because of all those times he had to be the default parent. Sometimes he envies me for seldom having to be the default parent any more. Whatever. In the end you just do the best you can and hope you don't screw up your kids too much along the way.

You are EXACTLY right.
Someone needs to lean into the home and children.
I usually don't care which parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whichever way you lean, you need to find the right balance for you. That will vary from person to person. Which is why books like "Lean In" are idiotic. There is no one-size-fits-all.

If you're LEANING, how can you be BALANCED?
Duh.

That's easy. You balance by one parent leaning in and the other leaning out. Simple physics and mathematics.

In all seriousness, I don't think there's a perfect universal formula to achieving work/family balance. I lean in because DH had job failures, so now he leans out. Sometimes I envy his freedom to work less and have more time at home. Sometimes I know he envies me because I have a higher profile and better paying job. Sometimes I envy the extra closeness he has with our kids because of all those times he had to be the default parent. Sometimes he envies me for seldom having to be the default parent any more. Whatever. In the end you just do the best you can and hope you don't screw up your kids too much along the way.

You are EXACTLY right.
Someone needs to lean into the home and children.
I usually don't care which parent.

But why does it have to be ONE parent. In my mind, the ideal society would be one where both genders are supported in more a schedule that permits both to be involved at home.

Also, to OP, I had the total opposite reaction: doesn't the early unexpected death of spouse support the thank-god-she-leaned-in-so-now-she-can-continue-to-support-her-kids point of view?

[Anonymous]

Let's be frank here, ladies. Everyone has their own priority in life. In the dual career families, the children are the ones getting short changed. I'm the nanny who's expected to pick-up the pieces. I'm not interested in being another parent to your children. I don't want your children more waking hours than you care for your own children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whichever way you lean, you need to find the right balance for you. That will vary from person to person. Which is why books like "Lean In" are idiotic. There is no one-size-fits-all.

If you're LEANING, how can you be BALANCED?
Duh.

That's easy. You balance by one parent leaning in and the other leaning out. Simple physics and mathematics.

In all seriousness, I don't think there's a perfect universal formula to achieving work/family balance. I lean in because DH had job failures, so now he leans out. Sometimes I envy his freedom to work less and have more time at home. Sometimes I know he envies me because I have a higher profile and better paying job. Sometimes I envy the extra closeness he has with our kids because of all those times he had to be the default parent. Sometimes he envies me for seldom having to be the default parent any more. Whatever. In the end you just do the best you can and hope you don't screw up your kids too much along the way.

You are EXACTLY right.
Someone needs to lean into the home and children.
I usually don't care which parent.

But why does it have to be ONE parent. In my mind, the ideal society would be one where both genders are supported in more a schedule that permits both to be involved at home.

Also, to OP, I had the total opposite reaction: doesn't the early unexpected death of spouse support the thank-god-she-leaned-in-so-now-she-can-continue-to-support-her-kids point of view?

I'm the above-quoted PP and I agree. I hope we reach a point where mothers and fathers can work and share parenting equally. Right now that's hard to do in most professions. Most job require close to full time in order to be benefit eligible, so at least one parent has a strong incentive to go full time. Also, being promoted in most fields doesn't favor the mommy (or daddy) track spouse.

[Anonymous]

Until you hit the effing desk.

[Anonymous]

Better paying jobs want you to make *them* your focus, not your other interests.

How much is someone going to pay you to say, "Hey, I have a sick kid today"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Better paying jobs want you to make *them* your focus, not your other interests.

How much is someone going to pay you to say, "Hey, I have a sick kid today"?

I think it's hysterically funny to call one's family "other interests." They are children, not a coin collection or crafting hobby. Don't we as a society want to support the "other interest" of children?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Lean In" was a lot about having a perfect husband. In that sense it was a weird feminist proclamation. Her construct ignored those who aren't in a perfect marital situation, and unfortunately that is where she sits now.

Not really a "perfect" husband, but a full equal partner (husband or wife). I do think that's a fair point. Truth is, you really can't lean in if you don't have that. And you're much better off marrying someone who wants to be that than marrying someone who doesn't.

There were always questions about how much this couple devoted to raising their kids. Dave Goldberg was placed on a pedestal as an ideal husband, was the lesser half of a power couple, ran a tech firm, etc. Seems like a lot of pressure. Calls into question to what extent you can have it all. The trade offs when you are a billionaire in charge of hundreds of billions of investor market cap are daunting. But everyone has regrets in life. Everyone wonders about the road not taken at the fork in the path.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let's be frank here, ladies. Everyone has their own priority in life. In the dual career families, the children are the ones getting short changed. I'm the nanny who's expected to pick-up the pieces. I'm not interested in being another parent to your children. I don't want your children more waking hours than you care for your own children.

What a great nanny! Can I hire you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My dad died early. I am thankful my mom worked because if we had depended on my dad bringing in the income and her taking care of the family we would have been in difficulty. As it was, his life insurance helped bridge our adjustment. I think the possibility of having your spouse die early is all the more reason to "lean in."

In my experience, the opposite worked out much the same.

[Anonymous]

I actually think the brief, postwar period in which one parent (usually the man) worked and the other (usually the woman) stayed home and took care of kids really is the ideal. Except I would want to update it so that men would be just as likely to stay home as women would.

My spouse and I both work and both try to be there for the kids (doctor visits, camp and ballet sign ups, cooking meals, trips to the playground, etc.). Let me tell you, it's exhausting. Specialization would be better. But few can afford to live on one salary in the modern economy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Better paying jobs want you to make *them* your focus, not your other interests.

How much is someone going to pay you to say, "Hey, I have a sick kid today"?

I think it's hysterically funny to call one's family "other interests." They are children, not a coin collection or crafting hobby. Don't we as a society want to support the "other interest" of children?

+1000
Well said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Better paying jobs want you to make *them* your focus, not your other interests.

How much is someone going to pay you to say, "Hey, I have a sick kid today"?

That's not always true, plenty of federal jobs pay very well and have lots of flexibility. I know because I have one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I actually think the brief, postwar period in which one parent (usually the man) worked and the other (usually the woman) stayed home and took care of kids really is the ideal. Except I would want to update it so that men would be just as likely to stay home as women would.

My spouse and I both work and both try to be there for the kids (doctor visits, camp and ballet sign ups, cooking meals, trips to the playground, etc.). Let me tell you, it's exhausting. Specialization would be better. But few can afford to live on one salary in the modern economy.

I don't. Domestic violence was rampant when the majority of women stayed home. Lots of women stayed in bad marriages because they had no way to financially support themself. I'm all for extended maternity leave, but I don't think it's a good idea for the majority of women to check out of the workplace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually think the brief, postwar period in which one parent (usually the man) worked and the other (usually the woman) stayed home and took care of kids really is the ideal. Except I would want to update it so that men would be just as likely to stay home as women would.

My spouse and I both work and both try to be there for the kids (doctor visits, camp and ballet sign ups, cooking meals, trips to the playground, etc.). Let me tell you, it's exhausting. Specialization would be better. But few can afford to live on one salary in the modern economy.

I don't. Domestic violence was rampant when the majority of women stayed home. Lots of women stayed in bad marriages because they had no way to financially support themself. I'm all for extended maternity leave, but I don't think it's a good idea for the majority of women to check out of the workplace.

It's such a relief women can do what's best for themselves and their families and not have to worry whether or not anyone "thinks it's a good idea". Guess what? Domestic violence can occur in any type of partnership - with SAHMs or WOHMs. Bad marriages and divorce are rampant even now, regardless of work status. I find it incredibly amusing when some women insist that WOH is the only way to protect oneself from divorce, or a cheating spouse, or domestic violence. Bad things can happen in any type of partnership or work situation. At some point, you have to find a partner you trust and do what works best for your own family. Honestly, the best thing I ever did was "check out of the workplace" - or "lean out," if you will.