A question for you "gender traditionalist" women

[Anonymous]

Please read this - http://www.npr.org/2012/11/27/165991723/dads-weigh-in-on-work-life-balance?ft=3&f=2,3,5,7,10,13,35,39,46 - and then tell me what your view is of working dads who also want to be involved parents and whether or not you feel that attitudes like yours continue to perpetuate a culture that makes it challenging for them to do that.

[Anonymous]

I do agree that a gender traditionalist wife and mom sort of puts her DH in a box if he wants to be more flexible, share the income-earning, and share the time with the kids:

Wife: "No, no, really, honey, I got it, you just go to work. I'll do everythign else."

DH: "Umm, but I want to see the kids more than just late at night and on weekends? Can I chaperone some field trips? Maybe we can go 1/2 and 1/2?"

Wife: "NO! I don't want to work outside the home! You just go to work and stay there until I tell you it's time to come home for your hot dinner!"

DH: (Sad) "Oh. . okay. . ."

[Anonymous]

I'm not a SAHM but I've seen plenty of posts from SAHMs on here saying they would love their DHs to pitch in with household help and be more of an "involved parent."

I think you are being very reductionist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do agree that a gender traditionalist wife and mom sort of puts her DH in a box if he wants to be more flexible, share the income-earning, and share the time with the kids:

Wife: "No, no, really, honey, I got it, you just go to work. I'll do everythign else."

DH: "Umm, but I want to see the kids more than just late at night and on weekends? Can I chaperone some field trips? Maybe we can go 1/2 and 1/2?"

Wife: "NO! I don't want to work outside the home! You just go to work and stay there until I tell you it's time to come home for your hot dinner!"

DH: (Sad) "Oh. . okay. . ."

Well, I'm the OP, and while I hear what you are saying, I think these women are generally married to men who are gender traditionalists themselves. So I'm not really sure your scenario rings true.

More to the point the NPR piece points out that men who have to drop everything and leave work to pick up a sick child from daycare/school, or who requests a day off to chaperone a field trip, is perceived as not committed to his job and "soft." Now that obviously doesn't happen as often in a more progressive region like DC, but it happens. Go talk to some working dads across this country (I know many) and ask them. They'll tell you it's true.

My point is that the people who are hardcore traditionalists and perpetuate these 1950's attitudes contribute to the culture that makes it difficult for modern men to be treated seriously in their careers AND be committed, involved fathers. And I think it's a problem and that the judgmental, conservative folks who look down their noses at two-earner households who are equal partners and share the load are dinosaurs who just need to go away already. Hopefully the tide will turn once all the fossilized Baby Boomers finally move out of the office and into the old folks' home.

[Anonymous]

I was born in 1964 and am considered a Baby Boomer. Who the hell are you talking about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a SAHM but I've seen plenty of posts from SAHMs on here saying they would love their DHs to pitch in with household help and be more of an "involved parent."

I think you are being very reductionist.

How so? I think you have your head in the sand. I think these women chose a traditional gender breakdown and now they want to have their cake and eat it too. All the while snarking away at WOHM's and making judgment calls about their commitment to their children. What they don't get is that we are sharing the load with husbands who respect the fact that we have careers, too. And that as wives and mothers it pisses us off when our husbands are treated like pansies for wanting flexibility in their work, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was born in 1964 and am considered a Baby Boomer. Who the hell are you talking about?

You are obviously on the young end. I'm talking about the geezers born right after the war who wax poetic about the 1950's. I'm over them.

[Anonymous]

I think you like to put people into pigeonholes. You have a lot of growing up to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: More to the point the NPR piece points out that men who have to drop everything and leave work to pick up a sick child from daycare/school, or who requests a day off to chaperone a field trip, is perceived as not committed to his job and "soft." [/quote=Anonymous]

As far as I can tell, this is true for both genders in all the major urban centers (NY, DC, Boston...)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: More to the point the NPR piece points out that men who have to drop everything and leave work to pick up a sick child from daycare/school, or who requests a day off to chaperone a field trip, is perceived as not committed to his job and "soft." [/quote=Anonymous]

As far as I can tell, this is true for both genders in all the major urban centers (NY, DC, Boston...)

Well yes, you are right. But my point is that there is a lot of debate on this board about moms. What about dads? The perennial WOHM/SAHM debate seems to miss the point that two-earner households (particularly in well-educated, career-oriented cities) are equal partnerships and that if men are able to achieve flexibility in the workplace too it makes the whole equation that much more possible.

And those of you arguing that I'm "pigeonholing" people well, if the shoe fits, as my mom always said. Look at other advanced societies and you'll see that, because they are generally more socially progressive they are not continuing to fight these gender wars the way that we are. We have some pretty entrenched camps and what the 1950's nostalgists don't realize is that we are not going back. Our economy will continue to be built around two-income households out of necessity and choice, and as a society we can build structures and policies around that, or we can continue to let the conservative fringe try to pull us backward. Did you pay attention to the past two elections? They seem to be fighting that battle pretty hard.

[Anonymous]

I believe this gem from Colbert is pertinent here - http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/421609/november-28-2012/the-word---sisters-are-doing-it-to-themselves. Fast forward to 2:53.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a SAHM but I've seen plenty of posts from SAHMs on here saying they would love their DHs to pitch in with household help and be more of an "involved parent."

I think you are being very reductionist.

How so? I think you have your head in the sand. I think these women chose a traditional gender breakdown and now they want to have their cake and eat it too. All the while snarking away at WOHM's and making judgment calls about their commitment to their children. What they don't get is that we are sharing the load with husbands who respect the fact that we have careers, too. And that as wives and mothers it pisses us off when our husbands are treated like pansies for wanting flexibility in their work, too.

?

Well, I hate to burst the bubble but I'm a SAHM with a very involved DH, who actually RESPECTS me...can you believe it!? Even though I "only" stay home. We treat each other with love and respect and we both value each other. We just decided that instead of paying someone else to watch our kids while they were small I'd do it. He would be a great SAHD, but he makes significantly more money. He is in a higher paying field than I am trained in, but I will return to work once our children are in elementary school.

Why are you holding onto the antiquated idea that all SAHM's believe in some 50's ideal of gender values? Oh I get it...in your worldview you can't possibly put aside a career for a few years, male or female, to take care of children and still be worthy of respect. On DCUM you either put ambition above all else, or you are an anti-feminist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a SAHM but I've seen plenty of posts from SAHMs on here saying they would love their DHs to pitch in with household help and be more of an "involved parent."

I think you are being very reductionist.

How so? I think you have your head in the sand. I think these women chose a traditional gender breakdown and now they want to have their cake and eat it too. All the while snarking away at WOHM's and making judgment calls about their commitment to their children. What they don't get is that we are sharing the load with husbands who respect the fact that we have careers, too. And that as wives and mothers it pisses us off when our husbands are treated like pansies for wanting flexibility in their work, too.

?

Well, I hate to burst the bubble but I'm a SAHM with a very involved DH, who actually RESPECTS me...can you believe it!? Even though I "only" stay home. We treat each other with love and respect and we both value each other. We just decided that instead of paying someone else to watch our kids while they were small I'd do it. He would be a great SAHD, but he makes significantly more money. He is in a higher paying field than I am trained in, but I will return to work once our children are in elementary school.

Why are you holding onto the antiquated idea that all SAHM's believe in some 50's ideal of gender values? Oh I get it...in your worldview you can't possibly put aside a career for a few years, male or female, to take care of children and still be worthy of respect. On DCUM you either put ambition above all else, or you are an anti-feminist.

That's great for you, PP. I don't think that every SAHM is an antiquated Betty Draper. But your husband has never had to drop everything to pick up a sick kid from school, no, since that is your role? Many men I know from dual-income households like mine (including my poor DH) dread having to do that b/c they are made to feel guilty, as if they are letting their employer down. They are not celebrated for being a great dad. You have missed my point completely - my DH and I most decidedly DO NOT PUT AMBITION ABOVE ALL ELSE. We value our careers AND our family. We don't work 80 hours a week, don't bring work home, and arrange our schedules to be home in time for dinner every night. It would be nice if employers didn't make you feel like a lesser part of the team for NOT putting ambition above all else. And the reality is that men who focus 100% on their career because their wife is at home managing the household and taking care of the kids frequently do not get men like my husband and in fact make their life hell at work. Whether they or their wives realize it or not, they are perpetuating traditional gender stereotypes for all of us. I don't have to appreciate their efforts. That's my point.

[Anonymous]

I stay home so my husband can focus 100% on work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a SAHM but I've seen plenty of posts from SAHMs on here saying they would love their DHs to pitch in with household help and be more of an "involved parent."

I think you are being very reductionist.

How so? I think you have your head in the sand. I think these women chose a traditional gender breakdown and now they want to have their cake and eat it too. All the while snarking away at WOHM's and making judgment calls about their commitment to their children. What they don't get is that we are sharing the load with husbands who respect the fact that we have careers, too. And that as wives and mothers it pisses us off when our husbands are treated like pansies for wanting flexibility in their work, too.

?

Well, I hate to burst the bubble but I'm a SAHM with a very involved DH, who actually RESPECTS me...can you believe it!? Even though I "only" stay home. We treat each other with love and respect and we both value each other. We just decided that instead of paying someone else to watch our kids while they were small I'd do it. He would be a great SAHD, but he makes significantly more money. He is in a higher paying field than I am trained in, but I will return to work once our children are in elementary school.

Why are you holding onto the antiquated idea that all SAHM's believe in some 50's ideal of gender values? Oh I get it...in your worldview you can't possibly put aside a career for a few years, male or female, to take care of children and still be worthy of respect. On DCUM you either put ambition above all else, or you are an anti-feminist.

That's great for you, PP. I don't think that every SAHM is an antiquated Betty Draper. But your husband has never had to drop everything to pick up a sick kid from school, no, since that is your role? Many men I know from dual-income households like mine (including my poor DH) dread having to do that b/c they are made to feel guilty, as if they are letting their employer down. They are not celebrated for being a great dad. You have missed my point completely - my DH and I most decidedly DO NOT PUT AMBITION ABOVE ALL ELSE. We value our careers AND our family. We don't work 80 hours a week, don't bring work home, and arrange our schedules to be home in time for dinner every night. It would be nice if employers didn't make you feel like a lesser part of the team for NOT putting ambition above all else. And the reality is that men who focus 100% on their career because their wife is at home managing the household and taking care of the kids frequently do not get men like my husband and in fact make their life hell at work. Whether they or their wives realize it or not, they are perpetuating traditional gender stereotypes for all of us. I don't have to appreciate their efforts. That's my point.

All right, I understand what you are saying, and I agree with you. Someone...name escapes me...wrote a book a few years ago that started a firestorm. But the general idea was...when women on a career track to upper management marry men with higher earning power they leave the work place, often after the second kid. So the women don't make it as frequently into upper management and then men who are there aren't dealing with the demands of a dual income working family. They don't have to do the things you mention; take sick leave when kids are sick, prioritize their family, etc.... So they don't work hard to create family friendly work environments because they themselves don't need one and wouldn't even know what would be required.

I get that. I'm not sure people who make it into upper management would honestly be that different if they had a dual income family though. I think those kind of people are so driven that they just aren't the kind of people who take off work when the kids are sick. If the wife (or husband) weren't doing it the nanny would be. You see what I'm saying? I'm not sure that even if your DH's boss had a wife who worked that he'd be any more sympathetic to your DH and the plight of working men and women who want balance. If their wife wasn't home to take care of things they'd hire someone else to do it.

I guess maybe it just takes more and more dual income families who do want balance demanding it over time to make changes. Honestly as time goes on there are fewer and fewer "career" SAHM's anyway. By that I mean women who SAH and never return to work. There is so much fluidity now in people's work and life that the 50's model is outdated for most people, even women who may be SAH for a season. Like me. And I am a feminist and do believe women belong in the work place...good lord that should go without saying.

By the way my DH does take time off for our kids for many reasons (recitals, co-oping at the preschool, having lunch with school aged DD, when I'm sick) so even dads with SAH wives OFTEN want family friendly work places; granted his needs right now are different than two income families (which we once were and will be again).