It might have been yesterday morning that the Today Show had a woman on talking about her new book, "The Feminine Mistake."
For info, look here: http://www.hyperionbooks.com/titlepage.asp?ISBN=1401303064
Basically, she's writing about how women are making potentially crisis-producing decisions when they make a choice to be a stay at home mom. The mistakes are financially based: what happens if the husband is injured, or suddenly finds himself unemployed or there a divorce or worse, death? Also, what company, in this environment of plenty of applicants to select from, would want to hire someone who's been "off the market" for a period of time?
I've been wrestling with this since I listened to her. I want to tell her to shut up, because who the heck is she to say that staying at home with your family's most precious resource is wrong?! But she's right. Financially, a lot of families are taking risks if one adult sacrifices work for raising a child.
We take a lot of risks, financially and otherwise. Adding a child to a family is a risk. Getting married to another person, tying your fate to theirs, is a risk. There aren't a lot of buses going down our street, but we all know we can step off the curb and... well, you know.
This book makes me uncomfortable and angry. I want to chalk this book up to just another way to cash in on the media driven "mommy wars," I want to rail against the sexism of the assumption that "the feminine mistake" isn't being made by a lot of modern stay at home dads.
But I'm glad she has people talking... and thinking.
Your thoughts?
2 comments:
2 more thought cycles on this topic I want added here:
I agree about reading a book before having a fully formed opinion. But...
I am conflicted with my feelings. She is right that families with only one working parent are willing themselves into possible financial distress. I think it's important that that perspective and information is shared.
I guess I'm angry that that's the reality for a lot of women who temporarily give up their career to do some of the most important work ever. I know that fact is no the author's fault.
I think though, that work/childcare are major decisions that don't solely boil down to calculated risks re: financial security. And the media covering this book (again, can't speak for the book without reading it) is framing this as though that should be all that matters.
I really am disappointed too that it's being proposed as an issue for women. There are more and more stay at home dads, and these are decisions that couples make together, not just the mom, and not just on a singular whim or desire to be at home with your new favorite person.
----------------------------------
Last night I was brushing my teeth and I figured out why I was so bothered by this. This premise, while very true, is asking me to not have faith (in my marriage, and in my hope that "everything will work out") and to worry.
That's why I was anrgy with the author; who is she to ask me to give up on my faith?
Again, she's got excellent points worth considering, and again finances should probably not be the only thing considered when making this huge decision.
I haven't read the book, but on its premise I agree with what the author is saying. Finances are probably the #1 thing that I worry about, and kids aren't even in the picture for us (casualty of being the daughter of a finance man, I suppose).
Beyond the money issue, though - a HUGE reason why I'm a proponent of women staying in the workforce is because of the potential to lose their identity if they become a stay-at-home mother. Suddenly she's no longer "Susan" - she's "Jenny's mother." (Just take a look at Nest signatures for proof.) And I think such a profound loss of identity could really take its toll on a marriage. The husband is used to interacting with Susan, but now all he gets is Jenny's Mother.
There's also the possibility that the husband will grow to resent all of the time that his wife gets to spend with the kid, while he has to go to work every day. Like you said - that's why couples make these big decisions together. But I can be a selfish person. Were I in that situation, I know I'd have a few days of resentment here and there. The fear is that those "few days" would begin to multiply.
As for the gender thing - how many stay-at-home dads do you know? I know exactly zero. On the other hand, I know of about 15 or 20 stay-at-home mothers. I'm not denying that stay-at-home dads exist, but I think they're still few and far between. The time for books like this to mention them isn't here yet, I think. Eventually - yes, the author will have to address them, and make the issue more gender-inclusive. But only after the dads have become more prominent in the mainstream.
Besides, if the book were more gender-inclusive, the author wouldn't have been able to parody "The Feminine Mystique" so cleverly!
Post a Comment