Full Time Motherhood?, How Selfish

Hartford Courant ^ | 11/05/05 | Julie Shiller

[kalee]

Full-Time Motherhood? How Selfish November 5, 2005 BY JULIE SHILLER

Across the nation, privileged young women are seeking to be competitive candidates to gain admittance to prestigious universities. Impressive SAT scores, awards, grades and extracurricular activities are of the utmost importance for college-bound high school students and their families.

The priorities of many of today's elite young women, however, are surprisingly conventional, according to one survey. The most fortunate and educated women say they will conform to traditional gender roles after completing their Ivy League degrees. They are choosing careers as full-time mothers and expect to be supported financially by their successful spouses. Such expectations are utterly selfish and a dishonor to the struggles that the Second Wave feminists (those who came of age in the '60s and '70s) endured for my generation.

ADVERTISEMENT Today, many white women who were fortunate enough to be born into wealthy families are taking their limitless opportunities for granted. In a recent article in The New York Times, "Many Women at Elite Colleges Set Career Path to Motherhood," Louise Story examines this issue. More than 60 percent of Yale women surveyed concluded that when they become mothers, they plan on working only part time or not at all. Although feminism promotes the right for these elite women to choose, they are unappreciative of their economic privilege. Story claims that they "are likely to marry men who will make enough money to give them a real choice about whether to be full-time mothers."

As a Third Wave feminist, I am embarrassed that Story could make such an assertion. Do these women feel a sense of entitlement to be entirely supported by their husbands? Although all women should be permitted to be full-time mothers, most do not have the freedom to stop working outside the home. It is not an equal choice when less wealthy and marginalized women are not granted the option. Women who were born into an unearned advantaged position are relinquishing their power and independence to patriarchy.

Females in the Victorian era were silenced and forced into restrictive feminine roles. Hartford's Charlotte Perkins Gilman wrote "The Yellow Wallpaper" in 1892 during a time when even well-off women were forced into domestic roles that did not challenge their intellectual abilities. The protagonist, a privileged white woman, was labeled a "hysteric" by a male-dominated scientific community that desperately sought a way to repress her for questioning her forced submission. In reality, she was merely responding to being suppressed by her husband and the controlling patriarchy. Now young women are choosing to return to the silence.

Today's liberated, Ivy-League-educated women are willing to sacrifice their privilege and their opportunities to become independent leaders of the 21st century. They are eschewing the opportunities that Gilman's protagonist and other oppressed women of the time yearned for. Ivy League women are not taking advantage of the ability they have to make incredible strides in the fight for gender equality that would benefit women from all backgrounds. Instead, they are choosing to use their power for their own selfish desires.

In the Victorian era, women were forced by men to adhere to submissive, weak and emotional roles as a way for males to maintain ultimate control and status. Now young, dominant women are in a commanding position to enhance the civil liberties granted to disadvantaged women and other minority groups. Unfortunately, the future of our nation has been placed in the hands of elite young women who have chosen to thoughtlessly improve their own lives while jeopardizing the future of those that they had the power to assist.

Julie Shiller, 20, of West Orange, N.J., is a junior majoring in sociology at the University of Hartford.

[klva]

It is classic liberalism. Poor women must work, so to be fair, all women must
work.

Equal outcomes for all, regardless of personal ability, motivation, or external
factors like geographic location, marital status, and imcome.

Traditional feminists would be rolling over in their graves. This is hijacked
feminism.

[klva]

Don't forget GLBT studies. That's a real major at my University now.
And to monitor these enlightening programs, we have a new Dean of
Indoctrination.

[usmom]

Full time motherhood IS an improvement over many meaningless careers. Careers are for the purpose of supporting a family; emotional and intellectual gains from them are purely secondary.


Amen to that. I now homeschool my three children and work one day a week while my husband is home with them or my mother-in-law comes over for 4 hours in the afternoon. I can't tell you how much more stimulating and fulfilling staying home and raising/schooling my children is than my job. My job is just a means to an end- a way to make some extra money to help out our family and be able to afford more for our children. I am a college-educated professional and people have hinted that I 'wasted' my time, money and potential, but I really don't care. I made my choice and am doing what makes me happy and is best for my family. I realize I am lucky to be able to do this, but to insinuate that only a 'career' can keep you happy and fulfilled or provide value to society is ridiculous. Maybe when you're young, single and enthusiastic to start out, but when more meaningful things happen in your life (like marriage and kids), you really start to see jobs as what they really are- other people making money off of your hard work and nothing more.

[ninenot]

See Maureen Dowd for Example Number One...

[kalee]

Her perfect soul(less)mate is the 20 year old Andy Weakling who wrote this article http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1515588/posts
posted yesterday. I pray Andy and Julie never meet. Could you imagine their kids?

[ninenot]

So, is there a "feminist manual" that outlines the correct choices for women or what??

Well, there IS a "black person's manual" for how to Think Black, at least in the mind (sic) of certain editorialists.

The Milwaukee asswipe editorialized that Justice Thomas is an "asterisk black" because he does not 'think like a US black [should].'

There's your precedent...

[Mr. Jeeves]

In the Victorian era, women were forced by men to adhere to submissive, weak and emotional roles as a way for males to maintain ultimate control and status.

A critical look at any era of Western Civilization will show that it has been impossible for men as a group to force women as a group to do anything unless a Koran-like code of conduct is in place, backed up by magistrates with beheading swords at the ready. This certainly wasn't the case in Victorian England.

It is much more logical to assume that women chose and accepted Victorian-era roles as a means of maintaining their own power and status within society - allowing men to appear to have the public control while women essentially ran society from behind the scenes. Older women taught younger women how to play the game, and a rough balance of power came about - to the extent a balance was possible in an era with no birth control and minimal medical knowledge.

Feminists threw away all of that to grasp at what men had: the illusion of control and "dominance", as young Julie calls it approvingly. They are only just starting to realize what they gave up by doing so.

[Yaelle]

Undoubtedly, these young "selfish" women choosing to become full time mothers had lovely "unselfish" women as mothers and felt completely abandoned their whole childhoods.

Being a full time mother is the most important profession.

[reformed_dem]

Now young women are choosing to return to the silence.

Silence? Is she serious? I'm a stay-at-home mom. There is absolutely NOTHING silent about me. Ask my husband who runs the household. Ask my husband who takes care of the finances. Ask my husband who knows how and why every penny is spent. I like to joke that he makes the money and I spend it, but seriously, if I left him in charge of the checkbook, he would probably fritter his paycheck away without another thought to other bills and walk around in rags. He is fantastic at supporting us, I know how to budget. We're a team.

[Beaker]

This gal can stuff it.. I can can bet, hands down that she too, is a wealthy privileged little snot with no concept of reality at all. I go to a liberal college where all the girls are JUST LIKE HER. Whiny, ranty, and with no concept of what it's going to be like when they get out of their sheltered little bubble. She has no idea what she's talking about- she only thinks that she does because her like-minded professors tell her so.

That said, there's nothing wrong with having a career if you've worked hard to get one. I'll be getting my degree in chemistry soon, and you can bet that I'm going to enjoy it for a little while. Am I selfish? No. I'm merely enjoying the fruits of my labor. I also want to make sure that I can provide for future children and give them the opportunities that I had to fight and struggle for. And, if it's economically feasible, you can bet when that child comes along that I'm going to to stay home. It's just the responsible thing to do. And by economically feasible I mean making sure that there's food on the table and a roof over our heads. Not working for the sake of having luxuries.

[dakine]

I think all Mothers should work and all Fathers should sit home and eat bon-bons...

[SmoothTalker]

That works too. I was often envious of my wife and wished I could have had the chance to spend so many hours with my children.

[Let's Roll]

Utterly selfish, dishonorable?

Excuse me, but normal people try to live their lives according to what they think is best for them not as cannon fodder for some discredited "cause". These people ARE nuts.

[Salvation]

**Full Time Motherhood?, How Selfish**

No it isn't selfish! This is fulfilling God's plan. (much more important than fulfilling the plan of the secular world!)

[kstewskis]

FReepmailed ya back!

[Verginius Rufus]

More like $120,000 for her sociology degree (going by the figures for tuition and room & board in The World Almanac 2005), minus any financial aid. She could have gotten a sociology degree at a state college in her home state and saved her folks at least $60,000.

[HitmanLV]

I think the basic problem boils down to the authors inability to cope with the idea that many women don't feel the same duty to have a career as she does.

Interestingly, she tacitly frames this duty as a duty to herself and to and the female sex.

Very odd.

[WV Mountain Mama]

I think it is because they have been programmed to believe that in order to be deemed successful, they need to define themselves so they can be compared/judged to a standard by other people. It is easy to judge a person in the workforce because they get promoted, raises, bonuses, etc. How can a successful mother be judged? It has too many intangible qualities that can't really be compared to other people. How can you really judge a clean house? A good meal? I try to make most of my foods from scratch with store bought ingredients, but I get a starch, veggie and main dish for the dinner every night. Does this make me better than a mom who heats prepackaged dinners with all a starch, veggie and main course included or worse than a mom who gardens all the ingredients. It can really only be judged by yourself, kids and (gasp) the hubby. There is no outside recognition, no promotion (except having more kids, which is my hubby's joke) no pay raise.

What probably threatens them the most though is that I am comfortable enough in my own skin, I don't need to be defined by someone else, which is not what they were programmed to believe. I have my own self worth, which is independent of another's opinion of me. Which is precisely the repression that they were programmed they needed to overcome to begin with.

Of course, who knows what those nutters think! :)

[Seizure]

The decision to fulfill one's self by willfully caring for one's family is a source of strength for many women. I am quite confident and comfortable with who I am. I do not need to prove anything to the world for the sake of women.

My father and mother immersed themselves in full-time corporate careers. I am an only child. I saw my parents for three hours per day during the week. During the weekend, my parents spent time winding down and resting. Being a latchkey child, I had far more responsibility than my peers.

My parents were the shining model of the American work ethic. Although I understood my mother's desire to work, it was disappointing when other parents were at the recital but mine. I auditioned for the cheer-leading team in high school. My mother informed me that she would not be able to accommodate the practice or event schedule. The same applied for the dance team.

My parents and I love one another a great deal. My now husband and I were going to be separated by the Gulf War when we were dating. So, we were married away from our families. One afternoon my mother broke down and sobbed and said, "I was never there for you. I have been an awful mother. We barely even know each other. One day you were my little girl and the next day you were no longer there. I missed it all."

My husband and I decided that our best course was for me to be a devoted mother and wife. Then our children would know without one doubt that we care for them because they , other than God, are our priority.

Before anyone assumes that I am some well-to-do woman with a lot of time and money on my hands, I will inform you that I am not. My husband earns a gross of $33,600. God provides for our needs.

It isn't that men relegate and debase women by "making" them care for the family. That is a task given to women by God. I am being obedient to my creator and I am filled with joy and satisfaction. God is above man, man is above woman. I am honored to care for my husband, our children, and our home. I receive strength from the Lord and my husband.

I have seen women who have forgone marriage and family for the sake of a career. They realize, with pain, that a husband and children was something they wanted deeply but were afraid of being derided by "enlightened, free" women.

I recall a conversation that the salutatorian had with the valedictorian of my graduating class. We were seated at the lunch table when he asked her what she planned on doing after graduation. She told him that she was going to get married and have a family. He asked, "Why are you going to waste your life? What is the point of being awarded valedictorian if you're going to do nothing with yourself?"

Hmm...that is exactly what feminists, who should realize that women choose to be devoted to their families, say about many fine, strong women across our nation.

[JoeFromSidney]

By the way, let's do the math. How much does it cost to have a live in nanny, now add in a house keeper to do the laundry twice a week, clean the house 3 times a week (we are talking about top to bottom cleaning, not just one room), and a full time chef. Let's use an approximate cost of $800/week. The cost of childcare alone in the daycare I worked for would be $400/week for my children for a 6 am to 6 pm day.

Just over 40 years ago I spent two years in Thailand with the Air Force. We had household help: a girl to do the laundry, one to clean the house, and a driver. We needed them because my wife's health was poor and the tropical environment took a toll on her. Besides, I didn't want to risk driving in Bangkok traffic (left hand side of the road, crazy Thai drivers, etc.)

Cost was low, easily covered by our housing allowance. However, I swore that I'd never have servants again if I could possibly help it, no matter how inexpensive they were. It was like having three more children in the house. We were glad to get back to the Land of the Big PX, where we didn't need household help.

I just don't understand people who want nannies, gardeners, etc. I know, it takes all kinds, but some kinds are a bit strange.