By leaving we don't stop living you know
Last week, I went to lunch with one of my friends. She is many things to me, but one of the labels that might be useful in considering this story is that she also happens to be a single (and awesome) mother to one of Grizzlewick’s little friends.
Recently, she has been struggling a bit with what to do with her life, and pondering her direction for the future. After looking for work for some time, at the beginning of the year she managed to find a difficult and poorly paid job. The job required a huge learning curve, was reasonably depressing and without many opportunities for advancement, when and if that was what she wanted to do. But she rationalised that she was doing some night-study, and she has a mortgage and bills to pay: in short, she needed the work. The workplace didn’t miss a chance, despite offering her the job, to remind her how poorly she was performing. Nor how much of a privilege it was for her to have the job at all.
She has stayed in the job though because she is acutely aware of what it is to be a single mother drawing a pension and relying on child support. She fights hard against the judgement she feels from others in her life: that as a single mother she is a lesser mother. She has worked steadily to ensure that her home is one of care and welcome. For his part, her former partner is committed to their child, and to this point their care arrangements have been genial.
A few weeks ago however, she applied for and was offered a much better job. The job she was offered not only utilised her many skills, built up over 14 years of experience, but also offered significantly more money. Like many good things that come to us, there was a catch: the job was full-time.
Feeling pleased to have gotten the job, but concerned to keep her former partner informed, she wrote him an email to let him know. She outlined in detail her reasons for taking the job, and the advantages she thought it had for she and her child.
Ten minutes later, he phoned.
Not to congratulate her on an ace new job.
Not to share his concern about what might need to be put in place, and work through the changed need for childcare arrangements.
But to accuse her of being “selfish” and “uncaring”.
I understand he managed to resist the temptation to call her a bad mother. I hope he doesn’t expect too much praise for his restraint.
At the heart of his argument about her new job is that she has a responsibility to provide maximum care (measured in hours) to their child.
Acknowledging that he had a right to be concerned about the child’s care arrangements, she suggested that if he were concerned about the amount of hours their child spent away from its parents, he had the kind of job in which it was possible to work a smaller time-fraction, should he choose to do so.
Ah, no.
Apparently, it’s inappropriate to ask men to reduce their work-time to look after children. And anyway, this wasn’t about him. And apparently, despite the fact that his debts are lower and his wage higher, he can’t afford to work less than full time.
I don’t mind people having strong opinions about the care of children. But I do mind “all care, no responsibility”. For the past five years, he has relied on my friend to be the full-time carer for their child. He has enjoyed a respite from primary care, and has not suffered in the advancement of his career, something which has come at least in part, to her detriment. Despite their long-term separation, she has committed to this whole-heartedly, with good grace and good humour. She, like most mothers, loves her child and enjoys parenting, despite the difficulties it sometimes presents.
My gut reaction to his reaction is that it’s an extremely privileged response, and creates mothers as the only possible carers, and certainly suggests that they are the ones best placed to make sacrifices for their kids.
However, as a mother who has shared, almost down to the hour, the care of her own child, I am firmly of the belief that some people have the kind of jobs where they can make a choice about participating more actively in parenting. And certainly my friend’s former partner is one of these people. Some choose to take this option, some don’t.
Is it that he just doesn’t want to?
Or is it not so much that he doesn’t want to, but that he wants her to feel obliged to do it more than any parental desire he himself feels?
Is it, as one friend claims, that he feels that her relative financial security will “leave him out of the loop”, or somehow diminish his power?
Everyone makes choices, and it’s clear in this instance he doesn’t like her choice. But with equal (in fact, given her new job, more) capacity to solve this problem, why does he not see it as equally his problem to solve?
Given that there is no disadvantage to him in what is being proposed, that he has the capacity to solve this “problem” and will not, is this just a case of sexism and adherence to gender roles?
Or am I just a careerist shrew who thinks all men should get back in the kitchen where they belong*?
* NB not what I really think, however I will admit to having a hankering for awesome home made meat pie.....
* winks at Mr Fix *
Recently, she has been struggling a bit with what to do with her life, and pondering her direction for the future. After looking for work for some time, at the beginning of the year she managed to find a difficult and poorly paid job. The job required a huge learning curve, was reasonably depressing and without many opportunities for advancement, when and if that was what she wanted to do. But she rationalised that she was doing some night-study, and she has a mortgage and bills to pay: in short, she needed the work. The workplace didn’t miss a chance, despite offering her the job, to remind her how poorly she was performing. Nor how much of a privilege it was for her to have the job at all.
She has stayed in the job though because she is acutely aware of what it is to be a single mother drawing a pension and relying on child support. She fights hard against the judgement she feels from others in her life: that as a single mother she is a lesser mother. She has worked steadily to ensure that her home is one of care and welcome. For his part, her former partner is committed to their child, and to this point their care arrangements have been genial.
A few weeks ago however, she applied for and was offered a much better job. The job she was offered not only utilised her many skills, built up over 14 years of experience, but also offered significantly more money. Like many good things that come to us, there was a catch: the job was full-time.
Feeling pleased to have gotten the job, but concerned to keep her former partner informed, she wrote him an email to let him know. She outlined in detail her reasons for taking the job, and the advantages she thought it had for she and her child.
Ten minutes later, he phoned.
Not to congratulate her on an ace new job.
Not to share his concern about what might need to be put in place, and work through the changed need for childcare arrangements.
But to accuse her of being “selfish” and “uncaring”.
I understand he managed to resist the temptation to call her a bad mother. I hope he doesn’t expect too much praise for his restraint.
At the heart of his argument about her new job is that she has a responsibility to provide maximum care (measured in hours) to their child.
Acknowledging that he had a right to be concerned about the child’s care arrangements, she suggested that if he were concerned about the amount of hours their child spent away from its parents, he had the kind of job in which it was possible to work a smaller time-fraction, should he choose to do so.
Ah, no.
Apparently, it’s inappropriate to ask men to reduce their work-time to look after children. And anyway, this wasn’t about him. And apparently, despite the fact that his debts are lower and his wage higher, he can’t afford to work less than full time.
I don’t mind people having strong opinions about the care of children. But I do mind “all care, no responsibility”. For the past five years, he has relied on my friend to be the full-time carer for their child. He has enjoyed a respite from primary care, and has not suffered in the advancement of his career, something which has come at least in part, to her detriment. Despite their long-term separation, she has committed to this whole-heartedly, with good grace and good humour. She, like most mothers, loves her child and enjoys parenting, despite the difficulties it sometimes presents.
My gut reaction to his reaction is that it’s an extremely privileged response, and creates mothers as the only possible carers, and certainly suggests that they are the ones best placed to make sacrifices for their kids.
However, as a mother who has shared, almost down to the hour, the care of her own child, I am firmly of the belief that some people have the kind of jobs where they can make a choice about participating more actively in parenting. And certainly my friend’s former partner is one of these people. Some choose to take this option, some don’t.
Is it that he just doesn’t want to?
Or is it not so much that he doesn’t want to, but that he wants her to feel obliged to do it more than any parental desire he himself feels?
Is it, as one friend claims, that he feels that her relative financial security will “leave him out of the loop”, or somehow diminish his power?
Everyone makes choices, and it’s clear in this instance he doesn’t like her choice. But with equal (in fact, given her new job, more) capacity to solve this problem, why does he not see it as equally his problem to solve?
Given that there is no disadvantage to him in what is being proposed, that he has the capacity to solve this “problem” and will not, is this just a case of sexism and adherence to gender roles?
Or am I just a careerist shrew who thinks all men should get back in the kitchen where they belong*?
* NB not what I really think, however I will admit to having a hankering for awesome home made meat pie.....
* winks at Mr Fix *
posted by gigglewick at
12:52 pm
13 Comments:
*stops stalking & comments for once*
The current system of Child Support, whilst it has its merits *cough* seems to have provided a guide for family breakups that seems to be considered acceptable. The mother accepts the burden and looks after the child/ren whilst the father goes off to work and forks over a decided portion of his pay, and collects the children on alternate weekends. It seems to me society has accepted that this is adequate, instead of the worst-case-scenario that this should be.
This model should be viewed as a starting point, not the be all and end all it has become. Fathers who meet this criteria seem to feel they have contributed sufficiently, and those who contribute slightly in excess seem to want to be viewed as heroes. I'm sorry, but no, your not. You cannot be considered a hero for simply living up to your half of the responsibility, especially because you ARENT if all you are doing is paying the minimum prescribed amount and visiting the minimum prescribed days. Consider what you would have been contributing had you not seperated? More than this, surely? Both in time and money?
While there are some outstanding parents, and some exceptions to the norm, the fact for the majority is that the mother is left to do most of the parenting alone, and with the stigma attached by society as well. And you know what? You cant tell which men are single dads during the week, but you can spot a single mum a mile off and give her your dissapproving glare - and trust me, she see's it. And when you DO see a dad out there with the pram/kids in tow, what looks does he cop? Thats right, approving ones, for doing "his part".
Humpf.
And for all those awesome upstanding dads who have seperated and pay their child support on time, visit and call the kids whenever they can, help out with extra money when its needed, and are available when the mum stumbles accross a parenting problem she doesnt know how to solve and can be relied on to give assistance..... well....there are those who dont. There are fathers who have never paid a cent, who have never called, never visited, never offered any idea on what to do when the little buggers being a right shit and all you want to do is smack his bum 6 ways from sunday.....
And there's obviously some who cant offer a congratulations when the mother has done something for hers AND her childs benefit, and can only add to the burden she already feels. Because I guarantee she already questioned her decision to not be that stay-at-home mum he clearly wants, but wont assist in providing.
(sorry for the rant, but geez it gets me going!)
This gets me going as well (and maybe I am a careerist shrew but then who doesn't want a meat pie).
I work with a guy who spends his life complaining how his ex wife has let herself go, despite how much money he pays her. Whenever I see her around she looks exhausted and strung out. He on the other hand saunters through life, seeing the kids every weekend with help of a nanny and buying them ridiculous looking trendy clothes that fit his (highly paid profesional man in control) image. Oh it makes me so mad I want to push him under a tram.
Oh dear, I feel I am so caught up with my own access/childcare/CSA/ex-hubby dramas that I can't comment in an impartial enough manner.
But some men are just difficult, or are so capable of compartmentalising their lives that they don't realise how arse-like their behaviour is. This guy sounds like he's trying to punish her for making a stand and trying for a different future... and probably reducing her financial dependence on him, which would undermine his position of power. Because Child Support is a funny old thing.
It doesn't sound like he's thought this through, and his initial reaction is one of self interest.
But... I don't know. I just hope she tells him to bag his head!
Firstly, congratulations to your friend for getting a good job. After 5 years of primarily being a mum it is extremely hard to find a job that uses your skills.
Secondly, the man is just being a moron with an unrealistic expectation of your friend and how the modern world works. I hope that she ignores him and continues to celebrate her good fortune.
epskee,
thanks for de-lurking.
In answer to the point you raise: this isn't exclusive to dads who are separated from their partners, plenty of dads in nuclear families seem to think that picking up a sock deserves an academy award. Or perhaps that's A-dad-emy.
MsBat,
Welcome back.
I want to reiterate, it's not that this guy is a bad father, nor has he been unsupportive in the past.
And the point you raise isn't exclusive to dads either, how about grandparents who buy $500 toys for kids when what they really need is a new pair of shoes or swimming lessons?
AB,
I think she already has. It's not that she doesn't have her child's interests at heart, either, just that at this point she needs to make foundation decisions for the rest of their lives...
KR,
I know! She is awesome though. As I said to a friend yesterday, I'd marry her.
In answer to your second point: yes.
On a broader note, I observe that everyone has assumed that she has thought this through and weighed her options before taking the job. This assumption is correct.
I guess I'm left wondering now if there is anyone out there who thinks he has a point. The prevailing view is that mothers should care for their children as much as possible. That isn't how we've arranged our family, but does that make me some kind of alterna-freak (and of course, Mr Fix an emasculated Mr Mum?)
Maybe if there IS someone who feels he has a point, they wouldn't necessarily feel comfortable saying that... Because at the end of the day what he's saying is that HIS work is more important than HERS. As HERS simply is, and always will be, simply in relation to, or in opposition with, her role as mother.
And that ain't right.
I know someone in a much more 'high powered' (if you will) job that the gentleman of whom we speak, who has immediately upon finding himself in the same position, changed his work hours in order to care for his children. As he bloody well should.
/rant.
That went somewhere entirely different from where I was intending.
I think that it is so disgusting that women are just expected to put their lives on hold for children, while men aren't. I'm not a feminist, really I'm not (most of the time), but I have huge issues with the idea that a women has to stop living once she has a child.
I'm not saying that having children doesn't change your life - it's supposed to! But that doesn't mean that your friend can't find a job that she enjoys, that pays well and make a plan to take it becasue it'll make her happy, as well as taking off the financial pressure.
I'm not sure what I'm actually saying right now so I'm going to stop before this ebcomes a 10-page rant about everything in the world. Pelase excuse me, it's been a bad day!
Being a single father of 2 children, one being 4yrs and the other 18 mnths I personally long for the day when Australia moves from the antequated family values presently held to a perspective closer to those of the northern European countries such as Norway.
In Norway a couple can take the first twelve months of a childs life off as paid parental leave. In fact to gain access to the full twelve months of leave the father must take at least 4 of those months, the mother can take the other 8. Once both parents return to work, which is the norm, they have access to reasonably costed childcare and flexible work hours to fit in around the family timetable. I have had reschedule a number of teleconferences with Norwegians around the dropping off and pickup of children from preschool which is totally acceptable over there. It's not here, is it? While the mother is still the primary carer there is not the gigantic divide in care responsiblilies that we find in our society.
I'm lucky, working for a Scandi company and a sensitive boss who supports the flexing of my hours to drop and pick up the boys as well as work from home 1 day a week so little son doesn't have to go to childcare. I was able to work from home a day a week when the big boys was born so my then partner could go back to Uni to finish her degree.
Again, I am lucky, blessed even.
Not all men see it this way. Not all employers see it this way either. My Dad was a hands on Dad which was passed on to my brother and I. Even then I have fallen into the old chauvist trap of the unequal distribution of care from time to time.
The point I am trying to get to is that Australia as a society supports the unequal distribution of care between the sexes. This is nothing new. Our work ethic also gets in the way as well. It is well known in project management circles that if you want a hard working team use Australians. Just don't expect them to come back for another project because they will be burnt out from the previous project. So our work culture supports unequal distribution of care as well. The status of carers also supports the unequal distribution of care.
rant...
I think we are at least a generation away from a major shift but that shift needs to happen. Shared care will really mean shared care. I hope.
My kids still want Mum when they are sick and count her house as home, but that doesn't mean I don't have a responsibility of care for them.
Aaargh! Someone whack that man (not you, Sirius, the one in the OP) very hard over the head with a giant cluestick, maybe a clue-baseball bat.
You tell a good story, Gigglewick.
AB,
It's cool, really.
Helen,
I AM (feminist). All of the time. But that doesn't mean that he's not being a prize idiot.
I.S.,
Thanks so much for weighing in - Mr Fix was just saying this morning that he feels under a lot of pressure to be a breadwinner, even though I don't put that pressure on him. There are all kinds of things at play in our constructions of families and working lives, I think.
Helen,
I may use the phrase "clue-stick" frequently. And thank you. Now if only there was a campfire we could crouch around....
Right then my two pen'orth (as me mum would say).
1) Good on you friend for making the decisions she has to provide the best she can for her family.
2) I wholeheartedly support Sirius' views having been a stay at home dad for the last year and only recently returning to my job part time. Australia certainly seems to me to be a pretty backward nation when it comes to its views on the family and gender roles in society. But I would like to point out that those looks when you are out down the park playing with your child and you're the only man in the playground aren't always admiration, often they are looks of suspicion as to why a full grown man is playing with a child. Sorry but that's been my experience and it took me around three months to really win the confidence of some of the members of the playgroup my daughter goes to. They thought it was 'funny' that I would choose to stay at home and look after my little girl. Anyway that's another post in itself.
3) The bloke who's giving his ex a hard time is frankly being a cock. He should grow up a little and stop being so selfish and remember that...
4) Like puppies, a child is for life, not just for Christmas.
Oh hang on that was 4p wasn't it. Apologies for rambling.
hmmm i am sure i left a comment here. dang. anyway what i have to say probably doesnt matter but isnt the whole point about being a feminist wanting 'equality' rather than superiority over men. surely the parenting role should be equally shared by both parents and a fair whack of respect for whoever takes on the larger part or sacrifices stuff they would rather not in order to do so.
That's exactly why I don't refer to myself as being 'feminist' as far as I'm concerned everyone should be treated as equal. Most of the feminists I've met seem to want to destroy all privileges for men and I find that wanting superiority will just lead to more problems.
In a nutshell: the guy is being a jerk. The world is more likely to take his side than hers. And that is very wrong. The problem is not with men, but in perceptions in the world in general. For every male chauvinist out there, there is a women who secretly feels guilty that she wants to live her life. And that is what we must change.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home