. . . Since we've talked about feminism and motherhood. The original posts that got me thinking about the ways feminists talk about motherhood were about the prohibition of children from certain spaces and the relegation of children to private spaces based on an inferiority of children. One commenter actually said that she considered herself to be raising her children to become human. This is an interesting extension of the argument that says a fetus isn't human--in her construct, she could easily justify the infanticide of ancient Greece and Rome--or of that girl who gave birth in the bathroom during prom. Clearly, she was exaggerating (I hope). Just as clearly, many, many of these women have some psychological problem that makes them resent and lash out against the smallest, least protected, most powerless members of our society who are still acknowledged as such. So we'll suggest that this is a personal problem shared by this substantial group of individuals who also happen to gather together under the label of "feminist." We will further concede that this group is perhaps a bit extreme in their not wanting to be disturbed by children--or by women talking to their children--in the grocery stores. Having made a great number of concessions, I have a few observations to make.
Academia is a very flexible career choice. If one wants to be in a 40+ hour a week desk job, one has the option of administration. However, many academic administrators work considerably less than that. If one wants to split one's time between editorial duties with a journal and teach a class or two, that is an option also. If one has what is considered a "good" teaching load as a tenure-track professor, one likely teaches 2-3 courses a semester. Once tenured, this might decrease further. If one has taught the same class multiple times, one is usually able to teach without much time spent preparing. Then, there is the research requirement, which can be accomplished anywhere. Conferences are like mini-vacations for those who can afford them and are accustomed to them, though for a beginner and one with a modest income, they can afford considerable stress.
Enter children. Or, consider children if they happen to exist already. Clearly, an administrative job would provide challenges for someone who wanted to spend a significant amount of time parenting. If one has a teaching job, however, it is possible for the number of hours actually spent away from the home to resemble a part-time rather than a full-time job. It is even possible, with departmental cooperation, to make one's schedule family friendly by working only 2 or 3 days a week, or by working mornings or evenings only (perhaps alternating with a spouse) and spending the remaining time with one's children. Children might even accompany the parent to office hours, meetings with students, less important departmental meetings, film showings, lectures or other after-hours activities (this would of course depend on the age and behavior of th child(ren) involved). This is challenging, but has its rewards. Research can be done in the presence of children just as easily as housework was traditionally--not that I'm saying that this was/is always easy. Clearly there are good hours and bad hours, and good days and bad days. But you know what? That article or whatever can be written with the kids--at least, if you don't procrastinate like me!!--and if you don't blame the kids for taking up too much of your time, and if you're not afraid to let them entertain themselves, or to stop when they need your attention. It can be done--just as easily as blogging with kids. The presence of children does not preclude intellectual activity. Conferences are rare, but can be turned into family vacations, with the other spouse filling in time gaps while the attendee is in sessions. Or if not, what's a weekend away once a year? Not too traumatic. (But don't--for God's sake DON'T--breastfeed in an MLA session!! I can't remember the name of the audacious academic who pulled that "stunt," but I have it on good authority--good feminist authority--that one simply can not do that!!--The horrors!!)
I have been asked point-blank if my children are in day-care. I have said no. And I have been asked how I get any work done. I have been told about the impossibilities of working on anything with (a) child(ren) around--all by other women. All by my peers. And I have been doing this for 10 years. Well, unless you count all that time when I was living at home with 5 siblings helping my mom go to school while I was an undergraduate. In that case, I've been doing it much longer. I have not asked how they afford 40-hour child care. I don't want to know. I can't, and I really don't want to try. But I am a fairly lone figure pushing my stroller on a regular basis through the halls of the department. My children are well known by all who see them--and this has been my modus operandi since I stepped into the building almost (God help me!) 8 years ago. Others have their children with them sometimes, but only occasionally, whether to show off, or because of a school/daycare holiday, or illness. But I maintain that it doesn't really have to be like this. Children don't have to be relegated to the care of others. It all depends on our perception of where they belong, with what they interfere. Truly--I believe it is a matter of perception. And that's where I think feminism has some part to play. Unless one wants to say that it could have a pro-child part to play but doesn't. But the idea that children, who once were the responsibility of women but need not be, should be relegated to other spaces to make room for women's own goals, needs, desires, whatever, certainly is something that feminism has fought hard to achieve.
Women in academia are supposed to be feminist. No one will dispute that. It's one of those "well, she's intelligent, so she must agree with this. . ." These assumptions run rampant through academia. The assumptions that children are a burden, make life difficult, and should be relegated to a space apart from one's career are assumptions that accompany women's presence in the workplace. While some may disagree, this is rare. I have known professors to keep their children in after-care daily rather than have them at home with the parents (both academics) when the parents' schedules ended earlier than a 5 P.M. day. I have seen children kept in child care situations "just in case" meetings or other activities should come up. On the other hand, I have met two academics--a single father and a mother (possibly separated--I'm not sure) who, in their early days of tenure-track, brought their children with them to class, office hours, after hours situations. These are the professors I admire, as they balanced their career goals and their family goals, standing up for their children's rights to exist, to exist in public, and to be with their parents. What may have been borne of difficult situations turned into triumph for all involved. And we just need to acknowledge that children can co-exist with parental ambition, and that difficult situations involving children can turn into occasions of triumph. But does feminism teach this, really?
13 comments:
The scenario you describe is rather foreign to my own academic experience.
I went to the University of Dallas, a private Catholic college, as an undergrad and I felt like many more professors there prioritized their families and integrated their children into campus culture. It was not an uncommon sight to see kids running around on the campus mall, playing quietly in a corner of a departmental office, etc. And students were often more than willing to provide free or incredibly inexpensive babysitting services during class times and meeting times.
I wonder how much of a gap there is in academic culture between large, public institutions such as UT Austin and smaller, private schools? Or is it just a Catholic school thing?
It's sad that so many academics turn to full-time childcare and that you are the lone mother who sees the possibility of combining the two lifestyles.
I know it definitely can be done. One of my good girlfriends is the child of two academics. She spent most of her early childhood on college campuses as her parents finished their degrees and began their teaching careers. Other grad students were frequently her babysitters and she was quite at home in academic life. Not surprisingly, she went on to become a teacher herself and her husband is finishing his PhD and they will begin a second generation of kids raised in the halls of academia.
I've got another friend who finished her PhD coursework as she was finishing her first pregnancy. Now she just took her comps the week before her third child was born. She's now ABD and the mother of three beautiful kids. Her husband is a tenure-track professor and they don't resort to daycare for the kids; but juggle their schedules so that everything gets done.
You know it isn't only moms who work part time who resort to leaving their children in childcare. I've heard many stories of stay-at-home moms who regularly leave their children in childcare several days a week so that they don't interfere in mom's social life.
It seems to me the root problem is that motherhood is not valued and spending time with children is, like you said, seen as a burden instead of a delight. Ultimately both mothers and children lose.
Don't be too quick to judge those who choose to put their child(ren) in daycare. Once again, we're faced with a parenting choice.
I'm glad that you've been able to work while keeping your children out of daycare, but daycare is not an evil institution. Supadiscobaby loves his daycare center, his caregivers, and the other babies in his class. In fact, I've found that he gets a bit cranky and bored after spending a week at home with mom and dad!
In addition to providing a safe place for baby to learn and play while we work, I find that daycare also gives us much needed baby-free time--which makes our time with Supadiscobaby more focused on him. And, no, we can't really afford daycare (thank you, student loans), but we also can't afford to stay in school for additional years while we work around Supadiscobaby's willingness and ability to entertain himself.
Yes, I'm in awe of those parents whose children stay at home with them--particularly when they're able to get work done! I know myself, however, and I know that I cannot concentrate on writing a diss while listening to Supadiscobaby's happy playing sounds in the other room. When he's around, I want to be around him :)
In a way, yes, Supadiscobaby is "relegated to other spaces" to make room for his parents' goals. But this isn't because we don't think he belongs in "public." His happiness is supremely important, and he is far happier playing with his friends at daycare than he is accompanying me to school or playing by himself in his room while Mommy and Daddy work. And I wholeheartedly disagree with your statement that feminism has fought hard to make it possible to get the kids out of the way so moms can work. What *true* feminism has fought for is the right to choose: keep the kids at home or use daycare; breastfeed or not; have kids or not; marry or not; work outside the home or inside the home; and so on...
It is not sad for a child to be in daycare when said daycare provides a stimulating, nurturing, and safe environment. My decision to put my child in daycare does not make me a bad mother. In fact, I would argue that it makes me a better mother than I would be if he wasn't in daycare. When I say "better" I don't mean to place myself in competition with mothers who make different choices (and don't *all* mothers make different choices, really?). I just mean it in terms of my own parenting. No one prioritizes their child more than I do. But part of that prioritizing includes making sure that I will be able to provide for him financial and emotionally in the future. Being able to pursue my career goals (and being able to finish in a "timely manner") is a big part of that.
Supadiscomama,
Yeah, I used student loans to keep my son in part-time preschool and Montessori through 3rd grade, but that's still cheaper than what it costs to keep a baby in full-time child care. I definitely couldn't afford it, even with financial aid. But I feel that for the first few years, the best place for a child is with his/her parents. I am aware of all of the research that says that daycare is just as good, etc.; I just can't see it. And my situation--having to work around kids my entire life--is certainly unique these days, but it taught me that it could be done. When my son was younger, my husband & I alternated our schedules or coursework & assistantships--rather like my mom & I did when I was getting my B.A. Now, I am able to teach in the evenings, which is great, since he has a full-time job. It's what works for me, and what I feel works best for all of us. I also have this problem--I don't really trust the "nurturing" of the child care providers. But I grew up on stories of neglect and abuse being uncovered at child care centers, and I'm just a suspicious person by nature. I've even read a story that someone posted not too long ago about her husband being moved to tears by the sight of their young baby staring into space in a baby swing in the daycare. Why should this be sad if it doesn't go against what we feel is right and want to do? Granted, at a young age, stimulus is limited, but possible, just with eye contact between baby and parent. I guess I believe in attachment parenting, and the research is there to support me, too. Interestingly, parenting is one of the only areas in which statistics can affirm just about ANY choice that a parent makes!
While feminism has certainly afforded us choice, I maintain that it has affirmed one choice over the other. And that choice is to keep children and careers separate.
What our personal reasons are for choosing the way we do is a different matter, and you sound confident & together in your choice. Kudos! I'm glad you were able to find child care you are happy with. I believe that when Supadiscobaby was little, you specifically chose the facility that you did because it was close and allowed you to run over & breastfeed throughout the day. I thought that was GREEEAAAT, actually!
I did once propose a child-care exchange of sorts among grad students, but did not hear back from anyone, perhaps because child care is an easier and ready-made option, however expensive.
Melanie,
I have actually wondered if a Catholic institution would be more family-friendly than what I have perceived around me in the past 8 years. I was a bit dismayed when I tried to attend a Catholic academic conference of sorts--a colloquium of sorts with workshops & round tables discussing what it means to be a "Catholic Academic"--and found that the director actively discouraged people from bringing their children, whom he thought would provide too much of a distraction for the attendee. So the attitude is present among academics in various circles, certainly. I am happy to hear of your experiences at University of Dallas. It is a fear of mine that I will not find a position with a family-friendly university, and that if Catholic teachings on "openness to life" come to fruition in my life (more than they already have, I mean), I will face serious complications... I would like to think that a Catholic university would be accepting of such things, but with what I've heard on the blogs about Catholic universities, I can't really be sure.
I think that being a child on a college campus is a wonderful thing. My mom was in college off & on while I was growing up, and I have fond memories of going with her to register for classes, buying ping-pong balls from the vending machine in the P.E. building, and I know (though I don't remember) that I was brought to a child psych class and observed informally from time to time... I hope my children remember these experiences fondly. One thing I remember feeling when I was older was a sense of being very comfortable on a college campus--I attributed it to the early exposure.
I also know moms like the ones you mention who leave their children in child care in order to shop, or play tennis, or whatever (those are real examples from around here). Now I do think that some time away is fine, healthy, and necessary, even to socialize, and that when they are older, a couple of days a week in mother's-day-out is fine. But on a level, this, too, is based on the idea that nothing can be accomplished in the presence of children.
_______________
Incidently, I have be here a while, but for M.A. (with thesis) and Ph.D. I also had some setbacks with my committee. I certainly don't attribute being slightly off schedule to the presence of my little one! Now, my terrible work ethic, maybe...
You might keep in mind that what works best for your family doesn't necessarily work best for all families. As Supadiscomama pointed out, feminism has given women a great deal of choices, even women who aren't feminists. But I don't think the only choice is to keep career and children separate. I've taken my child with me to meetings with my advisor, to conferences, and even on a rare occasion to class. Again, my choices probably aren't the ones you would make, and vice versa. That, however, doesn't mean I--or anyone who makes choices different from yours--to be berated or judged for my choices. The divide you talk about seems a lot like the working-mom vs. the stay-at-home-mom argument. There are plausible, healthy solutions for every individual, not for everyone unilaterally.
And yet it's not "what works best for my family," it's what I believe in and what I choose to uphold in my life--the attitude I choose to have and promote. And it does, indeed, involve judgment. But I admit that I believe in this. Doesn't feminism uphold my right to believe differently and promote my beliefs? Or am I obligated to keep my mouth shut?
Can we examine, for a moment, the difference between saying, "this is what's best for me" and saying, "I do things this way because it's what I believe in" or "I believe that this is the best way to do the things that I do"?
And I don't suppose anyone would do things differently if the an atmosphere conducive to children were more pervasive?
I do wonder when contrasting the way I do things with the way others do things to make a point became "berating". . .
Of course you're not obligated to keep your mouth shut. You just have to be prepared to have people ignore you, think you are mean-spirited, wrong, insensitive, etc. It comes with the territory of judging other people's lifestyle's and choices. Your cause is very personal and it can be very hurtful (as can a bunch of other causes) because it deals with a very sensitive topic - how a mother should mother her child. As mothers, we get very defensive when told what we are doing is wrong, could be better, or whatever. How would you feel if somone told you you are setting your children up for dependency? I don't think you would like it. I think you would be offended; some of the women you "preach" to about the presence of children feel the same way.
No one claims to be the perfect mother; the women you are dialoguing with (working mothers who plan to continue working) don't claim to be perfect or to have the right answers. We're all just getting by the best we can.
By the way, just because you believe in a cause does not mean that cause is right for everyone or even right period. You can advocate whatever cause you want and feel deep in your heart it's the right one. Be careful with the rhetoric of "it's what I believe and choose to uphold in my life" because statements like those defy logical reasoning. You are essentially saying that you are not changing your mind and that you are closed to argument. I don't think that's what you want to communicate. The reason rhetoric like that scares me is that that exact same statemnt was used when an elderly man at a wedding told me my husband and I should not be dating because we are not of the same cultural background. It was judgemental, hurtful, offensive, backward, and so many other adjectives. However, it wasn't worth arguing with this gentleman because "it was just his belief." Well, heck, some beliefs are just WRONG.
P.S. Feminism does uphold your right to believe differently and promote your beliefs... However, when you are essentially saying that all women should make "my choice", (as opposed to saying "most women should" or "this works best for my family") you are essentially arguing to restrict female's choices such as the book Get to Work which pushes the boundaries in the other direction from what you are saying. Therefore expect many feminists to believe you are in direct opposition to them and respond accordingly with their own beliefs. (Expecially if you're arguing that women should always take some action that feminists had to work hard to give women the choice not to do.)
-John
To clarify, the comment before my P.S. was actually my wife's ("C.") and not me. I was just trying to explain why I thought this subject seemed to be getting everyone riled up. (we really should start using different accounts at some point - expecially if she's going to discuss feminism)
Oh, I have no problem with any of this. And my feelings are far from being hurt. What I find most interesting is that the points I'm trying to make are being bypassed in favor of the old "don't judge other people" thing. Well, sometimes advocating what you feel is best involves making judgments. It's called having principles and standing up for them. If that makes me intolerant, call the P.C. police. Or go over to the blogs I refer to in my original post on this subject and see who's more tolerant--me, or those enlightened souls.
Bottom line--some of our opinions on this subject are influenced by the fact that children are not well-tolerated in certain situations. I'm not sure why this is so offensive a point. To extend--we might have more options if children were better tolerated. It's when I sacrifice the Sacred Cow of Feminism that I really shake people up. If I were saying these things in the name of feminism, no one would care--as long as I didn't say that I believe that all children benefit from being around their parents while they are young. THAT would be bad.
P.S.--Lest "M" think I was referring to her, my "don't breastfeed in an MLA session" was in response to an anecdote delivered by a certain Dr. R about a well-established scholar trying to make a statement.
I'm not really saying other women should choose like me, btw. I'm just saying that my choices are different, not influenced by the prevailing mindset, and it would be nice if the prevailing mindset were different.
How about those women who are condemned because their decisions are based on patriarchy or patriarchal institutions? Isn't that a judgment on what they choose to believe? Especially when religion comes into the picture? Sure, none of the commentors here may be personally guilty of this--I wouldn't really know. But we've all seen examples of it. And the mindset is that that kind of judgment is O.K., because these poor women don't realized they're oppressed. So while we're judging their decisions, we're calling them ignorant, too. Nice.
Well, heck, some beliefs are just WRONG.
Let me introduce you to the false analogy: Well, heck, is the belief that children benefit from the presence of their parents more than their absence and the presence of strangers just WRONG? Perhaps if their parents are neglectful or abusive, but I have had to make certain assumptions. Perhaps we can break this down using the Toulmin method and analyze warrants?
By the way, I just noticed your icon. Very cute. I like!
By the way, I just noticed your icon. Very cute. I like!
Hee hee! I made it on the meez site that Entropy linked to! It seemed appropriate! ;)
Post a Comment