• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Margie ClaymanMargie Clayman

Marietta, OH

  • About Me
  • Marketing
  • Librarianship
  • Random Musings
  • Contact Me

#WomenWednesday Who Loves Children More Than Women?

December 28, 2011 by Margie Clayman 13 Comments

How many posts have you seen recently that went something like this:

“Well, women don’t really want to be in higher management positions. Men are happy to work more hours, but women feel more tied to being home with the children. Jobs that prevent themselves from doing that are not desirable.”

Now, a lot of women take issue with these kinds of posts not because women find children yucky but rather because there are actually a lot of women who do want to go for that big and elusive job. There are women who are willing to and who desire to work those 20-hour days.

However, something else gets lost in this story, and it’s becoming an increasingly glaring omission. See, the thing is, a lot of men would much rather stay at home with the kids than put everything they have into their careers. A lot of men are trying to shift their priorities that way, in fact. But if there are obstacles in the way of women climbing up the corporate ladder, there are equally out-dated and pretty ridiculous obstacles in the way of men who want to place home and family as higher priorities than a big paycheck.

It’s a no-win situation for everyone

The fact is that making broad generalizations about who loves their babies more hurts women and men in equal parts. If a woman wants to really excel in her career and resorts to sending her children to daycare, she is uncaring, or a cold woman who doesn’t care about her kids. By the same token, I think a lot of stay-at-home dads are viewed as unmotivated. On the other hand, men who do fit the image of working more than being at home are, like the working moms, viewed as distant and maybe cold when it comes to their kids.

Why do we do this to each other?

Oh, and by the way, not everyone wants kids

There is another aspect to this complicated business too. There are some women and some men who simply do not want families. They may not even want to get married. They may not even want to have pets. They want to fly solo with no worries and no compromises. Does that make them uncaring or unloving? I know plenty of people in this category and they are some of the kindest, best people I know, so my vote is for saying no. But is that not how society views these folks?

A new place for conversation to begin

In order to begin the conversations that will lead us to a more equal and fair place for men AND women, we must begin to understand that not everyone is driven by the same desires and motivations and that that is perfectly okay. In fact, that’s what makes the world so interesting. Some women want to stay at home with their kids once they reach that point in their lives. Some men want to do the same. Some women want to become extremely successful in their jobs more than they want families. Some men want to do the same.

To nurture a sense of equality, we must begin to treat people as individuals. We cannot make broad statements like, “Well, women aren’t paid as much cuz they love children more.” We can’t make broad statements like, “Well, men would rather work than stay at home with the kids.” And most importantly, we must begin to refrain from judging others whose desires and drives do not match our own.

Right?

Image Credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/efleming/1882086947/ via Creative Commons

Filed Under: Musings

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. dougricesmbiz says

    December 28, 2011 at 9:09 am

    Personally, I don’t think anyone really likes babies. Let’s face it. They’re gross. I think we just ooh-and-ah over them and wax poetic about how cute they are to endure birthing/raising them. Too harsh?

    Reply
    • margieclayman says

      December 28, 2011 at 11:52 am

      @dougricesmbiz Hah! Well, that’s a new angle 🙂

      Reply
  2. dogwalkblog says

    December 28, 2011 at 10:16 am

    I have all sorts of opinions on this, but just two I want to share. I see a lot of women refer to their stay-at-home partner as a “manny” or muse on social media channels that they want a manny, i.e., male nanny. It find the term incredibly offensive and derogatory. The other issue that chaps my bottom is the use of DH (Darling Husband) in social media channels. I understand characters are at a premium (140 or fewer) but DH is a back-handed, passive aggressive term. Even if you don’t mean it to be, it is. Sometimes it is women who are perpetuating the stereotype of a “unmotivated” man more than any other group.

    Reply
    • SocialMediaDDS says

      December 28, 2011 at 11:27 am

      @dogwalkblog I definitely agree with your concerns in principle. Those are terms that make me very uncomfortable as well. But, I think @margieclayman has correctly shared that instead of pointing out the disrespect and broad brush generalizations that society perpetuates (even encourages), it is time to take a new tack. It’s time to create a new culture perhaps. A culture of acceptance and tolerance such that there will be no mannys or DH’s or equally offensive labels given to women. We are all in this together so why can’t we just support the lifestyles and life choices that each of us makes without all of the messy labels and judgments.

      I loved this #WomenWednesday post margieclayman Thank you!

      Claudia

      Reply
      • margieclayman says

        December 28, 2011 at 11:52 am

        @SocialMediaDDS@dogwalkblog Exactly right. I don’t think it’s appropriate to paint any group of people in one tiny way. That’s how we create racial profiling and other things that I think we all can agree are not productive or useful. Peoples is peoples, according to the muppets.

        Reply
    • margieclayman says

      December 28, 2011 at 11:50 am

      @dogwalkblog I remember when I first started encounter the DH acronym online. Dear Husband or Darling Husband. Something about it rubbed me the wrong way as well but I never could quite put my finger on why. Maybe it’s a hint of passive-aggressive like you say. Or maybe I just found it kinda gross 🙂

      That’s what I wanted to get at though. If you look at a lot of the commercials running these days, men are portrayed as inept (still) while women are portrayed as home magicians (still). Aren’t we past that?

      Reply
      • NicoleFende says

        January 5, 2012 at 12:00 am

        @margieclayman@dogwalkblog I always thought it meant Dear Husband, and while I don’t use it never realized how it might be taken. I do say Hubby – is that offensive too? I don’t mean it to be. He works hard, is very supportive of my entrepreneurial business, and is a great Dad.

        Are we at risk of being oversensitive? Or is it (as Josepf says above) an insidious thing we need to guard against.

        And for the record while I have a whole zoo at my house (kid, cats and a dog) I absolutely realize that is not for everyone, nor should it be.

        Reply
        • NicoleFende says

          January 5, 2012 at 12:02 am

          @margieclayman@dogwalkblog Just realized it may not be clear, and can’t seem to edit past comments. My husband works full time outside the home. My daughter goes to *gasp* daycare. String me up now.

          Reply
        • dogwalkblog says

          January 5, 2012 at 7:22 am

          @NicoleFende@margieclayman Hubby or hubs is fine.. it shows a cuddly layer of endearment that most men secretly like but would never admit in public 🙂 Conversely, though, wifey or the wife is NEVER wise to say.. ever… except to tell men to never say it.

          I don’t think we are being oversensitive. I think we are just all trying to find a common level of respect for each other while also trying to find the right words to describe what we mean specifically. Language is such a slippery thing and always has that huge bag of culture attached to it. Who knows, in 50 years, hubs might be the most offensive thing you can call anyone. But for now, it makes us kinda gooey inside.

          Reply
  3. dogwalkblog says

    December 28, 2011 at 10:16 am

    I have all sorts of opinions on this, but just two I want to share. I see a lot of women refer to their stay-at-home partner as a “manny” or muse on social media channels that they want a manny, i.e., male nanny. It find the term incredibly offensive and derogatory. The other issue that chaps my bottom is the use of DH (Darling Husband) in social media channels. I understand characters are at a premium (140 or fewer) but DH is a back-handed, passive aggressive term. Even if you don’t mean it to be, it is. Sometimes it is women who are perpetuating the stereotype of a “unmotivated” man more than any other group.

    Reply
  4. dogwalkblog says

    December 28, 2011 at 10:16 am

    I have all sorts of opinions on this, but just two I want to share. I see a lot of women refer to their stay-at-home partner as a “manny” or muse on social media channels that they want a manny, i.e., male nanny. It find the term incredibly offensive and derogatory. The other issue that chaps my bottom is the use of DH (Darling Husband) in social media channels. I understand characters are at a premium (140 or fewer) but DH is a back-handed, passive aggressive term. Even if you don’t mean it to be, it is. Sometimes it is women who are perpetuating the stereotype of a “unmotivated” man more than any other group.

    Reply
  5. susangiurleo says

    December 28, 2011 at 3:35 pm

    ONe of the reasons I left the “work for someone else” working world was because I couldn’t find a place that would flex time enough so I could work full time AND be present for my young child. So I do my own thing now and I *gasp* can do BOTH!! On the days I work late, my husband takes up parenting our son (which we define as ‘parenting’ and not “helping mom out”).

    Often I think we buy into these stereotypes in our personal life as well because the culture of “moms at home/dads at work” is so ingrained. It often doesn’t occur to us that we can work and be good/involved parents, so we force ourselves into artificial choices.

    Which could bring on another rant (which I will spare you) about the trend to expect ourselves to be with our babies 24/7 and never allow them to have a babysitter or, heaven forbid, go to daycare. My son went to daycare a fwe days a week, goes to afterschool program and does summer camp while I work and we’re both better for it.

    Reply
  6. Josepf says

    December 29, 2011 at 2:52 pm

    The weight of cultural expectations is both tremendous and insidious. Insidious because we are born into them like fish into water and cultural “norms” are simply what we do… Tremendous because it takes amazing energy and courage to go against what “seems” right (normal).

    Moreover, we discriminate constantly. It’s both an inbred survival trait (eat these blue berries, not those pink mushrooms) and a learned skill (Sesame Street’s one of these things is not like another). So the first big step is margiclayman ‘s “we must begin to understand that not everyone is driven by the same desires and motivations and that that is perfectly okay”. Bold statement Margie, bold statement. Puts you over there (Sesame Street) in that Radical camp eating fruit loops and listening to Wind Chimes. 🙂 (joke, [purely joking for effect))

    Great conversation starter. Am looking forward to seeing how this series unfolds…

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Post: « Margie Clayman’s 2012 Reading List
Next Post: You’re becoming an automaton »

Primary Sidebar

Recent Posts

  • Seeing Double: African American Literature
  • Book Review: Alexander Hamilton by Ron Chernow
  • Book Review: Land of Lincoln, by Andrew Ferguson
  • The portrayal of the infertile woman in entertainment
  • Chapter 3: A Weird Thing Happened Today

Recent Comments

  • Delores Baskerville on Are you locking out blog subscribers?
  • frank c tripoli on Book Review: Alexander Hamilton by Ron Chernow
  • Lyv on #30Thursday number 10 (we’re in the double digits?!?)
  • Fitoru on New Recipes, 2013
  • Anna Wyatt on Help me petition to deactivate driver-side airbags for Little People

Archives

  • February 2021
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • April 2017
  • October 2016
  • July 2016
  • April 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • December 2014
  • October 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • February 2014
  • December 2013
  • October 2013
  • August 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • June 2007
  • April 2007

Categories

  • Book Reviews
  • Crafts and Charity
  • Gardening for Renters
  • Marketing Talk
  • Molly Maggie McGuire
  • Musings
  • PassionPlayers
  • Uncategorized

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Footer

marjorie.clayman@gmail.com

   

Margie Clayman © 2022