feminism making mother-at-home a choice
[email protected]
In a message dated 8/11/04 7:28:58 AM, danielle.conger@... writes:
<< But, I still think the choice to stay at home is denigrated--it's a choice,
but not such a good one. >>
If you're hanging with people who think it's not good, find better friends.
Or find people who know the value of it.
Change can't be whole and complete or we wouldn't recognize the place.
-=-I caught a tremendous amount of flack as a grad
student because I was not going into debt to put my babies in childcare.
Another female grad student with kids was told not to apply for an award
because it was for "serious dissertating students only," a comment that did
not, apparently, apply to the 3 male grad students with toddlers and infants
at home. I was told point blank that I should have waited to have children
until after I had tenure; being a mother was secondary to a career.-=-
Flak.
Spelling moment, because I know you write a lot and probably care. <g>
We hear it said a lot, but don't see it written as much.
I see that it's not fair that dads are considered more unbounded than
mothers, but as a mother do you think the dad at home is just as good in every way as
the mom at home? I don't. The balancing circumstance had better be REALLY
really good for a nursing mom to leave a baby, or to wean a baby so that
others can keep it.
-=-I was
also told point blank that I should not limit my job search geographically
for my husband because after all we could end up divorced and I'd have
sacrificed my career to live in the backwoods with someone else.-=-
Well isn't that feminism gone wild, to say "Yeah, you're married but your
career should be your own true love"?
-=-I would, apparently, be a much stronger female rolganized sports.-=-
And leaving them with the role models of bus drivers, teachers, and
hamburger-stand service folk. Another small pool of women, and not that they aren't
working hard but will the kids REALLY see the Entire World of Possibility from
school?
-=-I think the second wave feminism
of the '60s and '70s did a really great job of carving out a certain kind of
equality in the male-dominated marketplace, but it did so based on a male
model of work that left families in the dust or at least required them to be
invisible and undemanding.-=-
Since the 60's, cottage industry has been making a comeback, though (at least
where I am). It's pretty highly respected here for someone to do furniture
or pottery or welding or whatever from home, and not necessarily have a shop
and warehouse where they go. (But New Mexico isn't real in lots of ways, and
certainly isn't American mainstream overall.)
-=-I would like
to see corporate culture become more family-friendly, allowing both men and
women the time, space and support they need to put their families first.-=-
Paternity leave is no longer a fantasy or a joke.
Personal time, same.
Family counselling benefits (to prevent divorce it seemed, three emergency
counselling visits) were one of the benefits Keith had when he went to work for
Sperry before Kirby was born. Sperry became Honeywell, benefits change from
time to time, but they seem family oriented to me.
Things are changing.
In the current, August 9, Newsweek, Anna Quindlen has a wonderful column
about how liberalism has chnaged the country. It's worth reading. I don't know
if they put those online or not.
"We liberals have been shamed into thinking our vision failed, when in fact
it has simply been absorbed ito the national self-potrait. From the idea that
a woman ought to have the same legal rights as her male counterparts to the
belief that workers should count on being safe from hazardous conditions,
formerly liberal principles have become bedrock democracy."
Around 1985 a young female friend of ours came over for help on an essay for
college. She had a list of options, and one was to tell how feminism helped
her life, or how it had not. She was going to write about how the feminist
movement had had no effect on her life. Keith, who had not long before that
been a sexist pigboy from a family of all boys in a military/redneck town didn't
even glance at me before saying, "What!? You need to write how it DID make
your life better." And he went on sensibly about her being at the university,
not being pressured to marry, not being limited to nursing or elementary
education, and so forth. She wrote the pro-feminism essay.
Someone several years ago came into a discussion like this one (AOL days I
think) and said the 60's were dead and had had no effect. How nutso. How
blind. People can buy health food easily in most parts of the country. I'm one
mile from a Keller's farm store, which pre-dates the hippies and sells
organic meats (and other cool stuff), less than a quarter mile from a Wild Oats and
a Keva Juice in the same little mall, across the street from an Ayurvedic
medicine teaching facility, two blocks from an Ayurvedic vegan restaurant.
There's a shop across the main road from my house (a few hundred yards) that sells
supplies for wiccans, and nobody has so much as egged their windows.
People wear their hair short or long as they wish, with little flak or
pressure. Boys (and men) wear beards if they want to, and don't if they don't want
to. Girls (and women) can wear long skirts, short skirts, or pants. They
can dress like boys if they want to, and few people say a word.
Try that in the 50s.
Try that in the 60s!
Late 60s, young men with long hair were in danger of being held down by
rednecks and shaved. Young women who dared to wear mini-skirt or to go braless had
that brought up in court, if she were molested, as evidence that she had
"asked for it."
Try THAT in the early 21st century, and be laughed out of the legal
profession.
When change comes that steadily and solidly, it hardly shows, but by looking
back forty or fifty years you see the huge speed at which things changed.
Sandra
<< But, I still think the choice to stay at home is denigrated--it's a choice,
but not such a good one. >>
If you're hanging with people who think it's not good, find better friends.
Or find people who know the value of it.
Change can't be whole and complete or we wouldn't recognize the place.
-=-I caught a tremendous amount of flack as a grad
student because I was not going into debt to put my babies in childcare.
Another female grad student with kids was told not to apply for an award
because it was for "serious dissertating students only," a comment that did
not, apparently, apply to the 3 male grad students with toddlers and infants
at home. I was told point blank that I should have waited to have children
until after I had tenure; being a mother was secondary to a career.-=-
Flak.
Spelling moment, because I know you write a lot and probably care. <g>
We hear it said a lot, but don't see it written as much.
I see that it's not fair that dads are considered more unbounded than
mothers, but as a mother do you think the dad at home is just as good in every way as
the mom at home? I don't. The balancing circumstance had better be REALLY
really good for a nursing mom to leave a baby, or to wean a baby so that
others can keep it.
-=-I was
also told point blank that I should not limit my job search geographically
for my husband because after all we could end up divorced and I'd have
sacrificed my career to live in the backwoods with someone else.-=-
Well isn't that feminism gone wild, to say "Yeah, you're married but your
career should be your own true love"?
-=-I would, apparently, be a much stronger female rolganized sports.-=-
And leaving them with the role models of bus drivers, teachers, and
hamburger-stand service folk. Another small pool of women, and not that they aren't
working hard but will the kids REALLY see the Entire World of Possibility from
school?
-=-I think the second wave feminism
of the '60s and '70s did a really great job of carving out a certain kind of
equality in the male-dominated marketplace, but it did so based on a male
model of work that left families in the dust or at least required them to be
invisible and undemanding.-=-
Since the 60's, cottage industry has been making a comeback, though (at least
where I am). It's pretty highly respected here for someone to do furniture
or pottery or welding or whatever from home, and not necessarily have a shop
and warehouse where they go. (But New Mexico isn't real in lots of ways, and
certainly isn't American mainstream overall.)
-=-I would like
to see corporate culture become more family-friendly, allowing both men and
women the time, space and support they need to put their families first.-=-
Paternity leave is no longer a fantasy or a joke.
Personal time, same.
Family counselling benefits (to prevent divorce it seemed, three emergency
counselling visits) were one of the benefits Keith had when he went to work for
Sperry before Kirby was born. Sperry became Honeywell, benefits change from
time to time, but they seem family oriented to me.
Things are changing.
In the current, August 9, Newsweek, Anna Quindlen has a wonderful column
about how liberalism has chnaged the country. It's worth reading. I don't know
if they put those online or not.
"We liberals have been shamed into thinking our vision failed, when in fact
it has simply been absorbed ito the national self-potrait. From the idea that
a woman ought to have the same legal rights as her male counterparts to the
belief that workers should count on being safe from hazardous conditions,
formerly liberal principles have become bedrock democracy."
Around 1985 a young female friend of ours came over for help on an essay for
college. She had a list of options, and one was to tell how feminism helped
her life, or how it had not. She was going to write about how the feminist
movement had had no effect on her life. Keith, who had not long before that
been a sexist pigboy from a family of all boys in a military/redneck town didn't
even glance at me before saying, "What!? You need to write how it DID make
your life better." And he went on sensibly about her being at the university,
not being pressured to marry, not being limited to nursing or elementary
education, and so forth. She wrote the pro-feminism essay.
Someone several years ago came into a discussion like this one (AOL days I
think) and said the 60's were dead and had had no effect. How nutso. How
blind. People can buy health food easily in most parts of the country. I'm one
mile from a Keller's farm store, which pre-dates the hippies and sells
organic meats (and other cool stuff), less than a quarter mile from a Wild Oats and
a Keva Juice in the same little mall, across the street from an Ayurvedic
medicine teaching facility, two blocks from an Ayurvedic vegan restaurant.
There's a shop across the main road from my house (a few hundred yards) that sells
supplies for wiccans, and nobody has so much as egged their windows.
People wear their hair short or long as they wish, with little flak or
pressure. Boys (and men) wear beards if they want to, and don't if they don't want
to. Girls (and women) can wear long skirts, short skirts, or pants. They
can dress like boys if they want to, and few people say a word.
Try that in the 50s.
Try that in the 60s!
Late 60s, young men with long hair were in danger of being held down by
rednecks and shaved. Young women who dared to wear mini-skirt or to go braless had
that brought up in court, if she were molested, as evidence that she had
"asked for it."
Try THAT in the early 21st century, and be laughed out of the legal
profession.
When change comes that steadily and solidly, it hardly shows, but by looking
back forty or fifty years you see the huge speed at which things changed.
Sandra
[email protected]
In a message dated 8/11/2004 12:46:25 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:
Someone several years ago came into a discussion like this one (AOL days I
think) and said the 60's were dead and had had no effect. How nutso.
<<<<
My mother-in-law said (with a straight face!<g>) that the 60's absolutely
RUINED this country! <G>
Ben and I get a chuckle out of that every time it's mentioned! <G> (But HE
had to grow up with her!)
~Kelly
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
SandraDodd@... writes:
Someone several years ago came into a discussion like this one (AOL days I
think) and said the 60's were dead and had had no effect. How nutso.
<<<<
My mother-in-law said (with a straight face!<g>) that the 60's absolutely
RUINED this country! <G>
Ben and I get a chuckle out of that every time it's mentioned! <G> (But HE
had to grow up with her!)
~Kelly
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Danielle Conger
Sandra wrote: If you're hanging with people who think it's not good, find
better friends.
I have found people who value it through unschooling, this list, LLL, soon
the Live and Learn Conference--and that makes a huge difference. I have been
working to surround myself with like minded people because it keeps me from
feeling like such a freak. *g*
==
See, what I'm looking for is not an either mom or dad kind of set up. I
think that babies benefit hugely, as do fathers and families, when the
father is just as involved in child rearing and care as the mom. That means
the dad taking care of and bonding with the baby, carrying and cosleeping,
skin to skin contact--none of which precludes the mom nursing and practicing
all of these things as well. Babies benefit hugely from a close relationship
with both parents, and I think this kind of relationship makes dad a kinder,
gentler parent in the long run. You're right that I think the mom is
paramount, but I think the dads are far more important than they've
generally been.
When we were in grad school, dh used to care for the babies while I was
teaching and doing office hours. This was one to two hour stretches, in
between nursings, either at home or in his lab. He helped deliver them,
carried them, nurtured and cared for them in a far more active way than most
fathers, even though he never got to give them a bottle. Attachment
parenting works best, in my opinion, when both parents practice it, which
requires more physical presence from fathers than most jobs allow.
So, I'm looking for shorter work weeks, more vacation time, flexible hours
for BOTH parents, enabling families to be TOGETHER more and both parents to
be primary caregivers. I'm looking for families to come first in real life,
not just in empty political rhetoric that furthers a particular corporate
agenda that ultimately undermines real families.
==
Yes, things are changing. The Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) was a huge
step in the right direction, though there are still lots of loopholes and
shortfalls.** Compared to countries like Sweden, however, America lags far
behind--just google it. Sweden offers 18 months of parental leave at 80%
salary, and another source cites up to 96 weeks. Australia and New Zealand
offer up to 52 weeks, Canada and Denmark 50 weeks, Italy 47, Finland 44, UK
40 (not clear what pay percentage). America offers 6 weeks paid leave and up
to 6 months, or 24 weeks, unpaid at some companies; the FMLA only offers 12
weeks UNPAID and that only in certain circumstances.** In France every
single worker is guaranteed 5 weeks vacation every year, and the country
even subsidizes vacations for low income families so they get to go
somewhere. In America most workers get 2 weeks vacation a year, many of whom
can't even schedule the time off because they're too busy or they've used it
up staying at home with sick children or covering for daycare closings.
That's not even touching upon the health care issue and how many families,
or even just children, are uninsured and without access to basic medical and
preventative care. Yes, things are changing, but they still have a ways to
go for families.
==
I think one of the biggest ways things are changing is through cottage
industry, consulting and free agents. That's why I think Daniel Pink's book
_Free Agent Nation_ is so fascinating and so important. As workers retake
control over their own labor, they are retaking control over their families
as well, which is why writing that book led Pink to discover homeschooling
generally and unschooling in particular. In his speech at a recent Maryland
homeschooler's conference, he specifically stated that what he is really
calling free agent education is UNschooling, not homeschooling. I think
America is inching in the right direction, and I really feel that
unschoolers are on the cutting edge of that change. I'm excited, energized
and optimistic about the possibilities unschooling has to offer--I think we
are living a big part of the change.
--Danielle
http://www.danielleconger.com/Homeschool/Welcomehome.html
**Many employers are required by federal law to allow their employees (both
men and women) 12 weeks of unpaid family leave after the birth or adoption
of a child under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). At the end of your
leave, your employer must allow you to return to your job or a similar job
with the same salary, benefits, working conditions, and seniority. You are
among the 60 percent of U.S. workers who are eligible if you meet both of
the following conditions:
. You work for the federal government, a state or local government, or any
company that has 50 or more employees working within 75 miles of your
workplace
. You have worked for your employer for at least 12 months and for at least
1,250 hours during the previous year (which comes out to 25 hours per week
for 50 weeks)
There are a few exceptions: Your employer can deny you this leave if you're
in the highest paid 10 percent of wage earners at your company and your
employer can show that your absence would cause substantial economic harm to
the organization. In this case, your employer isn't required to keep your
job open for you. Another exception is if you and your partner both work for
the same company. In this case, you're only entitled to a combined 12 weeks
of parental leave between the two of you. Even if you're not eligible under
the FMLA, you may still be eligible for leave under your state's provisions,
which are usually more generous than the FMLA, or under your company's
policy.
source: http://www.babycenter.com/refcap/pregnancy/pregnantatwork/449.html
better friends.
> Or find people who know the value of it.==
I have found people who value it through unschooling, this list, LLL, soon
the Live and Learn Conference--and that makes a huge difference. I have been
working to surround myself with like minded people because it keeps me from
feeling like such a freak. *g*
==
> I see that it's not fair that dads are considered more unbounded thanevery way as
> mothers, but as a mother do you think the dad at home is just as good in
> the mom at home? I don't. The balancing circumstance had better beREALLY
> really good for a nursing mom to leave a baby, or to wean a baby so that==
> others can keep it.
See, what I'm looking for is not an either mom or dad kind of set up. I
think that babies benefit hugely, as do fathers and families, when the
father is just as involved in child rearing and care as the mom. That means
the dad taking care of and bonding with the baby, carrying and cosleeping,
skin to skin contact--none of which precludes the mom nursing and practicing
all of these things as well. Babies benefit hugely from a close relationship
with both parents, and I think this kind of relationship makes dad a kinder,
gentler parent in the long run. You're right that I think the mom is
paramount, but I think the dads are far more important than they've
generally been.
When we were in grad school, dh used to care for the babies while I was
teaching and doing office hours. This was one to two hour stretches, in
between nursings, either at home or in his lab. He helped deliver them,
carried them, nurtured and cared for them in a far more active way than most
fathers, even though he never got to give them a bottle. Attachment
parenting works best, in my opinion, when both parents practice it, which
requires more physical presence from fathers than most jobs allow.
So, I'm looking for shorter work weeks, more vacation time, flexible hours
for BOTH parents, enabling families to be TOGETHER more and both parents to
be primary caregivers. I'm looking for families to come first in real life,
not just in empty political rhetoric that furthers a particular corporate
agenda that ultimately undermines real families.
==
> Paternity leave is no longer a fantasy or a joke.work for
> Personal time, same.
> Family counselling benefits (to prevent divorce it seemed, three emergency
> counselling visits) were one of the benefits Keith had when he went to
> Sperry before Kirby was born. Sperry became Honeywell, benefits changefrom
> time to time, but they seem family oriented to me.==
Yes, things are changing. The Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) was a huge
step in the right direction, though there are still lots of loopholes and
shortfalls.** Compared to countries like Sweden, however, America lags far
behind--just google it. Sweden offers 18 months of parental leave at 80%
salary, and another source cites up to 96 weeks. Australia and New Zealand
offer up to 52 weeks, Canada and Denmark 50 weeks, Italy 47, Finland 44, UK
40 (not clear what pay percentage). America offers 6 weeks paid leave and up
to 6 months, or 24 weeks, unpaid at some companies; the FMLA only offers 12
weeks UNPAID and that only in certain circumstances.** In France every
single worker is guaranteed 5 weeks vacation every year, and the country
even subsidizes vacations for low income families so they get to go
somewhere. In America most workers get 2 weeks vacation a year, many of whom
can't even schedule the time off because they're too busy or they've used it
up staying at home with sick children or covering for daycare closings.
That's not even touching upon the health care issue and how many families,
or even just children, are uninsured and without access to basic medical and
preventative care. Yes, things are changing, but they still have a ways to
go for families.
==
> Since the 60's, cottage industry has been making a comeback, though (atleast
> where I am). It's pretty highly respected here for someone to dofurniture
> or pottery or welding or whatever from home, and not necessarily have ashop
> and warehouse where they go.==
I think one of the biggest ways things are changing is through cottage
industry, consulting and free agents. That's why I think Daniel Pink's book
_Free Agent Nation_ is so fascinating and so important. As workers retake
control over their own labor, they are retaking control over their families
as well, which is why writing that book led Pink to discover homeschooling
generally and unschooling in particular. In his speech at a recent Maryland
homeschooler's conference, he specifically stated that what he is really
calling free agent education is UNschooling, not homeschooling. I think
America is inching in the right direction, and I really feel that
unschoolers are on the cutting edge of that change. I'm excited, energized
and optimistic about the possibilities unschooling has to offer--I think we
are living a big part of the change.
--Danielle
http://www.danielleconger.com/Homeschool/Welcomehome.html
**Many employers are required by federal law to allow their employees (both
men and women) 12 weeks of unpaid family leave after the birth or adoption
of a child under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). At the end of your
leave, your employer must allow you to return to your job or a similar job
with the same salary, benefits, working conditions, and seniority. You are
among the 60 percent of U.S. workers who are eligible if you meet both of
the following conditions:
. You work for the federal government, a state or local government, or any
company that has 50 or more employees working within 75 miles of your
workplace
. You have worked for your employer for at least 12 months and for at least
1,250 hours during the previous year (which comes out to 25 hours per week
for 50 weeks)
There are a few exceptions: Your employer can deny you this leave if you're
in the highest paid 10 percent of wage earners at your company and your
employer can show that your absence would cause substantial economic harm to
the organization. In this case, your employer isn't required to keep your
job open for you. Another exception is if you and your partner both work for
the same company. In this case, you're only entitled to a combined 12 weeks
of parental leave between the two of you. Even if you're not eligible under
the FMLA, you may still be eligible for leave under your state's provisions,
which are usually more generous than the FMLA, or under your company's
policy.
source: http://www.babycenter.com/refcap/pregnancy/pregnantatwork/449.html
Dawn Adams
Danielle writes:
Dawn (in NS)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>Canada and Denmark 50 weeksJust to go further (and brag), our 50 weeks in Canada is paid leave (actually employment insurance) at 55% of our prior income. It is also split so that the first 6 months (I think) is maternal leave and the rest is parental, availible to either parent and could be worked I think so that the mom could take her maternal leave and the dad the parental leave at the same time. I took both with Harry so I had the year. I think the parental leave is availible to adoptive parents as well though I'm not sure of the maternal leave. I do think the rate should be much higher because I saw many low income friends who could only afford a month or so off work before having to go back...But I know we have it pretty good up here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Dawn (in NS)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 8/12/2004 12:29:54 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:
Just to go further (and brag), our 50 weeks in Canada is paid leave
(actually employment insurance) at 55% of our prior income. It is also split so that
the first 6 months (I think) is maternal leave and the rest is parental,
availible to either parent and could be worked I think so that the mom could take
her maternal leave and the dad the parental leave at the same time. I took both
with Harry so I had the year. I think the parental leave is availible to
adoptive parents as well though I'm not sure of the maternal leave. I do think the
rate should be much higher because I saw many low income friends who could
only afford a month or so off work before having to go back...But I know we have
it pretty good up here.
******************
Michael Moore, at the Democratic convention this year described Canada as
"Like us-only better."
Kathryn
Kathryn Baptista, Conference Coordinator
Come to the Live and Learn Unschooling Conference August 27-29 in Peabody, MA!
For more information, go to www.LiveandLearnConference.org
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected] writes:
Just to go further (and brag), our 50 weeks in Canada is paid leave
(actually employment insurance) at 55% of our prior income. It is also split so that
the first 6 months (I think) is maternal leave and the rest is parental,
availible to either parent and could be worked I think so that the mom could take
her maternal leave and the dad the parental leave at the same time. I took both
with Harry so I had the year. I think the parental leave is availible to
adoptive parents as well though I'm not sure of the maternal leave. I do think the
rate should be much higher because I saw many low income friends who could
only afford a month or so off work before having to go back...But I know we have
it pretty good up here.
******************
Michael Moore, at the Democratic convention this year described Canada as
"Like us-only better."
Kathryn
Kathryn Baptista, Conference Coordinator
Come to the Live and Learn Unschooling Conference August 27-29 in Peabody, MA!
For more information, go to www.LiveandLearnConference.org
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Dawn Adams
Kathryn writes:
Dawn (in NS)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>Michael Moore, at the Democratic convention this year described Canada asLOL. He's pretty much got honourary Canuck status here. He even made some pretty direct comments about our recent election (dissing the right wing party here) and there was no uproar from Canadians about an American sticking his nose where it doesn't belong...because, I guess, he does belong. Of course we're always flattered when we find an American that knows as much or more about us and our politics then we do. It's usually the other way around. :)
>"Like us-only better."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Dawn (in NS)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 8/12/2004 9:45:53 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
KathrynJB@... writes:
Michael Moore, at the Democratic convention this year described Canada as
"Like us-only better."<<<<
I must have misunderstood. I thought he said, "Like us, only colder."
~Kelly <g>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
KathrynJB@... writes:
Michael Moore, at the Democratic convention this year described Canada as
"Like us-only better."<<<<
I must have misunderstood. I thought he said, "Like us, only colder."
~Kelly <g>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 8/12/04 12:52:57 PM, Wishbone@... writes:
<< and there was no uproar from Canadians about an American sticking his nose
where it doesn't belong...because, I guess, he does belong. >>
As far as I'm concerned, you can have him.
And I'm far from right-wing.
Sandra
<< and there was no uproar from Canadians about an American sticking his nose
where it doesn't belong...because, I guess, he does belong. >>
As far as I'm concerned, you can have him.
And I'm far from right-wing.
Sandra