Someone on my friend list for Facebook posted this article tonight.
In it, the woman author whines about not being to have it all, all being career and kid. She drones on about having to wait until you find the right husband, work your way up the corporate ladder, and gain a comfortable lifestyle, along the unfairness of taking years off without being unable to jump right back into a career and the fact that a woman’s fertility dictates that we should have children in our twenties.
Hello? Time to think outside the box, my friend.
This woman seems to want all of the liberation, but none of the trade-offs. She wants to be corporate powered career woman along with traditional stay at home mom. I know as a single, childless person I’ll probably get slammed for this, but hey, I’m an old lady now (at least fertility-wise) and here’s my opinion.
Women can work now. We have a ton more options than forty years ago. So take advantage of that...
First, the author refers to finding Mr. Right Enough – the man she marries. Who says that the guy who ultimately ends up being your lifelong companion also needs to be the father of your children? While I haven’t found Mr. Right Enough, there are plenty of guys I’ve known and dated that I wouldn’t mind splicing genes with. Newsflash: you can have children out of wedlock now. You won’t be stoned or have to wear a scarlet letter. You can make a choice.
Second, who says that you have to be making a ton of money and pay off all of your debt before you have a kid? My parents were dirt poor when they had me and my brother. They made certain sacrifices in regards to location, cars, and other material objects, but they survived, and today they’re just fine financially. Sure, my siblings and I didn’t attend private schools or receive a Mercedes on our sixteenth birthdays, but we were pretty comfortable, and we’ve all turned out to be productive members of society.
In conjunction with one and two, there were plenty of times where I honestly considered having a kid with someone I knew I didn’t want to be with over the long haul. As it turns out, I wanted to be a goof-off during my twenties. I didn’t want the responsibility of raising a child, but I never thought that I wouldn’t be able to do it if I did, and if I’d applied myself just a little bit more and cleared $60k a year at all during my 20’s, I might have done it. As soon as I came to law school I started lining up babysitters, surrogate fathers, and stand-in daddies – just in case. (This is where I admit to seriously considering becoming pregnant at the end of my first year in law school.)
Third, who says that you have to stay at home in order to raise a well-adjusted kid? If you’re me, then your child is probably better off being introduced to a wide variety of caretakers other than their parent. It takes a village. Daycare will not kill your child. A nanny will not ruin your child. Don't be selfish. Want to keep moving towards that career? Don’t quit your job! When have you ever heard of a guy taking five years off and then being affronted to find that he can’t jump right back into his career field of choice? There are options. Many jobs today allow for telecommuting – at least to a certain extent. You can be home part of the time, hire someone to help around the house and with the kids and still get things done. Or you can *gasp!* send your child to daycare, after-school programs, etc.
There are ways to get it done, but you have to take the good with (societal) bad. Looking back, I sometimes wonder if I should have done it differently. I don’t just admire ladies like New Duck, PBB, LagLiv, or Magic Cookie (and PT-Law Mom, Zuska, and Butterflyfish to some extent (in this respect; of course I admire all of these women in general(!))). I think they’re smart for doing things the way they did. And I feel a little better knowing that they’re raising the next generation AND steering the legal/corporate/career realm.
Now buck up little campers and go kick some ass while you change the world.
Comments?
Monday, June 22, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
You make a lot of good points, but I disagree that single parenthood is such a great option for most people. Partnered parenthood is demanding enough. If you're single, you can do it -- and I greatly admire people who pull it off -- but I wouldn't do it voluntarily.
And the stuff she says is sort of true, to the extent that biology tells us to have kids young but the way most of our lives are structured, it's difficult to do that. I also agree that unless you essentially have someone else raise your kid, you can't both be super-ambitious at the same time. (Of course, as you pointed out, she's assuming that Mr. Baby Daddy
is out working and has neither the time nor the inclination to care for the kids so she can be ambitious.) But yeah, it's a little whiny and old-fashioned, especially the stuff about how the man is going to ditch his no-longer child-bearing wife for a younger model.
It sounds like she's digging for a story after having read the statements made by the British Ob-Gyn folks.
I'll tell you what, having children earlier rather than later certainly makes sense from a purely physical standpoint. Nothing wears you out faster than a small person. If you're younger, you've got more energy. Downside, you may not be as patient with that same little person as you will be when you're older.
There are plenty of women out there who will have children during the "window" prescribed by the doctors, and then there are plenty more who are going to try and get a foothold in their career first, or find the right partner, or live their own life for a bit before becoming wholly responsible for someone else's.
You certainly don't need to find Mr. Right to be a mom, but I think the affirmative decision to be a single parent is probably one best made when you're older rather than younger.
CM - I totally agree with you on the single parenthood thing - except in one respect. When I was younger, I totally thought that I could do it and therefore I might have pulled it off whereas the older I get, the more I realize that it's a two person job. Then again, I've met plenty of persons who are married and basically serve as a single parent. It all depends on the situation.
Ooh, and you bring up a good point - who's to say that there isn't the 'stay at home dad factor' which was my dream for a very long time, btw.
Also, as I mentioned, I literally had people lined up to be a "father/male figure" to my illegitimate kid if I decided to have one. Just ask my friend Alex, or possibly even Fairy God Brother.
Do you read Penelope Trunk? You would probably really like her if you haven't found her yet.
"I literally had people lined up to be a "father/male figure" to my illegitimate kid if I decided to have one"... I have a friend who had/has an illegitimate kid (forced myself not to use quotes on illegitimate just now...the kid is now taller than me and seems oh-so-very-legit...weird to type that). She invited 6 or 7 guys to his christening when he was a wee baby. One of the guys shared with me that day his disdain for her casting a wide net, inviting, as he said, "any guy she ever slept with to play the father role for Little Joey." Maybe he just felt embarrassed to be included in the lineup. But his comment pointed out the strange casualness, the happenstance nature of who was invited to play a significant role in the kid's fundamental development. I don't think she or her son have seen many, or any, of those guys in several years.
Post a Comment