Stay at home Moms are bad!!?
Find a Conversation
| Wed, 08-04-2004 - 3:23pm |
How in the world this woman makes these statements and believes them is amazing.
Oh and here are her qualifications:
"Ritter is director of the Center for Women's and Gender Studies at UT and an associate professor of government and women studies."
Want to bet whether she is on the left or the right?
***********************************************************
Ritter: The messages we send when moms stay home
By Gretchen Ritter
'Well, I could have just stayed home and baked cookies." In the firestorm that followed her comment, Hillary Rodham Clinton learned that you should never deny the virtues of stay-at-home motherhood.
Nowadays, the candidates' wives prove their maternal merit by competing in a cookie cook-off every four years. In the decade or so since this line was uttered, women's rights advocates have grown silent on the topic of motherhood. Few dare to criticize the new stay-at-home mom movement recently discussed on this page in the Austin American-Statesman.
It is time to have an honest conversation about what is lost when women stay home. In a nation devoted to motherhood and apple pie, what could possibly be wrong with staying home to care for your children?
Several things, I think.
It denies men the chance to be involved fathers. This is a loss for them and a loss for their children. What does it mean when fathers are denied the opportunity to nurture their kids in ways that are as important as their work? What do the children miss when they don't have fathers changing their diapers, picking them up from school, coaching soccer, making breakfast or dinner and doing homework with them? On both sides, the answer is too much.
Women who stay at home also lose out — they lose a chance to contribute as professionals and community activists. Parenting is an important social contribution. But we need women in medicine, law, education, politics and the arts. It is not selfish to want to give your talents to the broader community — it is an important part of citizenship to do so, and it is something we should expect of everyone.
Full-time mothering is also bad for children. It teaches them that the world is divided by gender. This sends the wrong message to our sons and daughters. I do not want our girls to grow up thinking they must marry and have children to be successful, or that you can only be a good mother if you give up your work.
Nor do I want boys to think that caring for families is women's work and making money is men's work. Our sons and daughters should grow up thinking that raising and providing for a family is a joint enterprise among all the adults in the family.
The new stay-at-home motherhood movement parallels the movement to create the "perfect" child. It's not just that mothers are home with their children; they are engaged with their children constantly so they will "develop" properly. Many middle-class parents demand too much of their children. We enroll them in soccer, religious classes, dance, art, piano, French lessons, etc., placing them on the quest for continuous self-improvement.
Many of these youngsters end up stressed out. Children should think it is all right to just hang out and be kids sometimes. They should learn that parents have interests separate from their lives as parents. And we should all learn that mothers are not fully responsible for who their children become — so are fathers, neighbors, friends, the extended family and children themselves.
Finally, the stay-at-home mother movement is bad for society. It tells employers that women who marry and have children are at risk of withdrawing from their careers, and that men who marry and have children will remain fully focused on their careers, regardless of family demands. Both lessons reinforce sex discrimination.
This movement also privileges certain kinds of families, making it harder for others. The more stay-at-home mothers there are, the more schools and libraries will neglect the needs of working parents, and the more professional mothers, single mothers, working-class mothers and lesbian mothers will feel judged for their failure to be in a traditional family and stay home their children.
By creating an expectation that mothers could and should stay home, we lose sight of the fact that most parents do work — and that they need affordable, high quality child care, after-school enrichment programs and family leave policies that allow mothers and fathers to nurture their children without giving up work.
Raising children is one of the most demanding and rewarding of jobs. It is also a job that should be shared, between parents and within communities, for the sake of us all.
Ritter is director of the Center for Women's and Gender Studies at UT and an associate professor of government and women studies.

Pages
Hi Lily.............
Hi Delsinger,
I think that it is a personal preference of what you consider to be a perfect balance in your life. Whether you are a SAHM or a WM it really does not make a difference. Each has a hard job. SAHM need to balance the family and the household while trying to maintain outside social balance. WM balance family, home and work on a daily basis. Each is important to the outcome in a whole.
I personally did not like being a stay at home. I yearned for adult conversation and was tired of having conversations about naps, meals, growth, milestones and dirty diapers which is what I seem to have with my friends who are SAHM. I didnt know for 2 days that John Ritter died till I heard it in passing. Soooooo I went back to work.
I have made consessions with my job with hours and travel for me does include my family if at all possible but if not I do all I can to assist my husband to care for the kids while I am away.
I personally have become much happier overall and my chilren are well balanced and happy also to greet each day to Mommy and Daddy, spend time with their friends and teachers and return home to play, eat and laugh while Mommy and Daddy tuck them in.
It is noone to judge anothers choices. Accept and embrace that each person is individual and so are our choices.
That is exactly my view.
>>> personally have become much happier overall<<
I really think this is the bottom line, if the mum and dad is happy and fulfilled, then it is to the best interests of their family.
I am glad it worked out for you.
alfreda
Thanks for your post Travelnmom of 2.
The most important line in that article to me was: "Several things, I think." What this woman thinks has absolutely no bearing on how I choose to raise my children. In child psychology, I was taught that children develop the base of their personalities and belief systems in the first 5 years of life. Believing this, I chose to raise my children before I started my career, so that I knew that I could share my belief system with my children throughout the day and by example. While I am not saying that children who are raised in daycare are getting the lesser end of the deal by any means, by staying home with mine, I knew that I would play a key part in their development. Some parents don't have the luxury of the choice of whether to work because of financial reasons, and those that do have the choice know the needs of their family and what works best for them.
The bonus for me is that while at home with my kids, I found that children were my passion and that I wanted to be a teacher once my children started school. I am VBS and activities director for the children's programs at my church. I am active in my community youth programs and am treasurer of the PTA. Now, I teach where my children attend school and will be their to play an active role in their live throughout their school days and have a career at the same time. Luckily for me, we live in a small town, so the school has K-12 grades on the same campus so I can keep an eye on them. Maybe not so lucky for my kids though. I would eventually love to lead an education reform program and maybe even dabble in politics, but right now I want to be most active where I am needed most - with my children.
<< Raising children is one of the most demanding and rewarding of jobs. It is also a job that should be shared, between parents and within communities, for the sake of us all. >>
Raising children is not the job of the community, it is the job of the parent or guardian of the these children. Communities are there to help support parents in this incredibly challenging job to the degree that the parent chooses, not to impose a feeling of guilt if a parent chooses to stay home or go to work. If this woman is part of the community that will help in raising my children, I would just as soon my children not be subjected to such insane ideas.
Amen!
I whole heartedly disagree. Many women don't have the choice to stay home for economic reasons. They are not the issue. Also many women would probably be bad mothers if the DID stay home, because they would hate it so much.
Have people forgotten the definition of feminism? It is the right to make a choice to stay home or work, to do what you want to do.
But, for the women who choose to stay home with their kids... lucky kids. I have a college degree, and had a career before my children were born. My husband and I have done without a lot in order for me to stay home, or work part time now that they are in school. I can tell "nanny raised kids" apart from "home with mom" kids in 10 minutes. The rare exceptions to this are kids that are raised by relatives who have carte blanche with discipline. (Not to say that both groups don't have their exceptions!)
Women that don't have a choice are not my argument. But the women I know that work in order to maintain the beach house and the mercedes are different. They rationalize that they are doing it for the kids, so they can have the best of everything. Who are they kidding? These kids are so overscheduled with every lesson, club, sport, etc. that they don't know which end is up and where the nanny is taking them next. But again, these are probably the women that would do more harm than good at home.
As to Ritter's argument about men being more involved, my husband would have loved to have been the one at home with our two boys. But his career is able to support us, and mine couldn't. Simple. However, he has made some choices in his career that allow him to be home every night, not traveling or working weekends. He coaches the teams, attends the games, cooks and cleans. Regarding her comment on gender bias, that doesn't happen because Mom stays home. That is the relationship between Mom and Dad. I marrried a nice man, and my job is to raise 2 nice, smart gentlemen that don't harbor stereotypes about women. BEing home I can do that.
Where does she get off saying that you have to work to get involved in community activism? Is she crazy? Has she been to a PTA meeting, or pre-school board of directors meeting, or a school board meeting, or local community center board meeting? If she had would have seen me and many other stay at home momes there at one time or another. Who does she think coordinates the soccer leagues? The CEO moms? Any community meeting (related to children especially) has enough former working mom talent to run a Fortune 500 company. Does she think we really stay home and bake cookies? You bet we do. Somebody has to. Who does she think baked the cupcakes for Valentines Day? Who does she thinks volunteers in her child's classroom while she is at work? Who is helping the kids read in 1st grade? Who volunteers in the clinic and kisses her child's boo-boos?
Regarding your comments on whether Ritter is on the left or right, I don't see the relevance. I am a card carrying liberal feminist who has made the choice to do what I think is best for my family. I don't think that is a political decision.
For young moms out there with kids too little for preschool, hang in there. None of my friends had kids when I did, and I got isolated and depressed. However, as soon as they were old enough for preschool, I found a group of adults that needed my help. And it goes on from there! You'll make friends, and enjoy contributing again.
Hope this isn't too long for all to read. Look forward to feedback!
Why can't it be a personal choice?
Personally I choose to stay home because no one can raise my children with our family values but someone IN MY FAMILY!!
Personally I choose to stay home so my children have a safe place to come after school. Personally I believe that if I am home and involved in my children's lives, they will be less likely to stray from my family's values.
I also have friends that choose to work and send their children to daycare. Their children are perfectly normal and happy too. IT IS A CHOICE AND NO ONE SHOULD BE JUDGED FOR MAKING THEIR CHOICE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. No one should think they are better than someone who makes the opposite decision.
I feel that women would be much better off in this world if we got off our soapboxes and just supported each other for once - no matter what choice we make. If we could just see each other as allies instead of being so competitive I think society would be better off as a whole.
The way I view it, we blatantly judge each other when we feel poorly about OURSELVES. Every one is of value. NO MATTER WHAT CHOICE WE MAKE. We should all stand by the decision we make and do the very best we can.
Pages