Ads


Everything’s Coming up Rosen

Unless you’ve been hiding out in a Nepalese hut contemplating the infinite, you’ve probably paid some attention to the tempest swirling around Hilary Rosen’s recent remarks about Ann Romney’s work experience. I’m not as interested in Rosen’s actual snipes (which even she seems to acknowledge were beyond lame-brained) as in the problems surrounding contemporary American motherhood that they highlighted.

I don’t know squat from motherhood. I’m the oldest of eight children and the daughter of a stay at home mom who happens to be my best friend and general life-coach, but my personal experience in the area is nil. This makes me hesitant to write about motherhood, but it does seem a subject meriting thought, especially for a young woman entering the period of her life when one often makes Big Choices. So if anything I say seems presumptuous, unrealistic, or stupid, just chuckle.

With that said, it seems to me that we do women no favors when we conflate childcare and motherhood. Motherhood isn’t a job–it’s a vocation and an identity. Stay at homes are not “full-time moms” any more than women who work outside the home–as if breadwinning fathers were “part-time dads.” Fulltime childcare, especially as it’s usually combined with housekeeping, however, is a job–is hard, demanding, work. And the sooner we stop fetishizing it as the core of what it means to be a mother and a woman, as some sort of sacred, higher, path for the female sex, the sooner we will see it for what it really is: difficult, necessary, and honorable work whose workers deserve dignified and decent working conditions.


To be Queen Elizabeth within a definite area, deciding sales, banquets, labors and holidays; to be Whiteley within a certain area, providing toys, boots, sheets cakes, and books; to be Aristotle within a certain area, teaching morals, manners, theology, and hygiene; I can understand how this might exhaust the mind, but I cannot imagine how it could narrow it. How can it be a large career to tell other people’s children about the Rule of Three, and a small career to tell one’s own children about the universe? How can it be broad to be the same thing to everyone, and narrow to be everything to someone? No; a woman’s function is laborious, but because it is gigantic, not because it is minute. I will pity Mrs. Jones for the hugeness of her task; I will never pity her for its smallness. –G.K. Chesterton

I appreciate Chesterton’s thought, but rhetoric like this seems to imply that childcare is one long, exhausting, ecstasy of creative energy and emotional fulfillment. A woman needs no other identity or outlet: motherhood, or at least the Victorian ideal of motherhood predicated on rapt and constant communion between mother and child, is all in all.

Our cult of motherhood demands human sacrifice—hence the constant need for, and glorification of, victimhood (interestingly, in my experience especially by women privileged enough to pay me for childcare while they work neither for pay nor passion). I see women at the playground who look like zombies–completely exhausted, frazzled by the demands of their children, clad in dirty and ill-fitting clothing, constantly interrupted in what may be their only adult interactions till the Mr. gets home by the requests and complaints of their children. “Men just don’t understand,” they say. “It’s all part of being a mom.”

In what other field would we accept and even romanticize these working conditions? Contrary to the sacrificial lamb aspect of the motherhood mythos, it is perfectly acceptable to say “We need to make buying clothes for me a priority in our budget, because I am a human being and a worker, and both of those facts demand a certain dignity.” It is perfectly acceptable to say “No, you’re not doing trombone camp this year, because I have interests and talents that do not involve you, and spending my life in the car prevents me from pursuing them.” It is perfectly acceptable to say “No, I will not stay up late making rice-krispie treats in the shape of ninja turtles, because who does that? Thanks for nothing, Pinterest.

Childcare and housingkeeping is usually accomplished by mothers, but it is not motherhood, and it is certainly not a primary identity. It is intense work that men, women, grandparents, et cetera undertake for the sake of children, their families, and society–important work, rewarding work, but no more and no less. The sooner we get over our obsession with domesticity as female fulfillment, the sooner we scrap this ridiculous bifurcation that simultaneously glorifies DIY martyrdom and treats work in the home as a fun little hobby.

Perhaps counter-intuitively, I think Catholic stay-at-home moms escape this trap much better than their secular counterparts. Betty Duffy, Mrs. Darwin, Pentimento, and Simcha Fisher, among others, write very frankly about the demands and rewards of domestic labor, and they’re also interesting, engaged women who provide some of the funniest, most insightful, and most challenging writing I have ever encountered. It may be the financial burden a counter-cultural lifestyle imposes–a little semi-voluntary poverty often requires both spouses to see their respective jobs as a joint endeavor to keep the whole ship afloat. Some of it might be comfort with the idea of vocation–that their primary vocation as a wife and mother in these particular circumstances entails this particular work. It may even be a certain level of separation from the more noxious messages popular culture sends women.

Whatever it is, I hope it’s catching. Not because stay-at-home-moms are failures if they don’t look like a million bucks and conduct the Boston Philharmonic Orchestra in their spare time (that’s just what every mom needs in her life: more guilt), but because what our culture assumes about and expects of mothers and caregivers is nonsensical and unfair. Justice, they say, begins at home.

Clare Coffey is an undergraduate at Dartmouth College.

RESOURCES

Jennifer Rubin, Attacking Ann Romney — yeah, that’s the ticket!

Become a fan of First Things on Facebook, subscribe to First Things via RSS, and follow First Things on Twitter.

Comments:

4.19.2012 | 10:01am
DVO says:
I did a lot of chuckling while reading this. First off, it's not the "cult of motherhood" which requires human sacrifice, it's children who do. Secondly, in MY experience, it's usually the children of moms who DID get them to trombone camp and make the Ninja Turtle cookies (among plenty of other things) who wind up as Ivy League undergrads and feel sufficiently sure of themselves to pen missives on topics beyond their scope of understanding.
4.19.2012 | 10:21am
Dear Clare Coffey: Your column brings to my mind an incident in the life of Pope John Paul II. One of his university students delivered an impassioned defense of Marxism. His biographer writes that the Pope listened patiently and attentively and then responded: "This student is learning how to think philosophically." I, after reading your piece, came to the same conclusion about you.

The passage that you provide from G. K. Chesterton describes one way in which, through the "practice" of motherhood and homemaking (not "housekeeping") a woman can achieve integration of her physical, emotional, intellectual, and spiritual well-being. Homemaking in all of its aspects, interpersonal and artistically, has at least for me the status of one of the arts. The arts combine inspiration and real work; the final product is considered worthy of the tedium, time, and effort.

But, I will absolutely defend the truth that there are as many different but good approaches to motherhood and homemaking as there are good women who are wives and mothers. There are also ways that seem to miss the point of it all. Except for egregious cases of neglect, the fact that we should not attempt to judge seems self-evident.

Is there any human endeavor that does not involve sacrifice of many other sets of valuable things in the pursuit of one good and valuable thing? From my vantage point of advanced years, it seems to me that there is not. ... So, what is my point? It is that each person must decide within the limits of decency and responsibility (and, if applicable, holiness) how to fulfill the requirements of marriage and motherhood; never denigrating (or defining for them) the choices of others.

I recommend Josef Pieper on the virtues of the human heart; Father Servais Pinckaers on The Sources of Christian Ethics, and Dr. Robert Spaemann on Basic Moral Concepts (also Thomas Acquinas, of course), and all of these teachers on the subject of justice, its proper application, and on the subject of love. Also, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks on the related subject of the Sabbath and the Jewish understanding of a sphere of life and love not connected to money and markets.

One additional comment: The exhaustion of some high percentage of young mothers may have much more to do with nutritional needs (many young women are deficient in iron and other necessary vitamins and minerals) than with injustice. Unjust treatment, needless to say, of any person in any situation should always be addressed.
4.19.2012 | 10:25am
Clare says:
That's an excellent point, DVO. Certainly the fact that my mother was too busy keeping eight children fed, clothed, and out of trouble--not to mention, reading, praying, and teaching catechesis-- to shuttle me around to the activities most of my college peers engaged in has certainly affected how I feel motherhood and the demands we make of it.
4.19.2012 | 10:55am
violet says:
I myself as a young recent grad have often complained the same thing--in my marriage I have always tried to have housework etc divided exactly equally, have a career, and put my graduate education before spending time with my kids all day. However, as the mother of 2 young children, I myself am finding that I am unfulfilled. Perhaps the cult of motherhood, or domesticity of the woman, is not a cultural thing but a spiritual thing on a certain level. My husband is not torn to pieces every day for 3 years because his daughters are in childcare and he is not home with them. I am. This is not callousness on his part. It is femininity on mine, and it makes me reconsider my calling as a professor. Of course this is accompanied with a caveat that it is a highly experiential observation; there are women happy doing other things. But I think that I am not alone in feeling this way.
4.19.2012 | 3:21pm
To Attentive Listener,

The first paragraph of your response to Clare Coffey is condescending and belittling; likewise, the response of Pope John Paul II to his university student's impassioned defense of Marxism was also condescending and belittling of him. If the pope followed up this remark by failing to engage the substance of his student's ideas directly, then that failure only compounds further the fault of condescending to and belittling the student.

Anytime a person offers a sincere and serious reflection on any topic that really matters, their interlocutors owe it to them to treat their ideas with the same sincerity and seriousness with which they are offered, and to accord the interlocutor himself or herself the respect as equals due to them both in view their inherent dignity as human beings, and in view of their status as serious and reflective propounders of ideas. I must say it angers me especially to learn that Pope John Paul fell into this form of belittling condescension when he is so lionized for his moral qualities in so many quarters.
4.19.2012 | 4:01pm
Pope John Paul did indeed go on to respectfully address his student's philosophical and political ideas. The Pope was respectful of others in every aspect of his being. His entire life testified to his love of his fellow man.

My comment to Clare Coffey was intended as a response to her description of herself as a "young woman entering the period of her life when one often makes Big Choices". I understood this to mean her search for the truth of things, with particular regard to marriage and motherhood. My reply was sincerely and respectfully offered in the hope that it might prove useful.

I am baffled by your very hurtful and insulting comment. No words you could have used to describe Pope John Paul could have been more untrue. As for myself, my faults and failings which are many do not include any desire whatsoever to belittle anyone, ever, in any place, at any time.
4.19.2012 | 4:52pm
I'll do the dishes today first thing when I get home.]

And if you haven't seen the "William Tell Mom" song video kicking around on the internet, it certainly up there with other women who "provide some of the funniest, most insightful, and most challenging writing I have ever encountered." My wife, a teacher by heart and profession but for 10 years now a stay-at-home mom due to love and duty, thought it delightful.
4.19.2012 | 5:22pm
Stephen J. says:
I'll observe that one place Ms. Coffey's non-personal experience shows through is in the attributed comment: "'No, you’re not doing trombone camp this year, because I have interests and talents that do not involve you, and spending my life in the car prevents me from pursuing them.'"

Speaking as the husband of a stay-at-home mom, I can confirm quite confidently that as a purely logistical matter, my wife loses far more of her personal interest time (as do I) when our son is *here* than she ever does to the transport involved in getting him elsewhere. Thus we see the value of practical experience with the job to analyzing the choices people make about it.

That said, I thought Clare's observation about mistakenly conflating motherhood-the-vocation with childcare-the-job was brilliantly insightful, and I very much appreciated the truth that I'm not a "part-time dad" because I'm the outside-the-house breadwinner. My problem is that while I grant the two are not synonymous, I am unsure whether they can be productively disentangled, any more than you can disentangle, say, priesthood as a vocation from all the myriad jobs and labours (counsellor, charity worker, organizer, parish accountant) that are usually part of it.

Domesticity needn't be the ne plus ultra fulfillment of a woman's identity, but given how much role it's bound to play in her life and her family's, holding it up as something admirable, respectable and worth taking satisfaction in (and worth proper compensation for) strikes me as only good sense. It may be that that will cause some condemnation when an individual woman decides something else is even *more* important and others (possibly justifiably) don't agree with her, but if today's "man-boys" are to be condemned for putting their personal ambitions or leisures ahead of their adult responsibilities, I do not see how women can be justly let off when guilty of the same thing.
4.19.2012 | 5:34pm
Stephen J: I would disagree about the time issue. If you had eight rather than only one child, it very well could be simpler to keep the aspiring trombonist at home, where this (presumably older) child could help tend the younger ones.
4.19.2012 | 5:58pm
Tony says:
Thanks Clare, great article, I can tell you personally had terrific parents!
4.19.2012 | 6:23pm
Frank M says:
As the husband of a Clare, father of a Clare, and grandfather of a Clare I pay close attention to whatever another Clare writes or says. Thanks Clare Coffey
4.19.2012 | 6:33pm
Don Roberto says:
"What a comfort it is, this way of love! You may stumble on it, you may fail to correspond with grace given, but always love knows how to make the best of everything; whatever offends our Lord is burnt up in its fire, and nothing is left but a humble, absorbing peace deep down in the heart." —St. Therese of Lisieux

"We cannot choose the time we live in. We can only choose what we do with the time we are given." —Gandalf
4.19.2012 | 7:25pm
pentamom says:
"If you had eight rather than only one child, it very well could be simpler to keep the aspiring trombonist at home, where this (presumably older) child could help tend the younger ones. "

On the other hand, if you have eight, it's fairly likely that there's another one able to help with the younger ones. By the time you have an 8th, it's more likely that you have two teenagers than that you do not. That gives you more, not less, flexibility.
4.19.2012 | 7:51pm
Karen says:
Thanks to Ms. Coffey for actually mentioning that housework is, mostly, dull and exhausting, and that childcare involves an enormous amount of drudgery. All mothers who don't have full-time domestic staff end up with far too much of the crap-work around the house -- the tasks required to keep the place from being condemned by the health department and the inhabitants from either starving or living on fast-food garbage. These tasks are endless and would bore a lobotomized chimp into suicide. Far too many men think that XX chromosomes encode a love of laundry folding and scrubbing, so that XY chromosomes never need perform anything like that. Addressing this issue and making men do their fair share of the household scut work is a noble cause.
4.19.2012 | 10:07pm
Stephen J. says:
Not that I don't applaud asking men to do more chores where they can, but since when did *paying for the house* become less praiseworthy a responsibility than keeping it clean? (And don't say the man benefits from paying for the house too; the woman does her own laundry as much as anyone else's.)

And without disagreeing that the work is boring, nobody can claim that thanks to the invention of dishwashers, laundry machines and vacuum cleaners, it isn't a lot less physically exhausting and time-consuming than it used to be. If the objection is to having to do lots of work one finds boring, I'm not sure reality is any kinder to any particular group of people than another on that score.
4.19.2012 | 11:05pm
Jane Smith says:
Before I was a mother, I was constantly told about how housework and childcare were exhausting, dull, boring, interminable, and drudgery. Well, surprise, surprise, once I became a stay-at-home mother (thanks to all the doom and gloom descriptions) it was quite a pleasant surprise. In many ways, the work I do now (I grant that I only have one child) is far less onerous than being an office functionary before. Sure, there are many things I must do for my child, but he's a far more pleasant and flexible boss than that psycho I used to get paid by. Is some of what I do drudgery? Sure, but guess what people: all work is drudgery, that's why they call it work.

It's a mistake to condemn motherhood for expecting women to give up so much of their goals, aspirations, and personal fulfillment, while forgetting that is what work is for the vast majority of people. Yes, my (stay-at-home) mother spent my childhood engaged in work that didn't fulfill her talents or interests. But so did my father - he just did boring, unfulfilling drudgery in an office. Both of them made the sacrifice of work that would be personally fulfilling for the good of their family.

As for the essay as a whole, I commend Miss Coffey for a crisply-written and thought-provoking essay; nonetheless, this essay seems like a classic case of things looking much different from the outside. As I told a pregnant friend (and fellow Dr. Who fan), motherhood is much bigger on the inside. The stereotype of motherhood and domesticity being fulfilling for women exists because for many, many women, it is fulfilling. The fact that mothers consistently take the burden of childcare and housekeeping isn't some random artifact of history or conditioning. It's because *most* women find they want to do these things. Now, not every woman will be so, but because there are exceptions, should we deny what is the reality for the majority? Can we stop kidding ourselves that someday, if we just belabor the issue enough, men and women will be equal co-partners in parenting and housekeeping duties? Never going to happen, people, not until they figure out how to make men into women. It's not some artificial fetishizing of motherhood that understands some special relationship between motherhood and childcare. Motherhood is at its core a relational identify - there is no mother until there is a child. And when you have a child, the most natural thing that flows from that is wanting to take care of him. And no, it isn't the same for a father. Sorry, just isn't. The father cares for his child and feels about his child in a different way from the mother. Does it make my husband twitchy and anxious because he hasn't seen the baby in 15 minutes? Nope. But it does that to me. Actually physically being with and caring for your children gives a mother deep emotional rewards, and not being able to do so gives her more pain than it does a father. That's not cultural programming, not induced guilt. That's biology talking, and of course, at some level, the voice of God, creator of that biology.

Is it a mistake to conflate motherhood or childcare with your total identity? Yes. But is it a mistake to see those things as a large part of your total identity? No! It's what you are, what you do for the majority of your life. How could what you do the majority of your time not form a large part of your identity?

I find it odd that the concept of a "human sacrifice" is so denigrated. As a Catholic, I do belong to a religion that celebrates the re-presentation of the ultimate human sacrifice as the source and summit of Christian life. Yes, there can be a psychologically unhealthy understanding of sacrifice. But after the interminable lecturing on how mothers need to take time for themselves and their interests, I really doubt that too many real women are immolating themselves on the altar of motherhood out of some sort of sick masochistic martyr-complex. Sure, there are somethings about motherhood and childcare that are "must do now or death ensues," but the majority of my time I do what I please when I please - the laundry needs doing? Eh, after I finish this chapter . . . maybe after I finish this novel . . . oh, what the heck, after I'm done with this series.

P.S. As for the mothers in "dirty and ill-fitting clothes," I'll warrant that you don't see a lot of painters going off to work in 3 piece suits - same with childcare workers - you don't wear your nice clothes while toddler-wrangling if you want them to continue to be nice clothes.
4.20.2012 | 4:19am
edmond says:
No offense to any mother in this thread but I am a child of a career mom. This perspective is rarely talked about when discussions lead to the benefits between being a home mom and a "fulfilled" career mom. I can only think of the very many moments when as a middle child in a family of eight, I looked for an ally, specially when I was knew I was right. Sure, the absence made me tougher and more independent. Don't get me wrong, my mom is a most loving mom of the best kind and I know how torn she was about having to work to help dad make ends meet. Again, from the perspective of a child, stay at home moms who sacrifice their ambitions for cooking, cleaning and rearing the children, I hold in high esteem.
4.20.2012 | 2:25pm
Sachiko says:
I also appreciated the point that breadwinning fathers are not part-time dads.

I homeschool our six children--no helpful teenagers yet, but we do have some well-intentioned tweens. I've been the zombie in ill-fitting clothes.

Sometimes that resulted from the intersection of the economic realities of marrying into the (enlisted) military and the constant up-and-down one's body experiences when one spends years alternating between pregnancy and nursing. Who can afford to buy clothes that fit perfectly every other month?

Sometimes it's because of the demands of the job, like Jane Smith said. Nurses have their scrubs, and moms have their yoga pants, and both vocations often have the same kind, harried expression as they take care of the loving biological acts of drudgery that so many more vulnerable humans need. It's just easier on everybody if the boogers don't get on the nice blouse.

Sometimes it's because I had a period of ennui, or selfishness, or confusion, or what-have-you, where I listened too much to the usual cultural messages and withdrew myself from motherhood. Wait, why should I wear nice clothes when this is all scutwork? Wait, enjoying wiping bottoms is a symptom of Stockholm Syndrome! How will people know to rescue me from my tiny captors unless I put my clothing into disarray?

Or perhaps how I like this job sometimes is proof of my silliness and invisibility. If no one can see or appreciate my hard work, then surely they won't mind this stain on my husband's old t-shirt.

Personally, the more I embrace motherhood and feel that my contributions are worth something, the better I dress. The more I take care of myself. And, of course, the better my children fare.

So many of the moms I know need the vision of personal sacrifice. There's so much pressure to avoid, complain, delegate. It's as important as a love of the Constitution and our country was to my husband when he was serving in the military, even though he wasn't on the front lines but rather was writing code to help those other guys.

I think I may see what you're saying, though--I have noticed that there is a dearth of the middle ground in how our culture regards domestic tasks. Either they are jobs best pushed off on someone, anyone else--hapless spouse, luckless neighbor, minimum wage earner--or they are fetishized as done only in the highest fashion by professionals.

It's so hard to find the middle way (a Tao of Casserole, maybe?), where things are beautiful not because they are "ugly jobs done by a martyr" or "good enough for pay" but because they are done by a worthy mother, for a worthy family.
4.23.2012 | 3:56pm
Melanie B says:
I love what Sachiko says here about a middle way, neither seeing domestic tasks as thankless drudge work to be shuffled off onto someone else nor fetishizing them. I wonder if a deeper look at St Benedict's Rule might be helpful. St Benedict saw that the most menial work was not beneath a monk but was in fact vital to his sanctification. Work and prayer. Ora et labora. Menial work such as cleaning house and changing diapers and preparing food and doing the dishes was not beneath Our Blessed Mother nor was it beneath Our Lord. Perhaps if we take the Holy Family as a model for how to approach housework we would find that middle way. Work as loving service done for "the least of my brothers". Work as a way to sanctify our days not as some self-righteous martyrdom but doing what needs to be done because it needs to be done and being willing to ask for help and to accept help-- even imperfect help-- when we find we are sinking.

At the same time, I think it is interesting that there is this fear of victimhood and martyrdom. On one hand I get the point. There is a certain sort of self immolation that is done not our of true service but out of a sort of prideful glorification of self. In that sense, Mary was not a victim Yet at the same time Christ was a victim and there is a nobility in following in his footsteps. He washed his disciples feet and we are called to service and we are called to martyrdom. And it is possible that a woman is called to the small martyrdom of laying down the pride that thinks it is too good to get its hands dirty.

I think the middle road doesn't hesitate to do the work of service because that work is an imitation of Christ and yet it doesn't make that work the end-all. A mother's primary identity is as a child of God, a follower of Christ and her service to her family should always be in that context.

As several commenters have pointed out, dirty clothes may be a sign that the wearer is engaged in an unhealthy fetishization of motherhood. Or it may be that it is just one of those days. I often find that I look down at the end of the day to find my shirt covered in peanut butter and snot. I have in my care the physical needs of four children under six and especially when they are sick snot comes with the territory. I always dress up when it is important to dress up-- always wear a skirt and blouse to Mass. But I think of a t-shirt and jeans (or yoga pants) as the mommy equivalent of scrubs on a nurse. They are clothes that are meant to be beat up a bit because I know realistically that I'm bound to get messy and I save my few nice clothes for the occasions that warrant them.
4.24.2012 | 3:02pm
Sachiko says:
Also, we live in an immature, self-centered, anti-family culture. These days, "sacrifice" is very nearly a Bad Word.

Motherhood is a holy work. That doesn't mean it automatically requires martyrdom, but (to me at least) it does mean that, should the occasion arise, it would certainly merit it.

This reality is at great odds with our culture, and so it's not at all surprising that as we first experience the call to sacrifice, we are clumsy, confused, and sometimes self-pitying.

This is especially true for young mothers, as the change in their life can be so profound that they feel lost at first and sometimes unable to taste the fulfillment motherhood offers.

But that's how it goes; Sacrifice 101 teaches us that "This is hard"; Sacrifice 201 teaches us "...and it brings me joy." It often takes me awhile to matriculate to the higher-level course; I guess that's why I have to keep learning it. over and over again.
4.28.2012 | 4:26am
Joanne says:
@MelanieB "I often find that I look down at the end of the day to find my shirt covered in peanut butter and snot. " I know exactly what you mean. But in the end, i think we do too much for our kids. Experts suggest that parents let children do their own tasks by themselves. Children can do much better than their parents expect them to do and become more independent and innovative by completing tasks on their own
4.28.2012 | 6:39pm
Sheila says:
I have been reading articles on this theme all over the secular press constantly lately. Every time we moms try to do our very best at our job, we're accused of being "mommy martyrs." I understand why secular society should have a problem with that -- but I don't get why Catholics would object to martyrdom. I thought martyrdom was a good thing!

Sometimes, I see motherhood as a vocation -- like when I point out Jesus on the altar to my toddler or show him how to give the baby gentle touches. Sometimes, it's more like a job -- like when I sweep the floor even though I don't see anything "spiritual" about it ... it just has to be done. Sometimes, I see it as a hobby -- like when I cook something special just for fun, or when I tend my garden. Sometimes, it really is a martyrdom -- like it was last night, nursing my piranha of a newborn through exhaustion and excruciating pain, simply because he's a baby and needs to be fed no matter how I happen to feel about it.

If childcare is "just a job" and deserves the benefits other employees get, I would like to know where I can get a lunch hour, break time, maternity leave, and vacation time. No one is handing these things out. And not because they don't respect moms (though sometimes they don't), but simply because it is not economically feasible. Just like a "professional wardrobe" for me had to get cut out of the budget, as part of our adjustment to living on one income. I feel that kind of comment (about us moms and our frumpy clothes) comes from a place of privilege, like the comment I keep hearing that "it doesn't matter what a liberal arts education costs or whether it will ever pay, it's worth it for its own sake." Things can be of value for their own sake, but if they won't pay for themselves, people like me who aren't rich may not be able to afford them.

(Besides, when I worked in a daycare, every single worker wore yoga pants. It's kind of a sensible choice when surrounded by snotty toddlers and spitty babies.)

I guess I don't really understand your point. Is any spiritual take on my job just a "fetish"? And if I'm not required to be dressed to the nines and conducting orchestras, what am I supposed to be doing? It seems like you're saying there is something wrong with those of us mothers who find joy in sacrificing themselves for their children and happen to find fulfillment in the work we do on a daily basis. I consider myself very lucky to have the occupation I do, with so much freedom in how I organize things and the privilege of serving my own family instead of strangers, so I'm not exactly complaining about a lack of new clothes and break times.

Incidentally, I know you a little, though you may not remember me -- I was your brother's first-grade teacher two years ago. (What a kid. I still miss him.) Your mom seemed like a great model of what a mom should be -- tired and a little frazzled sometimes, perhaps, but with a big smile that seemed to me at least to say "Yes, it's hard, but it's important enough to sacrifice for." She definitely went the extra mile helping my student catch up in school, and never begrudged the fact that she was doing more than I was to teach him to read. I can't speak for her, obviously -- but it just never seemed like it was "just a job" to her.

I think, from the outside, motherhood looks unappealing to you because all you see is the sacrifice. But from the inside, it's so full of rewards that I don't feel like counting the cost. It's my personal road to sanctification, and it definitely is doing that, but it's also a very joyful path and I wouldn't trade it for all the professional recognition in the world.
type the text above in the box below

Links

Blogs

Find Us

Contact