s/o: Paying For "Women's Work"

[Lovedtodeath]

One thing that I have noticed is that because I am a SAHM (and have been since my pregnancy with my daughter) people (even my best friend) tend to assume that I have not had a professional job and would not know how to do one.

[Joanne]

One thing that I have noticed is that because I am a SAHM (and have been since my pregnancy with my daughter) people (even my best friend) tend to assume that I have not had a professional job and would not know how to do one.

 

I noticed that assumption when I've held less than professional jobs, too. The assumption tends to be that if you are in a lower-paying, lower-status job, you are at your level of contribution.

[Melissa in Australia]

Really? Is it that bad for many of you? Thats what is getting me about this thread- is it really so "wierd" to do what you are doing- homeschooling, SAHM etc? Or, does it just make you uncomfortable to be seen as just a bit different, and perhaps you are over sensitive to people's moderate judgements? I mostly feel people dont really care what other people do....people are too self obsessed for that. So I dont take it all very personally.

I am so used to not being normal or mainstream I am finding it hard to relate to those of you who find it such a big deal that you are no longer considered such. I am finding it hard to relate to why it would matter very much to you. But perhaps I have just become immune to people's judgements from my years of being on the outside of that whole career world anyway. Or perhaps the community I live in encourages individuality and walking your own path to the extent that I feel what I do actually inspires many, even if at the same time they might also have judgements.

 

Peela I think it must be some cultural thing. I certainly know that here , where I live, nobody looks down on SAHM, or Working mums, or Homeschooling Mums either. I really can't relate to what they are all taking about either.

[Joanne]

Peela I think it must be some cultural thing. I certainly know that here , where I live, nobody looks down on SAHM, or Working mums, or Homeschooling Mums either. I really can't relate to what they are all taking about either.

 

I haven't noticed it in Texas. I have to admit, though, that some of that may be because I am not firmly attached to or married to the rhetoric or passion of either "side".

 

I felt/percieved many more negativities when I was staunchly on the SAHM side.

 

Another interesting observation is that:

 

1) SAHM are more valued if they are perceived as having to "earn" or "work for it".

2) WOHM are more esteemed when they are perceived as being there because they "have" to rather than want to.

[Heather in Neverland]

I'm torn. In many ways, I am an anomoly in both worlds: the SAH and the WOH.

 

I think that women in the workforce and women at home are complicated subjects. I grew up at a time when women being at home was *devalued* - BY WOMEN. It was hard to get that voice out of my head (1970's organized feminism, which was, possibly by necessity strident and over-done).

 

I became a mom and an "AP" one at that. I read the LLL's book about staying home, read Mary Pride, basically shunned feminism. I eventually took care of other people's children for pay. For this a percentage of SAH moms and WOH moms (even some clients) looked at me with disdain. Interesesting, huh?

 

When I took on homeschool clients in my early single mother days, I was looked on with disdain even on this board.

 

I've worked, with 2 under graduate degrees, cleaning an office building @ night. Poor pay, terrible work, terrible and sometimes amusing assumptions by the office employees (90% of whose jobs I could do with minimal training).

 

Housework doesn't take 24/7 - homemaking *can*, but I'm not convinced (anymore) that it should.

 

 

 

Do you see the hypocrisy in this? It's not either or. There is not a singularly fitting answer, even for and within each family for the long haul.

 

My life story is very much like that of the friend being described. I can tell you, unequivacobly, that I am a better mom, wife, friend, Christian and person now that I WOH. OTOH, since much of my role is also SAHM, I mitigate a lot of the issues that develop with WOHMothering.

 

To be honest, I live in TX - a suburb of Houston. I have found very little criticism of SAHMothering, homeschooling OR WOHMothering. In my wide scope of people, I've seen families fail and families thrive from all settings.

 

I no longer believe the rhetoric from either side. The truth is that it's a trade-off. There are pros and cons from either choice. It's just as unfair to assume most WOHMs "miss their children growing up" as it is to assume that a SAHM isn't "contributing" or "fulfilled".

 

I don't believe that it's all about money or provision. It's NOT all about consumerism. And when a Mom chooses to return to school or work, it can be the right choice even if the family doesn't "need" the money.

 

For some mom-at-home-families, they have elevated a vision of "family" and make it an idol. And, yes, for some WOH families, it is about consumerism. But we do a disservice to people when we assume either way or strip a complex choice to fit it into a neat shape that we've scripted in our heads.

 

Totally amazing post. Dead on.

 

Could be the circles I run in but I find A LOT more "disdain" for working moms than I do SAHM's. The SAHMs are always perceived as the more righteous and if they left a career behind to do it they practically have sainthood.

 

Joanne is spot on here...there are TRADE-OFFS for either decision. And many times, although we are loathe to admit it, our negative feelings about it often come from with in ourselves because deep down we KNOW neither is a perfect choice without consequence.

 

When I am working, although I love what I do and I like not having to worry about whether or not we can pay the bills this month, I deal with mommy guilt all the time. For the two years that I did not work, I loved being home with my kids but I missed the intellectual stimulation of being in the work world and I hated having to worry about whether or not we could pay bills.

 

Either way I am both happy and stressed out at the same time. Either way there are people that either admire me or look down on me. Either way I am valued or devalued for my choice.

 

So the answer, ladies, is YOU JUST CAN'T WIN.

[dragons in the flower bed]

Could be the circles I run in but I find A LOT more "disdain" for working moms than I do SAHM's.

 

Probably the reason that SAHMs notice more disdain for their choice and WOHMs do for their choice is that we remember negative things more often than positive ones.

[dragons in the flower bed]

I think that women in the workforce and women at home are complicated subjects.

 

I don't think this thread is discussing the relative merits of woh mothering and sah mothering. That issue is much too complex to generalize about. We're talking about the factors that have contributed to the devaluation of unpaid hard work. Has WOH mothering contributed to that? Most of us seem to think so. Does that make WOH mothering bad? Absolutely, resolutely, loudly NOT. The question of SAHM v WOHM is neither here nor there. Well, actually, maybe it is here in this sense: "mommy wars" are often a red herring that distracts us from wondering where our culture is going and why. It would be possible to say, "the entrance of mothers into the workplace has had this negative effect," and not mean, "society would be better off if all mothers stayed home." I personally am saying the one and not the other.

[Rosie_0801]

One thing that I have noticed is that because I am a SAHM (and have been since my pregnancy with my daughter) people (even my best friend) tend to assume that I have not had a professional job and would not know how to do one.

 

I can't say I enjoyed my status as a checkout chick in a fruit shop and I admit to snarky feelings towards one woman. She was just a stay at home mum who talked about fruit and maybe the weather if I was lucky; and she thought she was better than me! I might have looked like a high school drop out, but I definitely wasn't, and I was studying at night school, so ner. Now I'm a stay at home mum who makes no judgments about check out chicks levels of education. ;) I've often thought the world would be a better place if there was such thing as compulsory check out duty.

 

So the answer, ladies, is YOU JUST CAN'T WIN.

 

Lol, don't we know it... I don't think we've got to the point where we really OWN that notion though, heheh.

 

The most acceptable path here is to stay at home until your kids are in school, then work part time, going full time once they get to high school. But like Peela and Melissa said, there isn't much outside pressure to take any particular path here. As you're saying, Heather, the heaviest pressure comes from the individual woman directed towards her own self. The only negatives I've had as a stay at home mum has been from a few of my mad relatives.

 

Rosie

[asta]

I'm sorry, Rose. Yes, you do ask, but I should have been more specific. I think that I tend to group both of us in an extremely small fringe culture (see the GUS thread on top of everything else), and this causes me to think of you as an interested party in the sense that a colleague would be an interested party. But my family and my in-laws will literally sit and talk for hours about their jobs, dh's and SIL's jobs, etc., and those conversations do not include me, even though I know that they all value me as a person and consider me intelligent and capable.

 

(Rant ahead)

 

This is the biggest bee in my bonnet. Well, except for the value part. In the "too much information" dept: One sister is ABT for a PhD and has an additional Masters - she treats me great! She is who encouraged me to breastfeed, have a natural childbirth, co-sleep - everything. Kids went to PS and on to Ivies. Another has her Masters, is a single parent, kids have all been in daycare from 6 weeks. She vacillates on how she treats me (hung up on me yesterday!). Last sister has the same level of ed as me - a Baccalaureate. Kids also in daycare from 6 weeks. Was out of work for a year and kept the nanny because she "just couldn't deal with the child". She treats me like absolute crap. Takes every opportunity possible to tell me how unqualified I am to be doing *anything* I happen to be doing at the time. Which is highly ironic, considering she works in a field for which she has zero education or training.

 

Which brings me to the crux: the last time I spoke to her? She had the gall to say to me "Do you have a W-2 for what you do? No? Then what you do has no value whatsoever." THAT is what is wrong with the US economic system.

 

I agree with Joanne - this should be a "what fits you best" argument. I think my first two sisters are an example of that. But the last one? OMG! Perfect example of what I believe so many of us are facing. And as Mrs. Mungo said, it isn't like any of us are only ever doing just ONE thing, either. All of us are running around taking kids to sport, volunteering in our community, going to school ourselves, running websites, etc. etc.

 

I just... GRRR.

 

Right this second, it occurs to me that a paradigm shift would help a lot. Perhaps we could focus on resource allocation rather than earnings. There are incentives for carpooling, and insurance incentives for being accident free, having a safer car or a shorter commute...why shouldn't there be some sort of grant/tax break/whatever for reduced use of infrastructure due to rugged individualism. I realize that this will connect back to the whole "money back for not using the public schools" argument, though.

 

 

I don't know if this still exists, but back when I studied at uni (lo those many years ago), there were governments in sub-saharan Africa that calculated the 'value' of breastmilk into their GDP.

 

 

asta

[Saille]

I don't think this thread is discussing the relative merits of woh mothering and sah mothering. That issue is much too complex to generalize about. We're talking about the factors that have contributed to the devaluation of unpaid hard work. Has WOH mothering contributed to that? Most of us seem to think so. Does that make WOH mothering bad? Absolutely, resolutely, loudly NOT. The question of SAHM v WOHM is neither here nor there. Well, actually, maybe it is here in this sense: "mommy wars" are often a red herring that distracts us from wondering where our culture is going and why. It would be possible to say, "the entrance of mothers into the workplace has had this negative effect," and not mean, "society would be better off if all mothers stayed home." I personally am saying the one and not the other.

 

This is the crux of it, yes. Visualize a GMA piece on "Mommy Wars" similar to the unschooling one from a few weeks ago. That's about as close as we ever get as a society to discussing what I'm talking about, although there has at least been some talk about empowered homeschooling in feminist magazines...the focus does tend to be unschooling, but still.

 

I can see how Heather would see more disdain for WOHMs, because she's in a different sort of religious community than I am. In mine, childcare and public education are seen as vitally important components of a socially just society, and homeschooling can actually be seen as failing to support the public schools. I had a very interesting conversation with an elder last summer, because I see homeschooling as a form of social activism. Public schools are not what I think they should be, and I believe that the rise in middle-class homeschoolers and homeschoolers who've chosen that path for primarily academic reasons creates fear of market instability in a big, top-heavy institution that has, until now, believed it had a captive customer base. I think that will improve things for everybody, not just my kids. She never had kids, but is an advocate for children at the local urban school board meetings, and has been for years. My POV had never occurred to her. At any rate, I also get less pushback than some, b/c I do have a bachelor's degree in education. So people are bemused, but not necessarily disapproving.

 

Peela, as far as being hard-nosed and not giving a darn what others think, like Rose said, I'm talking about the economic and overarching cultural issues, and not so much which individuals get my goat. If I were, I'd have a lot to say about two-income families who think we're cramping their style b/c we can't run off and do expensive out-of-pocket fun stuff with them/for them. Also, there's a sort of weird backlash that comes from working moms with internalized guilt who think they should be home, but don't want to be. I had to really struggle with a close friend about that for several years; it was bad to the point of enmeshment. All my choices were seen as a commentary on her choices. So I have a much thicker skin than I used to. ;) But I just got really crabby on asta's behalf.

 

Oh, and LOL Rosie...I've always advocated mandatory minimum wage employment in a restaurant.

[forevergrace]

With my first daughter I had to work, and I worked at night. I bartended and made great money. More money then I made working as a social worker (residential counselor for severely abused children) w/a college degree. I was a single mom, and there was no other choice. We needed to pay our bills and have food on the table. The guilt I felt was overwhelming, and that guilt never goes away!! I missed so much of dd's childhood, and I know how much this hurt her.

 

I waited almost 13 years before I had the next child. After she was in school; I decided to go back to school. Dh totally supported the idea, after two years I was a paralegal. I loved it and had a great job. Dh and I both decided that I would continue on to law school!!!! My employer was all for it, my family was in thrilled. Between Dh's salary and mine we definitely could do it. Then dd, seven at the time, started have difficulties in school. I watched her happy little being change. Right before my eyes my beautiful dd who would laugh, sing, dance, talk w/her imaginary friends was becoming more and more withdrawn.

 

So much happened after that, and when I finally decided to hs I was terrified. I felt that I was finally arriving in life. I had a fantastic job, made good money, and was going back to school for yet a third time (I really love school). Yet, when I looked at my dd, I knew there was no other option. This time I could make the difference, this time I didn't have to work, this time I could be there for my daughter. In that minute I knew that everything else could wait, because she couldn't. I would lose her, and she would lose herself.

 

So I'll be a lawyer when I'm 85. I waited this long, and dd is the most important thing in my life. I always felt really lucky getting to stay at home w/her until she went to school, I had just assumed it would all work out with her in school. I knew nothing about hs, and I always thought it was something those people did. DD is now eleven-years-old, and there are days when I want to strangle her, and there are days when I can't believe how terrific she is. She'll say something so incredibly off-the-wall, and dh will just smile at me and whisper it is all because she's hs.

Forevergrace

Proud Mom of:

Dd 24 years old.

Dd 11 years old.

[forevergrace]

I know the difference and I wouldn't trade any of it for the time I had w/dd. So we don't have two salaries, we do o.k. Anytime I start feeling bent on what other's are thinking it is usually my own fears running a muck in my head. It's not my business what other's think about me, and if they are judging me and my ways so much, I must be extremely powerful in their lives. Doesn't that just sound ridiculous, it's not all important. Self-esteem and self-defeat often go together.

Forevergrace

[asta]

Also, there's a sort of weird backlash that comes from working moms with internalized guilt who think they should be home, but don't want to be. I had to really struggle with a close friend about that for several years; it was bad to the point of enmeshment. All my choices were seen as a commentary on her choices. So I have a much thicker skin than I used to. ;) But I just got really crabby on asta's behalf.

 

 

LOL - have you and my DH been comparing notes?

 

 

a

[SproutMamaK]

Can I just say how much I love this thread? It's nice to have intellectual discourse about issues with this with people who not only can express their point clearly, but who don't take offense at the opinions of others (and are intelligent enough to actually recognize and care about such issues). This is SUCH a departure from the "real world" for me.

[Charles Wallace]

I get the opposite. Women will usually tell me they wish they could afford to stay home. It doesn't usually come up with men, but on three different occasions (all in the same little profession/geographic region) men told me in slightly more diplomatic terms that any partner of theirs is expected to share equally in the income producing. I've always wondered what that was about. I wouldn't mind working full time if I had a partner who could garden, breastfeed and homeschool. I think I'd rather like it, actually. Maybe the article in the other post shed a little light on the attitude. Or maybe the men were afraid they'd be expected to earn 100% of the income *and* do 50% of the non-paid work?

 

Eh, I realize YMMV, but I feel more than a little bit of skepticism about that statement, and I've heard it also. The skepticism I feel is based on the fact that many people -- at least people I know -- base much of their lives on sustaining material possessions that require two incomes, then argue that they can't afford to have someone stay home. For example, one person I know bought a large house with her DH in a nice suburb of a major city. They have probably 2-3 times the house space we do even before they had children, and even with children, have excess house space.

 

Both of them work, and because both of them work, they both commute, have cars, need daycare, and so on. Then their statement becomes, "Well, we couldn't possibly afford to homeschool." Well, of course not...that is, not and maintain your current lifestyle.

 

To me, this seems a little opposite, or at least opposite to my values, which is not to say that my values should be the same as everyone's, or everyone's should be the same as mine. Not the case. Hey, it's their life, their rules -- but at least to me, it's clear that either they value their house and stuff more than they value staying home, or they're saying something they don't mean. Possibly both.

 

If what you value is staying home with your kids, then it strikes me as logical to plan for that eventuality from the beginning: buy a house that can be supported by one income. Don't buy anything that can't be paid for with one income. Then proceed.

 

One of the problems, though, is that to make that choice would mean that they won't have as nice a house as their friends or won't have as nice a neighborhood to live in. They might not have an extra guest bedroom or might be embarrassed to have a house party because they'd be afraid to suffer by comparison. They might not be able to afford a big-screen TV for the Super Bowl, or might not be able to afford Pampered Chef. That's all true -- and for some folks, that's just too much to take. I've said it before, but I'll say it again: it's all about relative value. If "everyone else" in our social circle couldn't afford big-screen TVs either, it would not be any big deal. When "everyone else" can, though, it IS. To some.

[Saille]

I agree with your post, Charles Wallace. I think it's very well worded.

 

What gets my knickers in a twist is this:

 

We have a small mortgage (for this area) and lowish property taxes. We chose carefully.

We own both our (older) cars.

We don't have cable.

I don't have a cell phone plan.

We buy almost everything used, including clothing and furniture.

We grow a fair amount of our food, and we cook most things from scratch, including most of our bread.

Our kids share rooms.

I work two part time jobs.

We just about never use credit cards, and are paying what we do have down.

We mow our acreage with a push mower that was a gift. Before that we used a rotary blade mower and a scythe. It sounds silly, but it's true. Not only do we not live the normalized American lifestyle, we're pretty much skinflints. We had a serious conversation this morning about canceling trash pickup because hauling it to the dump ourselves is so much cheaper.

 

And we still just scrape by. Holiday gifts, any out of the ordinary purchase, major car repair, home repair, even dinner out...they're all huge nailbiters.

 

Now, I'll grant you that some of this is situational. Dh is doing something like three consolidated jobs on a good day; pay comparisons have made it clear that he's being paid less than he's worth, but his particular industry is in a state of extreme belt-tightening, and was before the Great Recession, but now? Forget it. He's lucky to have a job, and we express gratitude for that every day. OTOH, some of this is due to the rampant credit spending that has been such a trend in this country. The cost of goods and services does not reflect the percentage of our actual income that they represent, because so many people have not been paying for them with actual income. And I believe that this mentality goes back to:

 

a. mass production and its accompanying marketing perspective

b. two income mentality (buy it, you don't have time to do the job yourself or repair the tool that broke).

c. the gradual slide from "buy it instead of make it" to "buy it and pay for it later, you deserve it".

 

I'm sure some of it is TV, as well. If you come home too tired to make or do, you watch. Your entertainment is passive. And what lays in wait on that screen? An endless stream of implications that Americans are entitled to houses that look like the sets of their favorite shows. Then everyone goes to work or school, where most everyone else has also been watching those shows and commercials, and the whole mess is reinforced. It's insidious and pervasive.

 

That's what I meant about my life being commoditized. It's like we need some sort of mass intervention where everybody is locked in their homes and the malls are all closed until we figure out the difference between a want and a need. But I really feel like the problem has its origins with the two-income family. And I say that as someone who would own the word feminist. Business has stepped up to sell us things and convince us that these things *are* memories, experiences, and nostalgia. And Americans are tired and disconnected from home, and they believe it. Once you stop drinking the Kool-Aid, you can look back and say to yourself, "Oh, those were not experiences; those were just things." But when you're in the midst of it and so is everyone around you, it can be really hard to see.

Edited July 5, 2010 by Saille

[asta]

:iagree:

 

Especially the Kool-Aid.

 

a

[dragons in the flower bed]

Eh, I realize YMMV, but I feel more than a little bit of skepticism about that statement, and I've heard it also. The skepticism I feel is based on the fact that many people -- at least people I know -- base much of their lives on sustaining material possessions that require two incomes, then argue that they can't afford to have someone stay home.

 

It never rings true to me, either. Here's the thought process. "Homemade, second hand things that cost no money are not of value. Homework that I'm not paid for is of no value. To stay home I'd need to do more work myself and have homemade, secondhand things. I can't afford to give up all that value." I don't agree, and have built my life on a rebellion, but 2/3 of the rest of the continent seems to think this way.

[cathmom]

The Two Income Trap is a good read about this topic.

[Colleen in NS]

The Two Income Trap is a good read about this topic.

 

Thank you. I just looked this up and found it in my library.

 

Great thread.

 

I wonder if anyone has any more book suggestions on DIY and all that has been discussed here?

[dragons in the flower bed]

A Householder's Guide to the Universe is absolutely hands down the best book ever on the DIY stuff as radical worldchanging. It won't be out until October I think, though. (We got an ARC.) Householder's Guide has much practical information, but it's really a philosophical treatise.

 

Farm City by Novella Carpenter was another manifesto + practical insight kind of book.

 

Don't miss Food Not Lawns either, even if you don't have an interest in gardening.

 

I have no interest in growing my own food but I loved all of these books. They are glorious generalist types of books.

 

For pure theory, Radical Homemakers is considered the major book on the subject right now.

 

The Story of Stuff is mind altering. You'll want to watch the original twenty minute "Story of Stuff" movie. It's an antidote to the kool-aid.

Edited July 5, 2010 by dragons in the flower bed
add more titles

[Danestress]

I am in the suburbs, and I can tell you that switching to glass vs. tupperware, not having a swifter, giving up paper towels and using gentle cleaners rather than toxic ones does not actually add any real time to cleaning. Not much at all. I've never owned a swifter, but the other choices took no time to make. It doesn't really take more time to go to the farmers market and buy local than to get vegetables from Mexico at the Supermarket - maybe half an hour more a week if I plan for it.

 

If I decided to get really serious and said I would bike everwhere rather than drive or that I would not buy soap because of the paper wrapping and would make my own, it would be substantially more time consuming. If I never used a dryer and hung everything to dry, that would add some serious time, but then it probably would mean I would do less laundry. Washing by hand would be ... massive. I think if a family is going to make that kind of choice than yes, they need to schedule Mom giving a great deal of time to maintaining the house.

 

I really don't think it takes 8 hours a day to clean a house for the normal person, even a responsible person who cares about the environmental impact of her choices. But it's a matter of degrees, I guess. I agree that if I made my own cheese and jam, it would require more time. In my mind, those are hobbies. I don't really feel like there is a serious environmental impact for me to buy cheese rather than make it. I make bread because I like my homemade bread and find it saves money, makes me happy, and tastes good. But if I were going to complain about how over worked I am, I know I could just buy bread (and often do). I've made jam many times, and I have to say that I prefer to buy it.

 

To me, some of the things we are talking about have value to the individual. I want my house clean so I clean it. My husband doesn't care as much, and if I were to start griping about being overworked, I know he would think maybe I could change my standards. If I were the working parent and my DH complained constantly like some women do about being overworked and exhausted, I would definitely encourage him to go ahead and buy the soap, candles and jam rather than hand make them.

[dragons in the flower bed]

This article, Myths of Incompetence, seems relevant. I know I am taking a jump from, "unpaid hard work is valuable," to, "it is immoral to deny your responsibility for valuing that work," but I figured a bunch of you would want to consider the things said here. An excerpt:

 

And as long as this is purely an issue of personality, of hating or loving a particular kind of work, and the right to only mostly do things you just love, that's cool. But this only works because you leave out all the context, and all the things that can be conveniently unsaid. After all, she tried making the yogurt. She didn't enjoy it. It wasn't as good, and that's where her responsibility stopped.

 

Except that not liking domestic labor does not mean your family stops making use of domestic labor - in fact, all of us use a whole lot of it. And it always has to get done by a person - there are no robot maids. Holler would rather die than lactoferment her own cucumbers, but there's no evidence that she and her family don't eat pickles. She doesn't want to make bread, but she presumably eats it. She can't keep a basil plant alive, but she speaks of salad caprese in way that suggests she likes to eat basil.

 

By framing this as a purely personal issue "some people are just made in a pickle-making kind of way" and as a matter of competence "I couldn't possibly grow a cucumber, that must be the territory of other people, raised on farms, whose social status is already determined..." we led implicitly to assume that the pickles that she then eats will be grown and made by people who just love growing cucumbers and making pickles - that there is a natural sorting into "pickle people" and "nonpickle people" in the world, and that this is good and just and everyone is happy. Except, of course, that's bull.

Edited July 5, 2010 by dragons in the flower bed

[Saille]

For pure theory, Radical Homemakers is considered the major book on the subject right now.

 

LOL...I'm one of the interviewees for that book...I *did* tell you that, didn't I? I think I did. Gonna feel like kind of a dork if I didn't.

[dragons in the flower bed]

LOL...I'm one of the interviewees for that book...I *did* tell you that, didn't I? I think I did. Gonna feel like kind of a dork if I didn't.

 

No, you didn't. And I haven't read it yet. Someday I will.

[Saille]

After all, she tried making the yogurt. She didn't enjoy it. It wasn't as good, and that's where her responsibility stopped...

 

By framing this as a purely personal issue "some people are just made in a pickle-making kind of way" and as a matter of competence "I couldn't possibly grow a cucumber, that must be the territory of other people, raised on farms, whose social status is already determined..." we led implicitly to assume that the pickles that she then eats will be grown and made by people who just love growing cucumbers and making pickles - that there is a natural sorting into "pickle people" and "nonpickle people" in the world, and that this is good and just and everyone is happy. Except, of course, that's bull.

 

I also think that, despite being citizens of an industrial age, people persist in believing that their food is made on or near farms like the ones on farmville, by farmers. Yet there is a simultaneous conceit, an affected discomfort with dirt and blood and bugs and all the other minutiae of food production. Even if you're living the life you were going for (and I am, I'm just crabby about how my traditionalist dream has become a radical undertaking) you don't like doing it all the time. It's messy. It's hard. It's cold or hot or rainy and inconvenient. Good things, things worth doing, are hard. They take effort, and changed patterns of behavior...sustained ones. That's very much at odds with the consumer culture we're being sold, which says, "Replace it! Dispose of it! Get a new one! Get mashed potatoes someone else mashed for you!" None of which would stick if people were actually in the habit of making/doing themselves. It sticks because two adults in the household are working, and the extra income makes it affordable to live unsustainably, and when it doesn't, not only our lifestyles but our spending simply becomes unsustainable in support of the overall pattern.

[Danestress]

DH is an attorney. He has skills others are willing to pay for. People who won't represent themselves pay him to do it for them.

 

DH is capable of doing a lot of things around the house that he is not willing to do. This week he didn't feel like hanging a ceiling fan, so we paid someone else to do it. He had the money but not the inclination (though he did have the skill and has done it before) . I don't know if the electrician who we paid (he was here on other business that required a licensed electrian) loves hanging ceiling fans. Maybe he hates it. It doesn't really matter if he loves or hates it - he has decided to do it for money. Incidentally, there are also parts of DH's job he hates, but he does them anyway.

 

I can't afford to hire someone to pull my weeds or wash my dishes, so I do those things even though I don't love them. But I absolutely will not sew my own clothes. I've done it. I hate it. It's not worth it. I don't think that makes me bad. I don't really know or care if the person who sews them likes it or hates it. That person has apparently decided it's in her economic best interests to do it.

 

We don't all have to do everything. I think it's really nice to have a skill that others are willing to pay well for. Then some of that money can be used to pay for jobs that we can't do as well or are not willing to do. I personally don't want to make my own wine or grow my own coffee. I'm so glad we can just buy it. It's not that I think, "I am not a coffee growing kind of girl but others are." I just understand that we have a market and that on the market of life, attorney skills can bring in a certain amount that can then be saved or spent. I tell my children that they need to develop skills that other people are willing to pay for. I don't care if those are pickling cucumber skills or cutting hair skills or drafting architectural plan skills. As long as they have figured out how to earn a living and live on the living they earn, I am okay with that.

[stripe]

Yet there is a simultaneous conceit, an affected discomfort with dirt and blood and bugs and all the other minutiae of food production.

To paraphrase a pair of teenagers who saw Cathy Erway picking raspberries in the park -- eew, I would never eat anything that I picked from a bush!

[dragons in the flower bed]

Teew, I would never eat anything that I picked from a bush!

 

LOL! This goes in the laugh or panic category for sure. People are so terrifyingly, life threateningly ignorant.

[HRAAB]

I know this thread is about women's work, however, something happened yesterday which made me think of this conversation. In our (dh and me) personal experiences, it seems value judgments are based on the work for pay you do. When meeting people, one of the first questions is always: what do you do? Then the feeling we get is that we categorized according to 'what work we do'.

 

Dh has been unemployed for the last year with a couple short contracts. Outside of missing the steady paycheck, I don't think I've ever seen my dh so personally satisfied. So, yesterday at the big family picnic, we met a couple new people. One of them asks dh, "what do you work at?" Dh was silent for a few seconds and then answered "living". He got the strangest look ever in return and was then asked, "yeah, but what kind of work do you do?" Dh went into a little spiel about how his days progress from working in the garden for a hour in the morning and evening, irrigating, building a composter, replacing a handle on a broken shovel with a limb from a tree he had to cut down, going to the junk yard to find something or other, cleaning out the chicken coop, splitting wood... you get the idea. While it was obvious from dh's tone how much he enjoys his 'work', the man looked at him like he was loony tunes. He wasn't the least interested in dh's 'work'. I have the feeling if dh had answered with what his job used to be, the conversation might have progressed. (I think dh has been feeling a little angry that family/friends don't seem to attach much importance tot he work he's been doing lately - normally he would just give the expected answer - "I do consumer end technical writing")

 

Being a woman who chose to leave the workforce and stay home, I've run into this more times than I can count. Perhaps many of us can relate to this. Yesterday I realized this is probably even harder for men than women. Also, that maybe this whole topic of 'work for pay' extends way beyond gender. I work very hard. My dh works very hard. We do not receive any monetary compensation for what we're doing, but that hard work has enabled us to survive (with a couple short term contract jobs along the way :001_smile:) and live in a way that is totally counter-cultural. Yet, I don't feel that what we're doing merits much value with extended family and friends.

 

My whole point is that this issue, ime, is not just a gender issue.

[cathmom]

I also think that, despite being citizens of an industrial age, people persist in believing that their food is made on or near farms like the ones on farmville, by farmers.

 

That's the image that is perpetuated. In the movie Food Inc, it talked about how many labels show pictures of bucolic farms. The next time my 11 yo was in the grocery store, she took a look at all of the processed lunch meat and cheese section, and came back over to me saying, "It's true! There's all these pictures of farms!"

[Audrey]

I also think that, despite being citizens of an industrial age, people persist in believing that their food is made on or near farms like the ones on farmville, by farmers. Yet there is a simultaneous conceit, an affected discomfort with dirt and blood and bugs and all the other minutiae of food production. Even if you're living the life you were going for (and I am, I'm just crabby about how my traditionalist dream has become a radical undertaking) you don't like doing it all the time. It's messy. It's hard. It's cold or hot or rainy and inconvenient. Good things, things worth doing, are hard. They take effort, and changed patterns of behavior...sustained ones. That's very much at odds with the consumer culture we're being sold, which says, "Replace it! Dispose of it! Get a new one! Get mashed potatoes someone else mashed for you!" None of which would stick if people were actually in the habit of making/doing themselves. It sticks because two adults in the household are working, and the extra income makes it affordable to live unsustainably, and when it doesn't, not only our lifestyles but our spending simply becomes unsustainable in support of the overall pattern.

 

 

It disturbs me deeply that so many people have no idea from whence their food has really come. So many people are completely disconnected from the food they eat. Personally, I think the situation is hopeless. I've given up on the thought that the revolution will bring us all closer to the means of production. I don't think most people care, or want to care, about their food or who/what produces it.

 

But... this is not the place for that rant, so I'll leave it at that, and just go back to wallowing in the mud, destitution and ignorance where we farmers are supposed to stay.

[A.D.]

I also think that, despite being citizens of an industrial age, people persist in believing that their food is made on or near farms like the ones on farmville, by farmers. Yet there is a simultaneous conceit, an affected discomfort with dirt and blood and bugs and all the other minutiae of food production. Even if you're living the life you were going for (and I am, I'm just crabby about how my traditionalist dream has become a radical undertaking) you don't like doing it all the time. It's messy. It's hard. It's cold or hot or rainy and inconvenient. Good things, things worth doing, are hard. They take effort, and changed patterns of behavior...sustained ones. That's very much at odds with the consumer culture we're being sold, which says, "Replace it! Dispose of it! Get a new one! Get mashed potatoes someone else mashed for you!" None of which would stick if people were actually in the habit of making/doing themselves. It sticks because two adults in the household are working, and the extra income makes it affordable to live unsustainably, and when it doesn't, not only our lifestyles but our spending simply becomes unsustainable in support of the overall pattern.

 

 

I have read every one of your posts in this thread and I still don't see what the issue is. You want to live a "traditional lifestyle"? Great! Obviously no one is stopping you. I don't see why you seem to think the worth of what you do needs to be validated by others.

It should be noted that your belief that the lifestyle you crave was the norm for most people in the past is simply not true. While those in rural settings were often more self-sufficient, to varying degrees according to location and time frame, specialization and the trade of goods and services has been the norm for those in urban settings once we started living in groups.

I grew up on a family farm where we raised most of our food, my mom sewed many of our clothes, and my father brought in an income from a blue collar job. While I enjoyed my childhood growing up, I don't see anything particularly noble or special about it, and frankly I enjoy my suburban lifestyle more at this time.

[Saille]

I agree that if I made my own cheese and jam, it would require more time. In my mind, those are hobbies. I don't really feel like there is a serious environmental impact for me to buy cheese rather than make it. I make bread because I like my homemade bread and find it saves money, makes me happy, and tastes good.

 

Everyone is going to have different things that make sense to do. I was just oogling Jersey cows on craigslist, but we have a grass-fed dairy a few miles away that provides me with milk, cheese curds, butter, etc.. I also have a grass-fed meat farmer who studied with Joel Salatin living a few miles away. Some might argue that I should support the local co-op, but I don't. I drive directly to the farms because it's cheaper. And some would say that I should support the farmers, but in truth I'm buying my meat and exploring the concept of raising my own simultaneously, and the farmer himself supports that. He knows most folks won't do it, so I'm not a serious threat to his business. If it's cheaper for me, why shouldn't I? I suck at growing tomatoes in this climate, although I filled my freezer with them in Ohio. So, at some point I'll head to the farmer's market and fill my car with someone else's sustainably grown tomatoes, and can sauce. It will still be cheaper than buying canned organic at the grocery store all winter, just as buying bushels of scratch and dent apples from the orchard will be cheaper than buying organic applesauce. I don't make my clothes (much), but frankly, secondhand clothing is cheap enough to beg the question, why should I? I make my bread because it's cheaper, not than any bread, but than the bread I'd buy if I were going to buy bread. Even in a sustainable model, ROI is an important concept.

 

What I'm saying here, though, is not that everyone should adhere to my model, but that there are some problems with how social movements have played out economically. Counter-intuitively, it is not simply manually more difficult to make or do for yourself, it is more difficult on a societal level.

[dragons in the flower bed]

You want to live a "traditional lifestyle"? Great! Obviously no one is stopping you.

 

There is something stopping us. It is more or less impossible to live a homemade life. Part of what we're discussing here is what, exactly, is stopping us, and how we get past that.

 

I don't see why you seem to think the worth of what you do needs to be validated by others.

 

Maybe that is what's making it so hard. That's the major theory floating about on this thread.

 

It should be noted that your belief that the lifestyle you crave was the norm for most people in the past is simply not true. While those in rural settings were often more self-sufficient, to varying degrees according to location and time frame, specialization and the trade of goods and services has been the norm for those in urban settings once we started living in groups.

 

Most people didn't farm, but no one factory farmed. A midden is not equivalent to a landfill. Clothes were not made by the lowest class; making clothes was a valued trade because it took lots of hard, slow work.

 

We're not aiming for a return to a pre-industrial era. We're hoping for an increase in the recognition of the actually great value of slow, hard work. We're hoping for these things to all be seen in the context of what's sustainable, what's good for us.

[A.D.]

There is something stopping us. It is more or less impossible to live a homemade life. Part of what we're discussing here is what, exactly, is stopping us, and how we get past that.

 

Very few people have lived a truly homemade lifestyle in the past couple of centuries, at least in the western world. I also have trouble taking this concern seriously when someone is posting it on the internet.

 

 

 

Maybe that is what's making it so hard. That's the major theory floating about on this thread.

 

Honestly, it sounds more like whining than a theory. I still do not see the need for validation from others if you are living the lifesyle you want/

 

 

Most people didn't farm, but no one factory farmed. A midden is not equivalent to a landfill. Clothes were not made by the lowest class; making clothes was a valued trade because it took lots of hard, slow work.

 

And? There was still (relatively) large scale agriculture that fed the masses.

Also, you are idealizing certain activities. Those that made the clothes for the lowest classes were from...the lowest classes.

 

We're not aiming for a return to a pre-industrial era. We're hoping for an increase in the recognition of the actually great value of slow, hard work. We're hoping for these things to all be seen in the context of what's sustainable, what's good for us.

 

Do you want medals? Plaques? A parade? This is my very point about why I don't get this thread. There is not anything more noble about growing your own food or making your own clothes. If you value you what you create yourself more than what you can purchase - good for you! That is what you should be doing.

For myself, I enjoy being paid for my skills, and then purchasing what I need from others who choose to spend their time creating those items.

[Audrey]

There is something stopping us. It is more or less impossible to live a homemade life. Part of what we're discussing here is what, exactly, is stopping us, and how we get past that.

 

 

 

 

 

You know what's stopping you? The inflated commoditization of land. For a month's wages my dh's great-grandfather bought 160 acres of unbroken land. We're still farming it today. If it had not been for cheap land then, we certainly could never, ever afford land now. You've been cut out of the possibility of land by commercial and factory farming practices which has pushed an artificial premium on land.

 

I'm not even going to get into what commercial and factory farms have done to that land, because I'm already pretty bummed out by this whole discussion.

 

Suffice it say... you shouldn't have that stopping you, and more people should acknowledge the value of the labour and skill that sustains them.

 

But they don't, and that sucks.

[Saille]

nt

Edited July 5, 2010 by Saille

[HRAAB]

I have read every one of your posts in this thread and I still don't see what the issue is. You want to live a "traditional lifestyle"? Great! Obviously no one is stopping you. I don't see why you seem to think the worth of what you do needs to be validated by others.

It should be noted that your belief that the lifestyle you crave was the norm for most people in the past is simply not true. While those in rural settings were often more self-sufficient, to varying degrees according to location and time frame, specialization and the trade of goods and services has been the norm for those in urban settings once we started living in groups.

I grew up on a family farm where we raised most of our food, my mom sewed many of our clothes, and my father brought in an income from a blue collar job. While I enjoyed my childhood growing up, I don't see anything particularly noble or special about it, and frankly I enjoy my suburban lifestyle more at this time.

 

While I don't need other people to validate what I do, nor am I going to stop because I don't receive that validation, I don't see why it is wrong to desire some recognition or value. Humans seem to need that occasional pat on the back or the knowledge that what they do is valuable.

 

Maybe a better question is why don't we put more value on manual labor let alone whether we're being paid for it or not. I certainly value my doctor. I value the attorney that helped with my dad's estate. Even though they're well paid, I imagine they also want to know their work is valued. How many of us would be happy if our children aspired to being sanitation workers, or furniture movers, or truck drivers, or houses cleaners?

 

What is so wrong with wanting or needing to know in some way that the work you do is valuable to the world you live in?

[A.D.]

Ask yourself why there can't be a corner of the internet in which folks discuss why the suburban mentality is not working for them, without you coming in here so angrily to defend your right to do what most of America is doing.

 

I did not "angrily" defend anything.

 

No one is discussing, as far as I can tell, a 100% homemade lifestyle. The homemade quality of our examples serves to illustrate that we economize and simplify in order to be at home and homeschool our kids, and that this work is devalued by American society, treated, as the Danestress said, like a hobby, when it's not. What you are being told is that all of these things are devalued in comparison to paid work. Not that we want them valued more highly. That we want them in their proper place.

 

They are in their proper place relative to the values of each person. Why should someone else value you staying home to raise YOUR child or raise YOUR garden? They are not being devalued, rather they do not have value to others. My wife stayed home full time with our sons until the oldest was in high school. We placed a high value on what she did for our family, but we did not expect others to do so. We also did not place any value on the work other mothers did while their chldren were in school, as it did not affect our family.

 

My Czechoslovakian farmer great-grandparents would beg to differ with your arguments. So would my great-uncle, I'm thinking. Thrift, economy, growing/repairing things so you don't have to buy them...these were much more pervasive values in American culture pre-WWII.

 

And? I do chuckle at the glamorization of those "values". They didn't repair/reuse because of some noble goal. They did so from necessity.

[Saille]

nt

Edited July 5, 2010 by Saille

[Melissa in Australia]

........and so an other interesting thread goes down the path of mud slinging and throwing rocks.:tongue_smilie:

[asta]

Guys,

 

Read the rest of A.D.s posts (all 38?) of them. Every single one of them is inflammatory.

 

Just don't engage. He'll stop. Or get banned.

 

 

asta

[Mrs Mungo]

It disturbs me deeply that so many people have no idea from whence their food has really come. So many people are completely disconnected from the food they eat. Personally, I think the situation is hopeless. I've given up on the thought that the revolution will bring us all closer to the means of production. I don't think most people care, or want to care, about their food or who/what produces it.

 

I'm not arguing with your train of thought. However, it did make me think about specialized occupations, in general. People don't ask my dh about being deployed. People didn't ask my grandfather about his job (he owned a plumbing shop). The History of Salt was mentioned recently in another thread. How much do you know about where salt comes from? There are a lot of things people don't really want to know or think about.

 

I think buying locally is an important (whether or not it's noble, I don't really know or care) goal. I have organic tomatoes from my next-door-neighbor's farm in my fridge right now. It is *very* hard when we live in places where land is at a premium. Land in many places costs too much (initially and through property taxes) to farm or ranch.

 

I think moving toward self-sufficiency is an important goal.

[Saille]

Thanks. I should have looked. Sorry.

[stripe]

I know this thread is about women's work, however, something happened yesterday which made me think of this conversation. In our (dh and me) personal experiences, it seems value judgments are based on the work for pay you do.

This is why I like the book Shop class as Soul Craft. Written by a man with a PhD in philosophy who left his think tank job to be a motorcycle mechanic. It's a really thoughtful read.

[ChrisOR]

Without reading most of this thread, I thought I'd share this

by Dr. Elizabeth Warren. This is long, but there are shorter videos linked if you prefer to get a general overview. I think she also wrote a book about the shrinking middle class, due to risks associated with the second income.

[Saille]

Ooh, thank you! I like Elizabeth Warren a lot.

 

Ishki, that book Rose recommended, Radical Homemakers, would probably speak to both of you.

[Lovedtodeath]

Saille, I have vehemently disagreed with some of your posts in the past, but I am very much enjoying this discussion including all of your posts. I don't have much to add to this thread, but I do appreciate it.:)

Edited July 5, 2010 by Lovedtodeath

[dragons in the flower bed]

Read the rest of A.D.s posts (all 38?) of them. Every single one of them is inflammatory.

 

Thanks for pointing that out.