What do you think about this article?

[I.Dup.]

http://www.thenation.com/blog/170373/im-not-mother-first#

 

I got into a huge argument last night on facebook about this, and ended up permanently deleting my account (or I am in the process of that, I have to wait 2 weeks) because I was called so many names and had so many nasty things said about me and my family just because I shared my opinion on this article. Granted, it was on my cousin's wall and the people who attacked me are all of her very liberal friends who I have very little in common with (also, who don't know me, never have met me, never have even seen me), but it was still very hurtful.

 

I'm wondering if I am way off base and what the general concensus is.

 

ETA: She does mention political candidates in the article, but it is an article on mothering, not politics.

[itsheresomewhere]

I fail to see how saying I am a mother first is so bad to women. I am a mom first that is who I am. But for fun I do list on medical forms my job is a Domestic Engineer. That is just to see if they read it or have common sense.

[Joker]

I thought the whole point of equal rights for women was so we would have more choices. If I'm fine identifying myself right now as a mom first, that's my choice and I don't get why it would bother anyone else.

[edelweiss]

I absolutely believe that I'm a mother first. No question about it. There is no other role in my life that could possibly top that one.

 

I would hope that every woman who is a mother would declare herself a "mother first" (at least while her children are underage). Of course, I also believe that men who are fathers should consider themselves "fathers first" as well. I'm fortunate that my husband does.

[SorrelZG]

I thought the whole point of equal rights for women was so we would have more choices. If I'm fine identifying myself right now as a mom first, that's my choice and I don't get why it would bother anyone else.

 

I don't know how to express how I feel but this is close enough and probably nicer.

[justLisa]

I'm sorry that happened to you. :grouphug:

[Mama Geek]

The only thing I think is that I am a child of God first, wife second and mother 3rd. But I don't think that is what your major conflicts were about. I am still an engineer even though I am not working and may not do so again.

[SKL]

That woman seems to be having an identity crisis.

 

I work 7 full-time days per week, but even I feel like I'm a mother first at the present time. I feel that currently, what I do for my kids is more important than whatever else I may be doing. I could imagine it being different (e.g., if I were a soldier deployed to a war zone), but this is my reality. No apologies.

 

To each her own.

[momofkhm]

I fail to see how saying I am a mother first is so bad to women. I am a mom first that is who I am.

 

:iagree:

 

I think this author is way off base.

[I.Dup.]

But I don't think that is what your major conflicts were about.

 

My conflict was about saying that I thought it was selfish for a woman to so brazenly and proudly refuse to make her young child a priority for the first few years of his/her life. We went around and around, when pressed I said that I felt it was ideal but not always realistic that a mother stay home for the first few years, and apparently that is an evil that no one should ever speak. Of course I know that not everyone wants to stay at home or can stay at home, and I reiterated that 5 or 6 times, that I thought the author of the article's view was selfish and would never judge anyone's situation personally.

 

After going around and around about this, I was then called a kool-aid drinking tool who will never have any fulfillment or happiness in my life because I put my children first and to "Get off my throne" and stop "judging" women who work. This was after 5 or 6 times of saying I was speaking only about the article and my personal belief, I was not meaning that I thought all women who work are selfish, etc, etc.

[jujsky]

I thought the whole point of equal rights for women was so we would have more choices. If I'm fine identifying myself right now as a mom first, that's my choice and I don't get why it would bother anyone else.

 

:iagree: This, exactly!

[jeninok]

I really don't understand this, and I am fairly liberal and my husband would say I get a little up in arms about women's rights. :D

 

Even when I was pulling 80 hour weeks running a bar, I was a mom first, I had to do it at the time, I enjoyed doing, but I never once said or felt my kid wasn't my first priority.

 

I really don't understand having children and then being disdainful about caring for them, taking a few years off to stay at home with them, or saying that those who do are somehow hurting your rights.

 

Ridiculous.

 

 

ETA: I don't mean moms who work are somehow less than wonderful mothers just because they work. It is the attitude of somehow thinking it is less than optimal if you stay home, or they could never be with their own kids all day that really gets me.

Edited October 19, 2012 by jeninok

[3Blessings]

We live in a culture that worships self and values individuality. This is in direct conflict with putting ourselves in a role of service to others or (the horror!) thinking more about others than ourselves. In many minds, putting other needs ahead of our own is ridiculous.

 

No Asian culture (in particular) would publish this:

"And declaring our individual importance as people and citizens does not diminish the depth of love we have for our children or the central role parenthood plays in our lives."

 

In other cultures, self is far less important and individuality is second to family, community. This article would never be published by folks in those cultures.

 

It is too bad for us. I'm sorry it happened to you.

[I.Dup.]

Well see I agree with you, but then again, I don't think women who feel differently are bad parents or people. They just feel differently. Different isn't always bad to me. If the child's needs are being met in some way I don't get hung up on the details.

 

That's the thing. I didn't say anyone was a bad person or a bad parent. The WORST thing I said was that the attitude shown in the article was a selfish one, in my opinion. That is the WORST adjective I used, selfish.

 

I am so cynical right now about trying to have discussions with people who feel differently than I do. :glare:

[Joker]

My conflict was about saying that I thought it was selfish for a woman to so brazenly and proudly refuse to make her young child a priority for the first few years of his/her life. We went around and around, when pressed I said that I felt it was ideal but not always realistic that a mother stay home for the first few years, and apparently that is an evil that no one should ever speak. Of course I know that not everyone wants to stay at home or can stay at home, and I reiterated that 5 or 6 times, that I thought the author of the article's view was selfish and would never judge anyone's situation personally.

 

After going around and around about this, I was then called a kool-aid drinking tool who will never have any fulfillment or happiness in my life because I put my children first and to "Get off my throne" and stop "judging" women who work. This was after 5 or 6 times of saying I was speaking only about the article and my personal belief, I was not meaning that I thought all women who work are selfish, etc, etc.

 

I'm sorry you were treated harshly, but using the word selfish probably wasn't wise. I don't think it's selfish for other women to choose something different than I have. I've actually known a few women who were better mothers because they chose to work. They were much happier and I wouldn't want anyone to think they were being selfish.

 

I think it's all about respecting different choices. No one should care that right now I choose to call myself a mom first, but I also don't think anyone should be too bothered by someone wishing to not be known as mom first.

[I.Dup.]

We live in a culture that worships self and values individuality. This is in direct conflict with putting ourselves in a role of service to others or (the horror!) thinking more about others than ourselves. In many minds, putting other needs ahead of our own is ridiculous.

 

No Asian culture (in particular) would publish this:

"And declaring our individual importance as people and citizens does not diminish the depth of love we have for our children or the central role parenthood plays in our lives."

 

In other cultures, self is far less important and individuality is second to family, community. This article would never be published by folks in those cultures.

 

It is too bad for us. I'm sorry it happened to you.

 

I agree. There are so many sentences in that article that are harmful to the woman's movement and a woman's psyche in general, and the fact that they were so proudly touting it, I just had to say something. Of course I wish I hadn't. The sentence about how dangerous it is to define ourselves relationally rather than individually? Really? Does anyone believe it's better to forgo relationships with our children and our spouse for our own individuality?? I just don't get that mindset. I'm still angry about how the discussion went. Ugh.

[forty-two]

Idk, I completely disagree with the article writer's politics, but I do *not* identify myself as a mother first. Or as a wife first. Or even as a woman first. I am *me* - if I must identify as anything, I identify as human, and as a child of God. All the other identities are just subsets of *me* - being a mother *is* an important part of me, but it's not the totality of me, or the *most* important part of me.

 

So I kind of agree with the article that it is kind of sad that women are encouraged to see themselves primarily through their relationships with others - as a wife, as a mother - instead of as a *person* who happens to be a wife and a mother. (The feminist approach of defining a woman's primary identity as a *woman*, not as a *person*, bothers me for the similar reasons.)

 

Still no excuse for people to be nasty about it, though :grouphug:.

[Cassy]

We live in a culture that worships self and values individuality. This is in direct conflict with putting ourselves in a role of service to others or (the horror!) thinking more about others than ourselves. In many minds, putting other needs ahead of our own is ridiculous.

 

No Asian culture (in particular) would publish this:

"And declaring our individual importance as people and citizens does not diminish the depth of love we have for our children or the central role parenthood plays in our lives."

 

In other cultures, self is far less important and individuality is second to family, community. This article would never be published by folks in those cultures.

 

It is too bad for us. I'm sorry it happened to you.

 

:iagree: Yes, my thoughts were similar.

[I.Dup.]

Idk, I completely disagree with the article writer's politics, but I do *not* identify myself as a mother first. Or as a wife first. Or even as a woman first. I am *me* - if I must identify as anything, I identify as human, and as a child of God. All the other identities are just subsets of *me* - being a mother *is* an important part of me, but it's not the totality of me, or the *most* important part of me.

 

So I kind of agree with the article that it is kind of sad that women are encouraged to see themselves primarily through their relationships with others - as a wife, as a mother - instead of as a *person* who happens to be a wife and a mother. (The feminist approach of defining a woman's primary identity as a *woman*, not as a *person*, bothers me for the similar reasons.)

 

Still no excuse for people to be nasty about it, though :grouphug:.

 

I do agree with you! But I feel the author was meaning "self above all, even to the expense of our children." The people in the discussion I was having were saying things like "I'm not going to give up my desires for a kid's crap and random whims."

[TranquilMind]

http://www.thenation.com/blog/170373/im-not-mother-first#

 

I got into a huge argument last night on facebook about this, and ended up permanently deleting my account (or I am in the process of that, I have to wait 2 weeks) because I was called so many names and had so many nasty things said about me and my family just because I shared my opinion on this article. Granted, it was on my cousin's wall and the people who attacked me are all of her very liberal friends who I have very little in common with (also, who don't know me, never have met me, never have even seen me), but it was still very hurtful.

 

I'm wondering if I am way off base and what the general concensus is.

 

ETA: She does mention political candidates in the article, but it is an article on mothering, not politics.

 

Ditch those people from your Facebook. You don't have to go away, unless you want to anyway. You can block anyone you want and keep saying whatever you want.

 

This writer is a very young woman who has no clue what she is talking about. I'd bet she doesn't even have kids. If she does, then she obviously believes alternative caregivers are equivalent to parental care, which is NOT true.

 

It is a very practical reality that SOMEONE has to be able to take care of the kids. While in some families it is Dad, normally it is Mom because the truth is that Dad can generally make more money in our current structure.

 

So, pshaw....what does she know. Talk to me again in 25 years, I'd say to her.

[TranquilMind]

I But I feel the author was meaning "self above all, even to the expense of our children."

 

That's it.

[TranquilMind]

blessedwinter: My conflict was about saying that I thought it was selfish for a woman to so brazenly and proudly refuse to make her young child a priority for the first few years of his/her life. We went around and around, when pressed I said that I felt it was ideal but not always realistic that a mother stay home for the first few years, and apparently that is an evil that no one should ever speak.

 

That's sad and funny at the same time. Yes, how dare you.

 

 

After going around and around about this, I was then called a kool-aid drinking tool who will never have any fulfillment or happiness in my life because I put my children first and to "Get off my throne" and stop "judging" women who work.

 

Shake the dust off your feet. You can't talk to rabid zealots about anything.

[I.Dup.]

Ditch those people from your Facebook. You don't have to go away, unless you want to anyway. You can block anyone you want and keep saying whatever you want.

 

This writer is a very young woman who has no clue what she is talking about. I'd bet she doesn't even have kids. If she does, then she obviously believes alternative caregivers are equivalent to parental care, which is NOT true.

 

It is a very practical reality that SOMEONE has to be able to take care of the kids. While in some families it is Dad, normally it is Mom because the truth is that Dad can generally make more money in our current structure.

 

So, pshaw....what does she know. Talk to me again in 25 years, I'd say to her.

 

That's sad and funny at the same time. Yes, how dare you.

Shake the dust off your feet. You can't talk to rabid zealots about anything.

 

Thank you. This is encouraging. :001_smile:

 

Yeah! Stop apologizing for your feelings and beliefs. Become your own rabid zealot!! :D

 

I'm trying! But I keep getting knocked down by people who are way more rabid than I am, my feelings get hurt, and I want to crawl in a hole and never talk to anyone again. :tongue_smilie::lol:

[Kathryn]

I agree with what's been said here and am glad I'm not her child. Turning parenthood into a political pissing contest is something we should be past. Yes, I consider myself a mother before anything else. I don't think there's anything more important I'll ever do. I made two PEOPLE and I'm trying to mold them into responsible people. As is my husband. I guarantee that he DOES consider his role as father as more important than his money-making role. The idea that it is demeaning for me to identify myself as "mother" is demeaning. I don't think it's relational. Motherhood is not like being a cousin. It's a job, it's a duty, and one I take very seriously. I don't begrudge anyone else thei self-declared titles. Don't act like I am the one setting womanhood back by proclaiming my role to be mother.

[I.Dup.]

I agree with what's been said here and am glad I'm not her child. Turning parenthood into a political pissing contest is something we should be past. Yes, I consider myself a mother before anything else. I don't think there's anything more important I'll ever do. I made two PEOPLE and I'm trying to mold them into responsible people. As is my husband. I guarantee that he DOES consider his role as father as more important than his money-making role. The idea that it is demeaning for me to identify myself as "mother" is demeaning. I don't think it's relational. Motherhood is not like being a cousin. It's a job, it's a duty, and one I take very seriously. I don't begrudge anyone else thei self-declared titles. Don't act like I am the one setting womanhood back by proclaiming my role to be mother.

 

Preach it!! :D Where were you all when I needed you last night?!?! :lol:

[TranquilMind]

So true! I had completely different thoughts/ideals when I was a college student. I mean COMPLETELY! My mother would just shake her head and tell me I'd change my mind in a few years. I didn't believe it. But it was true.

 

Me too. I remember sitting in the law school lounge one day with a woman who was pregnant with her third, I think it was. (Ironically, I had dated her husband before she met him, and wow, was he boring...but that is another story).

 

Anyway, I remember thinking that I would never, ever be "tied down" like her, popping out kids. I pitied her. I was going to have a CAREER and no one would ever tell me what to do...

 

I was about 26 too, not a teen!

 

How stupid I was. I really thought I knew it all then too. I probably will say the same thing about myself in another 25 years, should I still be around.

[Starr]

You could just unfriend your cousin and delete all references to the conversations. :grouphug:

 

 

 

http://www.thenation.com/blog/170373/im-not-mother-first#

 

I got into a huge argument last night on facebook about this, and ended up permanently deleting my account (or I am in the process of that, I have to wait 2 weeks) because I was called so many names and had so many nasty things said about me and my family just because I shared my opinion on this article. Granted, it was on my cousin's wall and the people who attacked me are all of her very liberal friends who I have very little in common with (also, who don't know me, never have met me, never have even seen me), but it was still very hurtful.

 

I'm wondering if I am way off base and what the general concensus is.

 

ETA: She does mention political candidates in the article, but it is an article on mothering, not politics.

[justamouse]

It's the upside down feminism that is actually stifling to women.

 

Am I a mother first? Yes, I am, fully so, because WHY BOTHER HAVING KIDS if I'm not going to be?

 

Here's the thing. To say that you're *not a mom first* is to say that these small people entrusted to you to care for and raise well are not *worthy* of your full time and attention.

 

That is like juggling nuclear bombs.

 

You don't have any respect for the responsibility of raising a *person*? Then you write books like that.

 

 

For more of Jessica’s writing on parenthood, check out her new book, Why Have Kids?: A New Mom Explores the Truth About Parenting and Happiness.

 

Great. An expert in her field and her brand new field at that.

 

You know why stuff like this gets so much play time? BEcause older moms with experience under their belts just don't have the time to argue with her, so we ignore her and figure that in about 20 years she'll have a full grasp of her subject.

 

I've always considered moms who work to have two full time jobs. But I doubt any of them would say that they're not a *mom* first.

[justLisa]

I agree with what's been said here and am glad I'm not her child. Turning parenthood into a political pissing contest is something we should be past. Yes, I consider myself a mother before anything else. I don't think there's anything more important I'll ever do. I made two PEOPLE and I'm trying to mold them into responsible people. As is my husband. I guarantee that he DOES consider his role as father as more important than his money-making role. The idea that it is demeaning for me to identify myself as "mother" is demeaning. I don't think it's relational. Motherhood is not like being a cousin. It's a job, it's a duty, and one I take very seriously. I don't begrudge anyone else thei self-declared titles. Don't act like I am the one setting womanhood back by proclaiming my role to be mother.

 

I am going to have to remember that LOL.....and YES to everything you said.

[oceanseve]

I was okay with this opinion piece until it got here:

 

"It’s understandable that some women would embrace motherhood as their primary and most important identity. When you have little power, you take it where you can. Trumpeting the supremacy of motherhood and domesticity is instant access to cultural approval. But the veneer of importance is not power. How can any American mother truly believe that her work is valued when every policy, every mocking magazine cover, every pat-on-the-head Mother’s Day sentiment tells them different?"

 

 

#1 While complaining she is being demonized by domestic engineers (I love that! I'm stealing that from you, itsheresomewhere, if you don't mind :) ) for not being a mother first, but then she rips into women who embrace motherhood because they have no power and obviously making this choice because they are incapable of doing anything truly worthwhile.

 

#2 The idea that you get "approval" by chosing to be home with your kids is absurd. In my experience people look at you like you're crazy.

 

#3 The woman obviously feels guilt over her choices as a mother, otherwise why attack women who made different choices??

 

#4 The idea that being a 'mom first' means who have to drop everything for your kids at any time is ridiculous. I am mom first, I keep my children in mind when making decisions about my life. Doesn't mean I can't and don't do what I choose to.

 

I agree with you OP, the author is invested in the "mommy wars", it's sad. Women are free to make decisions about what they want to do with their life, stay home, have a career, whatever you WANT to do. Just because we WANT different things does not mean we should sit ideally by while someone rips into those who choose to raise their children and not pursue a career (which is what this article does). I certainly don't need anyone's approval but my own. The idea that because I choose to stay home means I am supporting inequality and sexism is ridiculous. I choose to do this because it's what I WANT to do and I sure as hell am not going to be guilted into anything else by someone that obviously regrets their decisions. Why else would she write such a hateful piece?

[Plucky]

Eh, everyone has an opinion. I'm a mom first. I have kids with special issues and so I have to be.

 

Don't post controversial things on fb. If someone is a jerk block them or unfriend them. I tell dh when he wants to get a vent in on fb that it would be simpler to just mount a marquee on the back of his truck like the poor schizophrenic lady down the street (she has 3 on her car and fills her windows up with stuff, too. Mainly about not judging her.)

[mommymilkies]

Idk, I completely disagree with the article writer's politics, but I do *not* identify myself as a mother first. Or as a wife first. Or even as a woman first. I am *me* - if I must identify as anything, I identify as human, and as a child of God. All the other identities are just subsets of *me* - being a mother *is* an important part of me, but it's not the totality of me, or the *most* important part of me.

 

So I kind of agree with the article that it is kind of sad that women are encouraged to see themselves primarily through their relationships with others - as a wife, as a mother - instead of as a *person* who happens to be a wife and a mother. (The feminist approach of defining a woman's primary identity as a *woman*, not as a *person*, bothers me for the similar reasons.)

 

Still no excuse for people to be nasty about it, though :grouphug:.

 

I really don't understand this, and I am fairly liberal and my husband would say I get a little up in arms about women's rights. :D

 

Even when I was pulling 80 hour weeks running a bar, I was a mom first, I had to do it at the time, I enjoyed doing, but I never once said or felt my kid wasn't my first priority.

 

I really don't understand having children and then being disdainful about caring for them, taking a few years off to stay at home with them, or saying that those who do are somehow hurting your rights.

 

Ridiculous.

 

 

ETA: I don't mean moms who work are somehow less than wonderful mothers just because they work. It is the attitude of somehow thinking it is less than optimal if you stay home, or they could never be with their own kids all day that really gets me.

 

I somehow mostly agree with both of these posts. I am a die hard liberal hippie Democrat. And so are most of my friends online and a couple IrL. I can not possibly imagine any of them (or myself) attacking someone because they say to put your kids first. But I think there are differences in opinion about what that means. Most of my friends are AP, as am I. I am child-friendly and child-inclusive, but not child-centered. I aim to include my children in my life and be parts of their lives, but not spoil them. Does that make sense? I can not imagine choosing to work outside the home with young children or do like many I know and stay out drinking all of the time and dump my kids wherever I can. And that cuts through political boundaries-I have way more conservative friends who do so. But not all, by any means. I just happen to live in a Conservative area. ;). So I feel the need to stand up for us crazy liberals who are being talked about, a bit. I feel it has more to do with personality and values.

 

I used to be a working mom, and it nearly destroyed me. Do I miss feeling like a worthwhile citizen and contributing member of society? Oh yes. Do I miss adult interaction? Definitely. But I wouldn't trade my role of mother first for anything. To me, I am a mother before I am a wife, daughter, or self. But that's a little misleading, because I am all of those things. I don't feel calling myself mother first is doing me a feminist disservice, because that is what I am and what I choose. I know many people who believe that they should put their self first above all else. I personally don't get it. But it's not my place to tell them what to do. I do find it sad that as a society, families and parenthood are not as respected or popular as, say, some strange notion that one must be a Barbie doll perfect woman who parties like a 21 year old, even if you're 50, and not doing so makes you a conservative freak. I've gotten many "talks" by people about how I need to get out more, party, leave my kids to cry in the nursery/daycare/school so I can be helpful to someone else, whatever. I disagree and I am perfectly happy watching Doctor Who with my kids instead of living out some fantasy single life that I wouldn't even want. Because in many ways, that's what many feel putting yourself first means. To be the same as before you became a parent. But how could we? It changes you so fundamentally. I can not imagine separating myself from my role as mother and pretending to be who I *used* to be. I dealt with this recently at a high school reunion. I was told that I had lost myself because I had changed since high school and was not ok with getting trashed, or doing things that are illegal and dangerous. They seem to have forgotten what I was really like in high school-holding their hair while they puked and taking care of my friends. :tongue_smilie:

 

/rant Sorry that is long and rambling. It probably makes no sense. I'm a little sick of being told by society & friends these very things and I've had a long day out at co-op. this introvert needs to decompress. :lol: please don't try to tear me apart for this post. It probably doesn't even make sense.

[justamouse]

Thank you. This is encouraging. :001_smile:

 

 

 

I'm trying! But I keep getting knocked down by people who are way more rabid than I am, my feelings get hurt, and I want to crawl in a hole and never talk to anyone again. :tongue_smilie::lol:

 

 

Don't delete your account because of them, just unfriend them. :D I will miss you over there if you leave!!!

[SKL]

We live in a culture that worships self and values individuality. This is in direct conflict with putting ourselves in a role of service to others or (the horror!) thinking more about others than ourselves. In many minds, putting other needs ahead of our own is ridiculous.

 

No Asian culture (in particular) would publish this:

"And declaring our individual importance as people and citizens does not diminish the depth of love we have for our children or the central role parenthood plays in our lives."

 

In other cultures, self is far less important and individuality is second to family, community. This article would never be published by folks in those cultures.

 

It is too bad for us. I'm sorry it happened to you.

 

Well, just because a woman is not a mother first does not mean she's only thinking about herself. Many women (and men) are thinking about something bigger than their own child (or any particular person, if they are childless). Women found schools, orphanges, and other activities with the goal of servicing many selflessly. Women found movements with the goal of making life better for many. Women's paid careers may be pursued with the purpose of making life better for many (engineering safer food/water/environment or more affordable, efficient methods; curing deadly diseases; teaching kids with learning disabilities; taking care of people nobody else wants to deal with).

[justamouse]

Exactly. Why have kids? They aren't trophies.

 

Exactly. Might as well consider them pets.

[justLisa]

Exactly. Might as well consider them pets.

 

Oh but I know people who treat their dogs better than their kids :glare:

[Cassy]

Well, just because a woman is not a mother first does not mean she's only thinking about herself. Many women (and men) are thinking about something bigger than their own child (or any particular person, if they are childless). Women found schools, orphanges, and other activities with the goal of servicing many selflessly. Women found movements with the goal of making life better for many. Women's paid careers may be pursued with the purpose of making life better for many (engineering safer food/water/environment or more affordable, efficient methods; curing deadly diseases; teaching kids with learning disabilities; taking care of people nobody else wants to deal with).

 

The lady who wrote the article seemed to be only thinking of her own 'value' and 'worth', and how she was perceived by others.

[forty-two]

I do agree with you! But I feel the author was meaning "self above all, even to the expense of our children." The people in the discussion I was having were saying things like "I'm not going to give up my desires for a kid's crap and random whims."

 

But it's not clear that you agree from what you originally said, especially from the perspective of those who agree with the article.

 

Because the article was speaking against the motherhood ideal that says a woman should not just sacrifice for her children, but should subsume herself in her role as mother (and wife). That her identity *is* mother, or wife, and to have needs outside that is selfish and wrong.

 

But the article goes too far the other way, throwing the baby out with the bath water - conflating selfless love for one's children with losing oneself in motherhood - assuming a zero-sum game in which a woman's needs are set against her kids' needs, and arguing that the woman comes first.

 

But too many responses attack only the surface issue - selfishness towards one's kids - without tackling the root issue of women and kids being set against each other. And so as they assert their primary role as mother, the other side hears that as promoting the "my identity *is* mother", that "my *only* value is in raising children" - that in the zero-sum game of life, they put their kids first and so accept that they, the mothers, lose. And they are happy with losing.

 

This sounds to the article writer as women choosing their own subjugation. There is no room for the idea that women and children do *not* have to be opponents, that it is *not* a zero-sum game, that women can be selfless mothers *and* have a self. And thus the animosity - they hear you say that the only way to be a good mother is to give up your own self entirely, to not be a *person*, but to be exclusively a mother, with no room for anything else - and that sounds like a fate worse than death. The shame is that it's a *false choice* - that there is a third way that values both women *and* children.

[mommymilkies]

Exactly. Why have kids? They aren't trophies.

 

They are to a lot of people. It's sad. I've heard dozens of parents at sporting events tell their kids they can't stand them, or that they'd kill themselves if they had to be home with them.

[Kirch]

ITA with what others have said about the mother first/how we self-identify. The other thing that bugged me about the article was that I thought she was way off base in identifying the "cult of motherhood" as the root of all societal evils (as defined by her). Sorry, but people who oppose abortion don't oppose it because they glorify motherhood. They oppose it because they identify the fetus/unborn child as a person and abortion as taking a life. Encouraging long-term or permanent birth control for "marginalized" women is an attempt to prevent unwanted pregnancies in women with few resources to do it on their own & an attempt to stem the tide of factors that keep people in poverty and other marginalized positions. It has nothing to do with a faceless "THEM" deciding that those women won't match up to the ideal of motherhood. Some of her arguments were simply ridiculous.

[SKL]

The lady who wrote the article seemed to be only thinking of her own 'value' and 'worth', and how she was perceived by others.

 

I agree, but some of the tangents are getting into cloudy territory. Being a mom is NOT the only way to serve others, and not being a mom (first or otherwise) isn't selfish per se. Each of us needs to decide for herself how she wants to serve others. If we decide service is only for doormats, that is a problem.

 

Anyone ever heard of a truly powerful woman, one whom girls look up to, who has gotten that way by putting herself ahead of everyone else? Me neither.

 

They've been trying to destroy the importance of motherhood since before most of us were born. It seems to be going strong. A few fools making noises on the sidelines are not threats to that.

[oceanseve]

Has anyone else browsed her book on amazon?? Read the titles of her chapters, here's a gem under the half of the book called truth: "Smart women don't have kids." Wow..... What do you want to bet she wrote this book and then had a kid just so she claim motherhood to increase sales...... :glare:

Edited October 19, 2012 by oceanseve

[Pawz4me]

I haven't read any of the other comments yet, but I AM a mom first. And proud of it. If you asked my DH, I'm pretty darn sure he'd agree that his most important role is that of father. We made that commitment well in advance of the arrival of the first kiddo.

 

I don't agree with the article that identifying oneself first and foremost as a parent is a bad thing.

[Amy in NH]

[urlher very liberal friends

 

Haven't read the article: I consider myself to be quite liberal, and I also consider myself to be a mother "first".

 

I'm sorry they were rude. Ad hominem attacks are the last stand of people who don't have logical arguments to support their positions.

Edited October 19, 2012 by Amy in NH

[I.Dup.]

They are to a lot of people. It's sad. I've heard dozens of parents at sporting events tell their kids they can't stand them, or that they'd kill themselves if they had to be home with them.

 

I had a nurse say this once when I was at a doctor's office with my kids (and at that point, I only had 5, lol) She said it right in front of my children, that she would kill herself if she had to stay home.

[NASDAQ]

I think if this women honestly thinks that it's normal for women to be made to feel guilty for having a hobby or going to a movie, she needs to get out of the play group circle for awhile.

 

I think part of the reason that Ann Romney etc. get a lot of traction for valuing full-time or primary-priority motherhood is because women raising children full-time often feel that that choice is _not_ valued -- e.g. the pol who said that Ann Romney has never worked a day in her life (because raising five kids isn't "work").

[Marylou]

Don't know about you ladies, but I was a pretty great mother before the kids came along!

[SKL]

Or maybe I'm just too stupid to see her point.

 

"HEYYYYY! I'm a PERSON! How come nobody acknowledges THAT????"

 

Ummm. What do you want, exactly? I mean, you have equal voting rights, you presumably have a social security card, a driver's license, and a passport if you want it. Is there some other secret token of personhood I haven't been informed about? What are they keeping from us dumb, ignorant moms? :bigear:

 

As for accepting subservience, this is how I see it. "I signed up for this." When I took a job as a nurse's aide, I signed up to clean bodily fluids. When I volunteered for charities, I signed up to serve them in a variety of ways. When I filled out adoption papers, I signed up to be tied to my kids' best interests, 24/7, for the next two decades at least. What's with the victim mentality? I wanted this, even though I knew it involved puke and tantrums and nastygrams from school. And no, I'm not asking for a medal. Should I be? I guess maybe I should be. :glare: Oh wait, I don't take my marching orders from journalists and bloggers.

[Marylou]

I wonder how she gets along with the men in her life. I surely wouldn't want to be married to the center of the Universe :001_huh:.

[Mrs Mungo]

I think taking a quote from 40+ years ago and using it in a modern political context leaves it open for extreme misinterpretation, as seen in most of the posts on this thread. I think many here could benefit from reading the *continuum* of feminist literature. Do I have to be a high powered working woman with a stay at home husband or nanny to agree with any of it? I don't think so. Aside from that, I cannot discuss it without getting political.