Women and Value

[Arcadia]

24 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

For those of you who don't experience the issue but acknowledge it as a social issue - do you truly see it as a social issue?

 

Infanticide against female babies, abortions because of gender, girls not allowed to get educated. It is still happening in current times.

[Murphy101]

2 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

That isn't what I was meaning at all.  I certainly see it as a societal issue....especially in certain fundamental circles.  I wouldn't call it a weakness but it is an internal dialogue that should be changed if possible.  

This. I honestly do not have any cares at all for who does dishes, diapers and dinner in anyone’s house. You happy with your set up? Good! 

BUT I will correct women who say:

“It’s so nice that your husband is babysitting while you go __!”

No. It is not babysitting. It is parenting. I happen to do it a lot more than him bc he earns a paycheck and I work for free.

”oh I can’t go on a trip, go out for coffee, leave the kids with Dh or whatever similar because either Dh can’t handle that or it would make him upset.”

Really? He can’t parent without you there making sure he does it?  Really you are scared of upsetting your husband by doing something he probably never thinks to even talk to you first before doing?  If you are happy with this - okay, then don’t blame him for it. If not, well. I know people who can help you.

I do not look down on any of those women. But no lie, sometimes I do feel bad for them and worry for them. And I want to let them know - they can change their situation if they want to.  If they don’t want to, that’s fine by me, but I will encourage them to change that negative interior dialog about it. 

[Melissa Louise]

11 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

That isn't what I was meaning at all.  I certainly see it as a societal issue....especially in certain fundamental circles.  I wouldn't call it a weakness but it is an internal dialogue that should be changed if possible.  

Sure. I agree. 

But if it's only that - only an internal dialogue that needs changing, nothing but a psychological task for disparate individuals - then really, you're saying it's an individual issue, not a social one. Which is fine, if that's your (general you) opinion. 

[Corraleno]

26 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

For those of you who don't experience the issue but acknowledge it as a social issue - do you truly see it as a social issue?

Because the disbelief and disdain for those who experience it is coming through pretty strong...there's a very strong vibe of this being an individual issue - some grift, some fakery, some weakness.

Hollis is a fake and a grifter because she's made millions by exploiting women who do feel that societal pressure by offering them a fake solution — Just think positive and work harder and you can have it all just like me!

No one here is saying that women who feel that their self worth is based on what they do for others are fake or weak. I think there are certainly societal pressures on women to be more accommodating and giving and less assertive than men, but I disagree that the fact that this pressure exists means that all women must necessarily have internalized it. Some women are able see that pressure but reject it from the get-go, whether that's because of how they were raised, or the community they grew up in, or their experiences in college or career, or just that they have the sort of personality that doesn't really care what other people think.

[Scarlett]

1 minute ago, Melissa Louise said:

Sure. I agree. 

But if it's only that - only an internal dialogue that needs changing, nothing but a psychological task for disparate individuals - then really, you're saying it's an individual issue, not a social one. Which is fine, if that's your (general you) opinion. 

It is both.  It is a societal issue, but we aren't trapped as individuals.  

[Melissa Louise]

Just now, Scarlett said:

It is both.  It is a societal issue, but we aren't trapped as individuals.  

I don't think I suggested we were?

(Though I think, if you've never experienced this type of female specific messaging in your life, you might be slightly downplaying the amount of inner work required to challenge it). 

[Scarlett]

I have young friends.....she works and he stays home with the baby.  She gets a lot of pressure from HIS parents about it.  That she should 'fix' this situation.  No one, at firsts gives them the credit for having purposefully decided on this set up.  And I do hear a lot of people judging them about it behind their back. I will even admit I had some ill feelings toward him for not 'getting a job.'  It was private conversations with her that changed my mind on that....so now I tell people, 'hey, it works for them.  It is their life and their decision.'

[Melissa Louise]

3 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

Hollis is a fake and a grifter because she's made millions by exploiting women who do feel that societal pressure by offering them a fake solution — Just think positive and work harder and you can have it all just like me!

No one here is saying that women who feel that their self worth is based on what they do for others are fake or weak. I think there are certainly societal pressures on women to be more accommodating and giving and less assertive than men, but I disagree that the fact that this pressure exists means that all women must necessarily have internalized it. Some women are able see that pressure but reject it from the get-go, whether that's because of how they were raised, or the community they grew up in, or their experiences in college or career, or just that they have the sort of personality that doesn't really care what other people think.

I don't think I said all women must have internalized it? 

Just us weaklings who care what people think 😂

[marbel]

39 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

For those of you who don't experience the issue but acknowledge it as a social issue - do you truly see it as a social issue?

Because the disbelief and disdain for those who experience it is coming through pretty strong...there's a very strong vibe of this being an individual issue - some grift, some fakery, some weakness.

 

 

Interesting, the only disdain I saw was the person who said those of us who hadn't experienced it were lacking self-awareness... and I believe the comments about grift and fakery are about the woman in the video, no one else, no one here.

I suppose my comment about 1974 may have been interpreted as disdainful, I  didn't mean it to.

[Scarlett]

2 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

I don't think I suggested we were?

(Though I think, if you've never experienced this type of female specific messaging in your life, you might be slightly downplaying the amount of inner work required to challenge it). 

No, no I am not.  I don't downplay the work people have to do to survive and thrive.  I have my own serious internal dialogue that I fight every. single. day.  The topic at hand just isn't one of those things I struggle with.  

[Melissa Louise]

Just now, marbel said:

Interesting, the only disdain I saw was the person who said those of us who hadn't experienced it were lacking self-awareness... and I believe the comments about grift and fakery are about the woman in the video, no one else, no one here.

I suppose my comment about 1974 may have been interpreted as disdainful, I  didn't mean it to.

It pretty much implied backwardness, but that's ok.  You're allowed to think/feel that.

I disagree that only backwards, old fashioned women can receive and be influenced by the message ' to be a good woman is to be good to others'. 

[Scarlett]

1 minute ago, Melissa Louise said:

It pretty much implied backwardness, but that's ok.  You're allowed to think/feel that.

I disagree that only backwards, old fashioned women can receive and be influenced by the message ' to be a good woman is to be good to others'. 

I think you are reading more into our comments than are there.  Seriously, we know it is a struggle for some women for various reasons.  Doesn't mean we think you are weak or fake or backwards.  

Honestly you are one of the most outspoken people on the board!

[Sneezyone]

7 minutes ago, marbel said:

Interesting, the only disdain I saw was the person who said those of us who hadn't experienced it were lacking self-awareness... and I believe the comments about grift and fakery are about the woman in the video, no one else, no one here.

I suppose my comment about 1974 may have been interpreted as disdainful, I  didn't mean it to.

DH used to say he would happily stay home with the kids (he would have, legitimately) but it didn't make sense financially/career trajectory-wise at some point. His upward future was a sure thing. Mine wasn't. I'd have LOVED our roles being reversed!! It's OK tho. I'll re-center myself. I am totally confident in that too.

Edited January 20, 2022 by Sneezyone

[Murphy101]

2 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Sure. I agree. 

But if it's only that - only an internal dialogue that needs changing, nothing but a psychological task for disparate individuals - then really, you're saying it's an individual issue, not a social one. Which is fine, if that's your (general you) opinion. 

Individual issues are what make up social issues?  It’s entirely possible for me to recognize in my previous examples of relationship conditioning while also saying that’s BS from previous generations that I don’t have to keep shoveling to the next one. It’s entirely possible for me to say people keep talking about gender roles and parenting books and all that crap but seriously our social policies do not reflect the supposed value priorities - so are they *really* our social values? Seems to me they aren’t.

[marbel]

1 minute ago, Melissa Louise said:

It pretty much implied backwardness, but that's ok.  You're allowed to think/feel that.

I disagree that only backwards, old fashioned women can receive and be influenced by the message ' to be a good woman is to be good to others'. 

Well i can only apologize that it came out that way, i would certainly never mean to imply anyone is backward. 

This is why I should stay in the cooking threads, sigh.

[SKL]

Yeah I wasn't raised this way, and I can't think of too many women I know who think this way.  There are a couple that come to mind, but they are not the norm.  I also think the mindset that that's how they should value themselves doesn't come from society at large, at least not in current times.

What messes with my head is my own past belief that I was gonna be better than what I saw around me.  I told myself I was gonna do this and I wasn't gonna allow that.  After some time trying, I had to give up many such ideas one by one.

I think personal sense of value is largely wired in at birth.  Some people who appear extremely successful feel like failures daily.  Others who are average have superiority complexes.  I see no indication that the latter group sacrifices more for others.

[Murphy101]

7 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

It pretty much implied backwardness, but that's ok.  You're allowed to think/feel that.

I disagree that only backwards, old fashioned women can receive and be influenced by the message ' to be a good woman is to be good to others'. 

Hmm.

I would say that to be Good is to strive toward Good. And sure, much of that is reflected in how we treat others.  

[Melissa Louise]

7 hours ago, BlsdMama said:

This has ALWAYS been an issue. New Testament Mark and Martha in the book of Luke. 

Man, I have always, always struggled with Martha and Mary. I even wrote a poem sequence called 'In Praise of Martha'! 

I'm starting to enter a more Mary stage of life, but part of me will always feel indignant on Martha's behalf. 

[Melissa Louise]

3 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

Hmm.

I would say that to be Good is to strive toward Good. And sure, much of that is reflected in how we treat others.  

And a lot of it is reflected in how we treat ourselves.

 

 

[Sneezyone]

If anything, I feel like there's a lot more disdain for women who don't bow/break under the pressure to conform to the ideal of selflessness being the model woman. They're called all kinds of names and made to feel less 'womanly' or 'motherly' and more 'selfish'. People bend over backwards to bring their self-esteem down a peg. Indulging in the intrinsic desire to see to one's own needs is much more frowned-upon, whether one is working in or outside the home.

Edited January 20, 2022 by Sneezyone

[Soror]

Without listening to the video because I don't want to support Rachel Hollis....

I agree with several of the posters, even those that seem to be at odds. I dont' know where that puts me. 

I would have said that I hadn't internalized the societal expectation re: women and value (although I've always seen it as a huge systematic issue). I would have said I have stayed at home by choice and that doesn't have any effect on my value or feelings of self-worth.

I would have argued that very forcefully until about 4 yrs ago. And I would have still argued that with conviction until a few months (maybe weeks ago). Middle age does a number on one's psyche, add in with that my children changing course and best laid plans being upended .....

 For all my talk and bravado, sincere belief that I'd escaped it and had moved past those silly ideas they were still there hidden away. Now, with the rest of my kids (likely) going off to PS next year I'm feeling unmoored. 

I went from living in my parent's house to married and living with dh. We always considered everything ours but I stupidly didn't realize that while we considered some things to be "ours" technically they weren't. (for example dh applied for cc's b/c he had the primary income and I was the authorized user- I finally got my own cards).  

And my focus, my work, has been on things that are not quantifiable. I told dh I would like to do something, anything that I can objectively see/know that I have accomplished something. 

 

[SKL]

Now having read most of the comments ....

On my first listen, got the impression the woman in the link was talking stuff she didn't personally experience.  I also felt that, unless she lived in an extremely conservative and insular community, it was highly unlikely that every woman she knew viewed their value as she described.

So now I think my first impression was probably not far off.

I'm not saying there aren't women who have been raised that way, and I'm not saying we don't all doubt our worth at times (men and women both).

That said ... some people make money by convincing groups that they are downtrodden, and then being their listening ear, their "champion."  This lady seems to be trying that.  Unfortunately, some women will get sucked in.  It won't benefit anyone except Instagram Lady.

[Lady Florida.]

1 hour ago, Corraleno said:

 just that they have the sort of personality that doesn't really care what other people think.

 I fall into this category but that's not my natural personality. Being a divorced Catholic woman in the 1960s certainly didn't win you any friends. And no, it didn't affect men the way it did women. I believe my mother, who was looked down on for being a divorcee, was determined that I shouldn't care what other people think. Not that I should be cavalier about others' feelings but that I shouldn't let others dictate my value.

As @Scarlett implies below, we all have our own internal struggles. For some of us the topic of this thread is not among them but the post wasn't a JAWM. It asked for discussion.

1 hour ago, Scarlett said:

No, no I am not.  I don't downplay the work people have to do to survive and thrive.  I have my own serious internal dialogue that I fight every. single. day.  The topic at hand just isn't one of those things I struggle with.  

 

@Melissa Louise I didn't quote any of your posts but tagged you so you'd see my reply. I don't think having those feelings/beliefs reflects weakness or any moral failing. I absolutely see it as a societal problem and one that should be addressed.  My disdain IS for Rachel Hollis. I think the way she comes across is fake and maybe if someone else said it differently I'd have immediately recognized the issue. The messenger obscured the message.

 

[Shelydon]

I can't relate to the video at all.  Definitely not how I feel.   I do feel like if you choose to do something (career, have kids, homeschool, volunteer, run a marathon, ride horses-- whatever) you should do it well. 

[KungFuPanda]

This is a bit of one-off, but I had a weird conversation with my boss about this at work.  He generally supports the local HS athletics through placing a company ad on their sports posters that are distributed throughout the neighborhood.  This year, the ads cost more.  The fundraising efforts have been outsourced to a company and the company takes a cut.  He didn't care for that and didn't really understand it.  He decided to write a check directly to the athletic department and that is fine.  What I explained to him was that the ads were never as inexpensive as he thought but were subsidized by women working for free to make them happen.  Women are becoming increasingly unwilling to do that and so the school outsourced the work.  

It's easy to think at first that if the parents volunteered to do the fundraising that more money can go to the kids.  Historically, though, this logic only works if you can con people into working for free and feeling good about it.  Lets face it, it was probably a group of women making this happen.  The men can't do it because they're "too busy at work." Their time is "too expensive" but it's ok if the moms do it.  If they're not generating an income their time must be more available.  I told him the equivalent situation would be if he was willing to donate one of his landscapers for a few days to work on this fundraising effort while continuing to pay the guy his normal rate.  Of course he would NOT because it's too expensive. I think he understood my POV in the end, but it'll probably need to marinate a bit to make total sense to him. 

[Arcadia]

44 minutes ago, KungFuPanda said:

I told him the equivalent situation would be if he was willing to donate one of his landscapers for a few days to work on this fundraising effort while continuing to pay the guy his normal rate.  

Here companies like Google, Yahoo, Intel had let employees take paid time off to do volunteer work at school. It is a good PR move. 

[El...]

I'm not a fan of this particular person, so I can't comment too much on her.  However, I think for many people, identifying the cultural norms you've internalized is an important part of maturity. At least, it has been so for me. Of course, we're not all stewing in the same cultures, so it's got to be different for each of us.

I remember when I was first married, I spent a lot of time watching Martha Stewart. I became a much better cook, and I loved the photography in her stuff. There was an unhealthy undertow though, which played into some of my perfectionism. It smacked strongly of The Feminine Mystique! I outgrew it, I think, and I'm glad I did. How exhausting. 

At this point, I'm not interested in some gal on the internet telling me how to do better at life. I do remember the insecurities that made me want a lot of guidance from an "expert." 

[El...]

50 minutes ago, KungFuPanda said:

This is a bit of one-off, but I had a weird conversation with my boss about this at work.  He generally supports the local HS athletics through placing a company ad on their sports posters that are distributed throughout the neighborhood.  This year, the ads cost more.  The fundraising efforts have been outsourced to a company and the company takes a cut.  He didn't care for that and didn't really understand it.  He decided to write a check directly to the athletic department and that is fine.  What I explained to him was that the ads were never as inexpensive as he thought but were subsidized by women working for free to make them happen.  Women are becoming increasingly unwilling to do that and so the school outsourced the work.  

It's easy to think at first that if the parents volunteered to do the fundraising that more money can go to the kids.  Historically, though, this logic only works if you can con people into working for free and feeling good about it.  Lets face it, it was probably a group of women making this happen.  The men can't do it because they're "too busy at work." Their time is "too expensive" but it's ok if the moms do it.  If they're not generating an income their time must be more available.  I told him the equivalent situation would be if he was willing to donate one of his landscapers for a few days to work on this fundraising effort while continuing to pay the guy his normal rate.  Of course he would NOT because it's too expensive. I think he understood my POV in the end, but it'll probably need to marinate a bit to make total sense to him. 

This is a fact that should be more commonly understood. 

[Murphy101]

16 minutes ago, KungFuPanda said:

This is a bit of one-off, but I had a weird conversation with my boss about this at work.  He generally supports the local HS athletics through placing a company ad on their sports posters that are distributed throughout the neighborhood.  This year, the ads cost more.  The fundraising efforts have been outsourced to a company and the company takes a cut.  He didn't care for that and didn't really understand it.  He decided to write a check directly to the athletic department and that is fine.  What I explained to him was that the ads were never as inexpensive as he thought but were subsidized by women working for free to make them happen.  Women are becoming increasingly unwilling to do that and so the school outsourced the work.  

It's easy to think at first that if the parents volunteered to do the fundraising that more money can go to the kids.  Historically, though, this logic only works if you can con people into working for free and feeling good about it.  Lets face it, it was probably a group of women making this happen.  The men can't do it because they're "too busy at work." Their time is "too expensive" but it's ok if the moms do it.  If they're not generating an income their time must be more available.  I told him the equivalent situation would be if he was willing to donate one of his landscapers for a few days to work on this fundraising effort while continuing to pay the guy his normal rate.  Of course he would NOT because it's too expensive. I think he understood my POV in the end, but it'll probably need to marinate a bit to make total sense to him. 

My state (and my city) just said they would allow state employees to volunteer in our extremely scant on staff schools to avoid going virtual.

I’m completely against it for a lot of reasons. But this is one of them. Women do not need one more thing they should feel guilty for not “volunteering” to do for free and we should all know by now that it’s going to be mostly the female state employees “strongly encouraged” to volunteer.  I’m sure they figure if the teachers (mostly women) can do it, just anyone can show up and manage it. 

[Scarlett]

6 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

My state (and my city) just said they would allow state employees to volunteer in our extremely scant on staff schools to avoid going virtual.

I’m completely against it for a lot of reasons. But this is one of them. Women do not need one more thing they should feel guilty for not “volunteering” to do for free and we should all know by now that it’s going to be mostly the female state employees “strongly encouraged” to volunteer.  I’m sure they figure if the teachers (mostly women) can do it, just anyone can show up and manage it. 

Volunteer?  Oh my word.  It gets crazier and crazier around here.

[wintermom]

I have worked as a volunteer coordinator and been involved in volunteering myself for decades in Canada, in many different settings (e.g., sport, intramurals in schools, Suzuki music school group classes, church, charity running events). I see a difference in the type of activities men choose to volunteer for than women in some cases, but I don't really see one gender doing the majority of the volunteering. I don't see a culture of men choosing not to volunteer because they feel their time is too important, or more important that women. 

On the other hand, there are definitely some cultures that do not have a tradition of volunteering, and when they immigrate to Canada they learn that this is part of our way of doing things. Many sports, music, scouting, etc. activities just won't happen without volunteers, and if you or your child wants to participate, then you need to engage in some of the volunteer load. 

Edited January 21, 2022 by wintermom

[Grace Hopper]

On 1/19/2022 at 6:36 PM, Melissa Louise said:

Yeah, I grew up thinking I had to be a 'good girl' to have value, and it got me into bad places. 

I'm trying to remedy this now, not by being 'bad' but by coming at things from a different, more self compassionate, less constantly self-sacrificing  angle. 

As an example, an old friend texted wanting to know when a good time to chat is. 

If I was still fixated on showing my worth as a good friend, I'd have scheduled it, despite not wanting to talk to this old friend, because she talks non-stop about herself and cannot change this dynamic, despite me addressing it gently with her over the years. I feel bad when I spend time with her, even though I love her. 

This time, I did something different. Suggested that email was best for me. She wants to tell me all about her news, I love her, but I can't hear it knowing that my news will be a two minute postscript at the end of an hour chat.

I CAN deal with it by email. 

I valued my needs more than I did being a 'good' friend.

Because truly, I am worth at least as much as my friend is worth. I'm as valuable as any other human on the planet. 

But that stance is hard won, unfortunately, and late. 

 

 

 

My goodness, I had the same experience with someone that used to be a close friend. When our kids were young it was much more a mutual sharing relationship. But then it became as you describe - every conversation point got turned into something going on with her. I did a boatload of smiling and nodding, and left our time together thinking of all the better ways I could have spent my time. It came to a point that this person was basically just using me as her free place to download, and what was being downloaded became increasingly heavy to bear. Last meeting caught me at a time when I was myself in a tough season, and I realized that I could simply not bear the weight of two sets of burdens while the other person decompressed with me as her talk therapist (ie, lightened her own load). I had to become unavailable. I wasn’t mean about it, but gah, it sucked that making a decision towards my own well being meant I felt like a toad for a while. Thank goodness dh agreed with the hard boundary decision, it provided  validation. (FWIW this person would never have been able to digest a conversation about the problem, too self-focused.)
 

It is kind of you to maintain email communication, @Melissa Louise. I tried that at first but the messages I received became somewhat emotionally manipulative and I had to be very careful in how much time I gave them and to choose carefully how to respond (ie, run replies by my own counselor first, who agreed that the messages I received were a bit twisty).

But yeah, the difficulty in just saying heck no, I’m not playing that game…. definitely counter to my ingrained behavior processes. 

[Grace Hopper]

21 hours ago, Scarlett said:

It is both.  It is a societal issue, but we aren't trapped as individuals.  

On 1/19/2022 at 11:28 PM, Joker2 said:

She resonated with me because that is how my mom was raised, so it’s how she made me feel. One small thing my Dh has always done is not let me serve him around my mom. My mom always served people food and such and she would always talk to me in a way that I was supposed to serve Dh when she was around. Like, we’re all eating lunch but Dh is done and would like dessert so I’m supposed to stop eating and get it for him (even when I was tending to babies). Dh would always make sure I didn’t get him anything around my mom and he got what he needed himself. Part of my family rift right now is me not just letting stuff go because “family” and “how that looks”. It’s difficult. I’m really proud of myself that I somehow still raised two dc who don’t care what others think. I still care way too much but am getting better. I’m probably not explaining myself well because this hits close to home, but I get it. Dh tries so hard to help me see it’s ok not to put everyone else first and be that person and I’m slowly getting it.

 

For me it was my mil making an extravagant show serving the men, food, etc, with the clear expectation that it was behavior I was to emulate. DH and I finally had to powwow about it and decided the same - I would not be serving him like that!

 

On 1/20/2022 at 8:14 AM, Farrar said:

I refuse to believe that y'all haven't ever experienced this pressure. I see a lot of lack of self-awareness here. You think she's too worried about how she looks? Or that it's hormonal? What does that even mean? She's talking about a general societal issue. I don't think it's as straightforward as Hollis makes it out to be (and I'm not a fan - I think she does this super poorly, honestly - the interviewer being all mind blown made me roll my eyes big time) or as tied to motherhood and being a wife because I see it manifest in lots of other contexts including professional work for women, but this is a pervasive attitude where women are defined by relationships with others and by how we support the systems around us and not by how we look out for ourselves. And we're judged much more harshly for personal ambition, personal boundaries, and self-care than men. I was raised by a mother who was intentionally trying to counteract this sort of line of thinking and I definitely feel like I was ahead of a lot of peers in not internalizing this crap and yet I still absolutely feel it sometimes.

I don’t deny others’ lack of self-awareness (eta wait, that came out wrong - meant to communicate that I trust others to be self aware!). However, I believe it is (was? times are a-changin) a larger part of the general culture than many think. (I also think this forum has a higher than average number of smart, forward-thinking women.)  

On 1/20/2022 at 12:32 PM, Corraleno said:

It's possible to recognize that these systemic issues (bolded) exist without internalizing those things and believing them about ourselves. I spent a decade in college and grad school, published academic papers, won national awards, and had a career before I ever got married and had kids. It never occurred to me that my worth as a human being was based on my performance as a wife and mother. Of course I want to be the best mother I can be, but that's because I love my kids more than anything in the world, not because I thought others would judge my worth based on how much I sacrificed for them. And I've never had a problem with stating upfront what I want, or taking the time I need for myself. I understand that other women may have a harder time with that, but the OP seemed to be asking about personal experience, and for some of us that has just not been our experience. It's pretty patronizing to suggest that since you've experienced it, everyone else must have experienced it and we just lack self-awareness.

The really ironic thing about Hollis's whole schtick is that she basically ignores the systemic issues that make life harder for women and focuses totally on personal responsibility. It's prosperity gospel BS tweaked specifically to appeal to middle-class, white, mostly Christian women who feel unhappy and unfulfilled, and she tells them that it's totally in their power to change that. Of course the flip side is that if you're not happy, then it's your own fault because you're obviously not willing to work hard enough to "manifest" the changes you want to see. She takes women who are worried that they're "not good enough" as wives and mothers and makes them feel even more inadequate if they can't also be happy, self-fulfilled marathon runners or business owners or novelists or whatever they want to be, because anyone can have it all, just like her, if they work as hard as she does. She presents her own life as a rag-to-riches story that anyone can replicate if they just work hard enough, while ignoring the fact that she was a 19 yr old intern at Miramax when she hooked up with a Disney exec, and the reason she was able to quit her job and start on the path to personal self-fulfillment was because she had a husband with a six-figure income that allowed her to pay someone else to "clean her toilets." 

To your first part: oh, to get a do-over of my college years and young adult life!!!

To your second part: thanks for pointing out this is RH. Her target market was conservative Christian woman culture. 

21 hours ago, Scarlett said:

That isn't what I was meaning at all.  I certainly see it as a societal issue....especially in certain fundamental circles.  I wouldn't call it a weakness but it is an internal dialogue that should be changed if possible.  

Conservative circles, especially, that’s where I walked in it. However, my own mom and sisters were definitely taught to make the men happy, circa 1950s. 

Edited January 21, 2022 by Grace Hopper

[Grace Hopper]

Well I went and messed up the multi quote. Sorry my post above is a mess, expand if you care to read it. 

[Grace Hopper]

Confession - perhaps I’ve conflated “goodness” with “niceness” in this conversation. Thinking on that…

[Sneezyone]

2 hours ago, KungFuPanda said:

This is a bit of one-off, but I had a weird conversation with my boss about this at work.  He generally supports the local HS athletics through placing a company ad on their sports posters that are distributed throughout the neighborhood.  This year, the ads cost more.  The fundraising efforts have been outsourced to a company and the company takes a cut.  He didn't care for that and didn't really understand it.  He decided to write a check directly to the athletic department and that is fine.  What I explained to him was that the ads were never as inexpensive as he thought but were subsidized by women working for free to make them happen.  Women are becoming increasingly unwilling to do that and so the school outsourced the work.  

It's easy to think at first that if the parents volunteered to do the fundraising that more money can go to the kids.  Historically, though, this logic only works if you can con people into working for free and feeling good about it.  Lets face it, it was probably a group of women making this happen.  The men can't do it because they're "too busy at work." Their time is "too expensive" but it's ok if the moms do it.  If they're not generating an income their time must be more available.  I told him the equivalent situation would be if he was willing to donate one of his landscapers for a few days to work on this fundraising effort while continuing to pay the guy his normal rate.  Of course he would NOT because it's too expensive. I think he understood my POV in the end, but it'll probably need to marinate a bit to make total sense to him. 

This is EXACTLY what has/is happening with MILSpouse volunteerism too.

[Murphy101]

56 minutes ago, Grace Hopper said:

Confession - perhaps I’ve conflated “goodness” with “niceness” in this conversation. Thinking on that…

“Be sweet”. “Be nice” is code for just shut(yikes on the typo. Sorry)  the hell up and be the eye candy men want you to be and that doesn’t make other women think too hard about how wrong that is. 
I’m familiar with it that brand of kook-aid. I just refuse to buy into it or ignore it when it’s offered.

44 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

This is EXACTLY what has/is happening with MILSpouse volunteerism too.

I’m not sure what milspouse is. 

Edited January 21, 2022 by Murphy101

[Sneezyone]

5 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

“Be sweet”. “Be nice” is code for just shit the hell up and be the eye candy men want you to be and that doesn’t make other women think too hard about how wrong that is. 
I’m familiar with it that brand of kook-aid. I just refuse to buy into it or ignore it when it’s offered.

I’m not sure what milspouse is. 

Military spouses. Historically, key and important coordinating/messaging/organizing roles have been done free of charge by unpaid spouses. There are a lot of spouses who no longer do that work and are unwilling to do that work for free, including the spouses of members who are geographically separated. My DH's boss, an admiral, has a spouse thousands of miles away. Some other 'volunteer' spouse hosts his local events. These are mission-critical roles like communicating messages from the command re: deployment dates, changes in schedule, family support resources, etc.

Edited January 21, 2022 by Sneezyone

[SKL]

I agree that schools seem to expect moms to give more time than dads, but I dislike the tone of this part of the conversation.  Being able to volunteer is a huge blessing IMO.  I used to work 60-80 hours a week and fight for my right to also volunteer during business hours.  My time at work was billed at up to $1,000 per hour.  But my volunteer time was priceless.

I hate that men get treated like gods when they volunteer even a fraction of the amount women volunteer.  But both men and women benefit a lot from volunteering, assuming their volunteer gig is a proper fit for them.

[Grace Hopper]

40 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

“Be sweet”. “Be nice” is code for just shit the hell up and be the eye candy men want you to be and that doesn’t make other women think too hard about how wrong that is. 
I’m familiar with it that brand of kook-aid. I just refuse to buy into it or ignore it when it’s offered.

 

Well now I agree with you there, but for many there’s been a lot of entanglement with theology for some of us (with the whole be sweet culture). 

Edited January 21, 2022 by Grace Hopper

[Murphy101]

38 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

Military spouses. Historically, key and important coordinating/messaging/organizing roles have been done free of charge by unpaid spouses. There are a lot of spouses who no longer do that work and are unwilling to do that work for free, including the spouses of members who are geographically separated. My DH's boss, an admiral, has a spouse thousands of miles away. Some other 'volunteer' spouse hosts his local events. These are mission-critical roles like communicating messages from the command re: deployment dates, changes in schedule, family support resources, etc.

Which is totally bleeping nuts. I’ve heard  stuff like that is a cause of marital strife too, which sure doesn’t help that high divorce rate the military is known for. 

17 minutes ago, SKL said:

I agree that schools seem to expect moms to give more time than dads, but I dislike the tone of this part of the conversation.  Being able to volunteer is a huge blessing IMO.  I used to work 60-80 hours a week and fight for my right to also volunteer during business hours.  My time at work was billed at up to $1,000 per hour.  But my volunteer time was priceless.

I hate that men get treated like gods when they volunteer even a fraction of the amount women volunteer.  But both men and women benefit a lot from volunteering, assuming their volunteer gig is a proper fit for them.

Hey I am 100% on board with people volunteering. A LOT of my daily life activities have at some point depended on volunteers and every day I work with volunteers who do important things in our community that the average genuinely has zero idea the local government depends on to happen. (Good banks, shelters, housing and other critical type assistance, medical, education — people think the govt does so much but they seriously have no idea how much the govt doesn’t do.)

But it IS work. Volunteer work. But still work.  People should respect that. And people should value it. And people should not be guilt tripped or forced to do it.

2 minutes ago, Grace Hopper said:

Well now I agree with you there, but for many there’s been a lot of entanglement with theology for some of us. 

Sure. The term for that is spiritual abuse. 

[BlsdMama]

22 hours ago, Melissa Louise said:

Man, I have always, always struggled with Martha and Mary. I even wrote a poem sequence called 'In Praise of Martha'! 

I'm starting to enter a more Mary stage of life, but part of me will always feel indignant on Martha's behalf. 

I’ve written so much on this…. I have a t-shirt. I’m telling you, there is little that has had as much impact on me as that story and it’s what - a mere 3 or 4 verses of scripture?

[Murphy101]

17 minutes ago, BlsdMama said:

I’ve written so much on this…. I have a t-shirt. I’m telling you, there is little that has had as much impact on me as that story and it’s what - a mere 3 or 4 verses of scripture?

Let me say too… I hate people saying “don’t be a Martha”  That’s literally who I am. So was my mother and my great grandmother and my great great great mother. I’m as good as this generational curse has gotten in 200 years. So shove off already with telling me not to be a Martha. I mean. Haha but also. Seriously. Stop. The scripture doesn’t even mean what most think it does. 

Edited January 21, 2022 by Murphy101