Paid work vs. stay-at-home parenting is not a binary choice - many parents want something in the middle. Other countries have figured out how to make it work.
I’m obsessed with this conversation. I actually wrote a post about serving capitalism vs your husband as the two binary ideals within the US. Whole heartedly agree that we need more part time jobs that allow women to use their degrees. I’m particularly interested by how this need for part time and flexible work has led many women to become social media content creators and go down the MLM rabbit holes. The lack of this opportunity in the US makes already vulnerable women put their child’s privacy (mom influencers) and their financial stability (MLMs where you lose more money than you gain) at risk
I live in the UK, we have the right to request flexible working hours (everyone not just mothers) this means I can work 3 long days a week and spend the rest with my daughter. The government has also rolled out a better childcare offer that working parents can claim 30 hours free childcare for school term time. It’s not perfect but definitely better than the offer is the US which boggles my brain is so poor!!
I absolutely love this. I'm hopeful that this type of analysis—and insight from abroad—can move the discourse needle toward more progressive policy on such a contested issue.
There's also a social value issue in the West. Women feel they need to remain professionals to prove their intellectual worth. And I wonder if we inferred status to women who mother full-time, or paid them as much as we pay our military generals, we might see a shift in what women choose to do. Right now it's the exact opposite: we relegate them to lower class, the Right, or tradwife culture, and chronically bully and denigrate them. And we incessantly argue *against* paying them. (To me, these arguments echo the "welfare queen" trope from the Right.)
Also. To be charitable to the social media sourdough lady, many women were beat over the head with the 60s libertarian feminist message that full-time motherhood = internalized patriarchy = bad, very bad. Women have been relentlessly shown through media that sensitive or nurture-inclined women were not only the enemy of female liberation (Boomer messaging) but also not cool, sexy, driven, or intelligent (Gen X/Millennial messaging) if they wanted to be mothers or choose childminding roles. Being "just a caregiver" is still seen as anti-intellectual. Wanting to be a mom signals to men you probably want commitment. (More women today have a harder time finding a man who wants to commit beyond sex than they do with being told by their husbands they can't go to school or climb the corporate ladder. Anecdotally, any time a single friend of ours finds a girl he likes, the first thing he usually brags about is not, "Oh she's so sweet and sensitive; she'll be a good mom." It's "Dude, she's loaded!" or, "She's crazy high up: C-suite!" Like they just won the lottery.)
When some women did (apprehensively) become mothers, and were blown away by how much they loved bonding with their newborn—or had a look through the academic literature on the critical role that emotionally attuned parents have on building the early architecture of the brain—it makes sense they feel they were lied to. It's also worldview-shattering to find a man whose love and respect don't stop when you opt out of incessantly striving. (In the early aughts, women were made to feel like they had to be Angelina Jolie circa 2004 to find love: not only stunningly beautiful, but can also fly a plane, ride a motorbike, shoot a gun off horseback, get covered in tattoos shooting whisky, be *incessantly* independent, deeply intellectual, a globe-trotting humanitarian, whip-sharp on the politics of war and international relations history, and speak in a deep and sultry voice. Ooof, exhausting. So when a man comes along and says, "I love your mind *and* your sensitive side. I'll pay the bills while you bond with baby until you feel ready to go back to work," ... Well, it's not surprising women feel lied to about what men really want either.)
The women who post or say things like the caption in that image are just pushing back against pop culture (or a family culture) that displays chronic vitriol toward sensitive and present mothering. And I think it's fair they do so because they're not actually attacking the other "side" (full-time working mothers), they're just broadcasting the realization that motherhood might, in fact, be valuable work—and isn't *always* awful.
It's an attempt to show the other side, and for some, it feels like standing up for children in a world that doesn't seem to value their neurobiological needs. (Children being needy is hugely inconvenient to late-stage neoliberal capitalism *and* the West's status-driven, credentialist, and individualist value system.)
In pursuit of trying to quell the "Mommy Wars", we shouldn't denigrate the this woman's sentiment either. I think we can all agree there's some truth to it, as well as some truth to the value of a "working mother" role model. (I adore the women in science I know; they're change makers! And, as stated above, I'm also clearly obsessed with the Jolie types who are committed to international and social justice.) But I DO want the world to also value the women like my mother-in-law, who was "just a mom." All three of her sons are the most sensitive, involved, sweet, and loving dads/partners. The world would be a better place if there were more men like them—and if women like her felt valued too.
But again, I loved the rest of this, keep it coming :)
Thank you for the kind words! I totally agree that disparaging women who choose to stay home with children is just as damaging (and sexist) as disparaging women who choose to work outside the home. We should respect women's choices on both sides.
Absolutely! Yes yes. It's easy to see the mommy wars for what they really are. One woman publicly stands up for her choice against her critics (usually a MIL or mom ha) by highlighting her reasons (eg. research on attachment security for the SAHM), and another woman who made a different decision (went back to work), takes that as a personal attack. It goes both ways: the working mom who publicly stands up against her critics (that MIL again? lol) cites the research on professional mothers correlating with a child's academic achievement (etc). Which, in turn, makes the mother who stayed home feel slighted. So I like casting *both* in a positive light and then fighting for real choice through policy change.
I worked part-time (28 hr/week) when my kids were little. Agree it's the best of both worlds. Kept my professional skills, health insurance (they allowed it for 0.6 FTE or higher), and sanity. Female dominated fields like mine (nursing) often accommodate these needs better!
Great post. Gotta love the image of the woman in the apron, posting this on social media, likely earning income as an influencer. The maddening irony of so many tradwife influencers peddling a lifestyle of domesticity and "not working" when in reality the most successful ones are the top earners in their family through their WAGED WORK as an influencer! Propaganda, indeed.
Also easier to fund when the Netherlands are the 4 largest exporter or refined petroleum, with a population of less than 20 million. Lots of money to go around. I feel like that is the key to getting a system like that to work.
Yes, I talked about that in the article-- the Netherlands has universal health insurance and job protection for part-time workers. When there is better worker protection and access to healthcare, there is a lot more flexibility and freedom for employees, including parents.
Curious what counts at part time? In Netherlands or elsewhere? Vs full time! Anecdotally, since having kids, I first worked 35 hours a week but SUPER flexible so in reality was less than that when my first kid turned one, and am now in a 28h a week position and my second is 15 months. It was really hard to find a job with some degree of responsibility (and decent pay) to match my skill set at less than 32 hours a week, I’m happy I was able to find the super cool job I now have (my old organization closed during my maternity leave). Having that extra wiggle room helps me feel like I can actually spend time with my family and not be so exhausted and busy we need to outsource everything. My partner works a lot though. My ideal would be two parents with four day work weeks!
I think of part-time as <30 hours a week, but I think that 35 hours with lots of flexibility could also fit the bill. I totally agree that a four day work week for BOTH parents would be ideal!
I’m obsessed with this conversation. I actually wrote a post about serving capitalism vs your husband as the two binary ideals within the US. Whole heartedly agree that we need more part time jobs that allow women to use their degrees. I’m particularly interested by how this need for part time and flexible work has led many women to become social media content creators and go down the MLM rabbit holes. The lack of this opportunity in the US makes already vulnerable women put their child’s privacy (mom influencers) and their financial stability (MLMs where you lose more money than you gain) at risk
I live in the UK, we have the right to request flexible working hours (everyone not just mothers) this means I can work 3 long days a week and spend the rest with my daughter. The government has also rolled out a better childcare offer that working parents can claim 30 hours free childcare for school term time. It’s not perfect but definitely better than the offer is the US which boggles my brain is so poor!!
I absolutely love this. I'm hopeful that this type of analysis—and insight from abroad—can move the discourse needle toward more progressive policy on such a contested issue.
There's also a social value issue in the West. Women feel they need to remain professionals to prove their intellectual worth. And I wonder if we inferred status to women who mother full-time, or paid them as much as we pay our military generals, we might see a shift in what women choose to do. Right now it's the exact opposite: we relegate them to lower class, the Right, or tradwife culture, and chronically bully and denigrate them. And we incessantly argue *against* paying them. (To me, these arguments echo the "welfare queen" trope from the Right.)
Also. To be charitable to the social media sourdough lady, many women were beat over the head with the 60s libertarian feminist message that full-time motherhood = internalized patriarchy = bad, very bad. Women have been relentlessly shown through media that sensitive or nurture-inclined women were not only the enemy of female liberation (Boomer messaging) but also not cool, sexy, driven, or intelligent (Gen X/Millennial messaging) if they wanted to be mothers or choose childminding roles. Being "just a caregiver" is still seen as anti-intellectual. Wanting to be a mom signals to men you probably want commitment. (More women today have a harder time finding a man who wants to commit beyond sex than they do with being told by their husbands they can't go to school or climb the corporate ladder. Anecdotally, any time a single friend of ours finds a girl he likes, the first thing he usually brags about is not, "Oh she's so sweet and sensitive; she'll be a good mom." It's "Dude, she's loaded!" or, "She's crazy high up: C-suite!" Like they just won the lottery.)
When some women did (apprehensively) become mothers, and were blown away by how much they loved bonding with their newborn—or had a look through the academic literature on the critical role that emotionally attuned parents have on building the early architecture of the brain—it makes sense they feel they were lied to. It's also worldview-shattering to find a man whose love and respect don't stop when you opt out of incessantly striving. (In the early aughts, women were made to feel like they had to be Angelina Jolie circa 2004 to find love: not only stunningly beautiful, but can also fly a plane, ride a motorbike, shoot a gun off horseback, get covered in tattoos shooting whisky, be *incessantly* independent, deeply intellectual, a globe-trotting humanitarian, whip-sharp on the politics of war and international relations history, and speak in a deep and sultry voice. Ooof, exhausting. So when a man comes along and says, "I love your mind *and* your sensitive side. I'll pay the bills while you bond with baby until you feel ready to go back to work," ... Well, it's not surprising women feel lied to about what men really want either.)
The women who post or say things like the caption in that image are just pushing back against pop culture (or a family culture) that displays chronic vitriol toward sensitive and present mothering. And I think it's fair they do so because they're not actually attacking the other "side" (full-time working mothers), they're just broadcasting the realization that motherhood might, in fact, be valuable work—and isn't *always* awful.
It's an attempt to show the other side, and for some, it feels like standing up for children in a world that doesn't seem to value their neurobiological needs. (Children being needy is hugely inconvenient to late-stage neoliberal capitalism *and* the West's status-driven, credentialist, and individualist value system.)
In pursuit of trying to quell the "Mommy Wars", we shouldn't denigrate the this woman's sentiment either. I think we can all agree there's some truth to it, as well as some truth to the value of a "working mother" role model. (I adore the women in science I know; they're change makers! And, as stated above, I'm also clearly obsessed with the Jolie types who are committed to international and social justice.) But I DO want the world to also value the women like my mother-in-law, who was "just a mom." All three of her sons are the most sensitive, involved, sweet, and loving dads/partners. The world would be a better place if there were more men like them—and if women like her felt valued too.
But again, I loved the rest of this, keep it coming :)
Thank you for the kind words! I totally agree that disparaging women who choose to stay home with children is just as damaging (and sexist) as disparaging women who choose to work outside the home. We should respect women's choices on both sides.
Absolutely! Yes yes. It's easy to see the mommy wars for what they really are. One woman publicly stands up for her choice against her critics (usually a MIL or mom ha) by highlighting her reasons (eg. research on attachment security for the SAHM), and another woman who made a different decision (went back to work), takes that as a personal attack. It goes both ways: the working mom who publicly stands up against her critics (that MIL again? lol) cites the research on professional mothers correlating with a child's academic achievement (etc). Which, in turn, makes the mother who stayed home feel slighted. So I like casting *both* in a positive light and then fighting for real choice through policy change.
I worked part-time (28 hr/week) when my kids were little. Agree it's the best of both worlds. Kept my professional skills, health insurance (they allowed it for 0.6 FTE or higher), and sanity. Female dominated fields like mine (nursing) often accommodate these needs better!
Great post. Gotta love the image of the woman in the apron, posting this on social media, likely earning income as an influencer. The maddening irony of so many tradwife influencers peddling a lifestyle of domesticity and "not working" when in reality the most successful ones are the top earners in their family through their WAGED WORK as an influencer! Propaganda, indeed.
So true!
Thank you for this discussion. I wrote about the pitfalls of part-time work as it stands in the US but you are correct that if we could adopt models like those of other countries it is a natural way to go when kids are young. https://open.substack.com/pub/cindyditiberio/p/the-problem-with-part-time-work?r=lvi1c&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
Yes- you are totally right that as it stands in the U.S., it's not a perfect solution to the work-life balance problem.
Work from home is also a massive boost. You're saving most people 1-2 hours a day in commute time and the hours are typically more flexible.
Also easier to fund when the Netherlands are the 4 largest exporter or refined petroleum, with a population of less than 20 million. Lots of money to go around. I feel like that is the key to getting a system like that to work.
Yes, I would love to work part time. But that means no benefits at all, plus even less security.
Yes, I talked about that in the article-- the Netherlands has universal health insurance and job protection for part-time workers. When there is better worker protection and access to healthcare, there is a lot more flexibility and freedom for employees, including parents.
Curious what counts at part time? In Netherlands or elsewhere? Vs full time! Anecdotally, since having kids, I first worked 35 hours a week but SUPER flexible so in reality was less than that when my first kid turned one, and am now in a 28h a week position and my second is 15 months. It was really hard to find a job with some degree of responsibility (and decent pay) to match my skill set at less than 32 hours a week, I’m happy I was able to find the super cool job I now have (my old organization closed during my maternity leave). Having that extra wiggle room helps me feel like I can actually spend time with my family and not be so exhausted and busy we need to outsource everything. My partner works a lot though. My ideal would be two parents with four day work weeks!
I think of part-time as <30 hours a week, but I think that 35 hours with lots of flexibility could also fit the bill. I totally agree that a four day work week for BOTH parents would be ideal!