While I have grumbled in private, I've largely avoided the "having it all" discussion because I find it so annoying. If I had it all, I'd be incapable of getting dressed, faced with so many clothing choices. But school principal of the elite Upper Canada College (UCC) Jim Power's piece in the Globe and Mail compelled me to respond.
He's not the first man to enter the discussion. And he's absolutely right -- men belong here. But I couldn't help feeling irked by his thanks to mommy bloggers (oh yeah, and five decades of feminists that preceded them) for getting the public conversation going. "But it's just not fair to count men out," he said. Whom precisely does he think has been counting them out?
Power says the role of educators is largely one of character development including teaching boys to step up at home and be involved as true partners. He considers framing the question in terms of gender a disservice to all. Again, he's right. But it's still framed in terms of gender because despite men taking on more, the lion's share of familial labour still falls to women. Yes, as Power says, it's "society's issue," not a woman's issue, but the burden of change has never been shared equally. Forbes recently released its 2012 Top 10 Best Parenting And Homemaking Websites for Women. Pretty much says it all.
It can be argued, as Power does, that society, the economy and a culture of work obsession that pays only lip-service to the balance between work and family life, is at fault. But the imbalance didn't evolve naturally like apes into humans or the vestigial appendix. It was driven by a zillion active choices -- most thoughtless, unenlightened and entrenched in an existing power structure.
UCC is one of the most prestigious private schools in Canada -- attended in good part by children of leaders of industry and lots of other stuff. I'm curious about the curricular details of "preparing young men for the rigours of fatherhood," and what percentage of the $30,575 per year tuition is going toward it.
I support teaching good parenting -- goodness knows we do next to nothing to prepare people for this critical role with the mammoth job description, but no interview necessary. Even for those who don't grow up to have children, these transferable skills would not be wasted.
The fathers Power meets talk about the pressure they're under -- how they badly want to find time to watch their child "master a new acrobatic trick," that they often experience a "tug at their hearts that they keep to themselves."
What about the other 99.99 per cent of parenting responsibilities? Many in the UCC community might have staff to do that work, but most of us don't.
"That child's joy at finally having your undivided attention," that Power mentions describes a reality for the majority of parents. But while most children compete for mom's attention with laundry, cooking, cleaning, grocery shopping and a full-time paid job -- when it comes to their dads, they compete with the job. That remains the division of labour in most heterosexual North American families.
While little girls may fantasize about marriage and children at far higher rates than boys (and it's worth considering the ideologies that feed those fantasies), rarely do they long to clean pee-stained toilet seats and poo-besmirched walls, launder barf-covered sheets at 3:00 a.m., cook six things on the off chance the kid will eat one of them. Only a masochist with no sense of smell would include those in his or her fantasy list. But traditionally, these tasks have fallen to 50 per cent of the population. Divesting parenting of its currently gendered roles is the goal. Change is coming, but it's slow.
I think it's great that Jim Power has written this piece, that he has given thought to the important role that nurturing will play in men's lives, and the need to start when they are boys. Power educates the children of the one per cent. While Anne Marie Slaughter, who counts herself among them, truly struggled with her choices, for most people having to juggle that kind of "all" will remain a fantasy.
The gains of feminism redefined "all" for women, and with it the game plan. But "all" has never needed to change for men. I'd argue that for women "all" means what women have plus what men have. For men "all" is what other men have.
We all need to redefine "all" and it will always include the good, the bad and the smelly.
Follow Aviva Rubin on Twitter: www.twitter.com/aviva rubin
Another advantage that women seem to have that men don't is complaining. Why have children then complain that you want help? If you can't suppress your urge to have babies then don't have them, adopt older children, as it isn't fair to the babies, and that goes for the men also. If your man isn't complaining then dump him, don't even consider him as a mate no matter how cute or rich he is. Women have it all, all of the time, they just don't know how to manage all that they have.
Little girls have fantasies about marriage and babies, encouraged by ideologies? Little girls need to have a support system because the are feminine, they have ovaries and they will kill to take care of their children, when they grow up. Don't strip them of their femininity.
Great point - says it all.
Adopting older children is not easier. Children who have lived years of their lives without parents, or have been taken from people who are unable to parent them, are traumatized. It takes love and patience to break down the barriers and build a trusting relationship with an older child who has never been given reason to trust.
Thousands of older children in Canada are waiting for adoption. Some did not become available for adoption until they were older. Many come in sibling groups. Many have disabilities. Some just don't have the "right" skin colour. Often, they have a mix of needs. Regardless, older children do not have fewer needs than babies. They just have different needs.
I'd suggest that in future you resist the urge to share your ignorance, but I'd rather thank you for providing an opportunity to allow anyone who lost valuable seconds of their lives reading your comment to learn something useful, so their time doesn't turn out to be a complete waste, after all.
Also, there is a large lack of respect for the work that men have always done around the house, such as shoveling, lawn care, and mechanical fixes around the house. In the last several years my dad laid a patio, built a shed, painted and dealt with multiple care problems, but that doesn't make the national news.
This "having it all" debate is pretty stupid when you come down to it anyways, as none of us can have it all. If we crave work/life balance then we will sacrifice making it to the top at work and if we crave making it to the top then we will sacrifice our personal life. Both men and women make these decisions everyday and at the end of the day the choice is a personal one that does not come down to what sex organs we have. So stop trying to face the sexes off against each other and start trying to get them to work together to improve everyone's work/life balance!
I wonder how true the tradition roles still play in a family with Mom and Dad both working full time. Obviously giving a small sample size here , but in my family/peer/friend group, late 30's married, kids, both parents working, I just don't see it any more. Not a one of my buddies would think he could get away with coming home from work, cracking a beer and expecting his spouse to have supper on the table the laundry done and take care of the kids while he sits on the deck having his beer. My wife would let me get away with that for oh as long as it took her to kick me in the butt.
I think for many my age and younger, the roles are much more blurred (or maybe harmonized is a better word).
Again, there's been some major progress in just one generation, but there's still room to grow.
*Not always true, just giving an example that I've lived and that I've seen happen.
We are certainly not alone in how we handle the division of labour as it were. As I said, our married friends and siblings seem to handle it very similar, excluding those who have made the choice to have one parent, admittedly the mother, be a stay at home parent.
Now, we as a peer group are not big shot execs or CEOs or what have you. We don't have our kids in $30,000 a year prep schools like the article the author here is citing. We are middle class people who need both parents working to provide for our families the life we want to.