Not feeling "Torn" about my life choices

I read the first book in the New York Times "Motherlode" parenting blog's new book club. I'm glad I read Torn, and, as another commenter said on the site, more for the essays I didn't relate to. I already know about my life, and I learn a lot from being allowed into those of other people.

I enjoy this stuff—little sociological sketches. Personally, I'm not "torn" because I'm lucky enough to work part time from home while my kid is little and plan on mapping out my own schedule of ramping up the more she is in school. Although, now that we've made it through the baby years, I would be comfortable with her in care, if we needed to. There was really nothing to decide for me, my gut wouldn't let me put a baby in daycare and we could afford not to. What is the most "tearing", I think, are those who don't want to have their little ones in childcare but have to because they need the money.

As one might expect, the discussion over on Motherlode got pretty intense, treading into "Mommy War" territory with myself as a participant. The blog post for discussion had thoughts of readers who, to me, seemed a little dramatic and defensive. They felt that it was somehow insulting that it's even suggested that women are "torn" between home and work. "Of course I work." Some said. I think that may even be a title of one of the essays in Torn. At the end of the day, though, it's just a book of other people's experiences, none really that I felt super resonated with me, but many of which I found interesting.

I found the overall message (disappointingly to me, an old-fashioned girl) very, very pro-work for mothers, even of small children. But I really liked the essays that took a critical look at daycare and that highlighted some of the pleasures and benefits of staying home—"Muthering Heights" and "Harvard to Homemaker" come to mind.

In the Motherlode comments, much was made about so many people not having a choice in the matter of whether they would work or not, even with small children, and then there was the ensuing analysis of lifestyle choices, the proud "but I like to work" comments, all what anyone who reads parenting and mommy blogs would expect.

The question of "choice" brought to mind another book I recently read. I consider myself progressive in some areas and friendly to the interests of working people, but I read The Flipside of Feminism by Suzanne Venker and Phyllis Schlafly anyway. While I didn't find the book to be particularly well-written and the tone was, at times, catty, they offered some good ideas, among which are that young women might do well to plan for motherhood.

We're told we can "do it all" and we should go after our interests, go to college, etc. BUT young women might want to consider the reality of what working in different professions might mean and make informed choices based on the possibility that they might want to have children someday and they might be "torn" (as I think they should) about leaving infants in daycare. Young women should also choose partners who can support them, if having children and raising them in the 0-3 years themselves is important. You can't live on "love" and you can't eat love or pay the mortgage with just "love." Young women should be mindful of their spending habits and those of their boyfriends/potential husbands when they are single and dating. Why not start saving for that house and building a safety net just as soon as your student loans are paid (and try not to accrue much, if any loan debt). All these considerations would make it much easier for those women who want to stay home with young children to do so. My husband and I don't have particularly high paying jobs for the area in which we live, but, bless his heart, he was always planning to buy a house, get married and have a family and so he was saving for this before we even met and had his loans paid. As soon as we got serious, he set me straight to do the same. Of course, not all choices are right for all people, but I do think that young women (late highschool, early college) are not led to think through the whole picture of what their lives might hold. A couple days later, a writer's letter to Motherlode's Lisa Belkin described a scenario where she was doing just that, preparing in the way she felt was right for the distinct possibility of future motherhood.

One commenter on Motherlode wrote of how she found intellectual stimulation in parenting. (The complaint of many being that staying home with small children is positively mind-numbing). This was met with some cackling that this could not possibly true and that this woman is making much more of the day-to-day reality of parenting than it really is. My thought was, since so many are keen on the "not judging" ( we hear this alot when we observe that we don't think daycare is a great place for babies) I don't think we should judge what different people find intellectually stimulating. Actually, I think its best when people are able to find intellectual stimulation where they are, wherever they are. I thought it was cool that the woman found this place for herself and observed that if more people had bigger minds they'd find this, too.

Toward the end of the arguments, I felt I, again, shared some eye-opening exchanges about motherhood and working and how women feel about it all. Reading heartfelt comments from people about their tough choice certainly is softening. Even hearing from career women about how much they love their children and how they feel their bond with their child is as good as mine is softening (I don't know that I believe it, but that fact that they want to believe it is touching.) I still feel very firm about my belief that, if at all possible, kids 0-3 don't really belong in long-term childcare. Of course, I understand the reality of life for many people today. It's frustrating. What I really don't want to be is a mean, guilt-mongering, holier-than-though person. In another Motherlode discussion where daycare came up, I tried to make clear that my anti-daycare stance isn't anti working people, it's anti the system that has daycare as a solution to problems of not being able to manage a household on one income, or single mothers, or dads out of work. It's anti- policy and social concepts that have led us to a place where two incomes are needed just to survive (gee, thanks, feminism!) and where there are fewer social/family community connections (and yes, government assistance to some lesser degree) that offer relief to folks on hard times. My anti-daycare view is not anti-individual, anti-working families or anything like that. Still, that so many upper middle class feminists blithely act like its no problem to put babies in daycare because their careers are more important, and then criticize those who "opt out" is troubling— and angering.

The anger dawned on me as I was finishing up Torn tonight and I came across the Katy Read essay I previously blogged about, on the regrets of a stay-at-home mother (all financial). In it she invokes Linda Hirschman, Leslie Bennetts and the like, and, I was reminded why I get so angry. I mean, work if you want and have someone else look after your baby all day, but don't act like I am doing something wrong (or foolish or bad or against some "sisterhood") because that's not something I could stomach.