What do we mean by “we”?
There’s an old joke that goes something like this:
The Lone Ranger and Tonto were surrounded by hostile Indians, and had no way to escape. The Lone Ranger turns to Tonto and says "Well, we’ve had a lot of adventures together, but it looks like we’ve come to the end of our road. I’ve been proud to have you as my friend. And Tonto looks at him and says: "What do you mean "we," White Man?"
Last week, Suzanne at Mother-in-Chief wrote a passionate explanation of how her skills and talents — and those of many women like her — are being wasted because corporate America can’t figure out a way to use them in a meaningful way on a part-time basis. She wrote:
"We did not quit our careers. Essentially, they quit us. Companies could not merge parent and paycheck. Instead of heading back into those high-paying, highly respected jobs, we lower our expectations…. Moms do not fit into the corporate culture. As a result companies are missing out on the talents of driven and dedicated women."
I recognize the phenomenon that Suzanne is describing, but I don’t see myself in her "we." And I know a lot of employed mothers who get nervous when they hear this kind of sweeping rhetoric, because they worry that if their bosses believe that "all women will leave when they have kids," things will get even harder for them. And some stay-at-home mothers do leave their jobs without regrets or ambivalence.
Working mothers and their advocate are equally likely to use overly sweeping "we" statement. Dawn at This Women’s Work has written persuasively about how mainstream feminist discussions of work and family issues still tend to marginalize stay-at-home moms. My favorite example of this is from the Work & Family Program at the New American Foundation. I think they do great work, but I grind my teeth every time I read one of their documents that includes a statement to the effect that families with stay-at-home partners have gone the way of Ozzie and Harriet. (I can’t link to an example because their website seems to be down tonight.)
I’m not saying this to pick on either Suzanne or New America. It’s an incredible challenge to talk about mothers’ issues without either minimizing the diversity of experiences (and thereby making some group of mothers invisible) or treating everything as a matter of individual choice, with no recognition of the systemic factors that shape our choices. This is tricky stuff.
August 8th, 2005 at 1:25 am
“I recognize the phenomenon that Suzanne is describing, but I don’t see myself in her ‘we.'”
Well put. I myself often feel this way. I live in a small resort town in Oregon; in order to stay here, most people have to be creative about how they earn a living. By extension, most parents have to be creative about how they juggle earning income and raising kids. I could describe about 10 different set-ups.
I recognize that in America today more people live in cities than in small towns — and Bend is an anomaly among small towns — but I often feel that the experiences I see around me are left out of the national debate.
August 8th, 2005 at 7:48 am
I think part of parenting is making hard choices, realizing you can’t have it all. I’m saying this as a dad who faced those choices and chose my kids over career ambition. I’m now working full time, but as I’ve blogged, it was really hard to realize I could not be the father I wanted to be and be as ambitious as I’d been socialized to be. I downsized the ambition and am much happier for it.
That said, I think if I could interpret Suzanne a bit, the problem is that parenting is not included in definitions of success in this country; it’s not valued in the corporate realm, in fact it’s too often seen as a problem. My wife, when she was corporate, also faced that attitude, that if she wanted to take time off after our daughter was born, or leave work at 5pm even if her work was finished, she was seen as a slacker, as not serious about her job. She ended up leaving the corporate world despite her successes because she was not able to be true to who she was — as a parent and as a human — in that environment.
The bottom line problem is the values that are so dominant in this country, values that unfortunately devalue or undervalue parents spending time with kids.
August 8th, 2005 at 10:13 am
It is tricky stuff. I find that one of the most difficult things myself is that the ‘we’ that I define myself in shifts. I’m a WAHM who sends her kids to daycare. I only WAH because the organization that I work for doesn’t have an office in the city that I live near–I didn’t choose this route, as so many WAHMs did. I identify more closely with women who work out of the house, and I have lots of things in common with those folks, but I also have the luxury of being able to go to my daughter’s school for a half-hour in the middle of a workday, without my boss looking over my shoulder, which is not true of many work-in-office moms.
August 8th, 2005 at 11:10 am
One issue I have with “we” talk is that it so quickly morphs into “us” … as in “us” vs. “them”. I think the Mommy Wars are overblown by the media, but the divide still exists.
Also, I wonder if there isn’t a hint of the classic issue women have of not being willing to speak up for ourselves. It’s almost as if women are unwilling to say “This isn’t working for me.” So it turns into “This isn’t working for us,” as women often feel better about advocating for others than we feel about simply asking for what’s needed for ourselves. The fact that others aren’t asking to be advocated for gets lost in the noise.
August 8th, 2005 at 3:13 pm
I do wish there wasn’t such a divide; I see it, really I do. And some communities don’t make it easier. I remember, about 8 years ago when I was fully into the PTA/elementary school scene (and was a SAHM, as was most of the people involved with the PTA, and honestly, the majority of women in my community) – I met a new neighbor, welcomed her to the neighborhood, etc. And she expressed her frustration at how everything in the school system was set up for SAHM’s, not working mothers – PTA meetings, conferences, school events like concerts and plays. And she was absolutely right, and made me feel ashamed for my part in any of that (as a PTA president, for example). It was definitely an either/or thing back then – this assumption that only the SAHMs were interested in participating in their childrens’ schools.
I hope it’s different now, but somehow I don’t think it is.
August 8th, 2005 at 6:59 pm
Did you see this interview with Jane Lazarre at Mothers Movement?
http://www.mothersmovement.org/features/05/jane_lazarre/a_sort_of_perfection.htm
It sums up a lot of what you’re saying here, and more interesting insights. Sad to think feminism has been struggling with this juggling act for decades, but it’s also good to know we haven’t given up, and are still working it out. Someday I’d love to see a collection of stories of women who are living the work-home juggling act.
August 8th, 2005 at 7:01 pm
This is one of my favorite quotes from the interview:
“I can only say it seems to me feminist writers and scholars have a responsibility to analyze and interpret the experiences of motherhood as one crucial path in female identity, as fundamental to some as sexuality, the need for creative work, the importance of financial independence and political power.”
August 8th, 2005 at 7:29 pm
I can’t help but wonder if you are the “anonymous friend” who posted on my blog when I published this essay on my feelings of being underemployed. I hear what you are saying about not wanting to use the word “we,” but when I use it, I really am referring to the group of women that I know and spend time with. Perhaps I am linked in to a very small subset of the mothers that feel this way. It’s great to know that you and others have carved out a place that is comfortable in corporate America, but from where I’m standing, it isn’t the norm. That said, I feel that changes should be made to improve the work-home balance for all parents. And that is what I was mostly writing about. Regardless whether you consider yourself part of the we, everyone could benefit from more flexible schedules, better maternity/paternity leave packages, more job-share options.
August 8th, 2005 at 7:49 pm
Just for the record — I’m not Suzanne’s anonymous commenter, and I totally agree with her overall point about needing more flexible solutions. In general, I’m less optimistic about part-time work, and more focused on improving the on-ramps for people who have taken time off from the workforce, but I think it’s worth working for both.
That said, I find it fascinating that I read Suzanne’s essay as having a broadly inclusive (perhaps over-inclusive) “we” and she says that she had a specific group in mind. A good reminder of the limitations of the medium, perhaps.
August 9th, 2005 at 6:59 am
On one hand, I share your unease at mothers being swept into the “work doesn’t fit our lives” commentary. I went to a conference recently. Every time I commented that I had missed the last two because I was busy having children, the person I was talking to would say “and how many days a week are you working now?”. I’m glad it was seen as an option, but as the sole breadwinner in my family, I don’t want to be pigeonholed as a part-timer.
But then, my ideal family situation would have both of us working part-time, and earning proportionally as much as we would full-time. I would like to live in a world where being a part-timer didn’t involve being pigeonholed as not serious, and it was an option I could explore without a serious loss of income and status.
I do agree with Suzanne that the world of work is losing a whole lot of talent at the moment – many of them are my friends.
But as an employer who has tried and failed to make part-time a serious option for less than three full days a week (and even then for my very flexible consulting company it requires a lot of managing) I can’t figure out how to fix it.
August 9th, 2005 at 11:24 am
It’s funny how so much of our views revolve around our own definition of “we.”
In my world (mid-sized midwestern city near a large university and lots of lakes), my entire circle of mother-friends works part time. I’m in marketing, another friend is an attorney, another works in a retail store, another works for a museum, and another works for a nonprofit, and another works for a hospital, and another is a nurse. My doctor even works part time. Some work 2-3 full days a week (like me). Others work 5 half days. Some work on weekends.
So, my norm is a group of women who have found remarkably flexible employers. And who are married to remarkably flexible men who have agreed to take over a huge share of the child “drop offs” and sick days and the rest. (Honestly, the employer is easy to find…it’s the husband that is tricky!)
Yes, there are challenges. Yes, we are tremendously underpaid , on the whole (taking flexibility over pay raises every time.) Yes, our husbands’ careers are probably taking a hit (can’t work til 6 when you need to pick the kids up at 5). Yes, we work at night after the kids are in bed (I haven’t watched a complete TV show in MONTHS! no time.) Yes, our house is a mess.
But, it is working and working very well for me and for my friends. So, there is hope.
I wonder if this is a geographic thing? If some cities have a “culture” that is more friendly to flexible work arrangements than others? That would be an interesting study.
August 9th, 2005 at 1:44 pm
I am one of those incredibly lucky people who’s been able to carve out a part-time work schedule that (for the most part) works for my life right now & my family circumstance. Yet, at the same time, in my recent annual review, which was basically quite positive, I was encouraged to think about adding more hours, because my employer knows I’m “capable of so much more.”
Ugh- yes, that maybe true? But it was a choice to work part-time, and part of that choice is a recognition that I can’t (and don’t want to) do all that would be required of me if I was full-time.