Why doesn’t anyone ever ask whether men can “have it all”?
This was previously published on Gloriously Alive.
I have recently read a few pieces on working mothers, and the debate as to whether a woman can thrive as both a professional and as a mother. This debate has been going on for decades, but has been fanned a bit higher by this article in the Atlantic, as well as the news that the new CEO of Yahoo is also six months pregnant, raising fears that she will not be able to adequately raise the fortunes of that flailing internet site.
Frankly, if she could get all the trolls and haters off of the Yahoo comments boards, that would be a tremendous feat unto itself.
|
It seems strange to me that although males also fulfill the role of professionals and parents as women do, there is almost no debate as to whether they are able to balance these two roles adequately.
|
Now, I’m not going to weigh in the topic of professional women who are also mothers. I do not believe that my point of view on that subject is particularly insightful, and neither do I have any interest in putting myself into the crossfire of this debate. I would rather blog about less charged issues, like theology, or race.
But I do want to point out a strange inconsistency, that I never have read a piece similarly focused on men, something entitled, “Why Men Can’t Have It All.” It seems strange to me that although males also fulfill the role of professionals and parents as women do, there is almost no debate as to whether they are able to balance these two roles adequately. I have given it some thought, and have deducted that there can only be a few possible explanations for this:
1. It’s that no one has ever written about it before.
Well, then call me the first. I think this is actually something of a plausible explanation for the dearth of discussion on the topic, the possibility that no man has ever bothered to ask the question of balance between roles. After all, there are many questions that men never bother to ask or think about—am I right, ladies???
But no. I don’t really believe this is the reason that I have never read any content on this topic. If it were a flameworthy issue, then some blogger somewhere would have brought it up, guaranteed.
2. It’s that men are more able to balance their roles as professionals and parents than women.
Puhahaha. That’s rich. Look at your average male during March Madness or whatever sports season they are into, and tell me that they are masters of balance. Look at your average male video game player (console or PC, take your pick), and tell me that they are able to juggle roles of weighty importance. Check out video of soccer hooligans in Europe or government officials in South Korea throwing punches and flour at each other on the chamber floor, and tell me that men are better able at measured thinking and balanced mentalities.
Nope, that ain’t it either.
3. It’s that no one expects men to be as involved in parenting as women.
Bingo.
The reason that women struggle over the question of being both a mother and a professional is because they have such a high view of both. For women, being a good mother and a capable professional are both roles that require incredible amounts of commitment and sacrifice, so much so that it becomes nearly impossible for the average women to fulfill both roles adequately. And hence, intense debate results.
|
The reason no one ever asks the question as to whether men can be fathers and professionals is because we don’t expect very much out of fathers.
|
The reason no one ever asks the question as to whether men can be fathers and professionals is because we don’t expect very much out of fathers. If a man is somewhat engaged with his children, and makes some attempt to be present and active in their lives, he is considered a good father. And fortunately, a somewhat active participation in a child’s life still allows a man enough time and energy to fully devote themselves to another calling, that of their professional lives. THIS is why men are better able to balance these two roles—not because of the enhanced abilities of men, but because the role of father is culturally diminished and relatively lightweight. A man can throw himself into his career, and dabble in fatherhood, and still win the approval of all.
Perfect example of this: go to Costco, and look for a parent taking care of multiple children. If you see a woman towing three children along while grabbing cases of bottled water, you don’t give her a second look (except out of pity) because that’s normal, and expected. It’s expected that a women will take care of three children while grocery shopping. But if you see a single man taking care of three children at Costco, doing the exact same thing as a mother, you will find old people clucking in approval and married women looking on in envy. Because they have seen a rare thing: a man taking care of children! Bravo, sir, bravo.
Now at this point, you might expect me to attack this mentality from the point of view that it is a negative double standard, and is unfair to women. I think that’s obvious. But as a male, that’s not really how I look at this issue.
Honestly, I think this double standard is unfair to men.
You see, when someone tells you or implies that you can’t do something well, that’s not a cause for celebration. Men should not feel emancipated because everyone believes they are only mildly competent as caregivers. Bro, that’s an insult. That means that people assume you can’t do a good job, that you aren’t as capable or committed or loving and patient as your spouse. Now that might be true, but still, no one should make that assumption. It diminishes the importance of fatherhood, and ridicules the abilities of fathers.
People make often light of this perception, writing movies and sitcoms about how incompetent fathers are at home, like Daddy Day Care or whatever. This is moderately funny, but many don’t realize that this is actually destructive because many men begin to buy into this mentality or stereotype without thought, and assume that they are not good caregivers, that not much is expected from them as fathers, that they are bumbling fools when it comes to family. We lower our expectations of ourselves as fathers. We tell ourselves, “Sure, we can be good CEOs, but we’re not cut out to be fathers.”
Now, tell me how that is any different or less insulting than telling a women the opposite: “Sure, you’re a good mother, but you’re not cut out to be a CEO.”
Man, I WISH someone would write articles questioning whether men could have it all, whether we could be top in our profession as well as good fathers, because that would mean that we are finally taking fatherhood seriously, and seeing it as a role that requires such commitment that there is a very real chance that it cannot be balanced with professional ambition. I wish men would fill online forums with their anguished attempts at living both callings, because that would mean that we are giving fatherhood the time and attention that it deserves, and are no longer selling ourselves short as fathers. God knows that there are so many communities where fatherhood needs to be taken far more seriously, not less!
But fat chance. Most of America has bought into the stereotype of the incompetent father, and have settled for the idea that a good father is one who doesn’t get in the way. Not me though. I plan to struggle with my professional career and my role as a father for decades, because both take so much of my time and energy and love. Because believe it or not, sometimes struggle doesn’t indicate that something is wrong, but that something is right.
Read more on Work/Life Balance.
Image of young smiling businessman courtesy of Shutterstock
About Peter Chin
Well said, Peter. As a stay at home Dad, I’m pretty sure that my focus on raising my son did some damage to my revenues as a graphic designer. (As most contractors know, you have to network and pursue business constantly…so although I got my work done, new business suffered.) But on some other levels it helped me better understand what matters to me in life so being a stay at home Dad can be looked as a process that shifted my focus and put me on some new paths.
But however you look at it, the dialog about men not “having it all” is unheard of.
There is a tendency in our culture for the men who raise children to be devalued. That is, looked at as doing this wonderful work because they have no alternative. We and our spouses can be hit with that message over and over again in subtle ways.
And if money drops off, well, that is proof that we are somehow “slacking”.
Tough stuff, all around.
absolutely – it is tough stuff all around, and that isn’t necessarily a bad thing. i have the same struggles in balancing family and work and money, but in a way, i think that’s good. it means that we are taking all of these crucial elements as seriously as they should. it’s refreshing to know that there are so many fathers who are on the same page.
I’ve been saying this for years, glad to see this article being written. Men don’t involve themselves as much in housework and childcare and no one thinks that the same issue of balancing is applied to them. But I’ve always thought that it doesn’t do men any good to not do enough in the home. No one can have it all but with the help/support of a spouse or someone else, you can balance most of what you can
It’s that no one expects men to be as involved in parenting as women.
Oh it’s not as simple as “no one expects that from men”. It’s that plus men are actively denied that line of pursuit. It would be like saying that the reason women haven’t gained much footing in the professional world is because no expects women to be as involved in the professional world as men are. I’m pretty sure there is some denial of women going on there too.
I think it has something to do with the way “all” is defined. For men “all” is defined as devote as much effort as possible to profession and devote little to zero effort to parenting. So by this standard men already have it “all”.
A man can throw himself into his career, and dabble in fatherhood, and still win the approval of all.
Oh he can? Let’s ask the dads that are sharing their stories over in the post about dads being able to take their daughters clothes shopping. Based on this “minimal effort” those guys would be celebrated, not getting accused of being molesters and perverts for fulfilling their parenting responsibilities. I think that “approval of all” is a smokescreen. Pat dads on the head for that little bit of work to get them out of the way so the moms, the “real parents”, can keep their place at the top of the hierarchy of parenting. Can’t have the help thinking that they might be able to do things on their own can we?
From my experience, people don’t /really/ expect women to thrive in their profession. When my mother started her business everybody smiled down at her. Not because it’s wasn’t a good idea, but because she’s a single mom. She’s doing great now, but people still act weird about it.
Denial is always a part of it, but that doesn’t make it not true.
Disagree. No one ever asks why men cant have it all because we were never told it was even possible (and its not). I’ve always believed that to expect to “have it all” was the height of entitlement and incredibly unrealistic. The message “you can have it all!” isnt “you have to do everything” but rather “you are entitled to an amazing career, tons of time to parent your kids, a super supportive spouse, vacations, etc etc etc…” It denies the existence of the tradeoffs the people have to make. Example- if I walk my son to preschool I cannot get into the office before 9. If I dont get in before 9 I will be behind every other person in the office. I will be perceived as less effective and will be less promotable. I’ve got to make a decision about what is best for my family. As sole income earner my career is pretty important- the risks involved with me making sacrifices for the family are significantly higher than the same person in a dual income family. Given that the vast majority of single income earners are men – that’s what makes Dad’s with 3 kiddos at costco somewhat rarer than mothers. Anyway, I don’t tend to go to costco but if you want to see a dad with 3 kids shopping come to home depot or the farmer’s market any weekend.
Bravo, Peter! I think that you’ve hit the nail on the head. I think things are not going to change for women until we change our stereotype of the male role at home. Joan Williams makes a similar point in her eloquent post here -
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joan-williams/ann-marie-slaughter_b_1619324.html
False premise, both for men and women.
“all” is usually defined as unhindered progress through one’s profession, or a sequence of professions, the change not being allowed to have any adverse effect. And being a terrific parent. And pursuing one’s passions without difficulties.
Problem is, at the simplest, that nobody can be in two places at once, and professional progress usually means being in a particular place, or at least for the work-from-home folks, their attention being in a particular place. ……. Is this something that needs explaining? Huh. Well, I guess what needs explaining is that being in one place means not being in another place. And if you need to be in a place to do something, then not being in that place means you aren’t doing that….
Jeez. This is complicated.
Now, you substitute parenting for professional progress. Same diff.
Mark’s point about his revenues falling is insightful. He accepts that. Feminists, on the other hand, think that’s patriarchal oppression, because that means not having it all. It is not acceptable.
Unless Mark’s work can be done while the kids are asleep and his wife is gone, and unless Mark’s work is what he’d pay money to do as a hobby, and unless he can do it as much as he likes, and as much as he needs to in that time frame, and as long as he has the energy for the other stuff, and unless he’s getting as much money as if he were spending fifty hours a week as a lead designer–T square and compass never resting–he doesn’t have it all.
And Mark’s a SAHM dad, and a stay at home worker, giving him a major break compared to others.
And, now, what about his wife? She doesn’t have it all because she has forty hours or more out of the house. Can’t parent. Even five hours a week out of the house means you don’t have it all.
“having it all” is a pernicious idea. But pursuing it keeps most folks out of trouble, except for when, say, moms who work and get time off for kid stuff insist on having the same progress and promotions as women who don’t.
Lots of those mothers could be stay at home moms. You seem them with three kids in tow shopping at Costco, but Dad is down in the salt mine working himself into an early grave so that Mom and the little ones can go grocery shopping. Why is it that men spending tons of time working to put food on the table isn’t viewed as a sacrifice?
collin.
By implication, a man’s day on the job starts with a power breakfast catered by a top-dollar restaurant. Followed by a really keen downsizing–of somebody else.
Then a five-star lunch on the company.
And a management retreat to Taho.
You call that a sacrifice?
You call that an honest attempt at an example of most men’s lives?
Another dad. Read the comment. It’s not an honest attempt at men’s lives. It’s a description of the kind of jobs men are supposed to have when feminists say the old boys club doesn’t allow women to have them.
If feminists are forced to acknowledge salt mines, they call them the fault of the patriarchy, but they have no intention of going without salt.
I’d give my RIGHT ARM if I could be there foe any of my childrens Field day or ‘moving up’ ceremonery. Those moments are gone and can never be recaputered. My job was to Protect and provide. And if the price to pay was to be absent from such things, well, that’s just the way it is!
First, even if you’re a high powered executive you’re working a lot and it isn’t easy. If you want to compare a top level executive, then let’s talk about his wife who doesn’t actually do any housework because they have a housekeeper, doesn’t cook because they have a chef, doesn’t deal with the kids because there is a nanny, and just sits around with her friends at the spa and goes shopping. The average man works very very hard to support his family.
Yeah and that’s when the gears switch from gender to race and how that housewife is so badly oppressing the staff, who is likely to be non-white. I guess the line of argument is if wife wasn’t so oppressed by the old boys club then should not be “forced” to treat non-whites that way or something.
I disagree with the second point. Balance does not have to mean being all equal all the time. Maybe March Madness is your time to hang with your buddies and have some fun and focus on that. Focus on other things, other times.
I think men are better at this. Isn’t the very example you give, March Madness, one that has nothing to do with either work or parenting? Isn’t it just guys taking some time to let everything else slide for a bit and enjoy life? The kids aren’t going shoeless or hungry, they’re playing with friends, the house doesn’t need to be spotless. The trick of balancing isn’t doing equal amounts of professional and house work, it’s doing enough of each to get what you want but not so much of either that it crowds out a satisfying life.
Finally, the examples you give at the end, video gamers and hooligans and politicians. That’s bullshit. That’s no better than me judging “measured thinking and balanced mentalities” of all women by the actions of Catherine Kieu Becker and Lorena Bobbit.
“2. It’s that men are more able to balance their roles as professionals and parents than women.
Puhahaha. That’s rich. Look at your average male during March Madness or whatever sports season they are into, and tell me that they are masters of balance. Look at your average male video game player (console or PC, take your pick), and tell me that they are able to juggle roles of weighty importance. Check out video of soccer hooligans in Europe or government officials in South Korea throwing punches and flour at each other on the chamber floor, and tell me that men are better able at measured thinking and balanced mentalities.
Nope, that ain’t it either.”
Good gosh, I don’t know where to start. I guess the first thing that stood out with me was the stereotyping of management, in particular upper management. If that is the true stereotype where they have five star breakfasts and same with lunches etc … then I guess that would also apply to the high powered women in management as well? But the truth is, what you see on TV isn’t what real life is all about.
What people don’t understand is that so called high power career has LOADS of pit falls. You’re constantly watching your back because someone, somewhere is out to get ya. If it’s not someone in your company, it’s your competition. Then you have the company you work for. Everyone and I mean EVERYONE is dispensable, there are no guarantees. Unless you negotiated a sweet fale safe contract, you can be out on the street at a moments notice.
Then you have the “I know you did a great job but what do you have in the pipeline?” Companies are result oriented and they don’t give a rats ass how they get the results as long as they get them. I traveled 80% of the week. My week started on Sunday night when I would fly somewhere in the US for meetings Monday morning. I was electronically connected to the company 24 hours a day, seven days a week. All the time having your ear to the ground listening for signs of a buyout, a merger or even a “we’re closing your division.” Yeah …. No stress there.
I ate at 5 star restaurants, I made deals on golf courses and over late night cocktails. I had a company car, two corner offices, one in Chicago and one in New York. Great expense account that no one questioned as long as deals were made and the company produced. All the time, my wife was home with our two kids. Having a flexible schedule at times, I was able to attend a lot of their school and personal events. Never missed a birthday, graduation or play. But reality would set in when I was up the next morning at 4:30am, getting ready for my next trip, checking my itinerary, calling the limo company to make sure my car would be there. Calling the airline making sure my flight was on time. 45 minute drive to the airport, I’d be on the phone (back when cell phones were for the very special) leaving messages for my secretary to follow up on things, leaving messages for my reps as well as the rep that I was more then likely meeting somewhere for a meeting that day. Then there is the personnel we had the honor of dealing with. Beyond the business, I had to keep a hell of a lot of well paid professionals happy … didn’t want to lose them to another company… keep them happy and bouse their ass if they weren’t performing.
Then there was the legal side of the business. Oh yeah, contracts, have to meet with legal, juggle between the client and their legal departments and God forbid that one of your clients be GOVERNMENT!
When I was transferred to Texas, I commuted every weekend for almost two months until I found a house in Texas. About a year later, the company sold my division. Had a good contract and was financially taken care of but then again, what’s next? Thankfully, I was well known and never been unemployed for more then a couple of weeks.
Again, all the time my wife who was fulfilling her dream was staying at home with the kids.
Can we (men and women) have it all? Yup, I had what I asked for and my wife had what she asked for. Neither of us asked or wanted to do it all, we simply made a choice as to what we wanted and stuck with it. My wife is very well educated and in many ways can easily outshine me in the career field. She could have, had she chose to, easily doubled our income but for what? Even with the income I was bringing in, we could have truly lived high on the hog but for what?
I now make jack, gave up the so called corporate world for something far more rewarding. Wife still isn’t working but that is in part because of the lack of jobs available, even with her background. So, we get by and enjoy the heck out of our grandson and adult kids.
Why would anyone want “it all” unless it’s what you want in the first place. Want it all or want everything?
1. Men don’t breastfeed, even if they wanted to, as some seem to want to do. So, not being at home to nurse for the first year is not an issue. He can’t do it anyway.
2. When has a woman EVER been asked by her prospective mother in law if she can provide for their son and any children that come along?
3. Men have pressure to make as much as possible, and increasingly more as they get older. It’s a different defintion of “having it all. Women don’t have that same level of pressure. However, many (not all) have a maternal desire to be at home with their children.
4. Men can be great, involved fathers even with full time, in the office jobs. Not sure why so many here don’t grasp that concept.
2. When has a woman EVER been asked by her prospective mother in law if she can provide for their son and any children that come along?
Well I think that does happen, just not in the way that a man would be asked of him and providing for his future wife and possible kids by his in laws.
Ever notice the bit about how mothers don’t think any woman can take care of her son as good as she can? It’s a part of the “no woman is good enough for my baby.” routine.
Bearing in mind that “providing” differs a bit when talking about traditional gender roles for men and women. A man is expected to provide via going outside the home to work everyday and bringing in money from the outside world. A woman is expected to provide via staying in the home and keeping it in it’s contents in condition and being primary care giver to children.
3. Men have pressure to make as much as possible, and increasingly more as they get older. It’s a different defintion of “having it all. Women don’t have that same level of pressure. However, many (not all) have a maternal desire to be at home with their children.
Regardless of desire to have children and be home with them they are expected to want children and want to be home with them. The other side of the coin that people don’t want dads in the home is that people don’t want women to leave the home.
I second Danny.
“Providing” looks different but carries a LOT of weight.
“Provide for”, as in make enough money for them both. Plenty of times, nobody cares much about her cooking skills since people can survive even eating out but can’t survive with absolutely no money. So, if he has no job at all, very seldom is there NOT a judgement or question as to whether he is a responsble man. If she can’t cook, people assume that she’ll eventually learn. Huge difference in the seriousness of those expectations.
It’s not true that people don’t not want dads in the home. They do. But, they want, and rightly so, for dads to bring money into the home unless he just has money. If he’s independantly wealthy or works from home, nobody cares that he’s home all the time. The issue is bringing in money.
I can agree that the expectations are different. I just am against the idea that only one side has expectations heaped on them while the other has none.
It’s not true that people don’t not want dads in the home. They do. But, they want, and rightly so, for dads to bring money into the home unless he just has money.
Not sure about this. Gender roles are changing and women have already make big strides in getting into the workplace. However at the same time this is being done while still actively trying to keep men out of the home. I don’t think it’s a matter of, “He can being in the home….as long as he is bring in money from somewhere.”. I think it’s more “His place is outside of the home, not inside it.”
Why worry about a man’s ability to make money dropping when woman’s ability to make money is rising?
If he’s independantly wealthy or works from home, nobody cares that he’s home all the time.
I don’t know about that. If said guy were already loaded there would be an implication that he is not a real man by virtue of being a privileged rich boy that doesn’t know the meaning of hard work.
Good Article Peter. I think another issue is that it’s not considered “manly” to have a huge parenting role-for example to go shopping with the kids or to be a stay at home dad, god forbid you do more things that are usually considered “female roles” when it comes to marriage and child rearing. You’ll hear it from your family, your male friends, etc. “you’re acting too much like a woman”, “are a wimp or a pussy”, “she’s got you whipped”, etc. What horrid double standards for both genders…..
Thank-you for stating this so clearly! The discrimination fathers face when being the primary parent is remarkably similar to the discrimination women faced and still sometimes face when pursuing careers. If you do the work well, you get a condescending pat on the head implying that your gender was something inferior to overcome. Also, men get shamed for not being primary earners just as women get shamed for not being there enough for the children.
If we can fight down those stereotypes, then it will be possible for most people to ‘have it all’ in a way – or at least have what they want most. The key is for people to search for complementary mates, so that each couple has one person who wants to spend most of her/his time focusing on the career and be a secondary parent, and another person who wants to spend most of his/her time parenting, and be a secondary breadwinner once the kids are old enough to be in school.
Here’s where the rubber meets the road for me. NOBODY, male or female gets to have it all. I understand that women want to have work outside the home, and they also want to be good mothers and parents. There is some blame to place on society which places unrealistic expectations on what a career looks like and what parenting looks like, making that ideal harder to achieve. The expectations that ride men’s shoulders is that of the provider, bring home the bacon, or you’re nothing, pat your kids on the head when you get home and you’re good, you’ve done your job. Also unrealistic. But here’s my world. I get up around 5am, I’m gone before 6. I get home around 5 on the average, kids are in bed around 8-8:30. I’m in bed by 10 (I hope) My wife has been working with the kids all day, she’s beat, wants a break, I’ve been working all day, I’m beat, I want a break, so we try the best we can to work together to get dinner done, get the house straightened out, all those things, and then we’ve got an hour or so with each other, and at that point we both want a little time to decompress on our own, so we’re looking at less time than that really to engage as a couple. So what am I? Half assed husband, Half assed Dad, Good worker. That doesn’t feel like having it all to me, and I can’t imagine why the hell anyone would want it. As it is, I take shit at work because I seldom work on Saturdays, because I feel like my family deserves to have me around on the weekends. Do I feel like that places my employment at risk, yes I do, but I have to draw a goddamn line somewhere.
There have been other similar articles written about this topic. They usually fit in the viein yours is in, that men also can’t have it all, so claiming women not being able to have it all as being sexist and evidence of some kind of social discrimination is ridiculous. That the reality is, men understand the concept of sacrifice, and can sacrifice in one area for the greater good of their family without the need to complain. I’ll try and find links. No promises.
” We tell ourselves, “Sure, we can be good CEOs, but we’re not cut out to be fathers.””
Well, I think men traditionally did not separate their careers from the role as a father. For most of the 20th century, a father was deemed highly capable if he could provide materially for his children and elevate his family’s status in the public domain. His role was limited (or elevated depending on perception) to breadwinner and public representative of the household, his career a means of fulfilling his role as a father.
Fast forward to today, women are expected to prove themselves capable of being everything a man can be in the public domain yet maintain their traditional role as mater familias. Part of that effort has included tearing down traditional masculinity leaving men no longer sure what his role is and his consequent waywardness a subject of comedy. I think in all of talk of glass ceilings and patriarchy, feminism perhaps neglected to raise the value of parenthood and highlight an equal barrier keeping men out of a women’s traditional world.
I used to work for a law firm where I observed a lot of workaholic attorneys putting in 10, 12, 14 hour days, 6-7 days a week. The men did not seem particularly upset about not being more involved in day to day child care. They had wives had home taking care of that sh!t. Some of them would try to go to their sons’ Little League games and so on whenever they could, but other than that, they did not really seem to be bothered by the fact that they spent very little time with their children. Or maybe they cared, but didn’t talk about it. I don’t know. I think if you asked them “can a man be an effective attorney and an effective dad” they would have said “absolutely yes!” because in their minds, they were very effective dads. They were bringing in tons of money to support the family in a nice McMansion, with a Mercedes and a Beemer and vacations in the Caribbean.
Don’t get me wrong, I think it is awesome that a lot of men now who are NOT happy with the above scenario. But that’s the traditional status quo. Men viewed themselves as supporters of the family, whereas the physical tasks and duties of child care were “women’s work.”
I think for women it’s a different question because women ask themselves, “Can I work 12 hour days and still be my child’s primary caretaker doing all the things mommies are supposed to” and the answer is definitely “no.” Every female lawyer in my firm who had a baby quit within 12 months. Granted, this was 15-20 years ago but I don’t think it’s changed a whole lot in the legal profession. It may be slightly better now but not much.
I don’t ask myself that. I ask myself whether I’ll be lucky enough to find a man who wants to be a stay-at-home father. I’m smart enough to know that I can’t work from 8 am to 6 pm and pick the kids up from school at 3 on the same day. So, if I have kids they’ll probably bond to Dad more strongly – and that might sting a bit, and I would miss them each day, but life always involves compromise.
The way my career is going I’m definitely meant to be a breadwinner. For me, being a home-maker would be suffocating and depressing, but being a workaholic at my vocation is totally fulfilling and exciting. There must be guys out there who find the cubicle farm suffocating and would find full-time parenting really fulfilling.
Yes, there are many of us. But it’s also true that the chances of getting divorced as a stay at home dad is higher than otherwise (please note: I am not pointing fingers), yet the mothers are still likely to get the kids**
**http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-467390/Househusband-backlash-high-flying-wives-ditch-men-em-em-wanted-stay-home.html
http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/2011/11/30/stay-at-home-dad-loses-custody-part-1/
http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/2011/11/30/stay-at-home-dad-loses-custody-part-2/
And yes, I realise these are only a few anecdotal examples, but they are egredious, and as stay at home dads, paying for legal advice is more difficult, so getting a fair fair is more difficult.
So yes, there are more men willing to stay at home (one of the articles suggest it tripled), but it comes with a great deal of risk.
I am old, over 50 now, and not once have I ever heard anyone tell a man he was not manly enough because he was taking care of his kids, I have heard ALOT though that he is lucky to get to take care of his kids and “I wish I could afford to do that”. I have also heard a ton of men say “If my wife made enough money for us to survive I would quit tomorrow” and BTW, I am one of those guys, I would quit my job tomorrow , if my wife made enough money for us to live on.
I think nobody ask why men can’t have it all because men as a group don’t say that they are particularly unhappy with what they do have.
Think of the level of discontent in women prior to the women’s movement(s) dating from suffrage to the rights movements of the 60′s and 70′s into today. Women voiced that they were unhappy with what they had and that they wanted more. And then they voiced what it was specifically they wanted, even when it was contradictory or as you point out impossible.
There isn’t a similar course of men’s advocate groups passionately voicing what men would like different from the status quo. If men want the freedom to be stay-at-home dads without the stigma society currently places on them, then they/we have to actually voice that desire loudly and advocate for it…
I think most women aren’t trying to have it all, its 2012, not 1970 which was 40yrs(!) ago. People forget that soon it will be half a century since the 1970′s and many of the myths about women wanting to have it all were more pertinent to the mom’s of the 70′s and 80′s at the height of women pursuing the “glass ceiling,” but still want a family. Not to say that this isn’t an issue today, but it’s not at the same fever pitch it was back then. Women today, just like men, want to be free from constant societal judgements on the choices they make about the balance of work and family. Maybe that is too much to ask, but I don’t think that’s asking for it all whether from a man or a woman.
No one can have it all; balance is never precise nor continuous, and it is not arrived at in terms of the number of hours devoted to this or the number of dollars set aside for that.
“Having it all” is just another spongy myth, another nebulous standard for men and women to compare themselves to and feel frustrated by. Life has so many goddamn moving parts and flies by so quickly and changes so readily that it tends not to be not about having — it’s much more about doing, trying, failing, flailing, sinking, rising and trying again.
This “having it all” bullshit means so many different things to so many different people at so many variable moments that the phrase comes to mean worse than nothing. It fucking makes me want to puke when I hear it.
Tom B.
Of course it’s stereotyping. It’s so exaggerated nobody should have missed it. It’s the implication you get from feminists when they complain about men having all the good jobs.
As another commenter noted, nobody says much about the guy in the salt mines.
@Richard Aubry …. Marie said “Think of the level of discontent in women prior to the women’s movement(s) dating from suffrage to the rights movements of the 60′s and 70′s into today. Women voiced that they were unhappy with what they had and that they wanted more. And then they voiced what it was specifically they wanted, even when it was contradictory or as you point out impossible.” Which falls in line with what you said about men working in the salt mines.
Back in the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s, the majority of men were not working in white collar jobs, they were laborers. My dad was one of them and died in his first year of retirement, as did several of his male friends. The feminist movement painted this picture that men had it all and it was so not true. Then the mention of unhappy women … oy. They were unhappy because they were told they should be unhappy and that there husbands that worked 60 hours a week were oppressing them and forcing them into their roles. Then they were sold this bill of goods that a man’s life was all that and more and it’s what women should want. Careful what you ask for, you may get it. Now they have it and look at us now.
40 years later what does our society have to show for it?