Feminism - the plus side
69Introducing the feminist me....
It's fashionable sometimes at the moment to bash feminism, to declare that it was all better in the old days. I don't agree, the old days can stay in the past as far as I'm concerned!
I'm 31, my other half is 30 - we were both born in 1977.
What has feminism done for me? A hell of a lot. My education, opinions, and life were just as important to my parents as my brother's was and is. I was brought up to believe I was the equal to men, and encouraged to pursue the academic and career choices open to me.
I don't think that would have been true had I been born in 1877, or 1927. In fact, had I been born a hundred years earlier, I would not even have had a say in who ran the government, let alone who ran my own life.
Housewives - then and now
My grandmothers' experiences
My grandmothers, born in 1911 and 1915, had limited education.
They were both born and brought up in and around Liverpool, in the north west of England. Liverpool was, at the time, a busy and prosperous port.
My maternal grandmother left school at 12 to care for her "invalid" mother (who lived another 50 years!) and stayed at home for a while looking after her mother, stepfather, and younger sister.
She then worked before she married, as a dressmaker, and curtainmaker. She never
expected to work after marriage, it wasn't done, but the Second World
War meant she did in fact work until her first child, my uncle was
born. She was proud to be, she thought, the first married woman bank cashier in Martins' Bank. Such jobs had not been available to women before the War.
She later did some dressmaking and curtain making at home, but it
had to be very low-key to avoid upsetting my grandfather. And he was easily upset by the idea of his wife working. His role was, he was convinced, to earn and control the money in the family.
My paternal grandmother left school at the normal age, 14, and later became a nurse. Her three older sisters were all nurses too, and all enjoyed the job. She became Matron of the Woolwich Children's Hospital in south east London during the War.
She gave it up (as she had to) after she married, and never worked again. It wasn't socially respectable in her community, because it made her husband look as if he couldn't provide for her amd their children.
My father reckons that, after her sons went to school, she was lonely, miserable, and bored. He thinks she was ultimately very frustrated, and would have enjoyed going back to work hugely, and my uncle agrees.
What do men think?
My mother's life and times
My mother, born in 1947, had an academic education, went to Cambridge, and did a degree in geography and a master's in geology. She then did teacher-training, and worked until she married, and stopped 3 years later, when her first child (me) was born. She went back to work part-time when her children were aged 17, 15, 11 and 9, at the school my sisters and I attended. In fact, she taught me for one lesson a week, as I was doing history A level. She did that for 4 years, then stopped again.
Despite being at an academic girls' school, she says the range of careers suggested to her and her fellow-pupils was fairly limited. Nursing was an option, but being a doctor wasn't discussed much. Teaching, secretarial work, and general support staffing was emphasised to the girls.
My mother and father both wanted a large family, and my mother wanted to be a stay-at-home mother.
Historical feminism
My life and education
My life is different again. I went to academic, private girls' schools, did law at university, and qualified as a barrister.
The schools I attended, particularly secondary school, were keen that girls should do what they wanted. We were encouraged to think we could equally well choose to be engineers, physicists, artists or nurses. The headmistress was enthusiastic about encouraging ambition, and every girl in my sixth form year went on to higher education, either university, art college, or technical training.
My education was probably easier for me than for my parents. Neither of their own parents had stayed at school past 16, and although encouraging and supportive, had not been there and done that themselves.
By contrast, my own parents understood and facilitated homework, quiet study space, and reading around subjects. They had also studied to A level, between them, the same subjects as I chose, English literature, history, and geography, and could therefore discuss my studies with me.
My boyfriend, who I met at university, did the same law degree and legal training. We now have a 3 year old son, and I went back to work after he was born. This was my choice - I love my work, and it makes me much happier and nicer than I would be if I were at home all the time.
I have a lot of respect for mothers who stay at home. All power to their elbows. My own mother did, and if I could be half as good a mother as she was and is, my son would be a lucky boy. But it's not for me. She had been very happy to encourage me in my career, and she is our emergency child-care if things go wrong.
I'm sure that the fact she was happy to stay at home means that she does not need me to make the same choices in order to validate mine.
Feminism - a personal view
Naomi Wolf gives her views on "Third Wave" Feminism
My family life
My boyfriend and I share our lives. We both earn the money, we both look after our son, we both do the housework. We respect and are interested in each others' opinions, and have a genuinely equal relationship.
We don't do exactly the same things - I wash and dry clothes, he irons, for example, but we see our home, lives, work and son as a joint enterprise.
Our son has lots of involvement with both his parents. His father
can and does change nappies, cook him dinner, play with him, and bathe
and dress him. That's a huge advancement on previous generations, and I
believe they have a better relationship because of that.
That's what feminism has done for me. It's given me choices. Some of my friends have chosen and may choose different paths in life. My best friend, who attended the same school as I did, is currently pregnant with her first child. She intends to stay at home until the baby is at least 5 years old. Feminism has given her choices as well.
What are your views?
Would you describe yourself as a feminist?
See results without votingCommentsLoading...
Thanks for your comment - I've greatly enjoyed your hubs, too.
That's all what a relatioship is about. I am glad to know that both of you have repect for each other and I know for sure that it's not just one of you but two of you together, who constantly work to keep the relationship that way. I found this article very pleasant and soothing.
Thank you for your comment - and Happy New Year! Glad you enjoyed the hub.
anothe rgood hub
thanks Lgali
yes, one can choose to stay home with the kids, but you need to have a backup skill just in case - faminism can save your life!
I agree. My mother, for example, did choose to stay at home for 17 years with her four children, but before that, she had gained a Cambridge degree, a teaching qualification, and had taught for 6 years.
Good going,London Girl. I'm twice your age and totally agree. My grandmother got a university degree in 1909--when she graduated she couldn't vote because she was a woman. In my day only 30% of women received higher education and a woman engineer, doctor or lawyer was extremely rare. Even for educated women, career choices basically boiled down to nurse,teacher, or airline stewardess. Boys were expected to BE somebody. Girls were expected to FIND somebody. I remember that there was one girl in my college class who took and passed the foreign service exam. Unlike her male counterparts, she was offered an entry level job as a secretary....the same thing happened to Justice Sandra Day O'Connor when she graduated from law school.
I'm glad those days are gone and I am happy that women of your generation have the freedom to spread their wings and make choices that work for them.
Wow, your Granny must have been an amazing woman - it wasn't exactly easy to get a university education for women then. What did she study?
Ahhh she was amazing :-) I think she majored in English Lit but I'm not really sure. I know she took Latin and Greek as well and I have to admit that her BA was from the University of Kansas not from a major University--but nevertheless it was quite an achievement for a woman of her generation. I wrote a hub about her last May. She had quite a life. I think it is amazing that she rode in a stagecoach when she was a child and died in 1969--the year Neil Armstrong walked on the moon. So many changes in one lifetime eh? I wonder what she would have thought of the internet LOL. Here's a link if you want to know more about her.
Thanks - I'll have a look.
Why not ask the Uni?
Yep -- we have had so many more opportunities than our grandmothers and mothers. I appreciate that!
It's not just about careers, either. It's about being able to open a bank account without one's father / husband approving, being treated and treating the opposite sex as equals.
LondonGirl, I see both sides of the equation -- both the pluses and the minuses. Of course it's a good thing that women can own property, open bank accounts and make their own decisions. I am a single mother by choice, and I couldn't have done this without the freedom to choose.
However, many of the things you describe as adavnces in your life, over those of your female direct ancestors, are not about that. They're really about social mobility and mandatory education. At fourteen your paternal grandmother left school, and entered the workforce, because it was socially acceptable for a fourteen year old of either sex to do this.
When married women were expected to quit their jobs upon marriage, it was because they were expected to get pregnant and maternity leave was not an option.
When my daughter was five and just starting kindergarten, she had a teacher who was seven months pregnant. My daughter had to put up with her teacher's maternity leave in the middle of her first semester in public school. It was very disruptive. At the time, I really wished the old policy had been in place.
It's one thing to give women choices. It's another thing to allow their personal lives to interfere with their jobs.
I agree completely, great hub. There's nothing wrong with being a stay at home mom if that's your thing (isn't mine but to each there own), but for the life of me I'll never understand why people insist on inequality when women are endowed with the same abilities as men.
Isn't it inevitable that in society, personal lives do interfere with careers?
I think it's a worse situation when people don't allow anything personal to come between them and their jobs.
Thanks for your comment, hope you enjoyed the hub.
Hi Writer - oddly enough, I agree with you as well! My best mate is pregnant and intending to stay at home with the baby, and more power to her, but I don't fancy it myself.
LondonGirl, it's not inevitable at all that personal lives must interfere with careers. It sometimes happens that careers interfere with personal lives. The question is: which way should it go?
Before, if a person employed by another wanted to keep his or her job, then the personal life couldn't interfere. A man had a baby on the way? Good for him. But he was not to miss a day of work, or he'd lose his job. It was once assumed that women couldn't help but have children interfere with their job, so they were never given a chance to show that they could keep working and still be mothers.
Now, women get a chance to show that they can be just as reliable as men, even those who are married. So far, great. I'm all for it. But then what happens? Instead of holding women to that high standard, we relax the standard for both men and women.
That's what the anti-feminists warned us would happen.
In the days of your grandmother, there were women scientists, women writers and women working in any number of professions. In order to do so, they sacrificed their personal lives. Sometimes they went without marrying. Sometimes they did marry and chose not to have children.
As a mother, I don't care about the teacher's right to have children. I care that she do her job. Making teachers choose what their priorities are isn't anti-women. It's pro-children.
I think more that there needs to be a work-life balance, for both men and women. And I don't think changing a teacher half-way through a year is really that big a problem.
I'm glad we've moved on from the days where work always came before everything else. I think that's the way to a healthier society.
LondonGirl, it wasn't changing the teacher half-way through the year. It was planned as having her work two months, then take two months off. She went into labor less than two months into the school year, and in the following two months, we didn't know from day to day who the teacher would be. They were substitutes, and there was no commitment.
Now, you're probably thinking that the average child doesn't notice this kind of thing. They do. It throws them off balance. It disrupts the trust that they are supposed to build into the relationship with their first teacher.
This disruption of attachments is at the heart of the current child care system. Some children are immune to any damage from this way of doing things, because they don't require intimacy before they can speak to someone. But for those children who do need intimacy -- who simply can't talk to strangers-- this is a terrible problem.
I think, in that case, the problem isn't maternity leave. It's the way the school chose to cover the leave.
One of my primary school teachers went on maternity leave, and we had the same replacement teacher throughout. This was also common in secondary schools.
LondonGirl, I agree that the school handled it badly. However, in order for them to have been able to handle it better, they would have had to be a wealthier school district. We are in an isolated, rural area. The closest town has an official census of under 500 residents. The school district has fewer than 800 taxpayers. They couldn't afford the kind of replacement that was needed and also pay the teacher on leave a salary. The law demanded that they give full benefits. These laws work okay in a big metropolis, but they put undue burdens on smaller communities.
Is all such funding local? So how much a school gets in income depends on the wealth of local residents only?
It's a combination. Originally, it was all completely local. Now, the State contributes some to the local school district, and the Federal government contributes some to the State. Each contribution comes with strings attached, and can, to some extent, be rejected, if the local people don't like the conditions set by the higher authority.
However, the basic structure is that local communities pay for their own educational system. It wasn't a bad idea, and it worked pretty well in the days of one room school houses. Local people pitched in, built a school house on land they could afford and out of materials they could afford, often with each family contributing some of the construction labor. Then they all pitched in and paid for a salary for one schoolmaster or schoolmistress. Sometimes, as part of the salary they would take turns inviting the school teacher to dinner.
You can see that under these conditions, it would not have been reasonable for any school teacher to ask for paid maternity leave. It wasn't a matter of feminism. It was an economic impossibility.
Things have changed since then, but the basic economic conditions of local communities haven't changed much.
thanks for the explanation.
Schools have, I think,been more centralised here since the start, if they were state schools or church schools.
I never thought of myself as a feminist but I realize now that I am. My mother (born in 1928) worked full time (as did my father) throughout my childhood. Our parents raised us to believe we had equal rights and responsibilities with men and should expect to support ourselves throughout our lives. Thinking for a moment that we were dependent upon men or in any way incapable of doing anything was never a thought. I'm 49 so quite a bit older than you but my marriage is definintely a split of duties and so forth. I'm supportive of women who are able to stay at home and raise their children full time, I don't believe there are hard and fast rules about how to make families work, but equality I would think is a must.
I agree with you. Each family will find its own way of doing things, but now (unlike in the past) it is far more likely to be an equal relationship between adults, whether the mother works outside the home or not.
I can see that even between my Granny and my mother - until my Grandad died, he kept control of the pursestrings, and gave her a set amount every week for housekeeping.
My parents have, and always have had, joint accounts.
Great personal insight. And because I enjoy the little things of what men do for the women in their lives....like opening a door, taking out the trash, tending to the woodstove...does not mean I am less of a woman. I'm prepared to do my part to in the give and take :)
I enjoy politeness too - whether that's rubbish, doors, etc. And I'd also hold open a door for a man if I'd gone through it first, not let it bang in his face (-:
another great hub!
"This disruption of attachments is at the heart of the current child care system."
I find it interesting that someone protesting feminism is worried about the effects of "the current child care system." It seems like someone with the view that women should not have careers would also not view teachers as child care. And I think it's interesting how AK's discussion turned to economic influences as the real cause of her problem rather than whether or not potential mothers should have a career.
I'm like you LG, went back to work very quickly after giving birth. But it seems to have worked out - I have a GREAT almost 17 year old. And I don't recall substitute teachers ever causing any big problems for us.
Glad your 17 year old is fun! A daughter, I remember, from another hub, I think?
Funny how folks tend to think feminism is just for women. Watching my grandmother, my mother, my wife, my daughters, and my granddaughters, I'm convinced otherwise.
The "What do Men Think?" video says a lot, but not enough.
It's possible to be a feminist and a masculine male. Feminism isn't castrating, it is liberating. For instance, men don't need to be decision makers to be men.
There's something about thinking free of language and navigating the social contexts where we live that requires feminism if we're going to have a chance at solving some of our social ills.
I think folks mix up relational needs with stereotypes.
Feminisim is for both women and men.
I agree with you completely.
I'm sure my whole family is happier, including my Dad, brother, and other half, because the women in it are equal and valued. there is nothing remotely emasculating in this equality.
Hi, Londongirl-I always see this hub having visitors...Um, is there any other way? I don't think we could fully imagine what life would have been like not voting, not owning property, having to get married, not working, having to be pregnant, etc., etc. I would have--I don't know--ran away and joined the circus. Or maybe like I said on another post--became a mistress or something. We take so much for granted.
Do you mean this hub just states the blindingly obvious? Perhaps it does, apologies.
Oh, heck no. I don't think modern women really realize everything we take for granted, LG. I simply couldn't imagine life 100 years ago for me. It would have been so hard. It's good to have reminders like your hub.
I didn't read to many of the comments, but if this has been covered, I do apologize,
My Great Grandmother was 104 when she passed away 3 weeks ago. She was born in 1905 in OKIT. She was not a citizen of the United States as Natives weren't allowed to petition for citizenship until 1924. At that time she opted not to as did many in her generation. You accept repression when you accept citizenship was her logic.
She always had her say in the tribe and close to the end of her years she had a very powerful say as she was one of the oldest living females giving her a very special place at the table.
My point here is Feminism is truly a European topic and is only an American topic by proxy. Because in the tribes everyone did what was necessary to make it. If that meant a man farmed he farmed and woman drew a bow. It just is what it is.
So, I see this concept of choice as irrelevant as it was always there. My Grandmother never asked a man to open a business, she never asked a man what she was going to do with her money.
Even though the government made it a law that a Indian particularly a female Indian was mentally incompetent and only a white man could be their trustee or guardian.
Even with that most inside Oklahoma rejected it and went about their business. It wasn't worth the U.S going to war for. If the issue would have been pressed war would have been inevitable.
As World War I was approaching it made more sense to give in and give Oklahoma Statehood and get access to the oil. So, they bought there way in, but a woman's choice was never taken away.
To those women who say it was taken I say it was given no one can take what you don't give.
TMG
What TMG says is true. From what I've observed, Indian women seem to have much more egalitarian relationships.
Interesting take, TMG - thank you.
Not just European, though. Similar issues occured in other socieities with urban and structured classes, such as in the Middle East, India, China, etc.
I know very little of Oklahoma, which is my bad.
LG, good hub. I fully agree with you: the wonderful thing about feminism is that it gives us so many choices, and states that they are all okay. I love that you have chosen to work and share responsibilities with your partner. I also love that you respect that others have the right to choose their own paths, as well. Well written. I enjoyed it very much! ~MotherHubber
Thank you! I do find it tough the way women condemn other women for working or staying at home, as if there were one right answer. Different things are right for different families.
"It's fashionable sometimes at the moment to bash feminism, to declare that it was all better in the old days." funny how your species pines for the 'good old day,' escapism comes in many forms I suppose.
"What has feminism done for me? A hell of a lot. My education, opinions, and life were just as important to my parents as my brother's was and is."
It saddens me it took so long for women to be seen as almost equals by their parents.
Great hub, pictures, and vids.
I hope some day the next leap will be realizing gender is nothing more than cultural design; not that I'm saying anything about sex.
Traditional gender roles serve a purpose; but a lot of other stuff is just static.
In Lightspeed,
lxxy
Thanks for reading, and commenting. I agree, it's very sad indeed that it took so long for parents to approach their children as individuals, not as boys or girls alone.
pgrundy 3 years ago
Great hub! That is what it is all about I think--more choice for everyone. You laid it out very clearly and in a personal, direct way. Thank you!