This is something I originally posted on my own blog way back on July 31, 2006. It was my first view into “feminists” who were working to pit women (those with children) against women (those without children). Since Joan Blades, one of the founders of MomsRising, was listed in Ms. Magazine’s “Women of the Year 2003,” I think it’s probably safe to say that she considers herself a feminist and is considered a feminist by others.
There’s a new movement afoot whereby “mothers” are lobbying for special treatment. It’s sad really. Instead of women coming together for a common good (like equal pay for equal work), they’re pitting themselves against other women (and men)…those without children.
The website is MomsRising and the book and documentary are titled The Motherhood Manifesto and, according to the website (I admit I have not read the book), they have six important items on their agenda:
Maternity Leave – Choice, choices, choices. I can’t say it enough. We all make choices and we all have to live with them. Extended leaves, if offered, should be offered to everyone equally. Why should the personal choice to be a parent affect someone’s employer any more than anyone else’s personal choices? Why not extended leaves for everyone? If someone wants to go back to school, shouldn’t he or she be entitled to a leave for that, too? What about an extended leave for traveling? Why is one life choice worthy of more employment benefits than any other life choice? Why does someone’s choice to procreate become the employer’s problem?Open Flexible Work – why is this important only to parents? The childfree would like this, as well. Whether it’s to help take care of an ailing family member or friend, take classes, or simply because someone is either an early-bird or a night-owl…why is this a “motherhood” issue? Do mothers really believe that they’re the only ones who should be granted the option of flex-time?
TV and Afterschool Programs – I don’t have a problem with parents wanting options for afterschool care for their kids, but why involve television? If you don’t trust your kids to go home by themselves and not watch television programming you don’t want them to watch, then you need to hire a babysitter. Or, here’s a thought…get rid of your cable. Network television (ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, and FOX) is relatively harmless. And if you don’t want to hire a sitter, and you don’t want to get rid of your cable, and you can’t trust your kid to obey your “no television” rule, then maybe you just need to lock your television in a closet every day when you leave for work in the morning. Or get rid of it altogether.
Healthcare for All Kids – why only healthcare for all kids? Why not healthcare for everyone? The website gives an example of how financially devastating it was for one couple when their child got seriously ill and, even though they had insurance, the uninsured portion of the medical bills were so exorbitant, they had to file for bankruptcy. Wouldn’t it be more financially devastating if a bread-winner became seriously ill? Not only would there be astronomical health care costs, but there would also be a decrease in household income. And this is true whether someone has kids or not.
Excellent Childcare – I understand that parents want more and better childcare options. However, these same people are only willing to pay a babysitter $2.50 an hour to watch their kids while they go out to dinner and a movie. If quality childcare is important, why aren’t parents willing to pay for it? If their kids are the most precious things in the world to them, then why aren’t they willing to pay top dollar for the best? If they want someone who has a degree in early childhood education, is certified in CPR, and has the patience of Job, they’re going to have to pay for that, plain and simple. People have to make a living, and that includes the people taking care of other people’s kids. Would you work for $2.50 and hour?
Realistic and Fair Wages – they complain that non-mothers are paid more than mothers and single mothers are paid even less than that. My question is: How the hell does the employer know whether the woman is a mother or not, let alone a single mother? Keep your yap shut about your personal life and no one is the wiser. How hard is that? Unless, of course, you’re using your kids as a trump card: “I need the afternoon off to go see my kid’s school play” or “I won’t be in today because my child is sick.” Play by the rules everyone else does, don’t yammer on endlessly about your kids at work, and no one is the wiser and you get the same pay as the childfree employees. And since even childfree women are still earning less than their male counterparts, why not just join the big fight and lobby for equal pay for equal work for everybody period…not just people who have kids.
And while I didn’t specifically see this issue listed on the MomsRising website, it’s been a particularly sticky item in the past…tax deductions. Why is the government paying people to have children? Having a child is a choice. The government is not forcing you to have a child, so why should the childfree pay for the choices made by the childed? And make no mistake about it, we do. Whether it’s the people whose children are past the Age of Deduction or the people who haven’t yet had any children or the people who have opted never to have children, those tax deductions given to those with children are being subsidized by those without.
It is all about making choices and accepting the risks and responsibilities that come with them.
Stay tuned…I actually have some ideas on how to fix some of these problems…a solution that’s fair for everyone.
