Breathtakingly apt and highly-fed-up non-mommy-blogger rant from Penelope Trunk of Brazen Careerist directed at individuals who imagine that stay-at-home parenting must be the most fulfillingest thing ever.
[A]ll you people who say you’d love to stay home all day with your kids if you could, you are completely full of shit.
I know because I was living at the poverty line in NYC while I stayed home with my kids. That’s how important it was to me to stay home. I wanted to be with them for every moment, be a great mom, all that. So I did it no matter what – no financial situation could have stopped me.
...
For all you guys who Twittered back to me that I’m a bad mom and that I should love being home with my kids, here’s a link for you: CEOs who are on Twitter. Because let me tell you something: None of these people needs to earn the money they are earning. They have enough money. They can stay home with their kids. But instead, they are at work.
Lemme tell ya something. Being a stay at home parent actually really is rewarding, cool, and fun. And also really, really stultifyingly, oppressively, mind-numbingly fucking boring.
Not one.
Not the other.
Both.
And yeah, if you wanted to do it?
You would.
But you’d have to want to do it enough.
But like most people with a choice if you haven’t you probably wouldn’t.
Trunk puts the issue very bluntly
How about approaching all those guys with Blackberries at soccer games? Let me ask you something. Do those guys check their email when they’re getting a blow job? Of course not. Do you know why? Because it’s INTERESTING. They are checking their blackberries during soccer because soccer is boring. The kids can’t figure out where the goal is. The kids (and their parents) lose interest. They want snacks more than they want to learn soccer. They are cute, yes. But even cute gets boring.
Now multiply preschool soccer by 23 hours a day, 6.5 days a week, 312 days a year, for four to sixteen years. That’s your window for boredom. The rest of the time is adorable, heartwarming, and totally fulfilling, sure. And on balance a lot of people find that worth it…
But in the grand scheme of things, people, it’s not a lot of time. Which, again, is why most people who say how much they’d love to do it but have a choice? Don’t.
I probably wouldn’t have become a blogger if I hadn’t been a stay-at-home dad. Because blogging you can do in 15 minute increments. Between loads of laundry. Between cranks of the “neglect-o-matic.” While the oven pre-heats or the Annie’s mac-n-cheese noodles simmer. While they’re playing with the most fascinating thing in the house you can safely let them play with — the tupperware containers in the kitchen drawer. While they trash their room playing dress-up with their playdate. (If you ever want to know why there seem to be so many “mommy” bloggers that should be your first clue. If you ever wonder why they seem so starved for contact that should be your second clue. That they so often have such narrow focuses should be your third. And in retrospect, that the majority sex is a primarily domestic activity, even though that doesn’t fit our romantic and/or socioeconomic notions of it, might be one clue about the narrow focus of my blog.)
But here’s where Trunk nails that one too — however boring, or bored, or distracted you think you can get the consequences for actually letting something slip can be anything from embarrassing to dire
as soon as your mind wanders too far, something bad happens. For example, I took the kids on a hike yesterday, taking a coat for myself but not for them. Because I checked out. Because I wanted to think about things that are more interesting than coats. This is normal behavior.
If you have a battery-operated Swingomatic instead of the kind you have to rewind every 15 minutes you really will neglect them for too long. If you “close your eyes for just a moment” you’ll find yourself wakened (in a panic) by the sound of little fingers working with awesome determination to figure out the babyproof/earthquake latch on the cleaning-supply cupboard door under the sink.
(Oh yeah, and while we’re on the subject of stay-at-homing it if every now and then you say what the heck and toss a couple of broccoli or carrot ends into the disposal your otherwise perfectly lovely partner or spouse, fresh home from an invigorating day at work and a commute full of NPR updates will happen to be passing through will brightly admonish you “please, hon, that goes in the compost bucket.” As if you weren’t the one who not only daily filled the compost bucket but regularly emptied into the yard-waste container, and took that out to the curb every Tuesday night for collection. But I digress…)
Don’t get me wrong. I’ve loved being a stay-at-home dad, and still do. But I guarantee I haven’t loved every minute. And anyone who, like the twittering twit who prompted Trunk’s tirade, thinks you should, or thinks they would, or (worse!!!) should you complain says “sorry your kids are a burden, send them to OH, we’ll enjoy them for who they are” — where by “we” Trunk deduces they evidently mean “my wife” — is indeed an asshole.
Which is all a long, involved way of explaining my basis for so appreciating Trunk’s awe-inspiring flame.
—-
One quibble: I happen to think Trunk slightly misses the mark when she hauls out the studies showing that having children don’t make people happy — Jefferson seems to have been right that happiness is best found in pursuit rather than an objective in its own right.
A burden voluntarily shouldered is not as heavy as one imposed. Having chosen to shoulder it imposes constraints as real as a poison-hotline call or “together night” interrupted by night terrors (“night terribles” as my daughter called it.) And once chosen those burdens become background against which small moments shine. Sometimes brilliantly and unforgettably.
It is another thing entirely, though, when the burden is chosen for you rather than chosen by you — to have them allocated as your lot, or fate, or “natural instinct,” or “natural place,” or even “God says.” And when those who have themselves neither faced the imposition nor made the choice, and thus have no clue, say what they think you should enjoy? Well you can probably see how that would tend to make one seem… humorless. Angry, even. And inclined to lob flaming posts.
(Via Amber Rhea’s Tumblr feed.)




Interesting post. On the flip
Submitted by ChrisJ (not verified) on Sat, 2010-01-02 15:48.Interesting post. On the flip side are all the folks who believe that it’s in a child’s best interest to spend all day, every day for the first six years of their lives with a stay-at-home mom who hasn’t made the choice for herself! (Actually, I’ve met one or two over the years who have made the choice, but probably shouldn’t have for their children’s sake!)
[Right, like being stuck at home with one person for in put is “enriching?” Stability is actually regally good for children, but stagnation isn’t so much. Balance is everything. Thanks, Chris. —fl]
I don’t know if my mother is
Submitted by Nightfall (not verified) on Sat, 2010-01-02 15:56.I don’t know if my mother is consciously aware of this sort of thing or not, and probably would be bothered or offended if I asked. But while she was a homemaker before my parents divorced, she was definitely not a stay-at-home parent – spent a very large portion of her non-housework time going out with friends. And since my father spent very little time with us even when he was home, it pretty much left me and my older cousin (who was living with us for a time) to do the bulk of raising my younger siblings. So I don’t know if she got away from stay-at-home parenting because she didn’t like it, or if she was simply too self-absorbed to even try.
Though raising them often amounted to damage control – we were granted very little power over them, yet still largely held responsible for their actions. And they learned to take advantage of that, the little bastards.
My mom told me how boring it
Submitted by k (not verified) on Sat, 2010-01-02 16:13.My mom told me how boring it was to be a stay at home mom too. She did it for my sister for a few years after she was born, & same with me – she stayed home for about 5 or 6 years until I started going to school.
And it was boring. I remember, it was fun to me, to always have someone to take care of me – I can remember playing the most asinine games that thrilled me but probably bored her to tears.
Yet she still liked it.
I don’t think I’d be able to handle that boredom though… as rewarding as it is, I’m sure, I think I like work too much.
[In my experience, anyway, it was never the stuff I was worried would be boring that actually turned out to be boring. The asinine-games part is actually not so bad. It’s the stuff you never even considered that mostly involve diligence and discipline. Thanks, K. —fl]
From the opposite
Submitted by jt (not verified) on Sat, 2010-01-02 17:11.From the opposite perspective, I can attest that my mom staying home with me was absolutely invaluable. It was a choice that was unquestionably the right thing for me, as a kid. (That said, it should be noted that one of my sisters saw no value in my mom staying home so, as with all things, it’s clearly an individual thing. Or my sister is infinitely negative.)
While my mom was home full time and was, in oh-so-many ways, very much a good little Hausfrau who liked being one (I was the snobby nine year old who refused to eat store-bought bread because it wasn’t as good as homemade), my friends who are happy being “stay at home” parents all actually work part time. The money they make ends up being pretty much a wash, given the costs of child care, but it keeps them sane and gives them interaction with people who can form complete sentences that don’t relate to having square pants.
But what the fuck do I know – I don’t have any kids of my own. Yet.
[Hi JT. “my friends who are happy being “stay at home” parents all actually work part time.” Yup. That’s not the same thing, at all, as the classic ideal of “stay at home” parenting. And meanwhile childcare and/or playdates/swaps are a great source of external stimulation for children.
A point I probably should have made in the main post, but didn’t in part for length, is that what’s really probably ideal for both children and parents is to swap things up a bit. If you could both work 3/4 time, with a little overlap during the day and maybe a little out-of-house child activities when you both work, then I’m pretty sure that (with some variation for mileage) all parties concerned would tend to thrive. Not least, by the way, because the primary caregiver wouldn’t necessarily fall so far back career-wise that it never becomes “economical” to return to the workforce when the children reach school age. That plus if conservatives are right that children need fathers too then it makes sense that they should have fathers too, and not just bacon bringers bungee-ing home from their commutes barely in time for bedtime stories. Thanks! —fl]
I think that the people who
Submitted by Mike (not verified) on Sun, 2010-01-03 07:10.I think that the people who say “I’d give anything to stay home with my kids…..” ...really have no idea what it entails. Many of them (not all) are likely in positions that they absolutely hate, working for wages that they feel are unfair and thus feel unappreciated in their job and are just simply unhappy with their situation. Some of them think – it certainly would be easier “work” to be at home with my kids ….and hey – I get to be with my kids so that MUST be good – right??
I don’t think all people are cut out to be full time parents – my wife for one, she is a GREAT stay at home mom, but if I did not work at home and allow her the breaks she gets to do things now and then with her friends, go to the gym everyday, etc….she would go nuts and would also NOT be a good mother under those circumstances.
If I did not work at home, I would have NO idea what it takes to be a truly “full time” stay at home parent – I feel fortunate to have gotten that glimpse and experience so as to not take it for granted (well, sometimes I’m sure I do, but for the most part, try not to).
Mike
I would say I’m more cut-out
Submitted by Dw3t-Hthr (not verified) on Sun, 2010-01-03 09:03.I would say I’m more cut-out to be a primary caregiver than I am anything else I’ve tried, but I’m also strongly dependent on the support that the rest of the family can give me in order to not go totally batshit nuts.
The fact that one of the husbands is in school and thus home part-time and semi-available (he’s generally doing homework or the like, but can be tapped for ‘could you hold this baby for a moment’ level stuff reasonably often) makes my weeks survivable.
LOL – I’m sure my wife would
Submitted by Mike (not verified) on Sun, 2010-01-03 09:52.LOL – I’m sure my wife would be totally in agreement with you Dw3t-Hthr!!
And – although, I’d love not to work and be a full time stay at home dad, I know that I could not do it either without the support system or a committed spouse to help out.