Okay, let's discuss the notion of what constitutes a "job".....

[Liberal Veteran]

In the context of the little spat between Laura and Momma T (and Karen Hughes addendum) about how raising the kids is a job, I want to start a discussion about that.

From my point of view, I say childraising (though hard work when done correctly) is not really a job (aka career/employment), but a lifestyle choice.

This notion came about around the time that women were finally given options of actually HAVING a real choice in careers and making good money and suddenly the counter to that was that homemaking was the same thing as a job.

So I propose the question for discussion:

If childraising is a job, does being in a 15 year long gay relationship, having a chronic illness, taking care of a house (cleaning several rooms, plumbing, electrician, carpentry, painting, cooking, laundry, etc), garden, lawn, and going to school in my spare time as well as taking care/feeding/grooming of two dogs, 6 cats, and a freshwater and saltwater tank ALSO count as job?

I am not proposing this to belittle the what goes into rearing children, but I think placing it as the exact equivalent of career/employment type thing is playing fast and loose with the term "job". I think it's something that inherently different from a job and more in the nature of a way of life (ie, lifestyle choice) and rewarding one (for most people who choose that path) and probably belittles the care and devotion that goes into childrearing by trying to make it an equivalent.

What are your thoughts?

[The Flaming Red Head]

1. I choose working less and for less so I could raise my son

and I was told by a noted attorney in my home town that in his opinion, I had never really worked, because I didn't make enough to be worth while. It sure as hell felt like work and then taking time off for a sick kid and to be a room mother and all that. Cleaning puke and poop is work whether you do it for pay (like me) or you do it for your family (like me, again) It's fucking work, OK!


Edited to add I guess it depends on who cleans up all the puke and poop, cause that is work. I doubt Laura ever did that.

And you sound like you work hard, too.

[GodHelpUsAll2]

2. But

The poster has a point. It is work, I do agree. I have 2 kids myself. However, those kids are here because of a CHOICE I made. I work not by choice but out of NEED. So I agree with the poster. Where it does take work to raise a child. It is a choice.

[The Flaming Red Head]

5. and right now

I work doing household chores that people less fortunate physically are no longer able to handle and it's work whether I do it at home or get paid it's fucking HARD work.

[sandnsea]

6. What does choice have to do with it?

I don't understand that. There will always be humans who need tending. Whether you're paid for it or not, it's still valuable.

[Liberal Veteran]

3. I sorta think raising a kid is MORE than just a job though....

...and that's my point.

Why do people try to pidgeonhole the two entirely different things into the same word?

[GodHelpUsAll2]

8. I don't know

But first. let me thank you for the post. It is the first time I have really looked at it this way. I have 2 kids and a full time job. I am no stranger to hard work. But, when I had those kids my plan was to stay home with them until they reached school age then go to work. That didn't work out and I had to work full time except for 6 months I took with both when they were born. But I knew that was a possibility when I decided to have them. And the ironic thing about your post is, whenever I find that I am running non stop because of school functions or activities they are involved in and I feel like I just can't bear one more drive or one more PTA meeting I tell my SO, "As much as I would rather laze around and not have to go all the time, this is the choice I made". And I get in the car and off we go again.

[sandnsea]

18. Abused spouses

They used to say "this is the choice I made" too. Back when society said getting a divorce was taboo. Women do not have to accept "tough luck" when it comes to doing the most important work of raising the next generation. We can demand more from society, if we value what we do and stop buying into this "you breed 'em, you feed 'em" bullshit. This is OUR country and we can make it work any damned way we want to.

[sandnsea]

4. caregivers, yes, job

The worst thing is that we've yet to raise the level of importance of caring for family members, raising children, caregiving sick family members or parents. It isn't a job, in that ugh sense. But it is the most important WORK we can do. Until we value it as much as we value income, women will never be respected and neither will anybody else whose income job includes nurturing. Biggest failure of the women's movement, imho.

[The Flaming Red Head]

7. I wish I could hire me

by the time I get home I don't get as much done at my house as I do for others.

[GodHelpUsAll2]

10. I disagree with you

I think there are plenty out there that value careing for family, raising children etc. However, speaking as someone who is a statistic (my husband decided it was a must that I work and then he decided he no longer wanted to be married and bothered with kids) the failures of this country to recognize those important things has turned into a vicious cycle. I HAVE to work to feed and house those kids I choose to have. And companies are so concerned about profit sheets that they care not if my child is ill as long as I "produce" as they want me to. Don't get me wrong, I am not whining because I have to work to take care of my kids. But when people toss around the "Until we value the importance of child raising as much as we do income" lines it's a bit hard for me to swallow.

[sandnsea]

12. Well there you go

"companies are so concerned about profit sheets that they care not if my child is ill"

As long as you don't value caring for your children as the most important work a human can do, society won't, and neither will any company. And you'll never get the kinds of benefits every other developed country has for their parents.

[GodHelpUsAll2]

14. So what do you suggest?

Will you feed my kids and make my house payment when I loose my job?

edited for second thought.

Certainly you are not suggesting that I don't value my kids are you?

[sandnsea]

16. Value parenting

What's the problem with that? Nobody said a parent had to stay home with their child, just that parenting is valuable and if you ever want the consideration you need at your job, you're going to have to start advocating for the needs of moms and parents.

[jdj]

35. I think that is blaming the victim.

I'm not sure the poster implied not valuing her work as a mother and caregiver, she suggested that society doesn't, and the truth is, it doesn't. But to suggest that that is somehow brought about by her emotional attitude toward motherhood is assine.

The fact is that motherhood/homemaking is not paid labor generally because it is the work women do, and that is because for a long damn time men have controlled systems of currency exchange in most societies. If men birthed and nursed children, there would more than likely be an hourly wage to it. Of course it is more complicated than that, but the fact that we pay $20,000 and up to women to birth children for us (surrogates) reveals the truth that of course it is a job.

[Tansy_Gold]

11. Something to think about

Whatever the work is, if women do it, it is under-valued, both in prestige and in pay.

If men enter the "field," it suddenly gains in prestige and pay.

If men leave the field, or women enter it, it loses in prestige and pay.

Child-care, whether tending one's own children or working in a pre-school care setting, is under-paid.

Elementary school teaching used to be a fall-back career for women: they taught for a few years until they had children, then maybe they went back after their kids were grown. It never paid enough to support a family --- until men started going into teaching in the late 60s and 70s. Then the pay rose -- school boards were literally "bidding" to get male teachers, often on the notion that so many newly single mothers needed male role models for their male children.

Nursing was the same way. Nurses were the women who did all the doctors' dirty work, they were assistants, not professionals. Only when men started going into the profession did the pay rise and the professional treatment improve. (It still isn't great, though.)

Doctors and lawyers used to be among the most respected and revered careers. No one would ever question anything a doctor said (well, except me because I was a brat and my parent's GP was a hack); doctors were gods. But then women started really getting into the profession and suddenly it didn't have quite as much respect. Same with lawyers.

If Laura Bush actually "worked" at something, I applaud her. But "raising" two children in an extremely wealthy environment where there were servants to clean up the "shit and puke" is not "work." (Do read Marilyn French's novel "The Women's Room" to get an insight into the transition period of the feminist movement and how some women reacted to being professional mothers.) If Laura actually changed diapers, fine. If boosh himself actually changed diapers, fine. But parenting is a whole lot more than impregnating, gestating, and giving birth.

Sorry for the rant. It's a personal thing.

[sandnsea]

15. Wealthy parents

Different story, that will never change.

[Pithlet]

26. Exactly

Whatever the work is, if women do it, it is under-valued, both in prestige and in pay.

Which is why it particularly galls me to hear people on the left denigrate it. Whether being compared to Stepford wives, or turning our backs on the feminist movement, or being lazy, it's just another jab at work still primarily left to women, whether they work outside of the home or not.

[jdj]

36. so true, men leaving veterinary

women entering

men entering nursing, can't pay women to do it anymore.

men become waitresses, now they are servers.

It's damn straight about valuation.

With regards to motherhood I think motherhood became devalued because of population increase. Back in prehistoric times the status of mothers (testified to by the artifacts of goddess religion or "fertility cult" in androcentric terminology) was undoubtedly higher. I think once humanity reached a critical mass, motherhood went down the tube in esteem.

[bloom]

9. Is stayed home for the most part

when my kids were little. And it was harder work and more demanding than when I was employed. Absolutely.

If you have never dealt with toddlers all day - you wouldn't know.

So if you have one of your own and you are paid to watch two or three of others kids THEN it would be a job -and otherwise NOT? I don't think so.

And like someone else was mentioning - if you are able to make the commitment to stay home (and in my case - like many others - choose a pretty scrimpy lifestyle) - it is easier to have the energy to make the dinosaur costumes - to read novels to them - and to generally have more creative energy.

That is not what would some people would like to hear - I imagine - but it was my experience. I think people only have so much creative energy - and you can hand it over to a company or your own business or you can split it or invest it in your children.

Sometimes - having some kind of job outside the home can make it easier to do the childrearing thing.

I think the ideal could be for each parent to work 20-30 hours a week... but I don't think most people would want to make the career sacrifices to so that.

[GodHelpUsAll2]

13. I don't

think you can an employer that will let you only work 20-30 hours a week.

[sandnsea]

17. Well think outside the box

Why the hell not? We don't demand it, that's why. We buy into the corporate hoopla, while they're making 500 times the workers wage when 40 years ago they made 50 times.

[GodHelpUsAll2]

20. Maybe I am

taking this a bit too personal. But for you to aim your "learn to value parenting" comments at someone you know nothing about is irritating the hell out of me. In case you were wondering. i'll fill you in.
I have 2 kids, I work full time. I have also spent countless hours, days and weeks traveling around this entire country volunteering for this organization and that organization to CHANGE the way things are in this country. I have left my kids in the care of my family at times and I have taken them with me and got them involved at other times. I have been doing this for 2 years now. So please, before you start telling me I need to learn to value parenting and that I need to demand something. Think about the fact that maybe, just maybe I am already doing more than my fair share of working for change. As are many others.

[sandnsea]

22. Then VALUE it

That's my whole point. You don't expect a damned thing from this society for all you do. You give and you give and you give. And when you have problems making it all work, you blame yourself. "Oh well, it was my choice." Your work is valuable, whether it's volunteer, or parenting, or at a job site. ALL of it. Society couldn't function without all that parents do. So when single moms, particularly, need this society to give back to them, we should. And if moms elevated what they do, society would appreciate it more. And all the nurturing professions that are out there. Why does a guy who builds a house make more than the day care worker who takes care of the kids who that house is for? No reason for it at all, except in what this society values.

[GodHelpUsAll2]

27. No, I don't

blame myself. And yes, it was my choice. What I do, is accept my responisbilities and work for change. My first responsibility is to my children. Part of that responsibility is to try and make a difference for my children's children. If anyone who had kids in the last 20 years chose to be a parent thinking there was a safety net in the event something didn't work out they are fools.

Change does not come easy. Especially when things are as far gone as they are. Huge portions of society are either ignorant or blind to the pathetic state of society. It will take a lot of time, a lot of effort and a lot of eyes opening before society realizes just what a mess they have made. Lots of parents, single parents especially, have drawn their lines in the sand. I know I have. It is perfectly clear to my employer who is first on my list and who is not. They are quite aware that my kids and my family out weigh my job 10 fold. But there are huge numbers of parents out there that are smacked in line by fear. And that fear is very real. Who will feed their kids? Who will pay for the doctor visit if they get sick, and the list goes on. So they do what they have to do to make sure their kids suffer as little as possible. So when I come across those who talk about "Not valuing parenting" and suggesting that it is merely a matter of saying "No, that won't work, my way is the right way" it irritates the hell out of me. If you truely want to make an impact, and get people to see the light and work for change laying a heap of guilt and accusing them of not valuing parenting, (which only adds insult to injury to those who truely are stuck in a never ending cycle of a society that cares less) then you have to show a little sympathy and let then know they are not alone. When that happens, I predict there could be one hell of a force that could indeed make a difference.

[sandnsea]

29. Post #2

It sounded more like a "tough shit" post, it's a choice, sit down and stop bitching. Like if you don't tow the "responsibility" line, somebody will point their finger at you and shame you about your "choices". It's a Republican trick to make women/moms/parents feel guilty and not demand to be treated respectfully by this society. To feel like "welfare queens" if they ask that their mothering be valued, with real child care and schools and health benefits. To call it socialism or social engineering. Never mind the fact that the Bush administration is selling the greatest global social engineering ever imagined. "freedom and democracy" at the point of a gun. These same people go all over the world and tell the poorest women in the world that govt sponsored child care, parental leave, and health care will hurt their opportunity for independence. And then teach them to sew, for 50 cents a day for the Gap. It's all connected. I'm just sick of it and I'm sorry if you thought I was jumping down your throat. You don't deserve to ever feel bad because you could use a little more help than what our society is currently giving.

[GodHelpUsAll2]

31. Then we are on the same page

And I do get very passionate about it. I am surrounded by people who will open their stupid pie holes all the time and talk about how "parents these days just don't care about their kids" and "mothers that work are so consumed by the almighty dollar and should never have been allowed to have kids" without once thinking of just why it is that mother or father is there working like a dog in the first place.

Anyway, I have ranted enough tonight. Now I must go to bed and rest so I can be prepared to fight another day.

Have a good evening.


I would also like to add that I do not believe this problem is exclusive to parents. There are plenty of single/childless couples out there that are victms of the same society gone mad.

[The Flaming Red Head]

46. Is that to me. My post was second.

I don't have time to sit down and when I do it just makes my back hurt even worse when I have to get back up. I qualify for nothing. No healthcare, no food, nothing and I'm bitching about it and I won't go away.

I think alot of this is about Mrs Kerry speaking off the cuff. I admire her for that. She shoots from the hip and gets hell for it. Me too.

I'll vote for both Kerrys and if you think I'm whining you can kiss my sore, sore tail.

[bloom]

23. I did eventually

I worked 32 hours most of the time - until the company I worked for got bought out by a giant behemoth and I got laid off.

Full time benefits started at 30 hours.

[GodHelpUsAll2]

30. I did too

then poof. My family friendly job was gone and I became a number in the jobs loss stats. And isn't it amazing. Having a flexible job did not at all impact my ability to do the tasks required by the job and the employer employee relationships were wonderful. Funny how that works isn't it?

[porphyrian]

19. Verbal Semantics

Obviously all of those things are work, but whether they should all be considered jobs depends on your definition.

Merriam-Webster says this:

1 a : a piece of work; especially : a small miscellaneous piece of work undertaken on order at a stated rate b : the object or material on which work is being done c : something produced by or as if by work <do a better job next time> d : an example of a usually specified type : ITEM <this job is round-necked and sleeveless -- Lois Long>
2 a : something done for private advantage <suspected the whole incident was a put-up job> b : a criminal enterprise; specifically : ROBBERY c : a damaging or destructive bit of work <did a job on him>
3 a (1) : something that has to be done : TASK (2) : an undertaking requiring unusual exertion <it was a real job to talk over that noise> b : a specific duty, role, or function c : a regular remunerative position d chiefly British : state of affairs -- used with bad or good <it was a good job you didn't hit the old man -- E. L. Thomas>
synonym see TASK
- on the job : at work

[Lars39]

21. The US doesn't do jackshit to help families.

Compare to France:

http://www.tulane.edu/~rouxbee/kids02/france6.html

http://www.info-france-usa.org/atoz/childcare.asp

The repubs are encouraging stay-at-homes for many reasons: one is that if a SAHM who has never worked becomes disabled, she recieves 0 benefits from SS. No safety net when it is needed the most.
Absolutely disastrous for the family.

The US mentality confuses a job with a person's worth. Europeans seem to be able to seperate the two. Education and having more time off to actually have a life makes a big difference. I don't know if the US will ever evolve. :(

[BiggJawn]

24. The all-important "JOB"

Why do we confuse it with "Vocation" Raising kids is a vocation. Caring for the ill, teaching the young, protecting society, yada, yada, yada, all vocations.

When you have to FORCE yourself out the door every morning, and all you have to look forward to trading 8 hours of your life dealing with fucking assholes who think it's YOUR fault they don't remember how to operate the machines they get paid 2X what you do to operate them ("This doesn't work. It MUST be broken") for is a few Pfennigs to keep the lights on and the Repo Man from your door, then THAT, my friend, is a JOB.

Now, if you hate raising kids and keeping house and all that as much as I hate dealing with the shit I gotta put up with 50 weeks a year, then, by all means, go ahead and call it a JOB.

And as far as getting paid for it, lemme ask you this:
You got a bed to sleep in? You got food in the pantry? You got transport and a few dollars to spend? Well, then, you're doing about as well as me.

[GodHelpUsAll2]

28. Now that

Made me laugh. I can relate to forcing yourself out the door and the idiots that depend on me to make twice as much.

[BiggJawn]

33. It's been a bad week at the "JOB"....

I USED to love what I do...

[Pithlet]

25. You're right

It is not a career or employment, at least not in the same sense. I don't think you're belittling stay at home moms by saying so. I felt I needed to reply because of how heated my responses were in that thread.

[jdj]

38. I'm not sure the OP is correct about the primary assumption anyway.

I think the notion came about more with automation and the move away from an agricultural society, because before then, everyone worked VERY hard at many different tasks for the family's welfare, including the children, and there wasn't nearly the need for cash money as probably 90% of the services we pay for today the family provided for itself.

I think the question is what is work, and of course that is work, and the other question is does it deserve pay, or some kind of wage (including support from a husband) and the answer in my book is yes, and I think the gov't agrees, or women would never get alimony or child support from their spouses.

[Pithlet]

39. From what I gathered

I thought it was about whether you could call it a career, or employment in a "draw a paycheck" kind of way.. And I wouldn't call it that, because kids grow up. They go to school. It's not something that you train for, like a career or vocation. And I wouldn't say that I draw payment, because my husband and I are a team. I don't see it as my husband supporting me. I worked for years before I quit my job, and I will get another one when the kids are older.

I'm a stay at home mom, and I love my kids, but this is a fleeting moment in my life. It IS work. You are absolutely right. And it is very important work.

[MontecitoDem]

32. It is WORK

No it's not a career or employment. But it is work. When you have toddlers it is relentless and around the clock. There is almost never a time for you to have a quiet lunch, or sit down to pay your bills, or make a personal call like I did when I was working fulltime. From sun-up to bedtime, and often in the middle of the night you are doing the ....

hah had to stop typing there because my son got up!

I also work for a democratic club in town, about 25 hours a week, also unpaid. (work late at night when everyone is hopefully asleep). Some people think if you don't get paid it isn't a job. I say, if you have responsibilities that require all of your attention, that you cannot blow off, that's a job. Even when it is fun - like making costumes and reading together. Hell, I often had a great time as a lawyer working 70 hours a week. Fun doesn't disqualify it from being a job.

I have tried it all. Working full time without kids, with kids, working part-time and now just being at home. It can all be hard and it can all be great. I think when most people say "you don't have a real job" they either don't have kids, they don't raise them the way we are trying to raise ours, or they are bothered that they don't have the "choice" to stay home.

I say, let's value each other and our contributions to the planet equally, whether our efforts are paid or not.

[shimmergal]

34. It's not primarily a job, or a vocation. It's a relationship.

Of course when children are little, you're so overwhelmed by the sheer work and energy demands that it may _feel_ like a job. And the way you feel bound to do it despite all this has some aspects of a vocation. But primarily it's about relationship--something that becomes increasingly clear as the children get older. Because it is, it's an ongoing tie even when the children are grown and don't need you to treat it as a "job" or even a "vocation" any longer (in fact they get annoyed when parents do!)

[jdj]

37. I have a relationship with my boss and co-workers in which

I am expected to do certain things.

No different than care-giving. If all care-givers worked for free, there might be veracity to this. But they don't, and some of them get paid a hell of alot. The standard seems to be, that you only get paid to care for people you are not related to

But then there is DSS, who will pay you to care for your own relatives, like elders, when they are sick, as long as you are treating it like a job, a benefit I think is splendid (although it is something bush may have already done away with.)

[Kanary]

40. Then I propose that ALL men take over the "nonjob" of raising kids.

Then, it will suddenly become an important job.

Un-freakin'-believable.

Kanary, who thinks kids are more valuable than being considered a "lifestyle choice"

Shit......

[Tansy_Gold]

41. "Mr. Mom."

need I say more?

:evilgrin:

[Kanary]

42. Most people are aware there is a big difference between Hollywood

and most middle-class lives.

One movie does not a "movement" make.

All through history, in patriarchal cultures, when men start performing the traditional "female" tasks, those tasks then take on a new importance.

*THAT"S* what has to stop. This patriarchal crap is destroying our culture, and we go happily trotting along with it.

From what I'm reading here on this thread, it's time women go on strike, and get the point across!


Kanary

[bobbieinok]

43. this discussion is almost an identical repeat of discussions in the 60s,

the early days of the second women's movement.

Refight the anti-war battles, refight the civil rights battles, refight the women's rights battles......

At least some of these were 'supposedly' 'won'.

/sigh

A lot of us are 40 years older, 40 years tireder, and some of us are now disabled.....we fought the battles 40 years ago, and now they have to be fought again.....

It really is true: 'Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty'....too many of us coasted....and we see how far 'the enemy' has pulled us back.

[Kanary]

49. Yes, it's extremely discouraging.

However, I disagree that it's because of any "enemy". There comes a time when we have to take responsibility for our own actions.

Yes, I think that you are partly right that we older ones having thought our struggles were fought and won, and we could go on to other thins.

But... from what I see, the big problem is what is seen right here at DU. There is no longer an atmosphere among people of working for understanding so that we can work *TOGETHER*. THat's rare here at DU, or in the Dem party as a whole. What now reigns is the idea that each of us is out to WIN. If we can say something strongly and loudly enough to get the other person to go away, or something mean enough so that they no longer want to interact with us, then we have "won". No matter how right the other one is in what they are asking for -- respect for their beliefs, respect for their dignity in how they wish to be addressed, respect for each one's goals for themselves, and the example of being a working mom or a stay-at-home mom is a very good example of that. Each choice is worth respect.

There seems to be some idea that we can change people for the better with intimidation and animosity. If one can shut up an "opponent" by assuming a haughty attitude, then they are the victor. It's not just silly, it's completely distructive.

But, bobbieinok, you are completely right that those of us who have fought these battles before are tired, worn out, and often in ill health. It's the right time for us to hand the fights over to the younger generation, and if what they want to do with it is to create verbal violence among each other, and an atmosphere of rancor, rather than understanding and acceptance, then so be it. That is the way to loss and watching the best of our system go down the drain. Maybe it's the case that stubbornness has to learn the hard way.

It's getting harder and harder for me to care anymore.

Kanary

[Tansy_Gold]

50. You're absolutely correct, bobbie

Who would have thought that in 2004, after all the gains of the 60s and 70s, we'd be fighting for reproductive rights for women, voting rights for African Americans and other peoples of color, free speech rights, rights to clean air and water and safe food and the availability of vaccines for common diseases? Who would have thought we'd see, within a single lifetime, another Vietnam-style disaster?

My comment in reply to Kanary was made late last night after a very frustrating day, but I meant the reference to "Mr. Mom" as a pop culture example of a mindset that says "when a man does it, it's real work; when a woman does it, it's just what she was naturally born to do." hell, it's been so long since I saw that stupid movie, I don't even remember much about it!

But I do remember the struggle of a friend of mine whose husband was killed in a car accident thirty years ago, leaving her to raise four young children. She was the quintessential "stay at home mom," busy baking cookies and hosting birthday parties with exuberance. Though Bob's insurance paid off the mortgage and social security provided Julie with some income, she simply couldn't raise four children without going to work -- or without living in poverty.

So I would question anyone who says, "If you VALUE your children, you'd stay at home and take care of them instead of going out and working." Is it "valuing" them to force them to live in poverty? Had Julie not found a job, she would have had no health insurance. Is that "valuing" our children? Obviously, I agree with the Kerry/Edwards statement that you can't have family values without valuing families. But the reality-based reality /sic/ is that for many women, whether they are married or not, they would be as reviled for "not valuing their children" if they stayed home and scrimped to get by on their husband's income as if they went out to work and "abandoned" their children to day care. (And many women are actually accused of being "lazy" if they stay home and don't "work"!)

The truth is, women are in a no-win situation, if they rely on what "they" say.

I went back to college at age 50 and earned both a BA and MA in women's studies, so I have all the zeal of a recent convert :D and I tend sometimes to get worked up about these issues. I remember in one of my classes, a young woman in the front row (I always sat in the back) burst into an angry tirade over feminists who said she was "wrong" for wanting to be a good wife, taking care of her husband, washing his clothes, making sure he had a clean house to come home to, etc. (She was a non-WS major, but the university required courses in a variety of areas, including gender studies, for graduation in all majors.) She accused feminists of hating women like her, of insisting that all women should ahve "jobs."

But when someone asked her why she was getting an education if she didn't have some intention of working for a living at some point in her life, she had no answer. And then someone else asked her what guarantees she had of always having a high-income husband to take care of her and her children. And then someone else pointed out that feminists -- in the narrow sense of the women's-rights activists of the 'ssecond wave' -- had fought and fought and were still fighting for the rights of women to make their own choices and to have the means of implementing those choices, no matter what they were.

The argument went on and on, with this young woman sputtering her defense and her hatred of "feminists" for probably half an hour or more. I don't know if we convinced her of anything, but some of the other students, young and "mature" alike, admitted that they had never understood feminism as defending the rights of "traditional" women before but they did now.

IMHO, no one should be denied the right to choose their "lifestyle" or be denied the means to follow it (within reason, of course). Our society has an obligation, IMHO, to guarantee that. We have an obligation to see that children, regardless the economic status of their parent(s), have adequate health care and educational opportunities. We have an obligation to see that everyone, young and old, rich and poor, black and white and brown and mauve, has clean air to breathe and pure water to drink. We have an obligation to see that everyone, inside our borders and outside, can live in peace. As a society that has managed to build weapons of mass destruction beyond any measure of world-destroying capacity, we have failed in our primary obligations. And the proof of it is that a woman with children to raise has to feel guilty and/or defend herself whether she stays home to raise them or goes into the "job" market to raise them. She's damned if she does and damned if she doesn't.

When a man, either through widowhood or abandonment by his wife, is left to raise children alone, he is consoled and praised and helped by everyone. This happened to my brother when his wife left him with two small daughters. He was such a hero to take on the challenge! And then one day I pointed out to my mother that he was no more a hero than any woman who gets left by a philandering husband, except that my brother had access to good-paying jobs and was looked upon with sympathy. He was never accused of "not being a good enough husband" and being the cause of his wife's departure. That conversation turned my mother into a feminist!

Enough ranting for the moment. I really must get back to the quilt I'm making for my daughter. It's taken me so long to write this, I've probably missed most of the discussion!

[Liberal Veteran]

44. I think kids are more valuable than "just a job"....

I didn't say that raising kids wasn't work and important.

Raising kids is 24/7 x 365. Why do you want to denigrate it into being the same as working a 40 hour workweek?

Aren't their things MORE important in life and of more value than a job?

[Riptide]

45. I was a teacher for years before I had kids...

Then, when I had my own children, I decided to stay home and use my teaching skills to raise three wonderful individuals. Now that my children are heading off to school, I am going to grad school and will be returning to teaching soon.

I think that feminism is about choices, whether it be about your body or your career.

I have no regrets about my decisions. I have spent my time at home volunteering (for the dems, with a reading program, and at my children's' schools). I don't care if you want to label it a "job" or a "lifestyle" I feel no need to convince people that taking care of children 24/7 is work. If you have to ask, you've probably never done it.

[YNGW]

47. Childraising is a full-time job.

>From my point of view, I say childraising (though hard work when done correctly) is not really a job (aka career/employment), but a lifestyle choice.

Don't tell my wife that. She'll kick your ass.

[skygazer]

48. Is farming a job?

It used to be, when the U.S. was a more rural society, that most families lived self sufficiently on their land. They didn't go somewhere to earn money to pay their bills - they provided what they needed with their own labor. Is that a career? Employment?

I think you're looking at it in a kind of skewed way. Our concept of "work" has changed to mean something you leave your home to do but it wasn't always like that. When you farm, you have a job to do, you labor, you are working toward a better life for your family. I think child care and taking care of your home could count toward that.

Ultimately, it's just another label. Why do we feel the need to categorize this stuff, to validate or invalidate each other's life choices and labor? Why can't we realize that our choices can be equally valuable without it being some sort of contest?

[Liberal Veteran]

51. But that's not really the point....

As I pointed out: I have a long-term relationship and take care of a house, cook, clean, do laundry, juggle appointments, go to school, do home repairs, take care of my yard, garden, chop firewood for winter heating, clean and maintain two large aquariums, and groom and feed and my cats and dogs.

Is it work? One could say "Yes".

Would anyone consider it a "job"?

Of course not. It's just living life and juggling the choices of the kind of life I want to live.

No one ever says "well marriage is a job". Why do we try to say childraising is a job? Because there is a little more difficulty in it?

I daresay, that most people work infinitely harder at childraising that say...Laura Bush, who had all the benefits of wealth and power assist her.