"Being a mother"...the hardest job in the world?

[syracusa]

We've all heard the line:
"There's no harder job than that of raising your kids".

First time I heard it I thought: "well, people who've been there must know what they're talking about, what do I know?". So I never questioned it.
But the more I live, the more I see first-hand and the more I learn, the more I think this is one of the biggest bunch of bunk that has ever been produced and sold in the popular culture.

Here are some parts from a recent review of new TV series "Desperate housewives" (this is what reminded me of this topic and made me post here).

<<We're pretty strict (as a society) about how to be a mother, especially these days," says the actress, who has two preschool children with her husband, actor William H. Macy ("Fargo"). There's the stay-at-home mom, where it's incredibly fulfilling and it's exactly what you've always wanted to do with your life and you've never wanted to do anything else. And then there's the career mom, which at this point seems to be looked down upon a little.
But no one talks about the woman who chose to stay home with her kids and is now going crazy, and has lost her sense of self and just doesn't love it all the time, finds it overwhelming at least some of the time. There is nothing harder than raising kids. A corporate job is a cakewalk by comparison, and I love giving a voice to the magnitude and the difficulty of motherhood.>>

I cannot believe that people have come to exagerate so much this "raising kids" thing to the point where we call it "the hardest job in the world". I find it so much more disturbing when in today's day and age a kid is not an "event" forced upon you but something that YOU yourself cause or bring about in full consciousness (hopefully).

One week ago I quit my full-time job in order to focus on finishing a PhD dissertation. These past 6 months of "corporate work" (well...it was "state work" but it still feels like a corporation) were one of the most miserable periods of my life. I held two similar jobs in the past (8 to 5, punching the clock, etc) and I was equally miserable every time.

Tired as H*LL and sleep deprived from having to get up at 6:00 am every day, feeling no control over my own life, feeling like I am somebody's prisoner 8-5 (talk about freedom!), reports with deadlines, demanding boss, impersonal co-workers, terrible back pain from sitting all day at a desk and not even being able to go out for lunch because I had to negociate geting the heck out of there one hour earlier to beat the nasty traffic.
ETC ETC ETC.

My better-off friends (to be read those who could fall back on a money-making machine husband) rushed off to have a baby as soon as they were done with school. Why? To have a reason to "stay home" and still pretend they're doing some earth-shattering favor to this world. In reality they only do it for themselves and their little "mommy egos".
So a new "job" entered their lives: that of "stay-at-home-mom".

Nobody seems to want to acknowledge that THERE MAY BE a harder job than the "stay-at-home". How about that of "forced-to-be-gone-all-day-mom" who is struggling to hold down a job (or two!!!) AND to raise kids?????

Boy, do I hear complaining and bitching from these "stay-at-homes" about each and every little thing the baby does and the "terrible" impact it has on their well-being, how hard it is, how it didn't burp the right way, how time consuming it is and how terible it was today when the baby dared to get up at 7:45 am and she had to do the same too!!!!!!

At the same time, none of these women seem to miss their work-out time, their store hopping and shop-until-you-drop hours during the day when the "losers" are at work and the "ladies" shop or "lunch" - even if that means carrying the babies with them.

A large part of these women's "hard-core work" is coming up with all kinds of funny-cutzie "baby-related" activities such as "let's drive "Precious Princess" to a photo-shoot for a baby catalogue, etc.

In their world THIS passes as heart-wrenching work. And everyone else is ready to believe them. Never mind that THEY chose do make the baby because THEY wanted all the fun and the cutziness associated with it as well as the glorified "mommy" status.

For all people, eating (hence job, unless you are a lucky bastard heir) is mandatory.
Babies are NOT mandatory - they are made for parents' pleasure and personal fulflillment.

So can we please stop proclaiming "rasing kids" as the "hardest job in the world"? That it requires a lot of dedication - this is true. But that it is harder than a "corporate job" - let's not exagerate.

Rather than going back to those 6 months from hell, I'd rather smell any amount of baby poop, deal with any sort of burps, diapers and kid noise - for the rest of my days.

When all is said and done, I would still be in charge of whatever the heck I am doing and I would still be doing it because I WANTED TO , not because I had no other choice (because I needed to eat).

And finally, after these final 6 months, I am just ready to pay my respects to all the men our there - who typically do no have the option of "staying-at-home" AND retain self- and societal respect at the same time... and who work their butts off to provide for their families and to give their wives the opportunity to play "mommy".

THIS is a much harder job, most men have to DEAL with it and I have nothing but gratitude for my wonderful husband who is now supporting me at home so I can finish a PhD, so I can stay in academia in my fancy "Ivory Tower" and never have to go back to that corporate/state Hell... and to also be able to play "perfect mommy" every day - soon.

And THIS is coming from a feminist.

[Karin]

I agree with some of what you said. I think that being a stay at home mom certainly is not the hardest job out there. but in your other examples, the moms with carreers, or who were going to school, were also moms. They are dealing with the stress of supporting a family, and raising a family, coupled with the knowledge that by focusing on one, you are sacrificing the other.

I think the mothers you described who treat children asa burden rather than a welcome addition fall more into the victim\martyr category. As a mom, I know it can be trying sometimes, but I would never choose anything else. I think people get caught up in a cycle of getting more and wanting more that they forgot to look at what they already have as a positive thing.

[Suburbanite]

yea I agree, being a mother isn't as hard as being a coal miner.

[castille]

Actually coal miners get paid $60,000 a year in Australia in their first year, and up to $100,000 a year.

That's more than a doctor. If not for the fact coal miners hate all foreigners, I'd probably do a year or two of mining work.

[Lava]

I guess being a hitman would be much harder. But, from observation, motherdom looks like one of the hardest jobs, if maybe not the hardest.

Being able to make your own decisions is good, but it doesnt at all translate into an easier life. When you run your own biz, most moves are determined by 'got to, got to', so youre just your own slave much of the time instead of someone elses.

I sure do value being able to go wherever whenever, take time to do whatever whenever, but in the end theres no let up. With a 9-5 you got no money worries, no serious ones I mean. Work for yourself and youre taking gambles with absolutely everything you own, day in day out.

Lava

[Suburbanite]

Originally posted by castille, Actually coal miners get paid $60,000 a year in Australia in their first year, and up to $100,000 a year. That's more than a doctor. If not for the fact coal miners hate all foreigners, I'd probably do a year or two of mining work.

It is considered the world's most dangerous job.

[PatrickHenry]

Down the list, miner. Crab fisher or logger is the top.
http://www.askmen.com/toys/top_10/16b_top_10_list.html

[syracusa]

Originally posted by Lava, Being able to make your own decisions is good, but it doesnt at all translate into an easier life. When you run your own biz, most moves are determined by 'got to, got to', so youre just your own slave much of the time instead of someone elses. I sure do value being able to go wherever whenever, take time to do whatever whenever, but in the end theres no let up. With a 9-5 you got no money worries, no serious ones I mean. Work for yourself and youre taking gambles with absolutely everything you own, day in day out. Lava

Well...not, with the 9-5 job (let's make it more like 7-7, if we include the commute and the overtime put in for all the nasty deadlines) you've got no money worries;
But with the "stay-at-home" thing you obviosuly don't have much of that either - maybe the husband DOES ! - becasue if you did, your "stay-at-home" butt would be at work, trying to reconcile family finances and the "mommy" calling. Wouldn't it.

But as long as you can afford to stay at home and NOT work in the public sphere (only for your own household and kids!), THEN you probably only need to worry about the milk bottle, the burps, the diapers and the like.

I'll take that over the corporate hell any day.

[Suburbanite]

that list sucks, being a truck driver is easy.

[tivodan1116]

Originally posted by syracusa, Well...not, with the 9-5 job (let's make it more like 7-7, if we include the commute and the overtime put in for all the nasty deadlines) you've got no money worries;

a brief aside - If your 9-5 takes you 2 hours each way to commute, you are living in the wrong city. Here, I commute over 25 miles each way, and it takes me barely 30 minutes (so i'm averaging just under 60 miles an hour, not bad considering the first 4 miles and last 2 miles are 30MPH zones).

At any rate, I think being a mother is a very hard job, I think being a father is a very hard job as well. I just read a study of juvenille criminal behavior that discovered that regardless of your criminal background, your children today have an 11% chance of being convicted of a crime in their life (without accounting for socioeconomic factors).

Hardest job in the world? Well, considering the responsibilities are very nearly permanent (unless you screw up and someone revokes your rights or the child dies) and exist 24 hours a day for the entire year, that's pretty difficult. The responsibilities of raising a child are quite minimal, really just the responsibilities of keeping yourself alive with some extra food, clothing, and shelter for the small hangers-on around you. However, the responsibilities of raising a child RIGHT are monumental. Even small deviations in parenting behavior can lead to serious problems for your child later in life.

I'll leave the ultimate issue of "hardest job in the world" for someone else to decide, but suffice it to say, any job that requires that much committment to be done properly is tough.

[Technosoul]

Being a mother is hard work (if done right) but it is not a job. With a job you get a paycheck and they hold out income tax and other things like Social Security, etc. Being a stay-at-home mom is basically a social and religious partnership where the the woman is viewed as the property of the working man. Men do not pay chickens to lay eggs, he does not pay a cow to make milk, and he is not forced to do more then feed his wife and provide some security for her. As rude as that sounds that is how it was set up many generations ago. Of course it is not all that bad if they (women) gain control and can shop til they drop. Such work can have more "perks" then a real job if the woman knows how to handle the situation correctly.

Well, perhaps this message will stemulate a few remarks.

Technosoul.

[syracusa]

Technosoul,

I agree and I don't think you said anything "offensive" - it is the pure reality. This is one of the tricks that most people don't think about when they discuss the "stay-at-home" occupation.

It is an occupation, but it is not a JOB. No bosses, no deadlines, no paycheck, no fear of being fired, no commuting, no "many things".

I do agree with everyone who says that "raising a child" is not such a biggie whereas "rasising a child RIGHT" it is. Absolutely.

BUT: please do not forget that parents (especially those who insist on raising the child RIGHT) made a clear CHOICE about introducing that situation (having a kid) in their lives. No 1 reason? To feel "more accomplished", "more fulfilled" and "more in line with society's norms" than...say someone who doesn't have any children.

Children today are no longer "automatic givens". You CHOOSE them and you want them for some specific social advantages that you perceive in having them.
However, financially speaking, children are no longer "assets" as they used to be seen (to help you around on the farm) but liabilities.

Little consumption machines who consume:
1. Your money
2. Your time
3. Your energy
4. Your attention

You made a choice, therefore you cannot complain. You were only hoping to get a lot of satisfaction and "extra perks" out of having that kid, and now you also want to raise that kid "right", to give him/her the best chances in life, so your little "mini-you" can come out on top, etc.

It is a choice that can only by supported by an ACTUAL job.
If there is no dad to hold a REAL job, how are you - the mom - going to raise that child RIGHT? You won't - not from a distance, while toiling at some job.

(Sorry for the gender stereotyping, but this is the way it plays out in most cases).

By comparison, a job - unlike a kid - is not a choice. You HAVE TO have a job or else. That was my point.

And yes, like Technosoul said, when these women get their hands on a good situation (a man who makes good money etc) - their stay-at-home life is really not all that bad, even when they put in serious efforts to do the raising "right".

I see it all the time and believe me, I don't feel like shedding any tears over these "stay-at-homes" ' "hard life".
On the other hand, 6 months of 8-5 work managed to make me miserbale as Hell.

[castille]

Funny thing is, you go and ask someone working a miserable job, what their dream job is.

Usually they dont know.

[syracusa]

If you were hinting to my choices, yes I do know what my dream job is - one that is very noble and satisfying, one that I prepared for, that is miserably paid and which I cannot profess because of that.

And castille...are you capable of staying on topic?

[prettyredhead]

Wow. I sense some resentment ...... maybe babies arent like working, but it isnt the easiest job.
Most women who are lucky enough to stay home are quite grateful. I wish it was manditory to stay home for the first two years with your baby. It is good bonding time.
Sadly, alot of women want to work and have babies. That is a CHOICE also, someone lied when they said you could have it all..... our kids are paying the price .
If you are married to a man who makes at least 50K a year, you CAN stay home and be a full time mom. That is if you dont live in NYC or some horrible place where it costs 100K a year to live.
If you refrain from purchasing a new car (foolishy thinking you wont lose money when you trade it in ) , the biggest house in the "best" neigborhood, dont insist on wearing Tommy and Nike, then you can live on ONE income. I dont feel sorry for people who overextend themselves.
Stress is sometimes your own fault. I wish for every child in America to have one parent at home.
Stay at home mothering isnt "hard" but it isnt easy . Poop, vomit, tantrums, dr. appointments, long lines, ect. It isnt fun when diarreha hits in Save A Lot and you are mopping up shit off the grocery cart, or your baby pukes all over you. ect......both are hard.
But I dont feel much sympathy when you are determined to prove you are "better" than stay at home Moms, simply because you are working and then trying to cram all your parenting into 4 hours a night. You CHOOSE to do that, often. Make the man support the family. Mom really should be at home when at all possible.
I think what this boils down to is Mommy envy. Many women would have liked to stay at home. I resent the fact that I cannot. Luckily, I was home for the baby years.... It takes budgeting and work, but anyone can do it.
Men have it much harder, that I agree. Be good to them, and thank them for letting you stay home. If that is the case....... be good to that man as he is becoming a minority. I worry about my sons future...
Also, get the hell out of the city if it takes you 4 hours of travel to go 20 miles. WTF??????????
I live in a town of 10,000 people. I would not live in the city if you PAID me . I dont know why anyone would want to live there. But, alas the only high paying jobs are there. Besides a Dr, Lawyer, ect. You can be those anywhere if you dont mind making less, yet enough to get along...

[syracusa]

Prettyredhead,

I pretty much agree with everything you said.

I did not say that being a mom does not require dedication and work - it deifnitely does. But like you said, I feel that men DO have it harder especially that they do not have a choice between job and stay-at-home as equally acceptable occupations for a man.
And I WOULD surely be grateful to a man who offered me the chance to stay at home and raise my kids.

See...you cannot sanely make the choice of having a child unless someone in the family - typically the husband - has a job. (At least in theory; some people are in big doo-doo and have childern anyway - but that's insnane). This is what I meant by "job is not a choice". I meant for MEN (and for some women). You gotta eat in order to live, but you don't need to reproduce in order to live. Know what I mean? ...

Now...I did get your point with the women who CHOOSE to have "careers" / jobs while having babies. It shouldn't be that way, especially when the kids are very young, in their formative years (up to 7 yo). It's nice to have the mom at home even after that age, but I also understand the need (later) to provide financially well enough so you give your kid a good start in life (good school, college, maybe even some help with the down payment on a mortgage, etc).

And as it is more and more the case, the dad by himself cannot provide financially up to that level.

As for living in small towns...well, there aren't many jobs over there. I know what you are saying...definitely must avoid a lot of commute, but it is often easier said than done.
But yes...with kids, you have to make extremely tough choices.

What bothers me tremedouly is that too many people treat "having kids" as something "cute" or "normal" to do, when they are not able - emotionally, financially, availability of mom at home and otherwise - to offer their children a really good start in life.

Like I said before, if more rich people had (more) kids, and more struggling families had fewer kids (or none) we would gradually head towards a better future for everyone.

But we are a very long way from that type of reality. Too bad.

[syracusa]

And no, there is absolutely no resentment on my part towards the stay-at-home moms. I think it's great to be able to do that and it's also great for the kid...but at the same time, I acknowledge that what the GUY does in the corporate world (so that I, as a woman, can stay at home and raise my mini-me's) is HARDER.

[castille]

But isn't the point of poor people having kids to have a better chance of their kids earning good money, and caring for their parents?

Or do kids in America abandon their parents?

[prettyredhead]

Sorry if I sounded offensive Syra.......I just get very protective and passionate about childrens rights. I want for every child under 5 to have a parent home full time, when possible.
I am grateful that I live where I live. Many people travel to Joliet or even Chicago to work (88 miles) but not me, that is insane to me.
I wish we all had to live simpler lives......... not so driven by the damn old dollar. Too bad people could not use the barter system anymore....

And yes, somtimes children abandon their folks to a "old folks home" and forget about them, except the manditory Christmas. People in America are selfish unless it something like a terrorist attack. That is what it takes for people to stop and think of others, disaster, or death. We are too driven to keep up appearances. It is sick. Can I come live with you???? lol

[syracusa]

Originally posted by castille, But isn't the point of poor people having kids to have a better chance of their kids earning good money, and caring for their parents? Or do kids in America abandon their parents?

Castille I know you are from China (I am also from a country that is quite traditional in that respect), so I understand where you are coming from.

But in the US or any other modern, globalized society (everwhere it's getting like this), this logic not only that it doesn't work anymore and it is contradicted by science, but it is starting to look increasingly selfish, even immoral for parents who use it to justify breeding.

Even when finances are not an issue, it is quite distrubing to say that you want to have children in order to make them into old-age insurance policies for yourself.

So much more if you are poor. Yes, the poor can only hope that their children will make more money than they have (and many do) - but this doesn't say anything. Most poor people's children end up poor themselves.
At best, they manage to move into the middle class, perhaps with the help of a job that often takes them so far away from their aging parents that there's really no chance that they will be right next to their parents to take care of them.
And then, there are those extremely rare exceptions to the rule where a kid coming from a poor family strikes it big and becomes rich. But relying on this to happen to your kid does not beat playing the lottery to get to the same place.

Besides, do not forget that if you are poor, the only way your kid can move into a better socio-economic place than you have is by struggling and busting their asses - and usually, that leaves little time, energy or disponibility to also care for an aging (and often highly cranky) parent.

Most struggling children still do it (out of morality and traditional respect for parents) - but that doesn't change the fact that their parents have been cruel to their kids.

Not only you had nothing to start them with, but you also expect and demand that children be grateful to you for the hard life you threw them in and be your insurance policy in old age.

Not a very good logic to me.

Too much time has been spent bashing "ungrateful adult children" and too little time questioning how much time the parents spent planning the future of that "ungrateful child".

And do not forget that it is the parent who created the child, not the child who created the parent.