Conference turris::womannotes-v2

    It will help when men share ownership of the problems.  For example,
    childcare needed because both parents work should not be viewed as 
    the "woman's problem," but as the couple's problem or as the family's 
    problem.  (Of course, it's still the woman's problem if she is the
    only parent.)
          
    I hate to hear a married woman talk about how much it costs HER,
    or what percentage of HER salary, goes to childcare!  Or assumes
    that she is the one who will take the day off if the child is ill,
    etc.  Until both women and men SHARE the responsibility and these 
    problems, progress is likely to remain slow.  When fathers also
    demand childcare, flex hours, etc., employers will take more notice!   
    The same applies to other problems a couple faces when both people
    work: additional dry cleaning and house cleaning expenses, etc.  
    
    I find it both discouraging and appalling that these issues have 
    been around for 15+ years with so little progress -- and much of 
    the reason is that women aren't insisting that the men in their 
    lives share in owning the problems!  In fact, we are likely to assume
    the responsibility without even asking men to share it!
    
    Nancy

    This is stretching it - but let's say that the *only* *real*
    reason women entered the workforce was for money.  Couldn't
    it be said then, that if men could have made more money,
    then the women would noever have had to enter the workplace in
    the beginning?
    
    Men's fault?  Women's fault?  Are we going to find solutions
    in blaming one party or the other?
    
    I thought the article was interesting because I have heard
    2 viewpoints (from women) regarding women in the workplace.
    One says "I can do the same job as a man, I don't need or
    want any preferential treatment"  The other says "I can't
    possibly keep up with this pace, can't something be done
    to accommodate the working woman with a full-time job at home?"
    
    I can see the validity in both statements, but isn't there some
    happy medium?
    
    Dorothy

    Then again, some women ensure that men don't share in the problems
    by applying the label "Working mothers' problems" to what are in
    fact "Working parents' problems."  There are a number of support
    groups, seminars, etc., all trying to address the real issues, but
    right down the line, they assume from the start that the fathers
    aren't interested.  It's hard for us to even learn about such
    things, since the information tends to get passed around
    woman-to-woman.
    
    I agree with many of the opinions in the article, though I consider
    many of the arguments sheer speculation (such as that kids in daycare
    are automatically more insecure - my experience has been the reverse).
    
    I feel that the first step is to recognize that the fathers MUST
    be part of the solution, and to encourage them to join in the effort.
    This will mean reaching beyond the traditional methods for organizing
    women, choosing names and language that is inclusive rather than
    exclusive, and showing the fathers why it is to their advantage
    to help.  Most of them don't understand, because nobody has ever
    bothered to clue them in.
    
    			Steve (a single parent)

    Steve,
    
    I can see where fathers can get left out.  I would not
    have seen this side of the issue had it not been for
    my husband.  He is divorced with 3 children.  We just
    had our first child and he bathes, feeds, diapers, etc. 
    and he loves it.  I asked him if he did this with his first
    3 and he said "No".  I asked why and he said it never seemed
    like an option, he found out during the process of his divorce
    that one of his ex-wife's complaints was that he never helped
    out with the kids.  He said she never asked him and because
    of that he kind of felt left out.  Thus the dreaded cycle
    of miscommunication.
    
    Dorothy

    'Should women in the workforce be treated differently?'
    
    To my mind the answer is an emphatic NO.  The answer lies in treating
    the _entire_ workforce differently.
    
    My manager in a pre-Digital existence was a wonderful Chinese man
    on his way toward becoming a US citizen.  His wife was also Chinese
    and they had three elementary-school-age children. [I am making
    a point of the Chinese part as the generalisations to be found about
    Chinese men and acceptable role definitions are quite contrary to
    this man's idea of who's work was who's].
    
    He managed a workforce that was about 60% female and 70% parents.
    
    One day, one of the fathers in the group got a call from daycare
    to say that his son was throwing up.  He was in Hung-Chih's office
    at the time.  When one of the secretaries popped in to mention the
    call the two men simultaneously said:
    
    	Hung-Chih: 'Put them through'
    	father: 'Tell them to call my wife'
    
    There was a brief silence, then Hung-Chih asked very quietly, 'Do
    you have reason to believe that this boy is not your son?' [Of course
    he did not expect an answer]
    
    As the man had gone into Hung-Chih's office in the first place to
    complain about a woman co-worker whose absences of late had put a
    project behind, Hung-Chih was rather merciless in pointing out that
    the man's wife might be quite a valuable contributor in her workplace,
    too.
    
    He was consistently vocal, and frequently not terribly tactful, about
    partnership being important in all relationships.  He was downright
    rude to one man who came back to work three days after his wife had
    given birth to a new child, opining that a man who cared so little
    about his children and his wife should never have been allowed the
    privildge of marriage and fatherhood! He was tireless in his efforts to
    work out schedules with parents of both sexes so that childcare issues
    could be resolved. 
    
    
     I miss him sometimes...
    
    
      Ann
   
    

    
    

    Re: .5, .6
    
    As much as I agree that fathers should get more involved in
    parenting, and are often excluded, that wasn't really the point
    of my comments in .4.  I was suggesting getting the fathers involved
    in improving conditions in the workplace for working parents.
    So much of the activity in this area takes place among women's groups;
    most men would probably not attempt to "crash" (in their view) a
    meeting of "working mothers" who were discussing company-sponsored
    child care, parental leaves, medical benefits, etc.
    
    				Steve

    
    Well, the level of suspicion leveled at men 
    makes their participation pretty iffy at best.
    
    Men are considered childmolesters and rapists 
    until proven otherwize; not what I'd consider a 
    cozy welcome... 
                    
    With an atmosphere like that, I'll pass on the 
    cooperation and let them solve their problems 
    whilst I solve mine.  

    Until this century, the death rate in this country was so high
    among young children that only half of them lived to be five years
    old.  Parents therefore tried not to become emotionally attached
    to their children before then.
    
    It was the Industrial Revolution that provided the first really
    great change in how people worked.  Before it, just about everybody
    worked at home, and "family" did not mean "the mommy, the daddy,
    and the kid[s]".  "Family" sprawled across generations and the
    collaterals of various siblings.  After it, the family was split
    up, with our "nuclear" family and with one member of the family
    going away to work.
    
    Now our children are surviving, and our attitude towards them has
    changed.  Now the expenses of survival have increased, and the number
    of family members going away to work has changed.
    
    Q.E.D.: we have to change the workplace to match these new realities.
    
    							Ann B.

    re: .6 -
    
    What a wonderful attitude!
    
    -Amy.
    

Note 195.8              Working Women's Unworkable World                 8 of 10
    
>    Men are considered childmolesters and rapists 
>   until proven otherwize; .....................

    
     By whom?    Not by me, and I am also a working women.
    
     Come on, we are all in this world together, and surely
     we can all attempt to cooperate together without this
     kind of generalized accusal.
                                                 
    
    
                    

    Re .3, if the only "real" reason women entered the workforce was
    for money, then it's the reasons they needed the money that are
    to blame.  I think the two major reasons are 1) inflation in the
    U.S. since 1967 and (2) the increase in divorces and, therefore,
    single women.  I don't think that can be blamed on either men or
    women.  It's a fact of life that everybody has to deal with, but
    some areas of society/and some people/and most companies have refused
    to recognize it.
    
    Re .4, .7, I think that the reason women don't ask men to join them in 
    trying to solve "working mothers" problems is because they've gotten the
    message somehow that men are not interested, and that it is something
    they (the women) are going to have to try to change on their own.
     I think that many men who would be in a position to do something
    about childcare (promoting changes in company attitudes)are older men, 
    managers, whose wives didn't work when the children were young, and so 
    they are not really aware of the extent of the problem.
    
    Re .5, I don't understand why, if your husband wanted to help his
    ex-wife with the children, he didn't just step in and help.  Why
    should he need an invitation to take care of his own kids?
    
    Lorna
      

	I'm a single parent of a 7 year old son.  I've been married three times
so far, and have always tried very hard to do my share around the house in a
cooperative manner.

	I've found through hard experience that at least a few women do not
really want any help with anything around the house, etc..  If they accept
the help, they also give up some measure of control, and some women like to
feel as though they control the household.

	Fortunately, I've found some women who do not have a problem with
sharing responsibilities and control.

					Larry
					  ~

    The reason we don't have any children is because I want to be able
    to stay home with them at least until school age; and right now
    we can't afford for me to quit work for 5 or so years.  If there
    was on-site child care at Digital, I'd be more than willing to keep
    working and very thankful to Digital for providing it.  But, I refuse
    to leave my child at 3 months old in the care of a baby-sitter or
    day care.  I do not feel that a child should be left on a daily
    basis until school age.  Call me "old fashioned" or whatever you'd
    like!!!  I think the first few years in a child's life are the most
    infleuntial ones and I want to be able to take my child to the park,
    put them down for naps, see them take their first step; let them
    know that I am there for them. Actually, I feel like I'd be happier
    not working; kids or not. 
    
    Virginia
    

    Virginia,
    
    You are neither old fashioned nor new fashioned! :-) Just one woman
    making a choice on what is best for her. That to me is the best
    way in the world.
    
    Bonnie

    Lorna,

    I didn't mean to say that that was the one and only reason women
    entered the workforce.  Women did enter the 'force' for economic
    reasons, but also because now they _could_ and some even _wanted_ 
    to!

    I was using my example in .3 to show how, if we really worked hard
    at it, we *could* find some way to blame men.  I said that to respond 
    to a comment made in a previous reply.  I wanted to get past the 
    'blaming' aspect and talk about solutions, and used that example to show
    how really silly it is, at this point, to point fingers.

>    I think that many men who would be in a position to do something
>    about childcare (promoting changes in company attitudes)are older men, 
>    managers, whose wives didn't work when the children were young, and so 
>    they are not really aware of the extent of the problem.

    I agree.  Unfortunately, these 'traditional thinkers' have to be
    weeded out of the system before some real changes can take place.

>    Re .5, I don't understand why, if your husband wanted to help his
>    ex-wife with the children, he didn't just step in and help.  Why
>    should he need an invitation to take care of his own kids?

    I knew someone was going to say something about that!  I guess it's
    one of those 'you had to be there' situations.  I don't think my
    husband 'wanted' to help.  He just figured things were Ok the 
    way they were.  He was working and his ex was a stay-at-home wife.
    He didn't find out til later that she wanted the help.  It's
    a lame excuse, but routines set in which often make people blind
    and unaware of some things.


    Dorothy

       I believe Ann hit on the correct "problem" a few notes back. The
       way the world was, is different from the way the world is now. The
       family patterns that worked before are falling apart and must be
       replaced by new ones. One of the issues of working women has been
       whether they should change to match the work world the way it was
       for men or whether the work world should change to meet the needs
       of the new generation of dual worker families.

       I suspect as more baby boomers get into the CEO ranks change will
       come easier. There is also the question of whether the work ethic
       should change to say that family life is as important as work life.

       liesl

    Re .8:
    
    "...let them solve their problems whilst I solve mine..."
        
    But the point is: This is an "our" problem.
                                      
    
    -Tracy
    
    

    re:.1
    
    �It will help when men share ownership of the problems.�
    
    Even moreso, it'll help when employers start recognizing that
    men *should* be sharing ownership of the problems. Many companies
    large and small just don't have policies that *allow* fathers
    to share in the problems (of course, the policies are made mostly
    by men, so here we go 'round again).
    
    Paternity leave? Child sick? Why take the *man* away from work?
    Despite Ann J.'s contrary example (which should be cross-posted in
    the "But there's still hope" topic), most of the time the "Why not
    call the mother?" question is made by the employer, not the
    employee.
    
    --- jerry

    re. several
    
    I remember as a child my father was a manager and my mother was
    a highschool teacher.  The first time I was sick and needed to go
    home from school she looked up my mothers number to call her.  Instead
    she found the number of my father listed under 'emergency'.  She
    said to me "We really shouldn't be calling your father out of work
    do you know your mothers number!"  Oh if only I was a feminist at
    age 8 - I would have given that woman a piece of my mind.  So I
    went on to explain, as best an eight year old can, that my mom was
    a teacher and could not be called out of the class room but my dad
    had a much more flexible job and could leave if he needed to.  Well
    the nurse didn't like it but she called my father.  Of course she
    was all apoligizing when she called him saying that "We didnt' have
    your wife's number so we had to call you."  My father explained
    the same thing to her that I just did - but probably in a much more
    understandable form.  From what I hear today, this situation has
    not changed much in schools or daycare.
    
    Attitudes must change before we can expect equal share of child
    care.  Attitudes must change before we can expect to bring up a
    generation that knows no sexism.
    
    Suzanne

    RE: calling parents from school
    
    When I taught, if a kid was sent out of class, then screwed up in
    "quiet study", the deal was to send them home. HOWEVER, if both
    parents worked, they NEVER did it, because mom wasn't home!!!!
    
    Imagine the messages this gave the kids!
    
    *I* kept saying: "Look. Call one the first time, and the other
    the next time, and keep alternating. If you should happen to get
    people who got docked for leaving work, you'd only have to do it
    twice at the most!" I bet we would've been surprised at the improvement
    in behaviour.
    
    MEanwhile, Dad's job is sacred, and mom's is.....what? 
    
    --DE
    

    I get sort of huffy at some of the ideas that seem to continue to
    get propagated, even in this notesfile, about why human beings work,
    and what motivates people to.  I think it is a gross oversimplification
    to assume that women work ONLY because they need the money.  Of
    course I need money to live on, but there are plenty of other reasons
    to work: enjoyment, challenge, social interaction, recognition,
    feeling productive, making a contribution, etc.   I think these
    apply as much to women as to men. 
    
    Of course, this is all separate from the double burden working parents
    (of both sexes) have.  I certainly don't have the anxswer to that
    one.  Our rabbi is always asking me (well, usually me, rather than
    my bushand) why we don't have children.  I say that my life is already
    full, I can't see any way either of us can take on any additional
    responsibilities right now, and anyhow I really don't want to foist
    off my various inherited health problems on another generation.
    
    /Charlotte