The choices we make.

I read an article today that really got under my skin.  Published by the British paper Daily Mail, the article is entitled "Why I'd rather my daughter marry a rich man than have a brilliant career."  The author, Frances Childs, describes a "chat" she had with a group of 17-year-old girls.  Some of the girls dreamt of growing up and being lawyers or doctors but several wanted to grow up and marry rich men, and have kids.  Childs describes how at one point she would have argued against this plan and for the independence and self-sufficiency that a career provides.  However, giving birth to her own daughter and becoming (in her words) "a harassed working mother" caused a shift in her beliefs.  She goes on to talk about the fallacy of women having a high-powered career and motherhood and doing both well.  Childs actually calls it a fairy tale. 

Up to this point, I couldn't agree with her more.  I will take a brief detour here and describe, in part, the journey my family went on to deciding that me staying home would be best for us all.  I realize it will sound like a contradiction to say that it was both a very easy and very difficult choice.  On one hand, Kent and I both had no problem agreeing that me staying home would be less stressful and more satisfying for he and I and better for our child.  We are very fortunate that Kent is successful and my income was not necessary to keep our household afloat.  Finally, we were lucky that staying home was something I wanted to do, and that I garner a great deal of satisfaction taking care of my home, my husband and my son.  However.  With that said, there are times that it's difficult.  The days when the Foster has been inconsolable and unhappy for twelve hours, the house is messy, I look disgusting and I can't seem to get dinner on the table.  Those days are hard, especially when I think about many of my girlfriends that go to work everyday in cute outfits and have increasing amounts of career success.  To be perfectly honest, I get envious, particularly on the bad, frustrating, can't-do-anything-right days. 

I work hard to keep in mind that the grass is always greener and if I were in a position that I had to work I would miss my child and husband terribly, it would be almost impossible to keep the house in order and dinner would come from a box or delivery man.  I enjoy almost everything about staying home and certainly I enjoy it overall much more than I did the job I held before I got pregnant, even though I got to dress nice and made decent money.  The job I do now matters to someone, to a few someones, in fact.  When I make a good meal or get the house clean or spend an hour playing with Foster in the yard I feel good about those things and like I'm doing a good job.  I get more happiness from that than I ever did administering benefits and handling customer service calls.  As I said earlier though, it can be a little difficult to keep that in perspective on the bad days. 

So I agree with Frances Childs that the idea a woman can do everything well is a damaging, unattainable myth.  The part in her article I found to be so offensive was when she goes on to say that young women (those in early to mid-twenties) are, and SHOULD, be looking to marry men who are extremely wealthy.  In part,

...For modern girls, marrying a rich man is an indisputable announcement of success. 

...A happy life isn’t guaranteed by marriage to a wealthy man either. But isn’t it time we admitted that it certainly helps?

Perhaps it's just me, but I find this attitude disgusting and deplorable.  All Childs has done is take the offensive term "trophy wife" and put a bow on it.  It's the exact same thing but she's trying to make it sound noble instead of what it is: a mercenary move based more on greed than any real interest in building a loving family unit.  Childs goes on to describe friends who have cleaners and nannies.  One even has the audacity to say that she's a wife and mother, in between her trips to the gym and Spanish lessons which are no doubt facilitated by the cleaner and nanny she employs.   

Where do women get the entitled idea that they shouldn't have to work?  That not only do they not need to have a job outside the home but that they don't need to have one inside it either?  Woman who make this choice are not making a decision that they should stay home because it's most beneficial to their families; they're staying home because they're lazy and spoiled.  I do not believe that making the choice to be stay-at-home-mom means toiling 14 hours a day cooking, cleaning and taking care of kids.  Of course anyone needs a break occasionally to get exercise or read a book or have a child-free lunch with friends.  I'm not saying that staying home means you put all of yourself on a shelf.   But I am dying to know what these women feel they contribute to their families.  And above all, I am baffled why they think their husbands should work sixty hours a week while they hire a nanny and get manicures.  If you don't want to participate in taking care of your family then why even bother having one?