Our Ms. Brooks: The Parenting Plot
In her column today in the Los Angeles Times, Rosa Brooks relates what I suspect is a common nightmare for today's parents: she forgot to prepare the 30 healthy snacks she promised for her child's pre-school class. Bad Mother Guilt Syndrome immediately set in. The key word, of course, is "Mother." Like in Soccer "Moms." Parenting, that awful neologism for raising kids, usually comes down to the woman's role in raising kids, as Ms. Brooks has discovered.
Intensive parenting is a relatively recent American invention, and the evidence suggests that it's not one of our better contributions to humanity. That mad swirl of activities? You get burned-out kids incapable of entertaining themselves. That homework you and your first-grader struggle through? It has zero educational benefit. That superhuman effort you make to protect your kids from every conceivable danger? It's not necessarily helpful if it means they never learn how to evaluate dangers for themselves. Someday, our kids will have to function without us.
And, um, how about us grown-ups?
It's not a coincidence that the emergence of the modern ideology of intensive parenting directly tracks the large-scale entry of women -- especially mothers -- into the workplace. In 1975, 39% of women with children under 6 worked. By 2000, 65.3% of them did.
Decades ago, when most mothers didn't work outside the home, there was far less cultural anxiety about child development, safety and "parenting skills." Stay-at-home moms of the 1960s cheerfully sent the kids outside for hours of unsupervised neighborhood play while they did housework (or maybe just had a stiff drink). Only when large numbers of mothers did the unthinkable -- found paid work -- did Americans suddenly "discover" that truly effective "parenting" requires at least one adult to be focused 24/7 on the children and their "needs." Surprise!
Of course, it's virtually impossible for parents to hold down two full-time paying jobs and also manage the full-time job of modern intensive parenting. Something has to give -- and much of the time, it's still the woman's free time, or even her career, that goes. Since 2000, more women with young children have begun to give up on the workplace, reversing the 20th century's trend. By 2004, the percentage of women with children under 6 who worked was down to 62.2%. [Emphasis added]
All sorts of trends have reversed since 2000.
Curious, that.
Intensive parenting is a relatively recent American invention, and the evidence suggests that it's not one of our better contributions to humanity. That mad swirl of activities? You get burned-out kids incapable of entertaining themselves. That homework you and your first-grader struggle through? It has zero educational benefit. That superhuman effort you make to protect your kids from every conceivable danger? It's not necessarily helpful if it means they never learn how to evaluate dangers for themselves. Someday, our kids will have to function without us.
And, um, how about us grown-ups?
It's not a coincidence that the emergence of the modern ideology of intensive parenting directly tracks the large-scale entry of women -- especially mothers -- into the workplace. In 1975, 39% of women with children under 6 worked. By 2000, 65.3% of them did.
Decades ago, when most mothers didn't work outside the home, there was far less cultural anxiety about child development, safety and "parenting skills." Stay-at-home moms of the 1960s cheerfully sent the kids outside for hours of unsupervised neighborhood play while they did housework (or maybe just had a stiff drink). Only when large numbers of mothers did the unthinkable -- found paid work -- did Americans suddenly "discover" that truly effective "parenting" requires at least one adult to be focused 24/7 on the children and their "needs." Surprise!
Of course, it's virtually impossible for parents to hold down two full-time paying jobs and also manage the full-time job of modern intensive parenting. Something has to give -- and much of the time, it's still the woman's free time, or even her career, that goes. Since 2000, more women with young children have begun to give up on the workplace, reversing the 20th century's trend. By 2004, the percentage of women with children under 6 who worked was down to 62.2%. [Emphasis added]
All sorts of trends have reversed since 2000.
Curious, that.
Labels: sexism
posted by Diane at 3:57 AM
4 Comments:
You know those little bottle of Smirnoff's, Jack Daniels, Kahlua, and the like?
DO NOT put them in the snack bucket that your 2nd-grade child brings home when it's their turn to provide goodies for the class. Elementary school personal have little sense of humor about these things, despite the most excellent nap the kids all had that day.
"personel"
Oh heck, I can't spell, and I don't even drink alcohol myself.
:lol:
Now that is funny!
Post a Comment
<< Home