ME conversations

Womens choices – you can do anything but not everything.

wp-1454723537007.jpg

 

It has been brought to my attention that I have chosen quantity over quality.

 

I am a wife

I am a mother

I have a household to run

I have extended family

I have lots of great friends

I am working two jobs

I am studying

I am trying to write consistently and regularly

I am trying to practice yoga daily

I am trying to be all that I can as a woman.

It would seem that I am spreading myself thin, trying to do everything and only doing a half assed job of it all.   I have had a shitty week, with this dilemma. I have been emotional, angry, ugly, determined, motivated, tired, and defeated. I have wanted to stand out in my yard and scream a big “fuck you” to the world. I also wanted to curl up in a ball on my bed and wail like a baby.

Well isn’t this a first world problem.   All of this choice.

I mean FFS, I physically, emotionally and mentally can’t do it all. I am pissed about it. The guilt of juggling work and wife/mother duties. The selfish me wanting to study and write over putting washing away. Wanting to sleep in my own bed instead of going to work at 11.00pm. But also wanting the money that the night shift brings so I can send my kids to private school. Having a rushed, tired, post night shift wine with a friend, before racing home to cook dinner, while kids are at sports training. I want to be the loving, devoted, kind, caring, attentive mother, that doesn’t screw up her kids. I don’t want them to hate me for my crap choices when they are grown men. I want the nice clean and tidy house with mopped floors and immaculate laundry room. I want it to feel like a home. I want the love and respect of my husband, but want to tell him to bugger off so that I can do it all on my own.

I have probably just pushed back feminism 120 years, with my moaning about choice and having an abundance of it.

So what am I going to do??? Ohhh who knows, keep doing what I am doing. I am about to dash to the grocery shop- because we are out of toilet paper. Perfect example of too much going on to even remember to buy loo paper when I did the groceries. Shit housewife.

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “Womens choices – you can do anything but not everything.

  1. Women expected to clean the toilet over getting an education, expanding their view and choices is a world-over problem, definitely not first world problem, a category which so many of our gripes do fall under! But this isn’t one of them. Reflecting on our choices and decisions is worthwhile. .. I wonder whether motherguilt is worldwide or FWP?

    Like

    1. I suppose when I said FWP, I was thinking that I am blessed to be able to make the choice to work and study and have a family. I was thinking of the millions of women that don’t have the choices that I do.

      Like

  2. I’m wearing many of the hats that you do and know how much a struggle it can be. I still haven’t got it all sussed but I’ve boiled it down to a simple check list to help me maintain that elusive work-life balance.
    Good relationships with those I love, a support network, a place to be creative, a place to take risks, a place that’s stable and secure, a way to broaden my horizons, looking after my health and looking after my spirit. Some how when I have them all they enable I create an upward spiral in my life and and I can handle the crazy. But remove one part and it all comes crashing down!!

    Like

  3. Your complaints and frustrations make me think of two things….

    Thing number 1.

    In our traditional ‘patriarchal’ past where women were systematically oppressed and men lived like kings, a husband was not only expected to financially provide for his family, not only legally obligated to do so (a man was even legally responsible for his wife’s debts) … but he was also ABLE to do so on his wages alone (even a blue collar husband).

    This meant the fruits of a woman’s labour in and around the house (while obviously oppression when compared to her husband’s job working in local coal mine, shipyard, factory, farm, construction site, or out at sea) went entirely to herself and her family (nobody taxed her labour). She worked 100% for her own and her family’s benefit.

    Man = able to support an entire household kids and all.
    Woman = able to devote the equivalent time and energy of full time career ONLY to domestic chores and childcare.

    This is interesting when you consider the ambition of so many women/ couples is to be able to earn enough so that one partner can be a stay at home ad be a full time mother/ father ……. or just a full time homemaker baking delicious pies – or having a go at being a novelist or a painter or starting up a small business venture – if there are no children.

    Today thanks to feminism (yay!) a woman’s labour is now taxed as much as men’s labour, such that a woman is essentially required to work for 2-3 days of each week directly for the state (just like men!). And now thanks to feminism (slightly less enthusiastic yay!) and the massive growth in government which is needed to support our feminist/ socialist society (feminism is essentially socialism) a man’s labour can rarely support a family alone, and typically the woman must ALSO now work full time too, just to pay the bills….. even in a middle class household… even without kids.

    This of course means she cannot be a full time mother (previously called ‘being a mother’) to her children, who in turn end up being harmed as a result of being abandoned in ‘day abandonment centres’…… at which point all the grown ups are too busy and too stressed out themselves to do anything to help. So we just drug them.

    And with both partners / parents working flat out just to put food on the table there is no room to manoeuvre if they need extra cash in a hurry, and the slightest accident (illness, redundancy etc) can leave them destitute. In the past a woman could always take on part time work in addition to her husband’s job, and even though her income as midwife or nurse or seamstress might not be huge it was still extra on top of what they needed to live (100% disposable income).

    Thing number 2.

    Studies in the UK show that more and more women are now becoming the primary wage earners (you go girl!) ……… and this is making them extremely unhappy and traumatised (oh noes!)

    It seems being the primary wage earner – responsible for financially supporting your whole family – is putting tremendous pressure on these women – pressure which they are finding unbearable and restrictive.

    Who’d have thought being ‘head of the household’ could actually be a burden rather than a privilege?

    Now, I am not advocating a return to traditional chivalrous, paternalistic (he for she) society … but I don’t think it is possible to ‘move forward’ until we straighten out the myths and dogmas spread by – ahem – certain movements and certain ideologies about what it means to have a job, earn a wage and support a family …… as well as what it means to be financially supported, and work around the house doing domestic duties and raising the children.

    Perhaps ‘patriarchy theory’ – which paints all men throughout history as a privileged oppressor class and all women as a downtrodden victim class – needs to be re-examined by the remaining 8% (UK) and 18% (US) of people who still believe it is a valid theory (that would be feminists).

    Some food for thought….

    Could it be that the traditional gender roles of the past were the most efficient (division of labour etc) and certainly the most preferable and beneficial for women (and children) given the circumstances of the time? (ie brutal and harsh with rubbish technology and scarce resources)

    Could it be that the narrow and restrictive gender roles endured by women (having to stay indoors and make sandwiches and change the baby’s nappies) as well as the narrow and restrictive gender roles endured by men (having to go outdoors and mine coal and build and maintain the infrastructure and fight the wars) was never an example of ‘men oppressing women’ after all…. but simply men and women responding to a general lack of technology (no electricity, no cars, no indoor plumbing, no supermarket’s, no street lighting, no effective contraception, most paid work was still manual labour etc) by playing to their gender’s strengths and supporting each other’s weaknesses?

    Could it be that men and women are NOT (as certain gender based ideologies seem to always be suggesting) two separate monolithic groups at war with each other in a ‘win/lose’ battle spanning millennia… but have in fact always acted as a TEAM (at least until very recently) …… you know, as ‘partners in crime’, as it were?

    Could it be that women in the past did not actually feel oppressed at all as they washed the linen by hand and scrubbed the front doorstep…… while their husbands toiled the fields or build iron ships or constructed a canal network or put out fires or laid telephone wires between continents?

    And could it be that the massive advances in technology which have created so many opportunities for women (and indeed men) to earn a living in a safe, comfortable, ‘indoor’ environment without having to do manual labour (or even get their hands dirty) is what has in fact liberated women … and that feminism has really only served to herd women (and by association children) into the same nightmarish over worked, exploited ‘tax-cow’ scenario that men had already been enslaved in for generations?

    Perhaps this is why the ruling classes have always been so quick to fund and promote feminist ideology, teach it in schools and universities and even have it promoted at the UN? If feminism is the kryptonite of ‘patriarchy’ why is feminist theory and feminist attitudes to gender identities and gender roles the default template for all mainstream cultural values, attitudes, historical narratives? Shouldn’t it be, you know…. an underground thing?!!

    Could it be that when modern women abandon their men to the scrapheap (or reduce them to wimpy, emasculated, beta males), abandon their children to be raised by the state (to be good little war mongering, national socialist justice warriors!) and choose to marry the state (men with guns) rather than husbands (men with jobs) this actually serves the agendas of the ruling classes (the dreaded ‘patriarchy’…. )?

    After all, the more women who decide to marry the state and use the state to get free stuff and special treatment the bigger the state can grow, the more it can raise taxes and generally interfere in everyone’s lives. But who pays for all of this free stuff and special treatment? The state creates no wealth of its own. The money comes mostly from taxing men… and now increasingly women too. But even this is not enough….. so the state taxes the future earnings of the unborn too (via government debt).

    Traditionally husbands helped women by getting a job which benefited society and then sharing their wages with the women in their lives. Feminism helps women by petitioning the state to usurp men’s role, but only in terms of dominance and decision making – and not in terms of actually earning a wage, which still must come from working men (via taxes) … and now increasingly working women too.

    So really all feminism appears to be doing is cuckolding husbands and children by bringing the state (which is essentially a charismatic/ sociopathic alpha male with guns who is dressed a uniform – in other words phwooooar!) into the relationship ………. or simply joining this state harem instead of getting married at all.

    But this alpha male (the state), for all his swagger and charm and guns, does not actually have a job! He takes you out to dinner or on holiday ….. but never pays for any of it himself. Most of the bill these days just goes to our children and their children…..

    Today men AND women now work 2-3 days a week directly for him. The money we earn from Wednesday onwards we get to keep. No wonder we are all rushed off our feet in ways our great grandparents never were (despite not having all the mod cons we have now). Our babies we must also hand over to the state so we can carry on earning and paying taxes. Keep funding those socialist policies and bigger government! Keep that hamster wheel turning!!!

    To keep moral up we are supplied with an endless stream of Beyonce videos and clips of Emma Watson being the perfect damsel – I mean empowered woman! …… or we are just medicated into a zombie state by our doctors ….. just like our children are.

    We don’t even bother to medicate the men, we just let them commit suicide or become homeless. Like whatever. They’ll be fine (they are privileged after all).

    Feminism – which is to say mainstream 21st century society – still defines women as inert, passive, ‘acted upon’ objects (helpless victims) and so the possibility that women themselves might have brought any of this onto their own heads due to poor judgement, greed, naivity etc is STILL never even considered. Women are – according to feminism / traditionalism (same thing) – the inert substrate upon which men imprint their actions. Thus having defined women as ‘acted upon’ objects, the only solution to any and all of society’s ills can ONLY come from men (he for she).

    So in an attempt to find a solution to all our woes – we run to the state and demand it grow even bigger and interfere even more in everyone’s lives……

    …… at which point they reply “Of course! It would be our privilege!”

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s