The Gloves Are Off, You Uber-Goober

Posted October 19, 2008 at 8:58 pm by Beth

In an article entitled “Eco-Housewives – Enlightened Caregivers or Feminist Nightmare?” found in the Fall 2008 issue of Brain, Child magazine, Tracy Sutton interviewed Shannon Hayes, a self-proclaimed Uber-Mom and “enlightened homemaker.” As such, her goal, as she explained to Sutton, “Cuts out the consumerist middleman and asks people to work hard for what benefits their family and their community directly.” In other words, Hayes lives with her family on a farm where they grow their own food, she gets up at 2:30am to milk the cows, and her family buys everything second-hand and trades their clothes and baby gear with others in their community. This is all in an attempt to stay out of our consumerist culture as much as possible.

Now first, let me make a little disclaimer on behalf of . . . myself: I wanted, and expected, to love the ideas touted by Hayes. I fully prepared myself to finish the piece and promptly relocate my family out into the wilderness somewhere and build a cabin next to our newly-planted organic vegetable garden. I am easily influenced by the whole eco-movement, and proud to be as involved as I can in that endeavor. I tell you this to make sure you know I did not have any sort of negative preconceived notions about what this woman would say – in other words, I didn’t want to fight; I wanted to agree and be inspired.

But when Sutton pointed out that perhaps stay-at-home moms are trying to accomplish the same thing that Hayes is in her attempts to remove herself from the workplace to focus her attention on her family, Hayes’s response sounded like nothing but fighting words:

“Not the same thing, Hayes says with some heat. Our consumerist culture romanticizes stay-at-home parenting because it’s a choice of the wealthy. Their wealth buys them special rights: ‘The right to be a chauffeur and join the right mommy clubs . . . to be a soccer mom.’”

Wow. I just love sweeping generalizations, don’t you? So I guess that means I made the decision to stay at home with my children so that I could go to playgroups with strangers with whom I had nothing in common. Playgroups are just so freaking fun. I suppose it had nothing to do with wanting to be with my children and what I perceived to be the best choice for our family. Goodness, no.

And by the way, not all families that choose to keep one parent at home do so because it is a luxury. For many, the costs of childcare far outweigh the salary that could be brought in by the second parent, making the choice for someone to stay at home a matter of practicality. Whether or not our society recognizes that or if it truly looks upon stay-at-home parenting as a choice only for the wealthy, I’m not sure. Regardless, I don’t appreciate having some uber-mom making assumptions about why I don’t work outside my home; to make the assumption that I participate in that mentality is unfair.

For someone whose aim is supposedly to show the rest of us how enlightened her lifestyle is, dropping the holier-than-thou attitude would be mighty helpful. I mean, if what you really want is for other families to participate in the kind of community you are trying to strengthen in an attempt to be better to our planet, this isn’t very persuasive; it’s just maddening. Last time I checked the best way to educate someone about an alternative lifestyle was not to blatantly insult them.

I mean, I’m super sorry I didn’t get a degree in sustainable agriculture and move my children to my parents’ already established family farm. And I’m super duper sorry that my family does not avoid conventional employment altogether, forgoing both medical and life insurance. Oh, but that’s right – we only need medical insurance because my children are automatically “poorly nourished” because I didn’t grow their vegetables myself but instead obtained them from a local farm co-op. I forgot.

Oh, and Hayes, the amount of money my family has lived on for the past four years has not been that much more than what you quoted your income to be in the essay. In fact, for the first two years of my son’s life we were living on significantly less than you. Just like you, “We save our money, we avoid debt, and we try to create a life that doesn’t require much.” We wanted to make it possible for me to stay home with our children, and so we made it work, not because we had the luxury to do so, but because we had the will.

In the closing paragraphs of this essay, Hayes admits that her system is not perfect, particularly if her daughters don’t continue on the farm. You know, she could always have the elders of the community dress up as freakish monsters and come out at night so that all the young people are afraid to leave and discover the outside world. Sorry, am I the only one that saw The Village? Hayes says that despite some potential holes in her system that she’s “doing the best that she can.” That’s funny – I feel exactly the same way. And that’s exactly why I try not to go around making assumptions about other parents.

Tags: Brain Child Magazine, Eco-Housewives, Eco-Moms, Enlightened Caregiving, SAHM, Shannon Hayes, stay-at-home-moms, The Village

http://krisunderwood.blogspot.com Kris

Riiight. Being a stay at home mom is a choice of the wealthy. A luxury. Ugh.
http://crazymamad.blogspot.com/ Mama D

They should have interviewed my sister instead. She pretty much lives that way and she is far less obnoxious and judgmental.

Why is it that some of the most intelligent people are just so stupid?
http://becauseiamthemama.blogspot.com bon

Wow!

That’s cool that I have managed to go from lower-middle class to WEALTHY in one sweeping generalization! Whee! This lady forgot religious reasons for SAHParenting as well! Our decision to have me stay home, like your families, is far more a matter of will than wealth. And with this fourth and final baby that I carry, I have now solidly entered the realm of no longer being able to AFFORD working.

What a schmuck.
http://girlymama.typepad.com girlymama

Right. A luxury.
I stay at home because I worked for non-profits and made pennies. Now that we have 3 kids, going back to work would cost us thousands of dollars, so for now I’m at home. Not everyone can afford a nanny, lady!
http://www.todaysdistraction.com Stacey

Who “romanticizes” staying home with the kids, even if you are wealthy? You show me a SAHM with an SUV and four sporting events to get to and I’m guaranteeing there’s Prozac in her purse.
http://sarahmchia.blogspot.com Sarah Chia

I swear, you are the mommy blogger of my dreams. How hilarious is this post!

Like you, I’ve run into people who have a GREAT message to send, but they send it from a perspective of elitism. It’s like they don’t even want you joining the bandwagon because you wouldn’t be authentic enough.

And by the way, what the heck is an uber-mom? Does growing your own veggies and giving baths in a washtub make you more of a mom than someone else?
amy

This seems to be a theme in your writing. I thought I would like this article, but the person made assumptions about other people (moms) and now I disagree. And by the way, I don’t judge anyone, except for those who judge others. I think that’s silly. The person is taking a position. It seems dishonest to completely discount all this woman had to say because of one comment she made about SAHMs. I observe that a lot of the mom blogging world (and the greater mom world) is devoted to pointing out how other people judge that particular mom’s choices (in your case, to be a stay at home mom), while affirming that the writer herself does not judge others. If that’s the case who’s doing all the judging?

Look. I think both being a SAHM AND living on a farm in the country are luxuries. You seem to think being a SAHM is not a luxury because it’s not easy, but that is a separate issue. She didn’t say being a SAHM mom was easy, she just said that it’s a choice only wealthy families can make. Maybe “wealthy” is too strong a term for you, but any family who can make it on one income while owning a house in the suburbs is living a comfortable life, and it seems completely disingenous to suggest otherwise.
http://www.totalmomhaircut.com/ Beth

Amy,
You’re right, she didn’t say anything about whether or not being a SAHM was easy, but neither did I. Not in this post, anyway – perhaps you are referring to others I have written on my personal blog? I have no idea what she thinks about how easy or difficult being a SAHM is. My issue with what she said has much more to do with her statement that all women become SAHMs because they are buying into the romanticism of stay at home parenting as an option that supposedly is only available to the wealthy. First, as I said, not every family that chooses to have one parent stay at home is necessarily wealthy, but many choose to live on budgets in order to make it work. For others, both parents working outside the home is not an option because the cost of childcare negates or exceeds one income, strapping the family even more, but they still do it. Second, and this is what really upset me, I don’t appreciate having a stranger make an assumption that I made the decision to stay home with my kids for any reason other than what was best for our family and my children.

Now, as to whether or not this is a “theme” of mine, perhaps so. In general I don’t like it when I read about someone making generalizations or resorting to name-calling. And again, I assume you are referring to a post from my personal blog on Amanda Peet’s “parasite” comment? Sure, these posts are very similar – they are both my responses to a person who has overshadowed their intent by resorting to unfounded and negative statements about a group of which I happen to be a part – moms, or SAHMs. In neither case did their words affect my opinion of what they were actually saying, their purpose, if you will. But in both of my posts what I was trying to say was that the generalizations they make certainly make it much more difficult to hear their cause. As I said in this post, it just doesn’t seem to me to be the best way to motivate people. What I said in my second paragraph here remains true. It’s not like I am now opposed to the idea of stepping out of mainstream culture to support a simpler, family/community based lifestyle. In fact, probably what upset me so much about what Hayes said is that I wanted her to more persuasive for the benefit of those who might not already be on board. I agree that she is taking a position (one I happen to really support), I just wish she could do it without the low blows. Same with the Amanda Peet thing (although I don’t really agree with her and didn’t before she made the parasite statement), she’s certainly entitled to her opinion. But I still firmly believe her cause would be better received if the people she is trying to persuade were not being called names or insulted.

As for your statement that I am being disingenuous, my family’s economic situation today is not what it was when I chose to stay at home. Hayes said that all stay at homers are wealthy, and she then described her own financial situation in relation to the poverty line. I used as an example my first 4 years of staying at home because it was right in line with Hayes’s, and therefore by her own definition not anywhere near economically wealthy.

Whether or not I’m the one doing all the judging, well, sure. I kind of think that if someone is going to publicly make a critical generalization about a group then they are opening themselves up to comment. Similar to blogging, no? Am I being judgmental by having a response?
http://www.imperfectparent.com Prescott

Maybe “wealthy” is too strong a term for you, but any family who can make it on one income while owning a house in the suburbs is living a comfortable life, and it seems completely disingenous to suggest otherwise.

I don’t think the term “wealthy” rankles as much as painting a group of millions of people with the designation of “stay at home parent” with such a broad brush. Which, even in your defense of Sutton’s article, you continue to do yourself. Surely you don’t believe that there aren’t a large number of SAHMs/SAHDs that rent and live in urban areas (or, you know, there are actually rentals in the suburbs, too).

And as Beth mentioned, cost of 2 kids in daycare can easily reach $400 a week (at least here in the Chicago area), which comes out to over $20k/year. Sorry, but not everybody has the skill sets to get a job that would net after taxes much more than that. I certainly don’t blame anyone for not busting their hump full-time to make $2/hour after deducting child care costs.

If I may be frank, Amy, you are projecting a lot of resentment which seems to be causing you to buy into stereotypes.
amy

I read your blog and I like it. I think you’re honest about motherhood. I like that you weigh in on things you’ve read, and, as you may have gathered, I like a good debate. I just think your response would be more interesting if it attacked the generalization in some way, or her greater point, rather than just stopping at criticizing her for making one. For example, I think your response would be more persuasive if you discussed why the generalization fails, rather than simply criticizing her for making one. If you have to be in 100% agreement to be persuaded by someone, it seems unlikely you would be persuaded by anyone.

As for SAHMoming not being easy, I guess I thought that was your point in saying “I made the decision to stay at home with my children so that I could go to playgroups with strangers with whom I had nothing in common. Playgroups are just so freaking fun.”

I was not commenting on your personal financial situation. I observe that no one in the middle class of America likes to be called “wealthy,” but by any standard, we are. I just think, being honest here, that most of the SAHM mom readers of Brain, Child, are on the wealthy end of the SAHM scale (whether they are in the suburbs or milking goats on a farm). Even if a mom chooses to stay home because childcare costs more than her income, I think that’s a privileged choice. And certainly, it is most always a principled one. I think that’s your point, and I think it’s a more important one than taking up the cause of all the SAHMs who are not you.

Just my thoughts.
amy

Prescott,

You may be frank. But, I think being a SAHM in this country is a privileged choice. I do. I’m astonished that’s a controversial statement. I don’t think that it’s a bad choice, I don’t think it’s a selfish choice, I don’t think it means someone is inherently consumerist, but, I do think it’s a privilege. I have at times choosen to be a SAHM, so I’m speaking from my experience.

Let me also say, that I think the decision to work and be a mom is a privileged choice for some (and a necessary one for others). The only stereotype I’m perpetuating here is that all the women reading Brain, Child are on the privileged end. I think the things Shannon Hayes said about SAHMs are ridiculous, but I’d like to see them challenged on an intellectual level, not just as “she generalized about SAHMs, so she’s unpersuasive.”

As for SAHMs being renters. Sure, but I think even they are privileged. If the choice is — we can make it on one income so long as we don’t buy a house, I maintain that’s privileged. In my experience, if a family cannot make it on one paycheck, the mom works too, often in childcare so that she can bring her child with her, or, she receives state assistance for childcare so that she may work, or her mom/sister/motherinlaw watches the child for free. Again, these are my observations from my experience.
http://sarahmchia.blogspot.com Sarah Chia

Amy,

Let’s be real about our lives here in America. Poor people in America are fat. Everyone and their brother has a cell phone AND a home phone. I have been a stay at home mom while my husband made $25,000 and we still had high speed internet. America is priveleged, okay?

Which is what your comment says, anyway. SAHM are privileged. Working moms are privileged. Yes. We are. Every one of us. We have things here that people in most of Africa, Asia and parts of both Europe and S.A. couldn’t even dream of.

Clean water, for example.

But the real privilege to being American is freedom. We have the choice. And if someone is determined enough, they can do anything they want.

Don’t believe me? I was a stay at home mom when I was single. I owned a home, too. I made less than $20,000 a year and lived in a nice neighborhood in the suburbs. It had a great backyard. And I had no debt but the mortgage.

Tell me that that’s wealthy, and you know what I’ll say? Yeah. It is. Because if you compare my income at that time to the rest of the world, then I’m in the elite. I’m wealthy.

So, the real issue is that Americans need to get over our whining about not having the latest iPhone and SUV and start discovering what our blessings really are.
http://www.imperfectparent.com Jessica

Let’s be real about our lives here in America. Poor people in America are fat. Everyone and their brother has a cell phone AND a home phone. I have been a stay at home mom while my husband made $25,000 and we still had high speed internet. America is priveleged, okay?

Which is what your comment says, anyway. SAHM are privileged. Working moms are privileged. Yes. We are. Every one of us. We have things here that people in most of Africa, Asia and parts of both Europe and S.A. couldn’t even dream of.

Bravo!

I couldn’t agree more.
http://www.thecleanplateclub.net kate

hi beth, you know i love your work and your blog is my favorite, but i feel like you may have a been a little hard on this woman. well, actually, let me say this….it would have been helpful to me, personally to hear more of what was said in her article. i know that the bit you quoted is what set you off (and i totally totally get that), but there something about this post makes me feel like she might have been unfairly represented…there must have been more to her essay. but, i also understand that the more that there was could have been equally as offending.

i’m saddened by it all, really. i dislike so much mothers talking down to and going after other mothers. we’re all in this. and it’s so freaking hard. shouldn’t we all be supportive of each other?

and right now i’m in the biggest struggle i’ve been in for 4 years with affording how to stay home. it sucks. i’m not wealthy. at all. and the other day an acquaintance told me i was “so lucky” to stay at home with my kids. and i felt like saying. it’s not LUCK. luck has nothing to do with it. it’s sacrifice. i like your nice clothes. i like that you eat organic ALL the time. but i put my resouces elsewhere. i CHOSE to give up stuff so that i could be the primary caregiver for my kids. and it’s wicked hard. we have to shop uber-thrifty. all my clothes (and theirs) have baby food stains. it’s not about wealth. it’s about putting in the time to raise yoru kids yourself. however you have to do it. at least for me.
http://www.totalmomhaircut.com/ Beth

Certainly in the grand scheme of things we as a nation are quite privileged, as is my family. Absolutely. The thing is, that’s not what Hayes meant as far as I could tell. She was talking about women staying home because they wanted to participate in some sort of romanticized SAHMdom and chauffeur kids to soccer practice. When she said “wealthy,” I think she really meant wealthy, you know?

The reason I sarcastically mentioned how “fun” playgroups are is simply because I think it’s ridiculous and insulting for anyone to insinuate that I chose to stay home because I wanted to participate for reasons other than being with my kids. Playgroups, in fact, are not the highlight of my day.

As for why I didn’t attack her overall point, well, that’s just not the part I felt strongly about. From what I gathered from the essay there were pros and cons to what she is advocating, and I’ll probably look further into what she’s actually written about it since it was hard to really get a handle on it when it was written by someone else. I ended up writing about the portion to which I had a strong reaction. That doesn’t mean I have to be in 100% agreement with someone to be persuaded though. I’m not sure where that’s coming from.

Kate, just saw your comment too. The thing is, Hayes didn’t write the essay herself, so I tried very hard to only respond to an area where she was directly quoted. (This is another reason I didn’t want to really attack her overall point, as mentioned above. I think if I’m going to go there I need to use something she’s written herself.) I will say that there was much more of her sort of elitist attitude that was apparent in the essay, but it’s hard to know where that was really her and where it was the writer. So while I would have really liked to include more, I felt like a direct quote from her was the most fair option, and assuming the quote is accurate I didn’t feel her point on that was something that could have been misconstrued by the writer.
http://www.totalmomhaircut.com/ Beth

From Kate:
“it’s not LUCK. luck has nothing to do with it. it’s sacrifice. i like your nice clothes. i like that you eat organic ALL the time. but i put my resouces elsewhere. i CHOSE to give up stuff so that i could be the primary caregiver for my kids. and it’s wicked hard. we have to shop uber-thrifty. all my clothes (and theirs) have baby food stains. it’s not about wealth. it’s about putting in the time to raise yoru kids yourself.”

I can completely relate to this, and that’s I think why what she said upset me so very much. I didn’t do all of that because I felt like staying home and attending playgroups – no one would.
http://www.imperfectparent.com Rita

My opinion is that of course being a SAHM a privilege. Being able to survive on one salary is a privilege. There are people who have to weigh the cost of child care vs a day job and if they can’t afford the cost of childcare and they can’t afford to live on one salary, they get jobs where one parent is home while the other works. Lots of people have a parent working night shift while the other works day shift. People who genuinely cannot afford child care and cannot afford to have one parent quit work do that.

For the rest of us, it is a luxury to be able to quit work and be at home with our kids, period. That doesn’t mean that it isn’t hard and there aren’t sacrifices made. Working mothers make sacrifices, too. It’s just that in the end, we chose a different sacrifices set of than they do. We sacrifice material things, often and they sacrifice time with their kids, often, and we both whine a lot about how our sacrifices are harder and our lives are more noble than the other group’s. It’s bullshit on both sides. If you’re in a position to choose whether to work or not, then you’re lucky.

Wealth is a very subjective term (as discussed earlier in the thread). I’m not going there. But, I do believe that a family that can CHOOSE for one parent to stay home (and yes, perhaps shop thrifty and live on a budget, but still keep up) is more fortunate than one who has to have parents working swing shifts around the clock to make ends meet or deal with second-rate (unlicensed, uninspected, unregulated) day care because it’s all they can afford.

As far as the original article, the woman seems really judgmental and not worthy of my energy. There are lots of people in the world who are hell-bent on making themselves seem better than everyone else. Who cares? So she thinks she’s the bees knees. I could not care less what that woman does with her time or what she thinks about how I spend my time. I like chauffeuring my kids, it’s part of why I did choose to stay home, so I could be really involved with their lives. I’m not so much into the mommy clubs (I hate them and avoid them if at all possible) but, really, who cares?

There are always going to be people judging. Whether that’s fair or not, it doesn’t matter. It happens. I’m just so far beyond the mommy wars now. I honestly don’t care what other mothers think about how I live or how I raise my kids. There is a handful of other adults whose respect means a lot to me, and I’d be sad if I lost it. But, the general population? Bah, who cares!

I did want to chime in on these sacrifices everyone’s making to stay at home, though, because I really believe that sacrifices are made on both sides. The only ones who are truly suffering are those who have to do what ever it takes for both parents to work to make ends meet. I think when we lose sight of that, we lose sight of how privileged we really are.
http://www.imperfectparent.com Rita

we chose a different sacrifices set of than they do

Good God, I really messed that up trying to change the wording, lol. I meant we choose a different set of sacrifices than they do.

Maybe if I hadn’t been home with my kids all day, my brain wouldn’t be such mush and I could have written a proper response.
amy

Rita–

I agree completely.

Beth:

My point was it’s more effective to attack the generalization itself, rather than to take offense at it.

The Gloves Are Off, You Uber-Goober

MORE ON THE WEB