Anna T gets SCHOOOLED

[lilah]

Anna T posted what is probably her hundredth anti-feminism, stay at home moms RULE, working moms SUCK post

ccostello.blogspot.com/2012/07/same-work.html

and finally gets someone to point out that hey, you don't know what you're talking about honey

Tzipporah said...

I enjoy very much reading about your experiences with you and your young family. You have a lot of wisdom and encouragement that many other women can benefit and I really respect that!

However, what I really, truly don't understand is why a person feels the need to put down other peoples choices to feel good about their own.

I've been a SAHM, a WAHM, and a working mom... and you know what? Every which-a-way was hard and rewarding for me and my family in different ways. The idea that someone with two kids under 3.5 thinks they can define any of those experiences (or which one was "best" for my family) strikes me as an opinion from a highly inexperienced and immature mother who feels the need to prove her worth by means of dis-proving others. It isn't becoming and probably isn't the impression you trying to give either.

When you gain experience in motherhood, and life in general, perhaps you too will be able to sit back and realize that your POV and your experiences do not adequately define others. It is best to maintain your happiness by way of being the best you that you can be in your given circumstances, and let others worry about themselves. You will realize there is way to believe completely in YOUR way, without devaluing the way of others. You will realize that to define someone else (or their value) is the opposite extreme of what feminism has done to women. and that both extremes dis-empower women from following their hearts and valuing that which is most important in their lives and encouraged them to bend under whatever pressure if greater--the voice which tell them they are worthless if they don't work and the voices which tell them they are worthless if they do work.

To De-value or UNDER-value another women is the most harmful thing you can do to family life. If you want women to regain their love of being SAHMs, then empower them to make their own choices--don't tell them they've made bad ones.

Most sincerely and with all due respect,

-a proud SAHM

July 04, 2012

Mrs. Anna T said...

Tzipporah, you are right in saying experience and POV change with age, and most likely new perspectives will open as years go by, and that is a good thing. However, I just couldn't help but feel a little irritated at comments like "There's nothing to do at home, I do it all in the few hours I'm home from work". It's NOT the same. The principal difference is mothering style, I suppose. If you stay home with your children, your workload multiplies.

July 05, 2012

Tzipporah said...

Surely you are right--there IS a difference. But arguing with other mother's about who does more work around the house/with their children is moot. It serves no purpose. Everyone gets defensive and it breaks down the walls of communication between mothers/women.

July 05, 2012

Anonymous said...

Hello,

Do you know what really bugs me about some religious/home-orientated blogs?.... comments which appear such as this; from BettySue, posted earlier in this thread:

"You hire someone else to do these things and then pat yourself on the back for how good you handle both traditional women stuff and work. You are being lied to and lying to yourself. Someone else is "mothering" your babies while you earn mere money."

.....The amount of bitchy, judgemental, nasty accusations thrown by women towards other women. So much for sisterhood, and so much for some apparently religious women on this site, among others.

Maybe some women have to work outside the home, maybe for some women child-rearing isn't the ONLY possibility or even desire for their lives and they consider themselves to be a good role model in many ways, including being in the home, cooking and cleaning. Maybe, just maybe, women are allowed a choice as to how to raise their children.

I am about to have a child, I would like to show my child something of beauty in this world, I would like to pass on skills and knowledge to my child, for him or her to confident and cultured. By keeping a neat, welcoming, Christian home is part of my role. However, my child will have thoughts, desires and possibilities beyond our home, and I feel it is my duty to be able to engage with those feelings to the best of my, and my husband's, abilities. If that means working outside the home later on to bring in extra 'mere money' to afford private tuition, art classes, horse riding, etc, I will do that with prayer and belief that I will not be harming my child or be banished to hell for such actions.

God bless, An Expectant Mother.

[bea]

Whoohoo. I can't believe she actually let that comment through.

I wonder if she'd respond to one that reminds her how her various positions on various things (like large families and no birth control) have changed as she's actually EXPERIENCED them rather than just read about them.

[erunerune]

Regardless of the rest of her insufferable bullshit, it speaks well of Anna T that she let that comment through.

[sea_gale]

Maybe next someone will point of that it's mighty hypocritical of her to slag off those working mums when she was one herself.

[lilah]

Whoohoo. I can't believe she actually let that comment through.

I wonder if she'd respond to one that reminds her how her various positions on various things (like large families and no birth control) have changed as she's actually EXPERIENCED them rather than just read about them.

How has it changed? Has she decided birth control/not having a mega family is okay? She seems like someone who is daunted by the work of raising two kids under the age of four and would not do well with say having a lot of kids under the age of ten. Heck I suppose if she was doing the normal fundie fertility thing she'd have another baby on the way by now.

[slickcat79]

This part of Anna's post stands out to me:

Actually I believe this is one of the biggest disservices feminism did to women. You can take a woman outside her home, but you can't take the home out of the woman - the hominess, cosiness, being family-oriented, children-loving... all of this comes far more naturally to most women than to most men, and so it happens that even when both spouses work, often the bulk of homemaking and child-rearing still falls on the woman's shoulders, making her overworked, overburdened, and overwhelmed.

It has issues. She gets feminism wrong, of course. Feminism is the thing that is telling women to work outside the home if they want to, telling men to step up in the home even if they're not used to it, and trying to make them both comfortable with mixing those duties. Both partners live in the home, they both contributed to bringing children into the relationship, so they both have a responsibility to make things run smoothly, however a family chooses to work that out.

Those family-oriented, children-loving "feelings" that women apparently have are more the product of societal influence than they are natural. Plus there are lots of women who have no interest in keeping a home and raising children, and men who like to do those things. I actually find the comments kind of ironic coming from Anna T, when she has already been totally overwhelmed with keeping a house and raising her children, and they only have two. If being a SAHM is so "natural", why has she felt overworked and overburdened by doing it? I think she's just making excuses for herself because she couldn't handle being a godly wife and mother (whatever that is) while working a couple days a week. If she is overwhelmed, EVERYONE must be equally overwhelmed, dammit.

[Lala29]

Well, having 2 under 4 IS overwhelming. I think, from her perspective, keeping up everything at home like it is now AND having to work (because we know hubby won't help) is just too overwhelming to contemplate. Her husband would probably do the minimum childcare too, so I bet she'd come home to a trashed house, kids in dirty diapers and bits of food strewn everywhere. Gah!

The thing is, most husbands are NOT like hers, they will help out, they will do chores and they will change their kids' diapers. I wish there were a more equal split to household/childcare chores, since statistically women still do the lion's share, but it's not like her marriage, where it's strictly separated.

She's still young, with young kids, and a young marriage. It's like the saying, a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing.

[Muriel]

Well, having 2 under 4 IS overwhelming. I think, from her perspective, keeping up everything at home like it is now AND having to work (because we know hubby won't help) is just too overwhelming to contemplate. Her husband would probably do the minimum childcare too, so I bet she'd come home to a trashed house, kids in dirty diapers and bits of food strewn everywhere. Gah!

The thing is, most husbands are NOT like hers, they will help out, they will do chores and they will change their kids' diapers. I wish there were a more equal split to household/childcare chores, since statistically women still do the lion's share, but it's not like her marriage, where it's strictly separated.

She's still young, with young kids, and a young marriage. It's like the saying, a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing.

I just want to add that when she was working outside of the home it was 2 days a week, she only had one child and her husband was unemployed, she is just lazy and making excuse for it :evil:

[YPestis]

Anna T has been bashing working mothers for years now. She used to be all about woman having choices but then she got married. She turned militant and started railing about the evils of mothers who work. Her anti-work rant peaked when her own husband was laid off and Anna T was forced to look for a job. She used her own experience of working two days a week with a young infant and an unemployed husband as an example of the utter EXHAUSTION of being a working mother. I honestly believe she's just a low energy person who do find working outside hard, but she uses her "working mothers is evil" as an excuse to never work.

Recently, I noticed a slight let up on her militant stance. At first, she mentioned fearing a third pregnancy and said it stemmed from her fear of dealing with evil doctors and hospitals. Sometime later, I guess she finally admitted to herself that the fear was from having to deal with another child. Anna T than blogged how she decided its ok to not have a large family and to use (natural) birth control. It was refreshing to hear her admit that the fundie lifestyle is not for everyone. I had hoped this also meant she'd let up on her anti-working mother stance. I guess that would be too much. Instead, Anna T used her anti-working mother stance as a way to justify her own lifestyle. I feel she bashes working woman because it elevates her own position. The more she talks about how poorly kept those women's homes are, how little they spent caring for children etc, the more she can own decision to stay home. She was rightly chastised for her double standards---that she'd berate feminism for taking away the choice of staying home while criticizing women who chooses otherwise. Of course, we know fundie women don't actually value choice for women. They just want everyone to emulate that rare upper class lifestyle of crocheting women who stay home and lovingly tend to children.

Anna T is also trying to emulate that lifestyle but she isn't close to having the financial means to do so. She mentioned in once recent blog that the family finances were not stable and that is a significant cause for concern. I have the feeling because of the shaky family finances, it is a huge sacrifice for the family for her stay home. Anna T is an intelligent, articulate and college educated women. She is capable of working and generating an income. The fact she doesn't work probably brings guilt because her children may be negatively affected. Hence, she justifies her decisions by bashing working mothers. She fears having to work because that would tire her out and it brings a host of stress into her life that she doesn't want.

The problem is Anna T believes that the "normal" home life is doing simple chores and tending fulltime to children all day. The reality is most women never lived like that, and those that did were extremely wealthy with servants. Of course, don't tell her that, all working mothers are bad mothers and can never make her children and husband happy like her.

[lilah]

I don't think it's fair to say that SAHM are lazy.

However I do see a trend with several women who came to fundiesm having grown up secular and fundie-light (like Lina, Anna T, Amber) is that they seem very intimidated with navigating jobs, school, adult relationships so they become attracted to fundamentalism because it provides all the rules and structure for you and gives you an excuse not to get a job or go on dates or do other challenging things. You can stay at home and crotchet doilies all day and call it godly. Anna T's main fantasy in life is to live in the world of Pride and Prejduice, ignoring the reality that the Bennet family employed cooks and maids to support their leisurely lifestyle

[ElphabaGalinda]

I don't think it's fair to say that SAHM are lazy.

However I do see a trend with several women who came to fundiesm having grown up secular and fundie-light (like Lina, Anna T, Amber) is that they seem very intimidated with navigating jobs, school, adult relationships so they become attracted to fundamentalism because it provides all the rules and structure for you and gives you an excuse not to get a job or go on dates or do other challenging things. You can stay at home and crotchet doilies all day and call it godly. Anna T's main fantasy in life is to live in the world of Pride and Prejduice, ignoring the reality that the Bennet family employed cooks and maids to support their leisurely lifestyle

I don't think SAHM are lazy, and even Anna T isn't quite lazy. She's just very very low energy. She seems to idealize a life of naps and crafts, and seemed to think before having small children that it would be an easy restful life (which I doubt it is!). Anna T is a strange one in that she's sort of learning from her experience in that she no longer takes a hard line on the necessity of having a large family, because now she knows what taking care of children really means. But she hasn't learned because she assumes every woman is exactly like her, and she still talks about things with which she has little experience like she's an expert. I'm surprised she hasn't mentioned much about homeschooling and how awesome it is, but she'll probably be an "expert" in that when the oldest starts kindergarden. Because something typical like having a job is overwhelming to her she assumes it must be like that for everyonel I still feel she'll learn the hard way, and already is, when she experiences more of what she's claiming to know all about.

[Lala29]

I agree with you lilah, saying a SAHM is lazy and that it's more suited to a 'low energy' type of person is not fair.

I've done the SAHM thing, the kids + school thing, and now the kids+work, and soon the kids+work+school thing when I (hopefully) get accepted to nursing school. SAHM was the most exhausting, to me. At school, being able to stay still, even though it was an intense 5 hour Anatomy class that started at 7 am (I had a 4mos old & a 3yr old at the time) was HEAVEN. I still had to keep my mind active (sweet, sweet coffee!), but physically, it was luxurious. I won't even get into potty breaks alone....*sigh*

Now I'm working a retail job, so I'm on my feet, running around the entire time. It's exhausting, especially since it's a closing shift, so I get the kids all day, then work, then fall asleep exhausted. However, I find the running around & helping people (for the most part, there are some grouchy people out there!) much easier than being a SAHM. It's a break from changing poopy diapers, tantrums, sibling fights, playing the SAME games over & over & over again, trying, in vain, to keep the house somewhat picked up, get laundry done, etc etc.

In some ways it sucks, in that I don't have the flexibility I used to have, such as putting off laundry until later, making appointments 'whenever' it's most convenient to the provider (aka getting me in ASAP because time wise I was super flexible, etc). I'm also not there during bedtime, etc etc.

I suspect that an office job that was less physical would be even better, since I'd get more physical rest there than I do now. Eh, burned calories=more cookies with my coffee. ;)

[heinz57]

Anna T has been bashing working mothers for years now. She used to be all about woman having choices but then she got married. She turned militant and started railing about the evils of mothers who work. Her anti-work rant peaked when her own husband was laid off and Anna T was forced to look for a job. She used her own experience of working two days a week with a young infant and an unemployed husband as an example of the utter EXHAUSTION of being a working mother. I honestly believe she's just a low energy person who do find working outside hard, but she uses her "working mothers is evil" as an excuse to never work.

Recently, I noticed a slight let up on her militant stance. At first, she mentioned fearing a third pregnancy and said it stemmed from her fear of dealing with evil doctors and hospitals. Sometime later, I guess she finally admitted to herself that the fear was from having to deal with another child. Anna T than blogged how she decided its ok to not have a large family and to use (natural) birth control. It was refreshing to hear her admit that the fundie lifestyle is not for everyone. I had hoped this also meant she'd let up on her anti-working mother stance. I guess that would be too much. Instead, Anna T used her anti-working mother stance as a way to justify her own lifestyle. I feel she bashes working woman because it elevates her own position. The more she talks about how poorly kept those women's homes are, how little they spent caring for children etc, the more she can own decision to stay home. She was rightly chastised for her double standards---that she'd berate feminism for taking away the choice of staying home while criticizing women who chooses otherwise. Of course, we know fundie women don't actually value choice for women. They just want everyone to emulate that rare upper class lifestyle of crocheting women who stay home and lovingly tend to children.

Anna T is also trying to emulate that lifestyle but she isn't close to having the financial means to do so. She mentioned in once recent blog that the family finances were not stable and that is a significant cause for concern. I have the feeling because of the shaky family finances, it is a huge sacrifice for the family for her stay home. Anna T is an intelligent, articulate and college educated women. She is capable of working and generating an income. The fact she doesn't work probably brings guilt because her children may be negatively affected. Hence, she justifies her decisions by bashing working mothers. She fears having to work because that would tire her out and it brings a host of stress into her life that she doesn't want.

The problem is Anna T believes that the "normal" home life is doing simple chores and tending fulltime to children all day. The reality is most women never lived like that, and those that did were extremely wealthy with servants. Of course, don't tell her that, all working mothers are bad mothers and can never make her children and husband happy like her.

That's the part I don't understand about the fundies: what olden days are they referring to in their lifestyle? Judging by the dresses/mannerisms they are aiming for something Victorian-ish. But my understanding is that at that time (or actually ANY time) rich women wouldn't work BUT had an army of nannies/cooks/tutors/maids to run the household. And poor women worked! So basically they all just want to be Betty Draper?

[fundiefan]

She's still around? I was almost in a coma from the boredom so I stopped reading any of her drivel ages ago.