I'm pretty sure I've seen some of them at the gym. They're like a mythical creature to me - I believe in my heart of hearts they do exist, but I've yet to have the opportunity to walk up and introduce myself to one. No, that's not true. I'm fairly certain I know at least one.
That's one more than I knew last year.
When my friend Matt asked me about my thoughts on this whole gender role shift phenomenon I decided I needed to do a little reading because despite how awesome I think the SAHD deal is, I know little about it. With the exception of a Facebook group I'm in, there are relatively few dads I know of who are home full-time with their children, whether that means they work nights, are laid off, have made the conscious decision not to work because of finances doesn't matter.
What matters? They made a decision that was the best decision for their family. They're taking on an active role with their kids. No, this isn't something new by any means, nor am I attempting to make it sound like it's a virgin concept that fathers spend quality time with their children. Dads the world over have taken notice of their children or opted to spend more time with them for years, decades, maybe even centuries. We really don't know. The idea this is a trending concept is a little misleading ... it's only trending because the media has shone its spotlight on the concept and that is mostly just in the last 12 months, or so I gather from my handy dandy Google search.
Let me get to the heart of this: The Atlantic piece I read about this very topic thorough irritated me and is not worth the Internet it's printed on; all hail Chris Routly & Co. (I don't know and haven't read stuff by all daddy bloggers or met a lot of SAHDs, so I'm lumping you all together just like us SAHMs usually are).
The piece in The Atlantic had its good points - the Census data I'm sure was probably accurate - but I think the point of the SAHD was missed. Entirely. And then it was all twisted to make it sound like fathers who have chosen to be at home raising their children as opposed to throwing them into daycares really do jack. Overhyped? How so? And where are the statistics that say men are less productive, less responsible because they're at home?
Confusion ensued after I read that. Twice. But OK. To each his own, I suppose, even if it means you counter your own proof that there is a rise in at-home dads. *cough* Crazy person. *cough*
I don't mean to demean the author's work; I just don't understand. Saying the number of a specific population has grown exponentially (though small as it seems based on the census data) and then slamming that very population with a statement such as "the last 15 years have seen men collectively stop taking on more responsibility as care givers, not take on more of it" seems absolutely counterproductive. If "responsibility" is meant to imply more men at home mean less men in the workforce and therefore lack adult responsibility ... please, sir, remove your head from your rectum and proceed to the nearest exit. An overarching statement not rooted in factual evidence, a douchebag you make.
And after I read that article and scratched my head and tried to remember if I had peed today, I moseyed on over to The Daddy Doctrines. If you didn't click the link above, go do that. I want you to read it and then send it to your friends, and give a copy to your dad. He'll appreciate this no matter if he stayed home with you or worked so many hours he was lucky to take a week's vacation to take you to Disney Land once every few years.
To summarize, though, it's not the numbers that matter but the attitude. The author states so at the very end of his piece. He also says this:
"But here in the 21st century, things have changed. Women are not limited in the same way they were 50 years ago. They graduate from college at higher rates than men. They can be doctors or lawyers or high-powered executives or engineers or run their own successful businesses. Certainly they still feel pressure to set aside their careers, just as men are still pressured to make monetary provision their major contribution to raising kids. But more and more are ignoring those pressures to fit into strict gender roles, in lieu of making choices for their family based on what’s practical, and on the goals and temperaments of each parent. Where a couple is fortunate enough that one of them is in a career that can financially support the family as the main breadwinner, it doesn’t have to be the husband for it to be a viable option for the other to stay home." (Chris Routly, The Daddy Doctrines)Attitude. Practicality. He hits so many amazing points in this piece, I wanted to read it again and I probably will. I'll make my husband read it, too.
Let's move on and get personal.
I came from working parents. I had a fabulous childhood. One of the things that made it fabulous was my mom went to days shift when I was in first grade (I think... it was a long time ago), but also every other week my dad was home all day long with us and the next week he was home for little league games and family walks in the evening. He worked swing shift - one week days, next week afternoons - and it made for memorable summers, and great fishing seasons and pretty awesome ... everything. I can only imagine what more I could have learned from him when I was a kid if he'd been home all the time.
But, my dad was the breadwinner and carried the health insurance. So, we relished the times we did get him all to ourselves, and on occasion I demanded a quiet morning fishing along one of the local creeks with just him. I am a self proclaimed Daddy's Girl and damn proud of it. We had to share him, though, with the radiator plant and so we simply grew up making the most of the time we had, much like my husband does with our daughters.
It's been a regular conversation in our house that if I could feasibly make enough by going back to work, the Boy would be home with the girls. My feasible is to figure my husband's salary and at least half of what I was making when I left the last paper I worked at - we're talking close to $90,000 a year. It's likely never going to happen. Though he has more patience, I made way less money. He has a job with great chances of upward mobility, I have a master's degree and ridiculous knowledge of where to put a comma. He's fun, I'm the enforcer. But it was the money that made the decision. To continue working would have cost us money in the end, so we made the decision based on practicality.
And that's what has kept me home since Charlie came along. We get by. We budget. We don't eat out a lot. He may be the main breadwinner, but that doesn't mean the breadbasket is always full, either.
The Boy took some vacation during the Christmas and New Year's holiday - he was off for more than a week. I did a lot of sleeping in. I did a lot of, "Can you help me with ...?" I did a lot of things I don't normally do. Like take a long hot shower every.single.day. Then one day I said to him something along the lines of, "I know I haven't done a whole lot the last few days, but it's because I want you to experience what I do every day." I took advantage of his daddying skills. Mad skills.
He totally got it. The blank stare and scared look said it all. Then he went back to playing with his children and being the best dad in the world because he has sacrificed days upon days all year long for this brief amount of time to just "be" with his kids.
 |
| Real men play Play-Doh. |
I know he appreciates what I do every day. I know there are hard days at the office when he's likely jealous that I'm home and have gone to the gym, the playground, the farmer's market, the grocery store, stopped at the bank, made dinner and washed four loads of laundry. I know it hurts him when at bedtime the kids want me even though they've had me all day long.
"If I won the lottery, yeah I'd stay home," he says tonight as we discuss this daddy-at-home topic.
If he were home and I were working? You're damn right I would appreciate everything he does for our family while I'm away. I would be jealous of the all day everyday, even the hard times, he would have with our children. But like him, I hope I wouldn't expect the house to be spotless, dinner to be gourmet and the weeds pulled from the garden. Kids are safe? Good enough. We'll work on the laundry together.
I guess my bigger issue is why the media - and I feel totally weird even saying this considering my life before kids was the media and the story and the reaction - tries to make this a thing. I mean, it is a thing ... an amazing and beautiful process of dads being present more now than possibly ever before. But some of the things I've read make it sound foreign and there are always numbers attached. Just fucking stop it with the Census and statistics. It is the least important thing in the entire equation. Never once have I heard, "Last year the Census accounted for like 12 million stay-at-home moms and it appears the number is declining and oh my God! They're ruining their children's lives by going back to work!" Why haven't we seen that recently? Because the focus is on this totally strange occurrence of dads, of all people, choosing to be at home. Dads! Who knew they could be so capable. [if you don't note the sarcasm, you have no business being here]
This shift in gender roles doesn't mean all these fathers are unemployed - technology has changed the playing field - or think they're better than a "real" job. I put real in quotes because, honestly, there is no job more real than devoting your life to your kids and home. This is why all of us stay-at-home parents do want to take a vacation even when our working friends might think "vacation from doing what!?" No, this shift simply means couples are finding balance, balance in their lives, in their bank accounts and in the way they cohabitate. Why isn't that the story we read most? I found this one from USA Today that shed some light, but it's probably not enough. Despite my hatred of stats, this article also has numbers in it, but there's less picking apart the Census data and more "look at how they make it work for them" moments than anything else. This one, just like The Daddy Doctrines piece, speaks volumes about where we need to be looking when people write about stay-at-home parents.
One thing about this supposed trend and all the silly Census stuff out there that does have me even more riled up is the lack of information about same-sex couples. How are those families accounted for based on the glorified traditional gender roles we've been living in for so long? Where are those statistics?
Please, let me get down from my soapbox before I go all nuts on marriage equality and all the awesome that it is.
No comments:
Post a Comment