Gender
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it always struck me, or rather after I'd passed through the mirror phase it struck me that despite the liberal leanings and alternative aspirations of so many of the local folk in Wales the women still did the lion's share of the housework and childcare. If that was the case, why was it so?
posted by Alp at Sunday, May 21, 2006
3 Comments:
maybe because behind many hippie men lay the blatantly lazy misogenous (spelling error...please correct ALP) men that women all to often tollerated . For some 'dropping out' from the bread head world often meant not going to the office every day, but for 1970's women looking after the kids was what they had always done and would always be expected to do. Some 'hipies' women also seemed to be baby machines, was this a choice? What was it all about? Some stories about gender roles would be really interesting. I too remember women 'keeping it together' whilst many men enjoyed the freedom they were able to enjoy.
When I was in Wales recently, someone said, 'Pembrokeshire is the graveyard of ambition'. As is so often the case, it was funny cos it was true (in lots of ways...)
Another time not so long ago, on a New Year's eve in the Golden Lion in Newport, either Robin Ash or Max, I can't remember which it was as I was a bit pissed, said to me *jokingly* isn't it about time you had a baby, with the implication being that I'm 'getting on a bit'.
What was a throwaway remark for whomever it was that said it was for me a big deal. This is because for the last few years I've been increasingly conscious that all my peers are either up the duff or mums.
There is an expectation of women in a certain sort of community that that's what they'll do, and it's viewed as being - still - to a great extent, the 'natural' thing to do. And natural, of course, within such a viewpoint, means 'correct'.
These may sound like the ramblings of a thirty-something woman who isn't able to make the leap of faith that is required to curb the small pleasures and excesses and triumphs of a fairly successful and selfish life in favour of another - a child - but I do think the issue of 'choice' is still key for so many women. And that having a baby is sometimes something people do if they can't think of anything else more interesting to do.
As someone who was brought up in a house where, as a twelve-year-old, Ceilidh came into the world, I was all too aware that having a baby around was utterly distracting for the parents. And that babies are demanding and noisy and not that intellectually stimulating. Perhaps that is part of the 'why'.
At work and among my friends I am often surprised by the degree of commitment that the Muswell Hill dads' seem to have to their kids. They really do share tending to the baby in the night; sharing the cooking; nurturing their kids in everyday ways. A part of me thinks that there's too much molly coddling in the way kids are brought up in London - a lot of people fuss and obsess and pay obscene amounts of money for twattish 3-wheeler buggies. Another part of me thinks its bloody marvellous that my no-nonsense, hard-nosed, highly successful officemate, journalist Brian Cathcart, calls his 'boys' every day just to see how they're doing, and went on a mission around Kingston after work the other day to find a book about communism for his son's school project.
Dads - despite their best intentions - have never been like that in my experience. And hippy dads are no exception (except possibly John Jabero and Moppy John and a few others).
However, I do think it's for women to decide whether or not they want to live a certain kind of life, be a 'baby machine', cowtow to their stoner men's whims - smile on adoringly as their menfolk repeat a riff for the millionth time on a sunday night jam...
Dear anonymous
Would love to hear a bit more about the 'lazy misogynous' men and the [over?] tolerant women...
cheerio
anna x
Post a Comment
<< Home