Recent Posts

Saturday, 25 August 2012

A Rant on Anti-Mummy, Anti-Happy Housewife Language

Ok, I am having a hissy fit. Until I moved to England for this summer, I never saw or heard the label, "yummy mummy". Maybe living in the Midwest of America, where there are stay-at-home moms, and moving in the home schooling, stay-at-home mom community, I just did not hear it.

I was a happy housewife and that stay-at-home period of my life was one of the most creative for me. I was extremely busy. I knew I was like a little core of stability in the home, around which much activity could be planned and done. This phrase applies to having children, which is another bug-bear of the socialist mindset. Having kids is a no-no, still.

This phrase is "all over' the media here and I am sick of it. The term began when it was applied to rich and famous moms, especially celebrity moms. But, now it is used for all stay-at-home moms.

Even Mrs. Blair used the term a few weeks ago. It is an insulting term which must be addressed, as it it based on false and cruel premises.

The term, which refers to moms who choose to stay at home, implies that the husband makes enough money for the mom to do so. The phrase is based on an idea that there is a slave man out there who works himself to death so that mom and kids can stay at home.

Most moms should stay at home regardless of income. Coming from a family where we took one holiday per year, I am shocked at the money wasted on four or even five holidays here. One mum told me she works for holiday money. Her salary pays for the family trips. I wonder when she will realize that she is doing this for herself and not for her children. This is adult self-deceit. Children who have stay-at-home moms do not need many holidays, as down time can be put into the schedule.

The term is against the Catholic view of marriage and procreation. Catholic parents are open to God's gift of life, which means nurturing those little lives and not farming children out to daycares.

The term is part of the language of Marxism. It implies that there is a class divide in the raising of children. This is simply not true.

I am not referring to families where there is a single parent. But, in a two-parent household, the nurturing should be done in the home. I am shocked at the vehement responses I get when I try to discuss this with women.

A generation or two have closed the door to even thinking about staying at home. I understand that with inflation it is harder to live on one salary. But, it is not impossible.

Why the press keeps publishing commentaries on yummy mummies is a problem of ideology. Take your pick. Consumerism and Marxism push the term.

Kids do not need all the stuff they have. A twenty-something smart woman told me that she had everything growing up. She and her brother lacked for nothing, and her mother worked. Why? Why the preoccupation with all the stuff? Why the preoccupation with multiple holidays?

Dads, stick up for your stay-at-home moms. Moms, stick up for yourselves and be proud.

Children need a stable home environment. They need someone to be there for them all the time. They need care and love on a daily basis, and not just before or after day-care.

This phrase is so horrible and divides the society on purpose. Socialists want to undermine the family and such a term does so...

Moms, be proud and do your best, but stay at home.


5 comments:

Emily said...

Yup, TOTALLY agree. My mom is a stay at home mom (well, we're all grown up, so I don't know if "is" is still applicable? Was?), and no, we didn't go to the beach every year like the other kids in my class did. We did go to Disney World, once, when I was eight and my brother was five. We went to the beach maybe three times, and it was for family things, like reunions (Our family is enormous, so we have to go somewhere with lots of housing!). No, we didn't have nintendo until my brother was in high school, and we didn't all have TVs in our rooms, or even landlines in our rooms. We didn't have a bazillion things.
When I talk about this with my colleagues, they say, "Well, I want to provide for my kids." But they don't realize that parental love and attention is worth so much more than a trip every summer and winter, and a bunch of toys.
(I'm 30, by the by, unmarried, sadly, because I want a ton of kids so I can stay home with them! :) )

Supertradmum said...

Prayers for you Emily

Sarah said...

I was having a conversation with a coworker over lunch. She asked me what my career aspirations were, and I told told her that I was hoping for a large family and intend to stay at home. Her eyes widened, she backed away and looked at the ground. Just then, another woman (the age of my parents) walked in and asked how many children. I told her I have no specific numbers, but that my husband is one of ten and we enjoy large families. This woman shook her head and said, "I was one of eight, but that was a different time. It's hard for families to afford that now. I only had two." Again, her children are my age, so clearly my husband's parents were also rearing their children in the same era as she was raising hers. My mother-in-law stayed at home. They made it work and chose quality time with children in lieu of fancy vacations, the latest technology, and expensive dinners out. My profession is social work, which is largely dominated by women. I was completely surprised that a room full of women would be so uncomfortable when I said I intended to stay at home. You are also right about the element of classism. If my coworkers didn't start talking about how having children is bad for the planet, they would often say, "well you can do that because your husband is a rich doctor." That's absolutely not true at this point in time anyway (medical school debt), but what can I even say when someone dismisses me by assigning me to a separate social class, unable to understand the "real world" where they live? It becomes a discussion where my values-based reasons aren't welcome.

Supertradmum said...

Sarah, I have been in the same conversations as you have experienced. Good for you for holding on to your convictions.

Not all families need all the things they think they do. I left home at 23 finally, although I had been away for college and I can assure you I can count the number of real vacations my family had in all those years on one hand. So what? My dad was busy working and my mom busy raising us kids.

The problem is partly that people are not willing to have less. God bless you.

Estre said...

Yes i will be the first to put this out there wake up woman of this era! Well i willI have to disagree ,13 years as a stay at home home and counting the days ..... Don't give be wrong I love my kids and don't regret staying home with them but I do wish I had done it differently.I look at my mother and grandmother and see burned out women who put them selfs on hold for a career as a stay at home mom. Yes, they are happy people who carry burdens of feeling unecomplished. The man have these great careers with many years of experience and complete support from home. My grandmother once told me that we sacrafise it all, for the husband and kids and at the end of it all, the man gets the best part of the bargain ,and the kids ,as young adults while still loved and nurtured ,they will always do what they want how they want it and when they want ,with not much of your input and appreciation of your sacrafise . My kids are still young so I still have much raising to do,but it makes me wonder if I'm being selfish. I think not. We are not in the 50's era. Woman are strong and independent and the divorce rate is very high. Any way, at the end of it all men from that era are not the same kind of man from now a days. Sociaty has change. Most men from our era are being raised or were raised by superwoman (single woman) that do it all and have a diferent set of values. These men don't know the meaning of commitment and the meanning of a stable home. This creates a huge problem for future woman like ourselfs that would like to stay at home with the kids in a stable partner. These men think that woman should be the superwoman at all times married or not and expect it. The dream of being a stay at home mom has been comprise. So,why should we sacrafise ourselfs. At the end of it all-our kids will still love us ,if we are good parents. I think ,only if you are well off should you stay at home 100% of the time and by this I mean RICH ! Every mommy should have at least a part time job as soon as your child has gone through the toddler years. Woman need full protection from the possibility but sad fact that when your are old and a little worned out he just might find some one younger or that if there is a divorce you can take care of your self and the kids especially if you know he sure can support the kids better than you can. I'm in a loving great marriage and I thank the lord for that , my kids love me and I love them I wouldn't change anything in the world but I did at one time found my self in the risk of a divorce and was face with all of these questions and no answer. After advice from my mother and grandmother who both have successfully marriages my mother going on 37years and my grandmother going on 70 ( I think ) I concluded all woman need to have a safety net and to keep their sanity. Take care of your self first because when others expect that you are their maid/mom/ and problem solver then your are surely putting your self second and you are creating dependents who will never appriciate you. Love your kids and husband but love your self first before is to late. Enjoy your kids and love them unconditionaly.