<p>"Culture shock" for us was going to Boston and not having Starbuck opne at 6am, culture shock was seeing more smokers, coming from a pretty smoke free state, and culture shock was stopping in states to transfer planes in the middle of te country, and seeing a pretty narrow population at the airport</p>
<p>We here in San Francisco love our tourists, they make us happy, but we do get a wee giggle as they are walking across the Golden Gate Bridge in their shorts dealing with our summer fog...okay giggling is wrong, but we do want that fleece jacket concession stand on the other side</p>
<p>oh dear-
I agree with FS :)
on being offended
just being in the world- is enough to toughen up most of us a bit- then add parenting into it- and we learn to pick our battles pretty quick</p>
<p>when I worked/was in school, I got flak for doing that, when I was extended nursing I got flak for doing that, when I placed the kids in private schools I got flak for doing that & when I planned on having them attend college rather than right to work, I got flak for that.
( I also got flak for not letting my husband smoke in the house & for calling the cops so I could leave the house safely resulting in him being placed in jail- some of the flak that I got was from the police!)</p>
<p>I had to develop a thicker skin fairly quick if I didn't want to be bleeding so badly I couldn't get on with my life.
What is that saying? Learn to recognize the things you can do something about & the things you can't?
I can't do much about idiots in the grocery store who would give me grief when I had to leave the checkout stand because my daughter was screaming so badly. But I did begin to educate others about sensory intergration difficulties, when the opportunity presented itself, elsewhere.</p>
<p>thats all we can do- live our life according to our values & be an example of how well that works.</p>
<p>( but I don't think that is a regional thing- it may be more of a generational thing- I notice that some people depending on what generational mindset they have- are very concerned about what others think- to the point that they care more what strangers think , than their own family- or to be more accurate- some people seem to care more about what they * think* strangers are thinking about them, than their family )</p>
As usual, you manage to find the kernal of truth in the matter, EK!</p>
<p>I also think that FountainSiren explained how I feel very well. I don't know how anyone can argue that it isn't best for any child to have both Mom and Dad stay home to nurture, discipline, teach, watch over and love. The reality, of course, is that this isn't possible, unless one is independently wealthy. So the question becomes, "Does it hurt kids to be cared for by someone other than mom or dad?" Most of the time, it's just fine. Kids are resilient, and can learn from and form attachments to other adults. I don't really think it hurts kids to have two working parents. It's just that we chose not to delegate that task, for a variety of reasons.</p>
<p>I get a little tired of the attitude that SAHMs are at home because they are incapable of doing anything else.</p>
<p>I also don't find this to be a regional thing. I've known moms who worked outside the home, and those who didn't, on the west coast, east coast and in the middle.</p>
<p>FS, you're right: working moms aren't hands on for education and love and the resulting children are emotionally anethetized robots who grow up to be rootless, self-indulgent, Democrats.</p>
<p>The snottiness of your post at least matched Ed's.</p>
<p>A reasonable person can only assume--as is your wont in these affairs--that you chose to surpass the “snottiness” you imagine to exist in your imagined foil. </p>
<p>Fwiw, I never said career women could not care for children, nor did I suppose they are composed of nuts and bolts--the former of which being a rather obvious component of your indignant sensitivity. Quite the opposite, I said I expect to be a career woman myself. </p>
<p>Here, your moral-indignation is only surpassed by your ability to manufacture some reason to get your Robespierre-load-on; on the bright side, these shenanigans give you character…or at least stand-in in the place of it. </p>
<p>Let's just call your calumny a misreading, to be generous, and TD, as luck would have it, I’m feeling very generous tonight.</p>
<p>Sorry if I offend anyone about who "ought to be at home". It was late at night, and the sentence just came off a little too quickly before I hit send. I was only expressing my personal opinion and family choice. I am sure there are outside career moms who also make their children the top priority. It seemed to be a much tougher job though to have to do both.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I don't know how anyone can argue that it isn't best for any child to have both Mom and Dad stay home to nurture, discipline, teach, watch over and love.>></p>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>After a dose of unadulterated nurturing disciplining, teaching, watching over, my kids were usually very happy when Monday came and Mom and dad went back to work and left the dscipline, teaching, watching over to others. We still supplied the love. Neither expressed the wish to go as far away to college as was possible.</p>
<p>I object to being told we OUGHT to be like prewoman's lib- it may work for some, but definitely not the rest of us. Working parttime is not the same as being a stay at home mother. All those volunteer activities do not require much thinking, teachers are working. The big key is "ought" - no room for the probably minority woman who doesn't relate to typical female jobs, that was judgemental, as if being female relegated one to all the yucky parts of parenting. Women are meant to be more than someone's mother, the ideal world would have men doing an equal share of the unfun parts of parenting and household management. Only going as far as a bachelor's degree even at an elite school and then getting the Mrs degree to be a homemaker- not impressive. What message do you want your child to get, that boys get to do what they want but girls have to give up their interests if they want to be mothers? Thankfully the schools don't push the old stereotypes. I do not mind seeming offensive to people who do not look outside their box/comfort zone, they do not mind offending those with opposing views when they make those statemements. Let's get back to the main thread idea, we won't change anyone's mind discussing the cultural issues of motherhood. It's a lot more fun to learn about other culture shocks.</p>
<p>edvest1- caught your last post after sent mine, I spent a lot of time composing/editing it. It's most interesting to see what happens to fathers with demanding jobs and how they change - I picked a good husband.</p>
<p>I actually find the opposite in the northeast with the stay at home mom situation. I can only think of one person who actually is in that family situation. I do live closer to Philadelphia though, so maybe being so close to a major city is part of it...For whatever it's worth, both of my parents work (my mom actually works 4 jobs) and I can't say I ever felt cheated out of spending time with them. They always made time for us, which considering how much they work, it's very appreciated. </p>
<p>I would definitely agree that people from the northeast tend to be very conscious of everyone else's background. Whenever we meet someone new, the first question usually asked is "where are you from." I just went from eastern PA to Pittsburgh and experienced a change (the state really is split between the Philly loyalty and the Pittsburgh loyalty). I have to be honest the first time I heard someone say "Yinz guys want some friiiies with that" I was very surprised; I didn't think anyone actually talked like that. I found out that I apparently have a Philly accent...news to me, because I definitely don't. And I will say that some people tend to be a little "clique-y." I know at least at Duquesne where so many people are from Pittsburgh or the general area, if you weren't born and raised there, you're seen as not really fitting in. I have to say that while I do like Pittsburgh, there definitely is that same reaction everytime I tell people I'm from Philadelphia...that "oh" reaction looking down. Maybe because not too many people are moving into the city would explain it. I can't say I've found that cliquey-ness with people from the west coast though. It's almost like they expect people to not have been born there. </p>
<p>Generally I'd say that west coasters are a lot friendlier (not to mention talk a lot slower too!!!) But I think once you adjust to the different attitudes people have then you're fine.</p>
<p>Since moving out to Northeast, I find myself friendlier. Maybe I am product of my surrounding. I just find the west coast friendlieness to be on the superficial side, and East coasters more about being just who they are. Take no offense, only speaking from my own experience. I am sure there are many wonderful and open and genuine folks anywhere.</p>
<p>One last comment on the SAHM thing. I'm just a teenager, so I only have my own experience as a background. However, I think that a major component that most of these arguements have forgotten is that staying at home is not an option for many, many women, especially in big cities such as LA where there is a lot of poverty. My parents were divorced- what choice did my mom have other than continuing to work? Would she have loved to spend more time with us? Yes, of course. Did we benefit from the fact that she wasn't always there? Again, Yes. I still had a loving, supportive family, but it allowed me to be more independent and get things done for myself. As that (time management etc.) seems to be a major topic on the college life and other boards, I think that not having someone regulate all of my time has helped me in college. It may not be perfect, but there are downsides to both stances.</p>
<p>
[quote]
All those volunteer activities do not require much thinking...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
Only going as far as a bachelor's degree even at an elite school and then getting the Mrs degree to be a homemaker- not impressive.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>wis75, if not for your previous posts, I would have thought this was a spoof. I think you desperately need to look outside of YOUR box. Did you realy spend time editing and composing it?</p>
<p>SS, Wis75 is the one who is living in the pre women's lib era. I don't know any women, working or not, who feel "boxed" in to a particular choice. Women I know do what they want, and I don't know any men brave enough to force them into a particular role.</p>
<p>Wis75, you seem to want to tell women what they "ought" to do. I don't have any problem with women that choose to work -- just as I don't have a problem with those who choose to step out of the workforce for a period of time. (most women take a few years off, not the rest of their lives.)</p>
<p>I've worked in the corporate world -- it's not exciting 100% of the time. There's plenty of "mind numbing" work to go around, both inside the home and inside the office.</p>
I don't know what world you live in, but I don't know any woman who feels that there are "men" jobs and "women" jobs. Two of my sisters have Masters degrees in Electrical Engineering. I'm pretty sure they didn't worry about whether those degrees were "appropriate" for women.</p>
<p>As one of the rare Dads who did a lot of volunteer work--site governance council at the high school, coordinating a 10-day trip with about 100 high school students and 20 teachers & chaperones to Vienna & Prague, acting as director of marketing for a junior ballet company, working high school registration--I can say that a lot of volunteer work requires plenty of thinking. Beyond that, they also serve who stand and wait.</p>
<p>I have my own biases but let's not get ridiculous about it.</p>
<p>FS, one doesn't have to be a deep reader to see your snottiness, and no, it's not a misreading, and if you persist in thinking me akin to Savoronola you persist in wandering without a clue.</p>
<p>"I don't have any problem with women that choose to work -- just as I don't have a problem with those who choose to step out of the workforce for a period of time. "</p>
<p>I also don't have a problem with women that choose to never work. In fact, I'd like to be that woman. I find recreation incredibly rewarding and I am very good at it.</p>
<p>"It's most interesting to see what happens to fathers with demanding jobs and how they change - I picked a good husband."</p>
<p>I think our workplace ought to change so that it's better for both mothers and fathers. It's stupid that lawyers are expected to work 80 hours a week. Why shouldn't that be two jobs?</p>
<p>It is clear that every family deals with these issues differently, as far as dividing responsibilities between the two parents. For example, sjmom stated that she "takes some credit for her husband's work success, because of the support he's received at home. He never had to leave a meeting, or cancel a business trip, or turn down an opportunity involving relocation, because she was there to take care of things." I found her family's approach interesting because we used a different philosophy. Although my husband's job is somewhat more demanding than mine, we have always shared the necessity to juggle work-related trips or meetings when they conflicted wtih child-related responsibilities, depending upon the priority of the particular events in question. (If it wassomething mandatory or very important for me to attend, my husband would juggle his schedule, and vice versa.) My husband has turned down opportunities involving relocation because it would mean that I would have to give up my job. In addition to the fact that I enjoy my work, etc., our philosophy (especially my husband's) has always been that it is better to have two incomes in case something happens to one or the other job, especially in these times when jobs are not as secure as in the past. So even though he may have individually come out a little ahead of where he is now if he had relocated, in total, we are ahead of where we would have been if I had not pursued a career.</p>
<p>As I mentioned, there are a variety of reasons why we chose the path we did. At the time, H's best options involved relocation, as would mine if I had stayed with my employer at the time -- the odds of that working well for both of us was slim and none. We made what we thought was a very practical decision, and also considered the option of H staying home. Knowing him as I do, I didn't think he'd really be happy in that role, and I was struggling with two toddlers, a demanding job, very ill parents and a bad commute. I think the two parent working scenario works best if the jobs are dissimilar -- it's tough to have two 50-60 hour careers with business travel and small children.</p>
<p>My point earlier is that it's ignorant to assume that SAHMs are spending all of their time with "mind numbing" work. Everyone has 24 hours in a day. Some of us spend those earning income and others don't, but I think it's a mistake to evaluate all activities based on economic terms. I viewed staying home with my kids as the most interesting intellectual project of my life. It wasn't always wonderful, and there were days that I thought they'd be better off with a nanny! But they were my own little experiment in some ways, based on a degree in psychology and lots of reading about ongoing research in child development. It was fun for me.</p>