Mid-century or Second Wave Feminism was focused very distinctly on desires that women have to engage in creative work, an ideological thrust that has been implemented by encouraging women to enter the workforce. And today, after the dawn of the new millennium, we women still find ourselves very concerned with, even obsessed, with this dilemma of “balancing” professional success with the commitment we want to have to our children.
Sheryl Sandberg of Facebook has implored women to “lean in” to their careers and not to pull back when children come along or to postpone building a family as long as biologically possible. Facebook famously offers to pay $20,000.00 towards reproductive treatments such as egg freezing. Women are free to engage in almost any profession. And yet, Anne Marie Slaughter, in a zeitgeist capturing piece, admits and attempts to explain “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All.” The faith-informed voice of Elizabeth Corey argued in First Things that there can indeed be “No Happy Harmony,” or no having-it-all, because the demands of motherhood and of professional excellence are diametrically opposed, though both are good. I admit that I found the latter piece depressingly defeatist. She says stay-at-home moms “sometimes pay a high price for suppressing parts of themselves that call out to be developed and rewarded.”
The truth is: no one gets to have it all. Not a single human being has a perfect life devoid of dilemma and tragedy; we are absurd when we suggest that there could be a silver bullet that will deliver all the happiness we could ever desire this side of heaven. Consider for a moment, the husband’s dilemma. Many men work jobs that fail to actualize their deepest potential for the sake of a stable income that supports their family life that they prize over and above their personal glory, just as their wives do. Only the luckiest among us are in occupations that bring identity and fulfillment. Vast segments of the population work to get by, not for prestige. It is a dangerous error to confuse occupations with a person’s being or vocation. As Pope John Paul II taught, we are not what we do or what we have; we have value simply in being, being creatures of God, made in His image.
And yet, I do not disagree that creative work and the development of talents is important in human life, both for women and for men. It is true that professional work often serves to help develop mastery and talents, even though it sometimes does not. It is also true that women, almost always more than men, desire to be close to their children, especially young ones, and select the nurturing role more often. Such a choice is noble indeed, as C.S. Lewis said:Homemaking is surely in reality the most important work in the world. What do ships, railways, mines, cars, government, etc. exist for except that people may be fed, warmed, and safe in their own homes? …The homemaker’s job is one for which all others exist.
Though stay-home-mothering can have its pitfalls, it is not to be denigrated as inherently unfulfilling. Nothing tops the joy of watching a child’s first step or the sound of a toddler’s laugh. There is an excellence in the very duties that come with the home: cooking, organizing, decorating, even the labor of home improvement, lawn work and financial management. Running a household without professional assistance is a demanding endeavor that would challenge anyone.
And yet, women have other aspirations and gifts too, which should be encouraged as well. We need to both celebrate women’s gifts and women’s unique ability to become mothers. As mentioned above, creative work is often confused with professional employment. It shouldn’t be. The most meaningful creative work is that which we would do even if no money or recognition ever came of it. There are many hours in a day, and even stay-at-home moms (I would know) tend to be able to find enough scraps of time to devote to something.
What I am suggesting is that there is a third way—a way that encourages the development of talents but does not settle for prestige or paycheck. Many standard “jobs” such as finance, public relations, event planning, education, construction, cooking, find an easy outlet in home life. The accountant manages family finances and investing; the event planner schedules playdates and organizes parties; the teacher teaches her children; the construction worker builds a deck or a tree house. If a homemaker engages in any of these, the development of talents dovetails seamlessly with family life.
But then there are the creative types of work: visual arts, writing, music, scholarship, dance, etc. These types of activities do not lend themselves as well to home life, but that need not mean that there is no place for them. Skills and knowledge bases really do whither without use, just as muscles do. It is wrong-headed to tell mothers that it “simply isn’t the season of life” to pursue something. A mother who excels at the violin can continue her occupation. True, it will sometimes mean saying no to gigs that require hundreds of miles of traveling. Some of the public recognition may be sacrificed, but the talent can be developed and maintained nonetheless.
Unfortunately, our standard of “success” is usually public recognition or the number of zeros in a paycheck. The standard should be though a happy, purposeful life. The rearing of children is in fact fulfilling and important, and it can balanced in the evening hours with the pursuit of a talent.
Mothers are human beings just like other women and just like men who benefit and grow from the pursuit of excellence in a way that contributes to their flourishing, in a way that makes them better humans and therefore better mothers. We mothers of young children only benefit by sharing our experience and our gifts and encouraging one another to pursue excellence.
And still, not everyone wants to be a writer or a dancer or a chef or knitter, and “just” being a mom is more than enough; just being human is a gift in itself. The value of “just a mom” is immense–the love, the presence, the competence, the joy she brings to the house. So even if her profession is particularly creative and demands certain extra time to be devoted to it, she should! To scribe poems in the evening hours may or may not bring publishing success, but it will bring happiness, which is all we could ever ask for, this side of heaven.
A true vision of happiness will not demand elite, exclusive careers such as major magazine editor or Wall street businessman; rather it will be a vision open to every human person in which all of us can thrive and contribute to a Civilization of Love.
Stephanie Pacheco is a freelance writer and convert from Northern Virginia. She earned a M.A. in Theological Studies, summa cum laude, from Christendom College and holds a B.A. from the University of Virginia in Religious Studies with a minor in Government and Political Theory. Her work has been featured in America Magazine, Crisis Magazine, Soul Gardening Journal and syndicated by EWTN and Zenit. She blogs about making sense of the Catholic Faith in modern life at theoress.wordpress.com and lives with her husband and two young children.
- 3 Principles for Pro-Faith Education in the Modern Age
- Reading with the Heart of the Church: Contents of Amoris Laetitia
- Amoris Laetitia: Pope Francis’s The Joy of Love
- The Communists are Right: The Family Is The Basic Cell Of Society. But Here Is Why Their Solution Is Wrong
- Book Review: The Choice of the Family, an Interview with Jean Laffitte
