![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Jun. 20th, 2005 12:28 pmI'm still recovering from an insanely busy weekend, and I know I still owe a tonne of comments, but I did want to post about an article in the New York Times from last week: Our Little Women Problem. ( If you don't have a subscription to the Times, registration is free, but the article is behind the cut anyway... )
Coincidentally, thanks to a mention of Rainbow Tour last week by![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
folk, I've been listening to Evita for the last few days - it's a show I first saw when I was 11, but didn't listen to much until I was around 15 or 16 - not sure why I picked it up again then, but I did.
It's probably weird to say that I "identified" with Evita as a character (ie not the real life person) but in a roundabout way, I sort of did, especially parts of High Flying, Adored - "a shame you did it all at twenty-six..." At sixteen, and at eighteen, and at twenty two, I was certainly on my way to something resembling that. I was the first intern hired at CNBC, I covered the Supreme Court with Chris Gordon for CBS in Washington, DC, I had a standing offer to produce at Mtv when I was in college, but I'd have to drop out of school to take it. But part of me knew I didn't really want to give up ordinariness for that sort of presence of lifestyle, and I've never once regretted the married-with-children track; while I have some bad moments with the very busy, very active, very strong boys, I truly, truly love my life.
So this opinion piece in the Times made me think, did I take the Jo track? In ten years, I very well may return to some form of journalism - perhaps what I do online with TLC and FA are more tightly tied to the work I used to do for TheKnot than may be obvious at first glance? Does that mean that I should write, now:
No qualms. I don't feel any. I don't think I have any, regarding the decision my husband and I made seven years ago to start having kids. But if I really, truly, absolutely have none, then why have I been so focused on making this post?
[not friendslocked but anonymous posts will be screened]
ETA: I realised after the fact why this has been on my mind over the weekend. It's because four years ago, when I had one child and was working full time, my husband came down with menengitis the week after I'd been given a talking-to by my department-head, Rich. While he was fine wiht my hours, the firm was concerned that I wasn't billing enough, and the fact that in the previous month, my sister had gotten married, so I'd taken a few vacation days, and the fact that only a few weeks before, the co-head of my department had been killed in a single-engine plane crash and our San Jose office had been closed, didn't hold any sway with them. So with my husband in the hospital, I felt obligated to still show up for work every day, and be in the office on the weekend, and just be glad that my mother in law could come into town to be at the hospital with Aaron and my nanny and sister were around to spend extra time with Harry.
And that, both at the time and in retrospect to a larger degree, were the reasons why I decided to stop with the full-time working, and move to a schedule that was more reasonable for - well, I won't say for a parent, because I won't generalize here. It was more reasonable for me.
I know there are women who can do both - the full time job and the 1, 2 or 3 little kids. I also know that the circumstances of the time dictated that I was not going to be one of them, at least for now.
Coincidentally, thanks to a mention of Rainbow Tour last week by
folk, I've been listening to Evita for the last few days - it's a show I first saw when I was 11, but didn't listen to much until I was around 15 or 16 - not sure why I picked it up again then, but I did. It's probably weird to say that I "identified" with Evita as a character (ie not the real life person) but in a roundabout way, I sort of did, especially parts of High Flying, Adored - "a shame you did it all at twenty-six..." At sixteen, and at eighteen, and at twenty two, I was certainly on my way to something resembling that. I was the first intern hired at CNBC, I covered the Supreme Court with Chris Gordon for CBS in Washington, DC, I had a standing offer to produce at Mtv when I was in college, but I'd have to drop out of school to take it. But part of me knew I didn't really want to give up ordinariness for that sort of presence of lifestyle, and I've never once regretted the married-with-children track; while I have some bad moments with the very busy, very active, very strong boys, I truly, truly love my life.
So this opinion piece in the Times made me think, did I take the Jo track? In ten years, I very well may return to some form of journalism - perhaps what I do online with TLC and FA are more tightly tied to the work I used to do for TheKnot than may be obvious at first glance? Does that mean that I should write, now:
[Heidi] has entirely reconciled herself to her disappointment. Having relinquished her dreams, she looks from stout husband to unruly children and pronounces herself happier than she has ever been.
She is philosophical about her early ambition: "the life I wanted then seems selfish, lonely and cold to me now." One day she may well write a good book - as indeed she will, in a sequel - but she has no qualms. Nor does she care that she has kissed the tenure track goodbye.
No qualms. I don't feel any. I don't think I have any, regarding the decision my husband and I made seven years ago to start having kids. But if I really, truly, absolutely have none, then why have I been so focused on making this post?
[not friendslocked but anonymous posts will be screened]
ETA: I realised after the fact why this has been on my mind over the weekend. It's because four years ago, when I had one child and was working full time, my husband came down with menengitis the week after I'd been given a talking-to by my department-head, Rich. While he was fine wiht my hours, the firm was concerned that I wasn't billing enough, and the fact that in the previous month, my sister had gotten married, so I'd taken a few vacation days, and the fact that only a few weeks before, the co-head of my department had been killed in a single-engine plane crash and our San Jose office had been closed, didn't hold any sway with them. So with my husband in the hospital, I felt obligated to still show up for work every day, and be in the office on the weekend, and just be glad that my mother in law could come into town to be at the hospital with Aaron and my nanny and sister were around to spend extra time with Harry.
And that, both at the time and in retrospect to a larger degree, were the reasons why I decided to stop with the full-time working, and move to a schedule that was more reasonable for - well, I won't say for a parent, because I won't generalize here. It was more reasonable for me.
I know there are women who can do both - the full time job and the 1, 2 or 3 little kids. I also know that the circumstances of the time dictated that I was not going to be one of them, at least for now.
