byronchild - logo

progressive parenting
Feminism
Childcare
Family Mental Health
Equality or liberation?
Have feminists, in their quest for equality
rather than liberation, led women
out of the frying pan into the fire, with
adverse repercussions for themselves,
their families, and social wellbeing? If
so, as plans affecting the family develop,
it is important to diagnose correctly
the causes of stress, dissatisfaction and
overwork experienced by many mothers
today. Some, claiming to represent
the interests of women and children,
call for evermore childcare — usually
without stating the age range of children
involved. But for young children this
can be a complicated prescription, with
side-effects and risks, especially if these
places are for infants under one or two
years, centre-based, and for more than
a few hours a week. This alleged ‘need’
for more childcare is a symptom, and the
risks for the social and emotional development
of very young girls and boys
are seldom acknowledged, let alone the
possible consequences when they grow
up to become the next generation of
women and their partners.
Pointers to a better diagnosis are
offered in The Miseducation of Women
(2002) by James Tooley, Professor of
Education at Newcastle-on-Tyne. He
adopts the distinction between equality
feminism and liberation feminism, made
by Germaine Greer in The Whole Woman
(1999). She suggests that ‘equality is a
poor substitute for liberation’. Equality
feminism relies on the (largely misconceived)
dogma that gender differences
are social constructs, and it prescribes
equal treatment for girls and boys in
education, careers and domestic situa-
byronchild 28
Have women been misled
by equality
&By
Peter S. Cook, MB.ChB, FRANZCP, MRCPsych, DCH.
tions. But Tooley summarises evidence
that some female/male differences, such
as certain abilities, interests, and mateselection
choices, appear to be biologically-based,
conferring special benefits
on the human species. So assumptions
that they should be ‘corrected’ may be
misguided and difficult to implement.
Liberation feminism (a related concept
is ‘maternal feminism’) takes it for
granted that there should be equality
of opportunity and remuneration, but
regards biologically-based differences as
important, especially in cognitive abilities,
mating interests, and mothering
— a term which equality feminism repudiated
in favour of ‘parenting’.
Feminist icons recant
Betty Friedan, in The Feminine Mystique
(1963), set women on paths to careers
and equality, avoiding motherhood
— only to be reproached later by disillusioned
followers who pointed out
that, unlike them, she already had a
husband and children when she urged
this life pattern. But her recantations in
The Second Stage (1981) were ignored, as
equality feminists continued to implement
her earlier prescriptions. Yet she
wrote: ‘The equality we fought for isn’t
liveable, isn’t workable, isn’t comfortable
in the terms that structured our
battle.’
Germaine Greer, too, had a belated
and poignant rethink. Having inspired
a generation of women not to want
motherhood, she now ‘mourns for her
unborn babies’, and confessed ‘I still
have pregnancy dreams, waiting with
vast joy and confidence for something
feminism?
Childcare seems to be always on the political agenda. But are the real needs of babies, very
young children and their mothers being ignored in the short-term interests of the economy
and the burgeoning childcare ‘industry’? An informed look at the impacts
of early childcare raises many questions.
that will never happen.’ In The Whole
Woman she says: “In The Female Eunuch
I argued that motherhood should not
be treated as a substitute career: now I
would argue that motherhood should be
regarded as a genuine career option…’
She says the ‘immense rewardingness
of children is the best kept secret in the
Western world’.
Some unintended consequences of
equality feminism
Unfortunately, the working mothers/
childcare juggernaut, once set in motion,
develops a momentum of its own. In
buying homes, two incomes outbid one
and prices rise accordingly. Something is
very wrong when many women in some
of the world’s most affluent societies
cannot afford to breastfeed and mother
their own babies. The ‘economy’ is said
to require their labour, and the childcare
‘industry’ has many powerful ‘players’,
and for some it has become very profitable.
But who has a greater claim on a
mother’s presence than her own baby?
We were all babies once. That breastfeeding
is of far-reaching health significance,
and involves a foundational
love relationship, not just a tank-filling
exercise, is largely disregarded. The
American Academy of Pediatrics now
recommends breastfeeding for a year or
more, and WHO/UNICEF urge at least
two years. Danish adults who had been
breastfed for nine months averaged six
points higher IQ than those breastfed
for less than a month, as reported in
a rigorous study in the Journal of the
American Medical Association in 2002.
Research consistently shows the greatest