Ah Trillian, you were brave enough to say what I was thinking...:clap:
Printable View
Ah Trillian, you were brave enough to say what I was thinking...:clap:
for me, the first time that i heard the happy mum = happy baby mantra, i felt a sense of relief. i was in the newborn days with DD and had advice being thrown at me from all angles and was drowning in it and the inevitable guilt that follows when you feel that you aren't doing the 'right' thing.
when i was told the mantra it gave me permission to take stock of the things that as a new mum would make me happy. and you know what? the thing that i knew that would make me happy would be to be a loving mum to a happy and content baby.
this then made me sit down and think about the logistics of that. and i took baby steps (pardon the pun) toward finding that peace. one of the very first acts i did to help was to create a daily ritual whereby when DH got home from work i would give DD a b/f, pass her to her daddy and i would go and soak in the bath for 20 minutes to rejuvenate and refresh for the night ahead. i don't see that as being a selfish act. and no, i didnt wait until i was insane or in need of a sanity break. i did it as a matter of course to look after myself so that i can be the best i can be for my daughter. I don't see leaving my DD with her daddy as a selfish act.
and yeah, DH and I organise 'dates' with eachother. again i see this as an important step in maintaining a healthy, happy family. we are all we have, and we are all Leila has. so it is (for us) vitally important that DH and I have time for eachother to reconnect, not only as parents, but as friends and lovers. i dont see calling her Godmother to come over for a few hours at night while we go to a movie or out for dinner as selfish. would DD prefer us to stay home with her (or take her too)? probably. but I have to look at this from a wholistic point of view. we are trying to create a happy, strong and fulfilled environment for our family and sometimes we need to separate not only our needs from wants but also our children's.
i guess this also stems from my perspective that i dont believe that Leila can ONLY be a happy baby when I am around 24/7. her happiness is much deeper than a superficial presence of the 'mother'. i know that her happiness stems from her belief and confidence that we love her, that we are there to catch her when she falls, to hold her hand when she walks and to let go when she wants to chase a flock of seagulls.
my DD needs are always a priority in our lives, and it too goes deeper than simple feeding, sleeping, play regimes. her needs are wide and varied and open to negotiation at any time. but we meet them (with vigour!! LOL!). a mum going out and doing something for herself to make herself happy does not automatically mean that she is creating unhappiness in her child or placing her needs ahead of her baby. it doesn't need to be a selfish act.
Clare, I don't think the odd night out is selfish when your child is left with a loved, and loving, adult. Heck, I've left my mum to put DS to sleep a couple of times so DH and I could go out!
I do think it's selfish when it's every week and it's a different teenager pretty much every week - and a 3-month rota means to a baby, even to a pre-schooler, it's a new teenager every week.
I agree that if you have a baby you have to make certain sacrifices. But not 100% sacrifices. Should I sacrifice all my sleep when I can kick DH out of bed once or twice on a bad night? Happy mummy, happy baby. Unhappy Daddy but that's not the point LOL. Leaving DS with his Dad is never a bad thing, whether it's so I can shower or do the groceries or just have a night out with the girls. I agree that if you're not willing to consider the child as a human and one who not only deserves respect but your time and love - unconditionally - then you shouldn't have children.
Having said that, there are times when a mother should come first. Very few occasions. Needing the loo is always one. Finances... I'm not happy about leaving DS at nursery but DS is and I'm happy that my home isn't being reposessed. Sometimes we have to think more of a bigger picture. I had a "martyr mummy" and it isn't fun. I am not going to give up EVERYTHING for the sake of DS. He is going to have chores and I am not going to spend hours doing his homework so he gets a good grade. (Helping, yes, but doing it all no.) I am going to say "actually, I need a new coat more than you need that computer game bought for you." Especially when, like this Autumn, I had no winter coat at all as the one that is 14 years old has too many holes in. (Thankfully I got my sister's cast offs from last winter, but that's not the point.) Because the self-sacrifice all the time didn't make me feel differently towards my mum but I did resent the way she hated her selfish family... well you shouldn't be facilitating it! You want me to clean my room, vacuum it? Don't you do it! Same with my ironing! I will happily not iron my pants, so don't whinge when you choose to do it!
Anyway. Really good points. And yes, the mantra is used wrongly to put mummy wants in front of baby needs (eg control crying). If a woman "wants her body back" then why have a baby? I'm not BFing and still don't have my body back in that it's now DS's climbing frame. Things change. But realising that you chose to have a baby, the baby didn't choose you: that's the first step in putting the balance in the right direction IMO.
All very interesting!
Like Liz, I agree.:
My conclusion is that no matter which way you put those 4 words, it's all just self-serving bullsh.. to try and make you feel better for the choices you make...They are just fluffy buzz words for what we have to believe to *survive* raising our children at times.
Funny thing is that people (ie: me!) don't seem to need to use the mantra when they actually, deeply believe that what they are doing (be it CC, working, not BF, whatever) is right for their family. If you do that then there is no guilt - so no deed to justify yourself?
To illustrate - I work full time. I did while Flynn was little and went back to work FT when Oliver was 6 months old. They have been home with DH, and more recently, my mum, whenever I work. I miss them when I work, but I want to work. So I feel I am the one that misses out, not them. Never once I have felt the need to justify my return to work. There have been times I have HATED being away but most often I have relished it. I have - or should I say "had" a very stimulating job - and I am the sole breadwinner in the family. That is how we make it work - it is right for our family. I know this so I have never resorted to HB=HM.
I do think, though, that in some circumstances we resort to it when trying to console a frazzled new mum. Especially one that you don't know well and don't want to counsel, gently, over the benefits of BF, gentle comforting, cloth nappies, organic food, crystal healing or whatever your particular thing is. To illustrate - if I see the stereotypical "bad mum" in the supermarket giving her 2 year old a Coke, and she says HB=HM, I am just going to nod and smile. I ain't going there - sheesh its sometimes hard enough in a place like BB, let alone the supermarket queue!!
Clare, I agree wholeheartedly. There are instances where it can make you take stock of the situation you're in and you set about making it happen so there is a genuine happy mummy and happy baby - just like in your own situation. There is a huge difference between selfishness and selflessness. What you're doing is taking the time to nurture your adult relationships and the relationship you have with yourself so that the parent and child one flourishes - that's completely different to the parent who will only nurture themselves and their needs and parent in a way so that they are happy, and that's when it's to the detriment of the child.
Ryn, again, I agree with you. It doesn't have to bee 100% sacrifice or surviving - you know yourself that being a parent can be a rollercoaster ride and there will be ups and downs. It's the down times that you have to survive to the best of your ability.
It might have sounded like in my last post that being a parent is all about surviving - but it's not and that wasn't the point I was making. For me, the good far outweighs the bad, but there are times when you do have to sacrifice a little bit of your own happiness and comfort to make sure that our children are. And that doesn't mean you have to be a martyr either - that's the extreme end of the scale.
It's just that the phrase itself is over-used to the point where its lost all its meaning - just like calling athletes Heroes.
I think it depends on who is saying it and in reference to what.
To re-visit a few examples on the thread (probably misremembering and getting it wrong...). The woman who had a traumatic birth and didn't get BFing established then going on to have an elective section and FF from birth next time. Happy mum? WHere? I don't see a happy mum. I see a woman so traumatised by her first month at motherhood that she has decided to embrace the failure she feels herself to be rather than attempt to re-connect with the mother she WANTED to be. Do i feel for her? Yes. Do i blame her for her response? Not at all. In this society it's hard to talk to people about birth and the overall trend of "Your baby is healthy so stop moaning" means many women remain traumatised for years after their babies are born. But do i really believe she is happy or that her chosen path for #2 will make her happy? Nope.
The women (several were mentioned) who leave their kids with virtual strangers (as far as the kids are concerned) so they can go out. Is it possible that those women are not engaging in their role as mother and are not enjoying it? Is it possible that the desperate need to "escape" at whatever cost it has to the baby is a reflection on their inability to really embrace the role of Mother? Again, it's not really relevant in terms of Right or Wrong, but it's interesting to me. How many women in our society struggle in this way? Remember being a teenager at a party and feeling TOTALLY out of place and like you don't get why everyone else looks so natural and happy? Imagine if that was your parenting journey, looking at other people connected with their kids and loving their roles as parents and thinking "why not me?". It must be really hard. And i know that some women decide to push on being Gentle despite those sorts of feelings, but i think that a) those women deserve bloody medals, and b) it's possible that those who are going off out and drinking and generally spending the first decade of their kids' lives bemoaning how irritating having kids is WERE NEVER going to be Gentle anyway.
To be honest i think that our society devalues motherhood. Parenthood in fact. Getting a decent, normal birth with compassionate care is very difficult. Getting decent caring support during the early days of your baby's life, when you might be really struggling with the 15 or 20 new skills you have to learn (and which you had previously been given the impression would magically arrive when the placenta came out) is also very hard. Some women are naturally maternal. Some women from childhood take every opportunity to hold babies, change them, cuddle them. Some women have many friends with babies, have been at births, have read every book written on the subject of birth they could find and have read about and seen BFing. Some women are able to look at the "Be thin, be pretty, be rich, be successful" message fired from every corner of the media and think "meh" and get on with being fulfilled instead. But not every woman.
When i hear "happy mum = happy baby" i usually think to myself "now here we have an unhappy mum". From my own POV - i wanted to BF. I read about it, i went to classes, i met with friends who fed and gave them the 3rd degree about it. DD was born, she did just what the books had said she would and for 4 months we did beautifully. Then a combination of me moving out of XP's flat following our messy and stressy break-up, terrible stress and no respite from caring for her and a seriously low thyroxine level meant my milk supply started to drop. At 5.5 months i began giving FF once a day because XP was using it when he had her overnight (i couldn't pump enough by then to keep her fed when she was away from me) and i felt it unfair that she had such a massive dietary change once a week for 24 hours. Then i went on the minipill to avoid pregnancy with my new partner. My let-down got very sluggish and DD began to fuss at the breast and skip whole feeds rather than suck for the 5 minutes it took to stimulate let-down. My bloods were done and re-done and my thyroid got more and more sluggish. By 6 months i was feeding FF twice a day, by 6months2weeks i was only able to feed once a day and on the morning of the day she turned 7 months i gave her her last BF.
Now, could i have avoided that? CERTAINLY i could. I could have told XP to stuff off and not let him have access to DD but the guilt would have made me miserable. I could have stayed off the Pill but being unable to get close with DP, who was the only joyful thing in my life at that point, would have made me miserable. I could have gone to bed with DD for days and fed and fed and taken motilium and fenugreek and whatever else is out there, but i couldn't afford the drugs, and there was NO ONE to help care for me. My family is hundreds of miles away, my ex-in-laws were not talking to me because of the break-up and i had literally no-one who could help me. I could have taken the radioactive tests they wanted to do on my thyroid and risked losing my milk for the week i'd not be able to feed in order to get the thyroxine and possibly get my supply back. But i wasn't ready to wean and wanted to "keep trying", at least i felt that between feeds when i was faced with a hungry angry baby and sagging dry breasts... I could have done many things differently.
But i didn't. I decided to FF. Did it help? Yes it did. Within 4 weeks my thyroid was doing far better, my goitre was gone and i had much more energy and was able to do so much more. Not worrying about whether i could feed her made my time with DD so much less stressful and i felt more "well" than i had for months. Did it make me happy? No it did not. It made me feel terrible. I KNOW BFing is what is best for my babies. I wanted to BF, i planned and learned and tried and i failed. I failed my baby and i failed myself. I forgive me, because i can still remember how low the place i was in was back then, but i will be doing my damndest to avoid it happening again. I never said "happy mum=happy baby" but people said it to me. I wasn't happy. I was living against my parenting ideals and it is a miserable way to live for me.
Equally though, i don't feel that being a SAHM, especially for the 2.5 years i was single and on welfare and very poor with it (because right now my life is CUSHY!!!), was a sacrifice i made for my kids or anything particularly special. That's the way i wanted to do it. That's what i chose. It isn't the ideal for me or for anyone but it was the best option for me in the situation i was actually in. Lots of things about it were rubbish, but the main thing, my relationship with DD, was and is great, and i loved it. It was more than worth it. So from that POV it's just lucky that homebirth, BFing, SAHPing etc. is good for DD and meets her needs, because it's how i want to do it and i'm not too interested in changing it! LOL. I AM happy. I might not say HM=HB, but for us it's true, we're both happy. I'm planning another baby next year and i am CRAPPING it about BFing next time because my Hashi's is still a wildcard, but there is no way i will be FFing JIC i fail again. If i fail again i will do so at the end of a long, every-avenue-explored and much-tramped-before-exhaustion-drives-me-off-it road, because THAT is the kind of motherhood that makes me happy, and THAT is the sort of happy mother who my (hopefully!) happy kids get.
Bx
I agree with Liz, Trillian, Lulu and some posters in between!
I think there is an element, also, of "my life doesn't have to change now that I have kids", in that parents seem increasingly unable or unwilling to 'give it up' for their children.
I think it's a hell of a lot easier to parent wholeheartedly and being absolutely child-centred when you're at peace with your new and changed role in life and that is means you are no longer your own person...for the better, because you're now putting yourself into a whole new person, a person who could well be a far better version of you!
The term HM=HB or even the converse suggests a dichotomy, or even a fission between the two entities. It's like in birth and people say it doesn't matter how the baby gets here, as long as baby and mummy are healthy and alive. It has become too easy to separate baby and mummy into two separate entities (and that's how it's easier for medicos to separate babies from mummies for hours on end before the first BF and natural bonding can occur etc), and this is what I believe leads to the ability to even think "Happy Mummy = Happy Baby", in the sense that Mummy's needs must be met first before the baby's needs are considered to be as vital.
We don't give enough confidence to new mothers to believe that they contain everything their baby needs. We advertise that they need all these mummy-substitutes like fancy buggies, swings, bouncers that go 'ping', playpens, whirring toys...everything except what the baby actually needs and wants...and that's a mummy who is existing for this timeframe to provide suvival and developmental stimulation just by being present with feeding, touching, communicating.
I think that the more mummies disconnect from these things and the way nature designed us to parent - carry, to co-sleep (cos other mammals sleep together!), to breastfeed (where physically possible, cos throughout the mammalian world you see where BFing doesn't work out, and it's not because of worrying that milk supply is diminishing or that it hurts too much), to PLAY with and teach survival skills - the less mummies are able to see themselves as interdependent with their babies and will see babies as somehow burdensome and stressful.
For me, once DS came along I was able to shift to a whole new consciousness - we were ONE entity and it really was a chicken or egg sicho with our happiness - one equals the other at exactly the same time as the reverse was true. It was not possible (and still sort of isn't) to suggest to me that by doing something that made me happy that might not be relevant to DS I would then have a happier baby. It made no sense and still doesn't. No, I would not feel better expressing to have a night out on my own. My place was with my baby because this time really is so short and how many people, during my pregnancy and after DS was born, were ready to tell me that the time goes so fast, make the most of it? So I did exactly that. Even during a horrendous initial Tongue Tie issue that directly impacted on breastfeeding, I made sure I was in the moment and didn't wish the time away, because that would wish away all the other magical moments that you just can't replace 'when you're ready'.
Anyway, all of this is quite aside from PND. Women who don't have PND who believe HM=HB and tell themselves this to justify their decisions that affect what the baby needs and wants are most likely not benefiting from people in their lives who support them in their new role and have caregivers who will happily brush her off with a HM=HB line so that they can tick her off their list and ensure their clinic gets government funding for meeting their quota.
It's just no longer about 'you' when the child comes along. There is another person whose needs are actually probably more important because they can't meet their own needs and need their primary caregiver to recognise and act on this.
There, I'm having my own rant, Lulu! Had to spread love, sorry chick ;)
Rosehip Fairy, I don't think giving children chores or deciding to buy a winter coat for yourself before buying your child yet another computer game is a case where your happiness comes before your child's. When it comes to buying things for my child, I absolutely love doing it. I love seeing the joy on her face. Yet, I KNOW she will NEED to learn that we can't have everything all the time. Same goes for chores. She will NEED to learn that we all have to chip in together, we're a team, I'm not her slave.
Being a martyr is not good for anyone. But we have to seriously wonder what is happening when people see their children as a burden that stop them from living their lives the way they would like to.
I don't think it is a bad thing to leave your child with it's father. It facilitates bonding between the two while giving the mother a break at the same time. I also don't think it's a bad thing to leave the child with other family members from time to time. I personally didn't feel right to leave her with someone else for more than 2-3 hours in the early months. Once she was about 8 months, I left her with her grandparents for half a day a week, a few months later, we stepped it up to about 8 hours as I needed to work in my business. I would have much preferred to stay with her. Or only leave her for 1/2 a day. But ths is what was necessary. Didn't make me happy, although DD seemed happy as she loves her grandparents. And hey, they were happy they had time with her.
Hoobley,
You have put in words exactly what I was trying to say.:
To re-visit a few examples on the thread (probably misremembering and getting it wrong...). The woman who had a traumatic birth and didn't get BFing established then going on to have an elective section and FF from birth next time. Happy mum? WHere? I don't see a happy mum. I see a woman so traumatised by her first month at motherhood that she has decided to embrace the failure she feels herself to be rather than attempt to re-connect with the mother she WANTED to be. Do i feel for her? Yes. Do i blame her for her response? Not at all. In this society it's hard to talk to people about birth and the overall trend of "Your baby is healthy so stop moaning" means many women remain traumatised for years after their babies are born. But do i really believe she is happy or that her chosen path for #2 will make her happy? Nope.
You have made another point about women leaving their children with virtual strangers...
I think this is a sagin of a big problem in our society: mother's often don't have a support network. Mothers need support. Be it physical or emotional. We often live far away from our families, communities are not as closely knit as they used to be. My parents also live on the other side of the world. And how I wish they were closer. However, I am lucky I have my inlaws closeby (although they do drive me insane). If I can leave DD with my in-laws, I don't have a problem going out every once in a while. Although we don't do that very often. TBH, I find DH and I can connect much better at home, sitting on the couch or patio talking, then sitting in a restaurant. Maybe we are boring, but that's jsut the way we are. Going out to me is about being with other people, with friends. And we do that once in a while. But it has never been about the 2 of us connecting.
We haven't done it for a while, but we used to have a family morning every Sunday, we would take DD out of the house, have breakfast somewhere, take her to the beach or playground or something like that. I found that mcuh more valuable for us. She'd have fun, we could both rejoice in her joy, and then, at home, once she was down for a sleep, we had time to talk about her or anything we felt like talking about.
Oh, and about you failing at BFing. I don't see you as a failure at all. You fed her for more than 6 months. So you were a success at BFing for 6 months. After that, yes, maybe you can say you failed. But really it was beyond your control. Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but I wouldn't say it was a happy mum = happy baby situation. It sounds more like healthy mum = happy baby. And you put her need to have a relationship with her dad before your wish to avoid FF.
Oh, and I totally agree, I have never seen being a SAHM (well, mostly anyway) is a sacrifice, either. I wouldn't want it any other way. I love my job, especially since it;s my own business. But I cannot imagine any job being more fulfilling than being around my child.
Ok, enough rambling.... you must be sick of me by now.
Saša
I think that's when we need to find the happy medium kwim? Parents who struggle with the complete change of lifestyle a baby brings do need a little extra help in finding it and get to a place where the don't need to go out all the time, because not all parents choose parenthood, often it is thrust upon them and they have to adjust to that the best way they can. So in that respect it does seem like a burden to them.:
But we have to seriously wonder what is happening when people see their children as a burden that stop them from living their lives the way they would like to.
Absolutely there are parents who are there because their hand was forced. I reckon these people especially need support networks all around them to help them adjust to, accept and accommodate their new reality. I agree, Trillian.
The babies need their parents to get this support for their best interests, as they didn't ask to be brought into a sicho where the parents couldn't come through for them on preparedness levels, KWIM? In this way, I feel a happy medium could be found, instead of going too far over into the 'parent interest' side of things at the expense of the baby and the needs that are optimally met by mummy. There are parents out there who have even wanted to be parents and they weren't realistic or someone wasn't realistic with them leading up to it, so they, too, become unexpected parents.
I like this point about unexpected parenthood, thanks, Trillian :)
Trillian & Mayaness, I absolutely agree.
I thought I was the only one who had this thought LOL! I think happy mum=happy bub is a phrase that women *sometimes* use to justify being selfish in situations that they really should be giving bub priority (I've never seen it done in this forum though). Like anything, it's a balance between babies needs and also your own needs because at the end of the day, you need to be at a functional level to care of your child(ren)! Children come first, in my opinion, but that doesn't mean mum falls off the priority list all together.
This has been an interesting read. I have often thought that the HM=HB statement should be banned. Often when I have encountered it, it really means Happy Mummy = stuff everyone else and their needs. I have heard it used as an excuse to turn playgroups into Mummy wine drinking sessions, as the mummies are more relaxed, so the kids must be! I now tend to ignore advice that is justified with that statement, as I feel that if the person is using it with me, that they don't really understand me and my situation.
I think there is a place for the statement and I'll continue to use it. Everybody has a different experience at pregnancy, birth and then parenting. For some women it is very important that the statement happy mum = happy baby is embraced and supported because sometimes the mother simply must come first. If she doesn't, you going to have a very unhappy everybody - mother, baby, husband, other children.
But Lulu, that's ignoring a mother's needs, which shouldn't be done at all. Ignoring a mother's wants for 99% of the time to put a child first isn't damaging.
Bec, I agree, when I use "happy mum, happy baby" I'm not happy. DS loves nursery, which is great, but I'd rather be a SAHM than work for half the time I have with him! I hate not seeing him! But I want to stay at home, DS needs to be happy, loved and with a home and loving parents. So I make myself enjoy work/study as much as possible. Even though it's a poor second to spending time with DS.
As for parents becoming so unexpectedly, for the vast majority (and I'm not interested in looking at the tiny minority here because that's another set of problems) they have had consentual sex and have had nine months of pregnancy. Even if they only knew about the baby for one of those months, they still decided to have sex knowing it could lead to a baby and they still had more warning than the baby did. Parents have the option of adoption; babies do not.
Yes, all parents need support. It's hard seeing everyone be all "mother" and knowing that you're just not. It's hard being the outsider. But that doesn't mean that you can torture your child because you were unprepared for the lack of help from anyone around you. You're a mother. It may not be what you expected and you may not "bond" or "fall in love" or whatever crap excuse you want to give but come on! This is a BABY! There is no excuse for not taking care of that baby.
This is from someone who had a "difficult", "hard work" baby (according to my friends - and when I've seen their "easy" babies I agree, but also wonder why they're easy given the amount of advice I had to CC), had no "bonding" or "falling in love" (overrated IMO), had no support from family or friends (MiL spent all her time with Niece rather than even asking if we were OK), had no sleep, had a baby in pain who screamed when put down even when I was in agony... in hindsight I didn't enjoy early motherhood, being perfectly honest! But I did know I'm raising another human being who needs treating with love and respect. No matter how I feel about it.
Sorry, I just don't buy that women who want their old life back without making any room for a baby from day 1 are "unprepared" or whatnot. They're just selfish. They need to see they have a CHILD now and things change whether they like it or not. And not just because they need a babysitter once or twice a week.
I'm not saying its an excuse to not take care of your baby. Sometimes taking care of yourself is the best way of taking care of your baby. And if that means once a week you leave your child with a babysitter, grandparent or whoever to go to movie on your own to feel recharged then I don't see why that isn't taking care of your baby to the best of your ability.
Its not fair or accurate to say that a woman who craves back the life they used to have is being selfish. I crave my old life. I want to have time for myself. I want to be valued for my intellect rather than my just ability to nurture my children and make a great casserole. I want to wear nice clothes without having them covered in vomit. That doesn't make me selfish. That makes me a mature, intelligent woman who for nearly 38 years had a fulfilled, challenging and independent life. It is a huge adjustment to change that life for one of a SAHM. Not for a second would I give up the beautiful children I have now, and I will not return to work even though I want to for me because I believe it is the right thing for my children to have me home. But that doesn't mean I'm not allowed to miss it, crave it or whatever you want to call it and it sure doesn't mean that when I use the "happy mum = happy baby" phrase for myself I am being selfish. Maybe its what I need to justify time away from my children so that I feel ok about it.
RH - everything you say about unexpected parenthood is why I said it's especially important for these women to have support around them so that they can tend to their child's needs and not have to come to a point where all they can do is say "HM=HB". With supports in place, that mother is freed up to consider her baby as important as her and her baby's welfare very much linked to her own in such a way that they can't really be separated.
I think the saying is pretty dumb, anyway. Women who look after themselves first, and actually try to keep themselves as separate entities from their babies don't actually have happier babies. They still have babies whose needs are unmet - they just learn to shut up about it, cos having needs doesn't mean they'll be tended to any sooner, they'll just be bandaided, cos that makes the mother feel better. The equation becomes a non-equation and cancels out the baby as an equal proportion. In BODMAS, the mother is the brackets and the baby is multiplication or worse! If it were a true situation of HM=HB, then the exact reverse would be true in the same way. Sorry if I'm getting too 'logical' here!
ETA:
Wow, that's a loaded statement!:
It is a huge adjustment to change that life for one of a SAHM.
I can see how older first time mums have a harder time adjusting their own identities. I'm a sort of SAHM and I am quite at ease with the fact that I'm intellectual, have been a good contributor to my community in my own right and that I am my own person. I share that now with DS. Having DS and tending to his needs was an evolution for me and I was able to embrace it, instead of seeing it in opposition to what I had been. Being a mother committed to meeting her child's needs and putting them on par with my own didn't diminish my own idea of myself, or other people's idea of me (not that that even matters much to me!). Then again, I didn't have a 'career' that defined me, and I was careful not to let anything so transient define me in my 20's. I had DS when I was 30, so not a huge amount of time to become attached to transient notions of self. I know people younger than me who had much-loved careers who have a hard time adjusting, too, so it's not just age. It's possible that it's also about how far values have to change when shifting from non-parenthood to parenthood as to whether you'll be more susceptible to the HM=HB myth.
Wow. Sorry, I just found this really sad. This just soooo reflects how people feel about SAHMs.:
I can't think of anything more fulfilling, challenging, nor independent than the life I have as a mum. I'm not squeezed into some cubicle in an office working for someone else.. I'm at home, free to do as I please with my family, and I work for bosses that love and appreciate me! Altho I'm somewhat underpaid, and I'm sure I'm due for longservice leave some time soon! LOL.