Post a reply: Francis Holland head says "you can't have it all"

Post as a Guest

This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
BBCode is OFF
Smilies are OFF
Topic review

Expand view Topic review: Francis Holland head says "you can't have it all"

Re: Francis Holland head says "you can't have it all"

by AbbevilleMummy » Mon Nov 09, 2015 11:22 am

Since this debate started in the national press I have heard a lot of people get put out by the expression 'have it all' and I don't really understand why?

To me, the expression means to be able to not have to make sacrifices once you have kids. Those sacrifices could be in terms of your career but also personal free time, hobbies, exercise, travel etc.

This is why I also believe that to 'have it all', (all at the same time) isn't possible as having kids is all about sacrifice!! :D

Whether you are male or female for that matter! I know that my husband, whilst he is still working, certainly feels that he has sacrificed himself somewhat since having kids. Sometimes he can't work as hard as he'd like to, he can't spend all of his hard earned money of little luxuries for himself anymore, and he has far fewer lads trips!

What we should be teaching our girls and boys is to make the most of when you are young free and single! :lol:

But on a serious note, I do get frustrated by hearing that women that have decided to be at home for a while, have given up on their careers. We are the first generation where strong, economically powerful women are now having children. Most of my mummy friends are lawyers, bankers, industry heads etc all at the top of their game when they decided to have kids. Yes, a lot of them have decided to pause their careers for now to raise their young families, largely because they have earned well during their 20's and 30's and so can afford to do so. But jump forward 10 years or so and let's see what they are doing! I have no doubt that they will all have successful careers again. Possibly not in their original field, but they are not the sort of ladies who are just going to sit at home watch This Morning that's for sure!

Hopefully time will show that we can indeed 'have it all' when you look at our adult lives as a whole and we will all be direct role models for our daughters on how to balance family life and personal achievements.

Re: Francis Holland head says "you can't have it all"

by torts » Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:19 am

I would agree that women cannot have it all - at the present time.

Following recent redundancy from a job that had amazing flexibility which allowed me to spend lots of time with my daughter, I struggled with being attracted to well-paid full-time jobs but also desperately wanting to be at home and do the school run and take my daughter to all her activities. As a single (widowed) mother to an only child, employing a nanny doesn't make much sense, but I don't want her to have to be in before-and-after school clubs five days a week or in institutional care throughout the long summer holidays.

Youngsters, perhaps especially women, should think ahead when planning their careers as to how they would manage the juggling and think what qualifications would allow them to work flexibly in future.

Of course, if employers could just accept the idea of flexibility more readily, then perhaps we could really have it all.

Re: Francis Holland head says "you can't have it all"

by nuttymummy » Thu Nov 05, 2015 10:19 pm

Ok, I'm also probably about to regret jumping in here but..... What exactly is "having it all"??!!! Surely the whole thing is entirely subjective and we all need to accept that we all make different choices for different reasons and what REALLY needs to happen is that we shouldn't be made to feel guilty for that. Some return to work because they want to, some return because they don't have a choice and the salary is essential, some don't return because they feel they want to be at home and some are at home because their salary wouldn't cover the childcare costs. There are so so so many variables. Let's face the facts - we all do what we feel is right in the circumstances and at the time, life is not a fairytale and who's to say what our children (girls & boys) will or won't want to choose. We need to make them aware that they will be faced with options and equip them with the tools to deal with the choices THEY will have to make.

Re: Francis Holland head says "you can't have it all"

by supergirl » Thu Nov 05, 2015 8:26 pm

I jump in because the equal (or unequal) pay together with the childcare costs are an important factor in the decision but not the only one.
For a lot of people (and you mentionned this Julian) it is a patnership between 2 parents. As you said for some parents it is very important that the children are with one of them instead of a carer and it has nothing to do with money. It is a decision based on the overall welfare of the children and the family and the (sometimes perceived) benefits of having one parent at home.

In our circle we know 3 dads who have put their career on hold to be with the kids while the mums are ar work; we know a few mums who have done the same while the dads work; finally we know a lot who are both working part time so the children are always with one of them.
All those families have made these arrangements based on the positives impact it will make on their family. The economic argument came after.

Re: Francis Holland head says "you can't have it all"

by juliantenniscoach » Thu Nov 05, 2015 6:37 pm

Oh I see. Ok let me try and explain. I think that in many cases the costs of childcare v the net income of working can be marginal. I'm not talking about the big city jobs which always dominate this argument, but regular jobs paying sub £50,000 for example (still a good income against the national average clearly).

Our state provision for childcare doesn't meet the employers need which then places the burden of cost onto the family. Again I'm not saying sexism doesn't exist, of course it does. However I do think the maths for many families don't add up for returning to work.

I hope that makes more sense?

Re: Francis Holland head says "you can't have it all"

by millymoo » Thu Nov 05, 2015 6:26 pm

Sorry I was referring to the point about the glass ceiling - if it is an economic reason why women leave the workforce then that should be fixed so that they can make a balanced choice for their family.

Re: Francis Holland head says "you can't have it all"

by juliantenniscoach » Thu Nov 05, 2015 6:21 pm

Hi Milly, perhaps I didn't explain myself properly. Were you referring to this paragraph?

"I also know a few families where the father has adopted the role of main carer whilst the mother returns to the workplace. In all the cases this is an economic choice."

If not then can you let me know and I'll try to explain it? Thanks.

Re: Francis Holland head says "you can't have it all"

by millymoo » Thu Nov 05, 2015 6:17 pm

Thanks for joining the debate Julian - I am curious about what you mean on the economic benefits of women leaving the workforce. The fact is women are still paid less than men for doing the same job in many industries. This is particularly true post maternity leave so until we have full transparency on whether salary is completely gender neutral women may feel it is a better option to stay and raise a family. There aren't many things I agree with this government on but forcing large employers to disclose how many women they have in senior management positions and whether they are as equally compensated as their male counterparts is a move forward.

Re: Francis Holland head says "you can't have it all"

by juliantenniscoach » Thu Nov 05, 2015 6:06 pm

juliantenniscoach wrote:Daring to tread my little feet into this discussion, I would say there's another side that so far has been dismissed. If you read the Guardian then the Telegraph on the same subject they take very different angles with the Telegraph printing more direct quotes.

I know many professionally skilled women who once they have had children, changed their priorities by choice. As parents, we all change hormonally don't we?

I think the mother who decides to raise her children rather than forge on with her career is often dismissed as 'given up'. It's not really fair to make that judgement. If one assumes there is a partner, then if the partner earns more money it makes perfect sense. I want my children to have one of their parents as the person responsible for raising them, not a carer, however skilled they may be.

I also know a few families where the father has adopted the role of main carer whilst the mother returns to the workplace. In all the cases this is an economic choice.

I do feel sorry for mothers who have no choice but to return to the workplace for financial considerations, because as we all know, this is an expensive city to bring up children, pay the bills, try to get ahead.

My daughters are 8yrs and 6 yrs and of course encourage them to try everything and in time will try to help them with their ambitions. Of course a glass ceiling still exists but I believe logistics and economics play a big role in this. It's too simplistic to say it's all because of sexism.

I've been reading the Swedish experiment on 6 hour working days which might, might be a practical solution or part solution. It is too early for raw data to be translated into coherent results. Here's the link:- http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 74646.html

Re: Francis Holland head says "you can't have it all"

by juliantenniscoach » Thu Nov 05, 2015 6:01 pm

Daring to tread my little feet into this discussion, I would say there's another side that so far has been dismissed. If you read the Guardian then the Telegraph on the same subject they take very different angles with the Telegraph printing more direct quotes.

I know many professionally skilled women who once they have had children, changed their priorities by choice. As parents, we all change hormonally don't we?

I think the mother who decides to raise her children rather than forge on with her career is often dismissed as 'given up'. It's not really fair to make that judgement. If one assumes there is a partner, then if the partner it makes perfect sense. I want my children to have one of their parents as the person responsible for raising them, not a carer, however skilled they may be.

I also know a few families where the father has adopted the role of main carer whilst the mother returns to the workplace. In all the cases this is an economic choice.

I do feel sorry for mothers who have no choice but to return to the workplace for financial considerations, because as we all know, this is an expensive city to bring up children, pay the bills, try to get ahead.

My daughters are 8yrs and 6 yrs and of course encourage them to try everything and in time will try to help them with their ambitions. Of course a glass ceiling still exists but I believe logistics and economics play a big role in this. It's too simplistic to say it's all because of sexism.

I've been reading the Swedish experiment on 6 hour working days which might, might be a practical solution or part solution. It is too early for raw data to be translated into coherent results. Here's the link:- http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 74646.html

Re: Francis Holland head says "you can't have it all"

by Wheresmyschool? » Tue Nov 03, 2015 10:05 am

And now Masterchef has waded in, from the Telegraph
Not enough female chefs are making it to the top of the profession, because women are not prepared to put a career in the kitchen above having a family, MasterChef presenter Monica Galetti has said.

"I’ve seen many amazing chefs, girls, come into the kitchen and then give it up to be with their boyfriend. Would he do that for her?”

Monica Galetti, MasterChef host

Ms Galetti, who quit her job at top London restaurant Le Gavroche earlier this year, said that there was no gender bias in professional kitchens, but that when it came to forging a career as a top chef, women have “to put it first to do well”.

Speaking ahead of the new series of MasterChef: The Professionals, which returns to the BBC next week, Ms Galetti said that more women were beginning to enter the profession, and that “in the kitchen we’re all equals – once you’ve got a jacket on, you’re a chef. It’s not about gender –
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/119 ... areer.html

Thanks for that, lets tell everyone they can't have it all and soon they'll all believe us.

Idiots.

Re: Francis Holland head says "you can't have it all"

by supergirl » Mon Nov 02, 2015 8:29 pm

Why do we need to talk to them about that???? I think this statement is outdated and I am certainly not telling my children that. I tell them that they can do anything they want if they want to and work hard for it, end of.

I have spent half term with my 2 daughters and my niece who is 16 and not at any time did my niece talked or asked or was remotely interested in the " can I have it all? What happens if i want/have a family".

The only things that were worthy of interests (i say that in lighthearted way as I adore her and all teenagers for that matter) of my niece were: the next 2 years and her exams, getting into her first choice uni, her friends and how cool she looks (and going to topshop :P ).

She is convinced she'll managed the first 2 (and she works hard) and spends a good amount of her free time doing the others.

I am totally convinced that she will have the tools, background and maturity to make the decisions she will need to make as she grows up and she ll be totally ready for anything when family come her way.

To me this IS feminism.

Re: Francis Holland head says "you can't have it all"

by AbbevilleMummy » Mon Nov 02, 2015 8:20 pm

I agree with you Millymoo on your guess as to her motives. And that really is depressing. Also as an educator, what is she trying to achieve by making these comments?? If you want to have kids one day in the future, don't bother trying your best in school in order to get a good career?

Re: Francis Holland head says "you can't have it all"

by millymoo » Mon Nov 02, 2015 7:53 pm

I don't think society should expect women to be superhuman but I do think it is depressing and demoralising for girls to think that they can't have whatever they want at such an early age. Agree with the previous poster who said she wouldn't send her daughter to a school where the head wasn't a feminist. It doesn't sound like Vivienne is an inspirational leader and she probably wanted to say something controversial before retiring and writing a book on how we should be raising girls in the 21st century.

Re: Francis Holland head says "you can't have it all"

by AbbevilleMummy » Mon Nov 02, 2015 6:54 pm

I also agree with this-is-cat's point.

However, I also agree that it is important to tell our girls they they shouldn't put pressure on themselves to 'have it all' all in one go. And by that I mean, we shouldn't be expecting them to be superwoman. I genuinely believe that it is impossible to be incredibly successful in your career, be an amazing attentive mum, have an imalculate house AND be happy all in the same month!

Some months or years they should focus on their careers, some on their kids/family and then back again; and always outsource the housework!

Top