Downside of Being a Boomer

[catherine]

I had no clue where to put this--perhaps it should have gone into the Open Forum, particularly because when I saw this article, for some reason I thought about Mrs-M and her love of the 50s, and I thought about all the wonderful SAHMs out there.

It also reminded me of market research I recently did on the obesity epidemic, where I asked many doctors what they thought were the causes of obesity. One or two (definitely outliers, but...) blamed the Women's Movement because women were out of the home unable to provide balanced, healthy meals to their families.

Of course, as a working mom I got a little defensive. But, thinking about it, while I know that we Boomers are responsible for a lot of great things--and the Women's Movement is one of them IMHO, what price have we paid?

Have some of our ideals and values been thrown off-kilter? Especially if you're a simple-liver? Think about how radical Amy Dacyczyn was in the 80s/90s--staying home and living a frugal life to achieve her dreams, and opting out of the run-run-run up-the-career-ladder lifestyle we Boomer moms were embroiled in. I remember her being mocked on Oprah by the members of the audience--some of whom dared to suggest she was abusing her kids.

This article I'm quoting talks about how Boomers are not as healthy as their parents. How, if at all, did we do this to ourselves? Any thoughts?

[redfox]

That men are completely unable to cook healthy meals for their family? Actually, Cargill & their ilk have destroyed the food system in this country, and most people have not been educated about healthy food. That and urban sprawl and the dependence on cars, with the concomitant loss of walking time has really impacted health.

The women's movement brought us these things (a short & quick list - please add to it):
Safe and legal abortion
Access to contraception
Women in elected office at all levels
Higher pay - though not yet equal to a males
Title IX

We are all responsible for our families well-being, and the sharing - though not yet equal - of home responsibilities is a very good thing. I'd rather spend my energy fighting Cargill et all. Erin Brockovich is one of my heroes, because she chooses to fight the good fight. Women are powerhouses in every arena, and yes, the Women's Movement is the reason we've made important gains.

The 50's was a time of sexism, racism, classicism and generally very bad for women. The romance of it all is in hindsight, cherry picking the cute and fun parts. Do you seriously want to go back to a time when women had to have their husband's permission to get contraception???

[SRP]

I don't think our problems can be totally blamed on the Boomers. I think they are just symptoms of an ever-changing society. Maybe the process was accelerated because there are so many Boomers to work on the changes. Maybe? But think of the changes we're seeing today - for example, how so many people are wrapped up in technology (cell phones, texting, etc.) at the expense of true personal relationships, that sort of thing.

I don't know why we continue to do this to ourselves, but it seems neverending. I think it's the classic situation of "newer doesn't always mean better." But people continue to think it does.

[ApatheticNoMore]

There's probably some truth to it, less breastfeeding and so on has I think been linked to obesity. I know not all moms are physically capable of breastfeeding even if they have the time so you do the best you can (the problem is the formula companies are also not interesting in really maximizing the health of their product either).

Have you ever seen mom's complain, often repetitively, about how much they miss their kids (at least this tends to happen with first borns) and wish they could stay home with their kids instead of having to go to work again. And I always wonder ok, why don't you JUST DO IT? I mean perhaps the complaints are some kind of psychological game and not even genuine and they really secretly get a lot out of working and don't really want to give it up. But I sometimes do wonder, doesn't you husband bring home any money, couldn't you do it if you really wanted to? Maybe just the first couple of years of your kids life and then go back to work? Frankly this childfree by choice person is TIRED of hearing you complain about this!

This isn't boomers by the way but people closer to my age (generation X and Y) who have young kids now. I don't think a mom being away from a kid much of the first few years of their life will ever be natural, I realize the larger problem is the current economic system, very little flexibility for part time work, time off, companies demanding much more than 40 hour weeks etc.

[reader99]

If put it in terms of both parents working instead of focussing on moms it would be less divisive. I do in fact think that when both parents work full time it is a lot harder to have the time to make a fresh nutritious dinner. One of my cousins fed her kids on fast food picked up on the way home from work and day care, and their health has suffered. Had there been a parent home full or part time, someone would have had the time and energy to make a real meal.

[Mrs-M]

Originally posted by Catherine.
One or two (definitely outliers, but...) blamed the Women's Movement because women were out of the home unable to provide balanced, healthy meals to their families.

This really rings the bell for me. Call me an outlier too, but I tend to agree with that. I see so many imbalances and deficiencies in families of today I never seen a generation ago. (Entire family units seldom sitting down together to eat, everyone on the fly chasing a buck, no one taking the time to take care of themselves, and the list goes on and on). The way I see it, society (today) is bent on destruction, and so far, they're winning! Look how few people work hard nowadays as compared to a generation or two ago. To back up my statement, DH and I talk about it all the time, how we see few people out in their yards working and doing things. It's quite literally nonexistent.

A generation or two ago the woman of the house took pride in her family, her home, and most important of all, in herself. You didn't see her gallivanting around town in a pair of old ratty sweatpants pulled up the crack of their butts like you see women gallivanting around today. I see the downfall of society today (in the way of poor and failing health) a result of excess. No one is happy anymore with just the basics, it all has to revolve around extremes instead. All the homes where kids are fending for themselves tells a perfect tale of such. I know it because my kids tell me...

Originally posted by Redfox.
Do you seriously want to go back to a time when women had to have their husband's permission to get contraception???

Maybe- maybe not, but I do believe there's a lot to be said about how things were back in the 50's (even 60's and 70's). Marriages (back then) weren't falling apart like you see them falling apart today all because someone got their little nose out of joint over something or another, and you didn't see kids so animal like back then either as compared to what we're seeing today. Back then a woman had her place and it was all hers, and it showed. Take a look at how presentable and classy women were back then. (Nails manicured and painted, hair perfectly styled, clean fresh dress attire- even around the house, and a walk that suggested confidence, style, and class). Sure, we can surely find all sorts of inadequacies and faults with any generation before us, but if one wants to take the time to delve into finding the better and the good back then, one doesn't have to delve very far. IMO, our modern day generation of today has nothing on the generation before it, never mind two generations ago. As the saying goes, "we're the product of our own making".

[razz]

Lordy the loads of guilt! Do you honestly think that when we were more agrarian that women had all the times in the world to make home-based nutiritious meals plus producing multiple children, making the preserves from the garden after planting and hoeing it all summer plus making making clothes for the family and washing wool and doing the laundry and.... they had lots of help from several generations living in the same home. Nuclear families changed the options.

This is not about boomers or any other age but about choices. Did I stay home with my kids on a limited budget but able to so because DH was earning a steady income? Yes. Is employment reliable for one partner today? No. Do we need all the electronic junk and annual vacations, cars, toys etc? If we have a choice between doing without as SLers often choose to do to ensure more family time, is there much more support for this lifestyle now than when I was home with a young family? No.

The expectations by society have changed and we mostly have bought into these expectations often borrowing money in order to fulfil them.
I am appalled to hear of teens changing clothes three or more times a day and throwing each outfit into the wash for mom to clean and put away. The sense of entitlement is unbelievable by all generations. Older adults expect to have top of the line medical care with joints replaced at will, families expect annual vacations and large homes for social or Christmas/Thanksgiving get-togethers, teens expect enough money to spend time regularly at the mall with friends, adults expect to consume drugs (alcohol, MJ, etc) with no thought of cost or consequence. Imagine having a graduation ceremony for children moving from kindergarten into Gr 1 as is routine now. this is crazy.

It is much easier to blame the women for not staying at home than changing our expectations to more realistic and affordable ones.

[Jemima]

We live in a world that is driven by money, not Boomers, and are daily brainwashed by the mass media that we need more and more material things, whatever the cost. Thanks to all of these artificial needs, it is now financially very difficult for a mother or father to stay home with the kids and live decently on the income of the working parent. We are suckers for anything that promises to "save" time, whether a newer, faster car with bells and whistles or nutritionally deficient food, never mind that we have to keep working to pay for it.

I'm divorced with no kids, or even nieces or nephews (only child, here), but my job absolutely drains me with a three hour round-trip commute on crowded expressways, many mindless coworkers, and a job that often seems like busywork. I have to have a car to get here and even though it was paid off long ago, the maintenance comes to several thousand a year, not to mention hours of waiting at the Honda dealership. I've been working on voluntary simplicity for sixteen years and I'm not there yet. Once entered in the rat race, it is difficult to jump off the track and go for freedom.

[ApatheticNoMore]

I don't know I look back through the generations and merely see a legacy of pain. My mom grew up in the 50s but was somehow scared and scarred by her upbringing in ways I'll never fully understand. It may have had to do with being the daughter of a preacher man (talk about a load of guilt trips). My mom wanted to be a career woman and deeply resented us kids for getting in the way of it. Even though she could have done both since this was the 80s or so by then. Nowdays, I see moms complaining about "having" to go to work and not being able to stay home with the kids. My grandmother seemed the most happy one, she had both kids, and higher education, and a part-time job (subbing and teaching part time non-college adult classes - woman's work to be sure, but good work nontheless).

[herbgeek]

Marriages likely were not falling apart, because women had no other options. What would you do in an unhappy marriage, or one where your husband was cheating on you if you had no skills to support yourself and wages for women were lower because of the assumption that they weren't the primary breadwinner.

I wouldn't be so quick to idealize the life of the 50's/60's housewife. I think there was a lot of desperation, particularly for talented women who had much to offer, but a society who thought she should be at home and not contributing in a larger way.