“Lean In,” by Sheryl Sandberg

Chapter 9: "The Myth of Having it All"

I love just about everything about this chapter, starting with the title.  Like many women, I closely followed the discussion Anne Marie Slaughter ignited with her article for The Atlantic, "Why Women Still Can't Have it All."  None of the subsequent discussion summed up my impressions of the subject as much as the title of this chapter.  The idea is ridiculous.  No one can have it all, not women, not men, not celebrities, not politicians.  There will always be something missing.

I want to quote practically every line of this chapter.  I will refrain from doing that, but at the same time, there's a lot that I don't want to paraphrase.  For example, "each of us makes choices constantly between work and family, exercising and relaxing, making time for others and taking time for ourselves."  I have a slight problem with her use of "making" time and "taking" time.  I feel like saying that we make time for others and we take time for ourselves makes the time for ourselves seem negative, while the time for others is positive. 

I agree with the premise that we have to prioritize, make choices, but I always stress with friends when we have this conversation that time for ourselves has to be right up there with other priorities.  I can't be as good as I should for my family or my work if I don't also care for myself.

Working women often compare themselves to others who are not in their same situation.  We compare our work lives with traditional men's careers, and we are comparing our skills at home with traditional stay-at-home mom rules that should probably no longer apply to us. We can't expect to do both as well as those who devote themselves to one or the other full time.  It's not fair, and it will never work.

As an example, Sandberg quotes Gloria Steinem, "You can't do it all.  No one can have two full-time jobs, have perfect children and cook three meals and be multi-orgasmic 'til dawn...  Superwoman is the adversary of the women's movement."

Another principle that Sandberg comes back to time and again in this chapter is "Done is better than perfect." I first came across this thought in 2008, when I worked for a wise man who encouraged me to spend less time worrying, and more time doing.  "Perfect is the enemy of good," he said.  Around the same time, another colleague taught me that an imperfect plan half completed is better than a perfect plan never started."

No one is perfect, just like no one can have it all.  But we can makes decisions about what areas of our life require more of our attention, and spend our time focusing on that, rather than trying to excel at every area.  We are, after all, only human. 

Sandberg then points out that most organizations will take 100% of what you can give if you let them do it. We have to "exert more control over our careers."  If you come in every morning at 7am and leave at 7 pm, you will begin to expect that of yourself, and so will those you work with.  If you,on the other hand, decide to give 100% of yourself to work during work time and then make it a priority to be at home with your family for dinner, you can make that an expectation at your work place.

Why do we do this?  "Mothers don't want to be perceived as less dedicated to their jobs than men or women without family responsibilities.  We overwork to overcompensate.  Even in workplaces that offer reduced or flextime arrangements, people fear that reducing their hours will jeopardize their career prospects." 

Sandberg then quotes a Colin Powell maxim that I would like U.S. government service managers to abide by.  Powell said: "in very senior jobs I've had I've tried to create an environment of professionalism and the very highest standards.  When it was necessary to get a job done, I expected my subordinates to work around the clock.  When that was not necessary, I wanted them to work normal hours, go home at a decent time, play with their kids, enjoy family and friends, read a novel, clear their heads, daydream, and refresh themselves.  I wanted them to to have a life outside the office.  I am paying them for the quality of their work, not for the hours they work." 

I learned something totally new in this chapter, something I suspected, but had no proof to support my theory.  Many of my friends worry that spending less time with our children than our mothers did damages the child, or hinders their development.  I've always told my friends that it's more about our guilt and our needs than it is about the children.  Sandberg quotes studies that draw this conclusion:  "Exclusive maternal care was not related to better or worse outcomes for children.  There is, thus, no reason for mothers to feel as though they are harming their children if they decide to work."

Working mothers often carry this burden of feeling like they are letting their children down, or worse, harming them, just by spending time away from the children.  For this reason, "guilt management can be just as important as time management for mothers."  There's no easy answer, but by identifying our priorities at home and at work, we are both more productive and more fulfilled as parents.  

The "aim is to have children who are happy and thriving."  I would add that my partner and I should also be happy and thriving.

There's no secret.  Having it all IS a myth.  We just need to do our best with what we have; recognizing and priotizing the most important people and things in our lives.

Photocredit:

Supermom:  http://playtodaydc.com/blog/40

Guilt:  http://www.klce.com/mom-are-you-feeling-more-guilty-lately/

“Lean In,” by Sheryl Sandberg
Chapter 8:  “Make Your Partner a Real Partner”

As a career woman and mother of three amazing kids, I know that I would not be successful without the help and support of my superstar husband.  In our family, it is my husband who thinks about birthday parties; my husband who often takes the kids to doctors' appointments; and definitely my husband who takes care of the finances.

In our family, my husband has already learned the lesson Sheryl Sandberg wants to share in the final line of this chapter when she says, "We need more men to sit at the table... the kitchen table."

The chapter is all about how men and women need to work together to ensure that everyone is given an equal and fair opportunity.  But too often, she equates this to splitting family responsibilities fifty / fifty.  This seems a unrealistic to me given the shifting requirements of most jobs and personal responsibilities; so I was glad that in some sections she focuses on the fair division of labor, whatever that might look like for your family.

The bottom line is, women can no longer be expected to be the sole caregiver for the children; they cannot be considered the default stay-at-home parent; and they should not be expected to work in the evenings while the husband rests if they have already been working in the home all day.

By the same token, men should be encouraged to participate in child care, and should not be told that they're doing things wrong simply because they're not doing it just like their spouse. They should have the same options as their wives to consider being the primary caregiver for their children, and they should be praised and supported if they do make that choice.

It's the 21st century. We have the opportunity to make our 21st century realities more healthy and fulfilling for everyone if men learn to lean in to the family just as women are being urged to lean in to their careers.

I’m totally onboard.

Photo Credit
Man Cooking:  mid-day.com
Father helps with Laundry:  deseretnews.com

"Blonde," by Joyce Carol Oates

I purchased this book because I had read strong, positive reviews.  I'm not unhappy that I read it, because I really knew almost nothing about Marilyn Monroe, but I don't think I'm better off for having read it.

This is a fictionalized version of what Marilyn Monroe's life might have been like if viewed through a stream of consciousness inner monologue of what Monroe and those who viewed or interacted with Monroe thought was real.  Monroe's inner monologue seems much more fantasy, whereas other characters (sometimes identified, often not) seem to have a matter-of-fact take, viewed through the prism of their impressions of Marilyn and the hazy mists of drugs, alcohol, and self-deception that the author imagines would have surrounded them in real life.

I find the book a heart breaker from beginning to end.  Marilyn Monroe was never real.  She was a character created for the real person inside, Norma Jean Baker.  But Norma Jean, though she always wanted others to "see" and love her, the real person, lost herself at an early age.  The child of a drug and alcohol-addicted washed-up wannabe; more often abused than understood; we feel in the book that she never, ever had a chance.

And each chance that comes her way is like a rug abruptly, forcefully, pulled out from under her, with ever increasing negative consequences.

There are definitely times when Norma Jean could have made better choices, but it seems that the author, while wanting us to acknowledge this truth, has already made up her mind that Norma Jean's past determines her future, and that Marilyn was always fated to have the last word.

It's a long book.  It's a densely-written book.  It's an addictive book.  In reading it, I've found myself identifying with Norma Jean - both for the things that happen to her, as well as in the bad decisions she makes.  I definitely had moments of "there but for the grace of God go I," without the possibility of super stardom to perhaps ease the blow.  In short, it left me feeling slightly used and dirty.

The one section in the book that really gave me hope was the love between Norma Jean and Arthur Miller.  While it's clear that Miller never completely understood her, it's also made clear that he loved her, and would -- if he'd been allowed -- have been so happy to save her.


Yet Marilyn - because by now, Norma Jean was well and truly buried under Marilyn's spell, despite the fact that she felt abandoned by the glittering and nearly-perfect façade - seems to have decided that one error, one flaw in the men that she thought she could trust and thought she loved, was enough to doom the relationship.  Or maybe she didn't decide it, that's just the way it was.  And Miller let her down.  If you read the book, you'll find out how.

If you're very into Marilyn, or you want an in-depth portrait of one author's vision of her, then read this book.  Otherwise, stay in your comfort zone.  You don't need to waste the weeks or months it will take to get through this tome.

Photo Credits:
Marilyn Monroe and Arthur Miller:  Photo Richard Avedon copyright the Richard Avedon Foundation
Young Marilyn Monroe:  www.everlastingstar.net

Wish the Beasts had Stayed Hidden in the Wilds

Nope, no way, uh uh... I cannot believe that this film was up for an Oscar.  Ok. How to describe...

Well, lots of crazy people living off the grid, except not really, because they have electricity and booze, and lots and lots of stuff that they apparently never dispose of.

And the children?  Well, in one of the early scenes, all the babies are wearing stained cloth diapers hanging off them loosely, with a number written on the bottom (I guess to make them easier to identify), and dropped off into an open area separated from the adult festival merriment by a red ribbon tied up between sticks.

Basically, children are neglected, barely bathed, and left to their own devices.  

I'm not going to give a summary of the story, it's easy enough to google.  I'll just say that with the exception of the wonderful, amazing, Quvenzhané Wallis, the movie was pretty stupid.  

Everything Q. (Let's just call her Q) said and everything she did (almost) was a joy to watch.  But when she was being left with her daddy by social workers, allowed to almost hurt herself badly on more than one occasion, eat garbage (almost literally), it was very hard to watch.

And then there was the magical realism.  I'm generally ok with magical realism, if it makes the film better.  And while I got the symbolism of these scenes, I hated every one, and I just didn't think they were necessary, nor even did they really make any sense.

Some of the cinematography was attractive, and I like the concept, but honestly, I wish I had just watched Iron Man 3 again.

If you've watched it, I'd love to know what you thought.