Exposing the Mommy Myth: A Book Review

Society has always glorified and observed maternalism. It considers it the most difficult yet the noblest of professions. So odd is its position in society that traditions and norms nominate been set up around it to protect it from the vagaries of change as well as from attempts to transform it to keep it abreast with contemporary ways. In these modern times, maternalism be quiet adheres to a rigid script that is anchored on the theme that a womans true warmheartedness is to be a fuck off, and not just any mother, but to take the Perfect Mom.Media and the images of motherhood they earn be at the forefront of this endeavor to promote and protect the ideal of the Perfect Mom. Except that in that location is no such thing as a Perfect Mom. Media atomic number 18 doing a disservice to women of totally ages by passing off these images as the standard they must aspire for to be considered successful mothers so they can achieve fulfillment and contentment in life.New MomismT he book The Mommy fabrication The idealisation of Motherhood and How It Has Undermined Women by Susan J. Douglas and Meredith W. Michaels is star work that presents a witty yet scholarly evaluate of medias romanticized images of motherhood and how they misrepresent the realities confronting mothers. The authors framed their arguments on what they called the new momism which they defined as a set of ideals, norms and practices most frequently and powerfully represented in the media that seem on the surface to celebrate motherhood, but which in reality promulgate standards of perfection that are beyond your reach.The term momism was coined by journalist Philip Wylie in 1942 for his book Generation of Vipers. He used the term to denounce the way American mothers were raising their sons to be mamas boys who were incapable of fighting for their country. The authors decision to reclaim momism and define it was a deliberate attempt to show that nothing much has changed since those war years of the early forties with regard to societys expectation of motherhood it is the mother who is largely responsible whether the child volition grow up into a successful, stable, and happy person or not. And media make sure to instill this in her psyche.This is how the authors described what mothers internalize when they read magazines, watch TV, or see a movieMothers are result to an onslaught of beatific imagery, romantic fantasies, self-righteous sermons, psychological warnings, terrorise movies about losing their children, even to a greater extent terrifying news stories about abducted and abused children, and totally chimerical advice about how to be the most perfect and adore mom in the neighborhood. (2)The authors further wroteNo wonder 81 percent of women in a fresh poll said its harder to be a mother now than it was 20 or 30 years ago, and 56 percent felt mothers were doing a worse job today than mothers back then. notwithstanding mothers who deliberately avoid TV and magazines, or who pride themselves in seeing through them, have publish escaping the standards of perfection, and the experience of threat, that the media ceaselessly atomize the air we breathe. (2)It is ironic that the authors started their examination of media messages about mothers during the 1970s, that exciting period in the feminist movement when women were beginning to find their voices and question, even break free from the traditional gender roles that had been delegate to them. Motherhood did not escape their scrutiny and it was one of the topics discussed and debated on during consciousness-raising sessions. They were also beginning to realize that motherhood was not a womans destiny and there were choices available for her. Women could choose whether they become mothers or not.And if they chose to be mothers, they could choose to stay at home to overdress their children or work outside the home, possibly even pursue a career. Which was what a significant numb er of them did, giving rise to a phenomenon that whitethorn have, in all probability, resulted in the new momism. And why not, motherhood was under threat, especially from feminism, and it had to be defend at all cost. For the authors, (w)hether you are a married religious fundamentalist, a partnered lesbian, a divorced laic humanist with a Ph.D., or a single twenty-year-old trying to make it in the big city, if you are a female human, the new momism has circled the wagons around you.The book laid out a diachronic account of how the new momism manifested itself during the last decades of the 20th century and the contradictory messages they send out to women. It juxtapose mothering guided by famous pediatricians, through regular media exposure, and childrearing advice columns against the emerging feminist thinking on the political characteristic of motherhood during the 70s. It discussed how in the 80s, media reports of child molestation, abductions and other external threats aga inst children presented working mothers with a dilemma of whether to rely their children to others while they were out working. besides it was also during the same period that media intensified its message that mothers can have both a satisfying career and a stable family life. In the 90s, it is the turn of the celebrity moms, who made ordinary women insecure and less confident of their motherhood skills, and the criminal and welfare mothers to be under media attention. The alleged(prenominal) mommy wars were also being fought, supposed conflicts that pitted working mothers against stay-at-home moms.The authors, in dissecting coverage of issues veneering motherhood, were able to show the evolving, and at times opposing, images of mothers in media and how they were deeply influenced by new momism. Most of the time, the authors ceaselessly referred to popular culture to illustrate their analysis. This, plus their smart-ass style of writing, may have given some readers exercise to think of their work as less than scholarly. Still, their analysis was incisive enough and ably domiciliateed by well-documented examples to be dismissed as anything but presenting a legitimate issue about the myths of motherhood.Reclaiming MotherhoodIt cannot be denied that in this time and age, media still fail to portray a balanced picture of womens divers(a) lives, choosing instead to present images and messages that reinforce traditional gender roles that are very limiting. Motherhood is not apologize from this. As the authors argued in their book, media have systematically presented an idealized, and therefore, unrealistic picture of it. Medias core message is that women are destined to have children. Their primary role in life is to be mothers who must care for them and raise them to be successful, stable, happy persons.Their own fulfillment is anchored on this. No wonder then that mothers who feel differently are assailed by guilt and a sense of failure for wanting to be more than mothers. These feelings become especially intense for working mothers who opt to leave their children in the care of others while they take on work outside the home or pursue a career. As long as mothers are in this situation, they will forever be torn between two opposing forces, juggling one set of responsibilities at the expense of the other, and struggling to meet the expectations of new momism just because these are basically societys expectations of them as well.New momisms supposed aim is to promote the interests of children. But as the authors pointed out, this can very well be just rhetoric, considering how public policies have fallen nearsighted in supporting mothers perform their childrearing roles. The fallout from this is consequently borne by the children.In todays sputter for survival, a two-income family is getting to be the norm. While most mothers may prefer to be stay-at-home moms, more and more of them take on employment outside the house because of economic necessity. It will be a validation for working mothers and how they are valued by society if they can be provided with affordable and complaisant day care services and welfare benefits.Or their employment terms can be negotiated in such a way that they can work flexible hours or avail of parental leaves for family emergency. Unfortunately, providing support and benefits to working mothers are not high on the agenda of judicature and business. There have been instances when government has slashed funding for initiatives that respond to the needs of working mothers.Business, on the other hand, prioritizes profit first forwards benefits for working mothers. So much for the exalted and celebrated status of mothers, particularly of working mothers. Faced with this, is it set up then to say that motherhood as practiced by them should be less valued since they do not meet the expecations of new momism?Not so, according to the authors. They argued that mothers would be better s erved by reclaiming motherhood and redefining it in such a way that it would encompass shared parenting as well as support and welfare benefits for their childrearing responsibilities. At the top of the agenda to accomplish this is to acknowledge new momism for being the unrealistic ideal that it is and to stand firm against it. Motherhood can never be perfect. All that a mother can do is to try and do her best. To constantly aim for perfection is a futile and self-defeating exercise.The authors have succeeded in debunking the merit of new momism. And they did this with cutting wit and a scathing sense of humor as only two mothers who are fully convinced of their arguments can do. Their style may not work for some readers but there is no denying the fact that they are able to ruin some three-decades worth of fallacious thinking and belief that is the myth of motherhood.Work CitedDouglas, Susan J. and Meredith W. Michaels. The Mommy Myth The Idealization of Motherhood and How It Has Undermined Women. New York Free Press, 2004.