Morning call: pick of the comment

The ten must-read pieces from the Sunday papers

1. Cameron tells us Britain is broken -- but not how to fix it (Observer)

After the horror of the Edlington case, says the Observer editorial, we must search our society for explanations. But there is a gap in Conservative social policy between the big "broken Britain" rhetoric and the little ideas.

2. Sending signals is not enough (Independent on Sunday)

John Rentoul points out that back in 1993 Tony Blair used rhetoric similar to Cameron's. But the Conservative leader's flailing semaphore doesn't address the complexities of "our broken society".

3. This social work by computer system is protecting no one (Sunday Times)

Hundreds of thousands of children are growing up in disorder and neglect, says Jenni Russell, and our system is prepared to deal with only a fraction of them. We must provide early intervention, or intensive support.

4. Marriage just wasn't a choice for my mother (Observer)

The Conservative MP David Davis defends Tory reticence on defining a marriage policy, arguing that it is a complex area. He illustrates this with personal experience, saying he favours marriage, but we must not forget those who are divorced, widowed or abandoned.

5. Apple's Tablet: a gizmo to save the world (Sunday Telegraph)

William Langley looks ahead to the launch of Apple's latest device, the iTablet, and thinks it could rescue our society from electronic servitude.

6. We were too slow in Haiti, and need to know why (Independent on Sunday)

Frank Judd says that wiith disasters likely to become more common, we need beefed-up international bodies that reflect the global public's desire to help.

7. After the Massachusetts Massacre (New York Times)

Neither in action nor in message is Barack Obama in front of the anger roiling the country over a dysfunctional economy and corrupt business culture, says Frank Rich. He must exercise take-no-prisoners leadership to stay in the White House.

8. Barack Obama's banking plan could split the west (Sunday Times)

Picking up the same theme, the Times leading article says that governments collectively can prevent banks from playing the system. Divided, they will end up achieving little.

9. Stop playing politics with our rights and freedoms. They're too valuable (Observer)

The Human Rights Act was used as a fig leaf for attacks on our civil liberties, says Henry Porter. What we need now is a great repeal bill which restores all that Labour has taken from us.

10. David Cameron's dream could end up a nightmare (News of the World)

Fraser Nelson discusses the possibility of a hung parliament, warning that the Tory leader could end up at the mercy of party rebels if he is elected without a large majority.

 

Follow the New Statesman team on Twitter

Getty.
Show Hide image

Just face it, being a parent will never be cool

Traditional parenting terms are being rejected in favour of trendier versions, but it doesn't change the grunt-like nature of the work.

My children call me various things. Mummy. Mum. Poo-Head. One thing they have never called me is mama. This is only to be expected, for I am not cool.

Last year Elisa Strauss reported on the rise of white, middle-class mothers in the US using the term “mama” as “an identity marker, a phrase of distinction, and a way to label the self and designate the group.” Mamas aren’t like mummies or mums (or indeed poo-heads). They’re hip. They’re modern. They’re out there “widen[ing] the horizons of ‘mother,’ without giving up on a mother identity altogether.” And now it’s the turn of the dads.

According to the Daily Beast, the hipster fathers of Brooklyn are asking their children to refer to them as papa. According to one of those interviewed, Justin Underwood, the word “dad” is simply too “bland and drab”:

“There’s no excitement to it, and I feel like the word papa nowadays has so many meanings. We live in an age when fathers are more in touch with their feminine sides and are all right with playing dress-up and putting on makeup with their daughters.”

Underwood describes “dad” as antiquated, whereas “papa” is an “open-minded, liberal term, like dad with a twist” (but evidently not a twist so far that one might consider putting on makeup with one’s sons).

Each to their own, I suppose. Personally I always associate the word “papa” with “Smurf” or “Lazarou.” It does not sound particularly hip to me. Similarly “mama” is a word I cannot hear without thinking of “Bohemian Rhapsody”, hence never without a follow-up “ooo-oo-oo-ooh!” Then again, as a mummy I probably have no idea what I am talking about. If other people think these words are trendy, no doubt they are.

Nonetheless, I am dubious about the potential of such words to transform parenting relationships and identities. In 1975’s Of Woman Born, Adrienne Rich describes how she used to look at her own mother and think “I too shall marry, have children – but not like her. I shall find a way of doing it all differently.” It is, I think, a common sentiment. Rejecting mummy or daddy as an identity, if not as an individual, can feel much the same as rejecting the politics that surrounds gender and parenting. The papas interviewed by The Daily Beast are self-styled feminists, whose hands-on parenting style they wish to differentiate from that of their own fathers. But does a change of title really do that? And even if it does, isn’t this a rather individualistic approach to social change?

There is a part of me that can’t help wondering whether the growing popularity of mama and papa amongst privileged social groups reflects a current preference for changing titles rather than social realities, especially as far as gendered labour is concerned. When I’m changing a nappy, it doesn’t matter at all whether I’m known as Mummy, Mama or God Almighty. I’m still up to my elbows in shit (yes, my baby son is that prolific).

The desire to be known as Papa or Mama lays bare the delusions of new parents. It doesn’t even matter if these titles are cool now. They won’t be soon enough because they’ll be associated with people who do parenting. Because like it or not, parenting is not an identity. It is not something you are, but a position you occupy and a job you do.

I once considered not being called mummy. My partner and I did, briefly, look at the “just get your children to call you by your actual name” approach. On paper it seemed to make sense. If to my sons I am Victoria rather than mummy, then surely they’ll see me as an individual, right? Ha. In practice it felt cold, as though I was trying to set some kind of arbitrary distance between us. And perhaps, as far as my sons are concerned, I shouldn’t be just another person. It is my fault they came into this vale of tears. I owe them, if not anyone else, some degree of non-personhood, a willingness to do things for them that I would not do for others. What I am to them – mummy, mum, mama, whatever one calls it – is not a thing that can be rebranded. It will never be cool because the grunt work of caring never is.

It is not that I do not think we need to change the way in which we parent, but this cannot be achieved by hipster trendsetting alone. Changing how we parent involves changing our most fundamental assumptions about what care work is and how we value the people who do it. And this is change that needs to include all people, even those who go by the old-fashioned titles of mum and dad.

Ultimately, any attempt to remarket parenting as a cool identity smacks of that desperate craving for reinvention that having children instils in a person. The moment you have children you have bumped yourself up the generational ladder. You are no longer the end of your family line. You are – god forbid – at risk of turning into your own parents, the ones who fuck you up, no matter what they do. But you, too, will fuck them up, regardless of whether you do it under the name of daddy, dad or papa. Accept it. Move on (also, you are mortal. Get over it).

Parenting will never be cool. Indeed, humanity will never be cool. We’re all going to get older, more decrepit, closer to death. This is true regardless of whether you do or don’t have kids – but if you do you will always have younger people on hand to remind you of this miserable fact.

Your children might, if you are lucky, grow to respect you, but as far as they are concerned you are the past.  No amount of rebranding is going to solve that. This doesn’t mean we can’t change the way we parent. But as with so much else where gender is concerned, it’s a matter for boring old deeds, not fashionable words.

 

 

 

Glosswitch is a feminist mother of three who works in publishing.