Debate about Working Women should be about Working Mothers

I know that there are glass ceilings for many women in various work places. And in many countries. In some countries, these are legal - other historical or plain strategic. A friend of mine who moved to Berlin from Washington DC keeps remarking on how stunning she finds it each time she sees a company or organization in German, where nearly all leadership positions are held by men, and women work in rank and file.

There are several successful women world-wide, who have had amazing careers. Some of these have had children (think Hilary Clinton, Anne-Marie Slaughter), some have even had many children (Ursula von der Leyen, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala). But I am sure that if I would dig out a survey (if one exists on this topic), very few of women in leadership positions have children. Or, perhaps to be more precise, very few have small children (with the exception of certain US CEOs a la Yahoo's Meyer, where maternity protection is non-existent).

So, two thoughts. Careers for moms are possible. Here I mean high-level leadership careers in the traditional, 9-5 office sense (or perhaps these days more like 9-11 availability sense). But I think most female careers, those of mothers that is, are delayed. By 10, even 15 years. And only those who are lucky, or have incredible endurance, manage to "wait until their time comes" (i.e. the children are old enough). I doubt very many have the energy, strategic skills or willpower to muddle through this way. I'm not sure whether I do.

Secondly, legal environments make a huge deal, in my view. Be it outright discrimination against women being able to work, or absurd tax incentives that keep women at home (my favorite "Ehegattensplitting" in Germany - which makes my head hurt each time I think of returning to a paid regular job). The list in the latter category is long, and includes issues such as entitlements and support for daycare or other care mechanisms (e.g. financial family support for grandparents as caretakers), or maternal care regulations that "nudge" women to return to the workforce (in time).

Berlin, where I live, sometimes makes me feel a bit torn in my role and potentials as a "working mom". The support system is there (with daycare etc.), but the incentives and social expectations are against me. Also a factor: success of a partner in their career… So many variables. Too much naval-grazing, I know. I should just again reflect less and do more, correct?  

Work and Viruses

Most people affected by a flu are not able to work. Add three small kids into the equation, in one household, and there's a route to career disaster. Last year, exactly at this time, my kids were ill non-stop. Our babysitter was making millions. This year, my kids, especially my youngest, have been ill non-stop. I haven't really managed to do anything for longer than two days at a go since I started this new phase. Forget rest. Forget time for contemplation. Forget inspiration. I'm struggling to get enough sleep, the nights are pretty awful, and there's no opportunity to nap during the days. I'm increasingly feeling like a drained, squeezed out tube. I know ir's a phase. It's this time of the year. But I admit, it's awfully tough.

Reading

I have a friend whom I love exchanging "books to read" with. I've been poor at keeping in regular touch recently, but already in school, she'd have a passion for novels that was contageous, and also has great tips for non-fiction. So, in this "spirit", and now that I have more mental energy (and non-office luberty), here are a few book tips. Funnily, this blog started when I, then with a small baby, wanted to break out of the "mommy bubble", and re-integrate into the world as an actively thinking (or at least reading) citizen. I feel happy that I've accomplished that, and although no longer reading the FT, I'm addicted to several online news outlets, my daily newspaper (Sueddeutsche), and even get through the Economist again regularly. Twitter has become a great news source as well, combining actual happenings with opinions. I just finished a great non-fiction book, "Virus", which explains how most viral infections (including lethal ones) have jumped over to humans from animals, and how our current food production, urbanization, and travel patterns are increasing risks. Fascinating stuff, and it was very relevant for my field of work (but something I would rarely find time to read if at work!). I just started on another book that I've been wanting to read for years, called "Nudge", which is about creating incentives for people to make (healthy, good) choices. Funnily, it builds on a lot of Daniel Kahnemann's work, which is again fascinating psychology, but I admit I failed to get through "Quick/Slow", as it got too repetitive. For novelistas, I tried Nobel winner Alice Munro, but although easy reading, wasn't touched, amazed or that impressed (I read her "Selected Stories"). I'm now reading a Finnish author (I do that far too rarely, which is not good for my mother tongue), Kjell Westö. Random list of the day....

We both want it all

Yesterday, Annemarie Slaughter, a great commentator on foreign policy and author of an article on women at work that was debated quite broadly ("You can't have it all") a year or so ago, wrote an article for the World Economic Forum in Davos titled "Behind every CEO mother is a caregiver father". It reminded me of an article a friend of mine wrote about one of the only German female CEOs, who also has a family. And what struck me then, and struck me now again, was that these "moms" are only successful in their jobs because the dads run the family (kids and household). And there I was again, wondering whether that is true, and more importantly, has to be. Can only one of us in a partnership have a (real) job, and the other one is left with childcare (and perhaps nice little projects on the side, but not a successful career)?  In our little household, we used to have a "rotating" model - one of us was at home (and at times worked part-time), whereas the other worked full-time. We then switched a couple of times, and both advanced (albeit slowly) but also had family time. But we are now in a situation where quitting a great full-time job (my husband's) is not a real option. So we tried a "we both want it all model", because I also wanted a "career", not just some erratic projects. It didn't work out, but not because of the kids or family situation. It didn't work out because of my job, where I realized a "career" would not be possible. I'm now back to erratic projects for the time-being, but I do hope - and know that it's possible, to "both have it all". Perhaps not with a US-style contract that is incompatible with kids' vacations (or own social and physical well-being), and perhaps not in a company that expects rigid office hours, PLUS constant availability (without compensation). But in Europe, in Continental and Scandinavian Europe, this model should be possible. I hope. Because we don't both only want it all, we both deserve it all.
p.s. I would have liked to co-write this post with my husband, and father of our three children (just under 3, 6 and 7 years old). But our weekly reality is a commuting dad, and as he's not a fan of blogging or sharing ideas through social media, I'll write on "both" of our behalf. See it as my views, and hypothetically his as well.

Social media and email friends - but would I recognize you on the street?

I have been sharing thoughts, statuses and private family pictures rather broadly on social media during the past years. I'm not one of those who has 2,356 friends on facebook (have I ever even met that many people?), but I realized I do share rather personal issues with people I wouldn't invite to my home. Until now, I thought that if seeing a baby or child grow up makes someone happy, even a rather random acquaintance (but one that I like, that's my criteria for these sites), or who wants to read my random thoughts, why not? But recently, I started sorting and went through my privacy settings. What was my criteria? Do I want to meet this person also in the future? Perhaps not, but some family and really old friends just deserve staying in the loop, in my view - I trust them. Have I shared a tete-a-tete cup of coffee with this person? That felt like a better criteria, but even here, some coffees took place 15 years ago, and the person has shown zero non-facebook interest in my life, or even intra-facebook a la liking and commenting. Is the relationship mutual? I share my kids, you share yours? I've been enjoying these types of posts, but realized that beyond fun family stories, I may not have a real relationship with the "friend" at all. I'll probably never meet the kids outside of facebook. So, finally, I found a good criteria: on top of the above, would I recognize the person on the street? I realized just how many people I know better on social media than in real life. And chop went the privacy setting, at least for the time-being. It may be very German, this data and privacy obsession, but more than that, I simply wanted to think about why I "connect" and "share" - and with whom. I may change everything again shortly, but again and again, it's good to realize who your "real friends" are. And that I thankfully know and I love each and every one of you!