Riina Solman: The feminist narrative does not favor motherhood

In the past, society frowned upon women who chose not to have children and instead focused on their careers. Today, the opposite is true — women who decide to prioritize raising children over pursuing a career often face criticism. The difference between these two perspectives lies in the fact that feminists have actively defended career-driven women from stigmatization, while no one fully defends women who dedicate themselves entirely to motherhood, writes Riina Solman.
Social stigmatization is not a new phenomenon. In the 1990s, when there was no parental benefit system in place, society quickly learned to look down on women in their twenties who chose to stay home with a child instead of building a career. Everything was evolving at a rapid pace and opportunities were abundant. Women who decided to have children before the age of 30 were considered foolish.
It was also a time when children weren't even welcome in cafes and restaurants. My first son was born in 1996 and I clearly remember the pitying, occasionally disdainful looks from colleagues as I waddled around the office with a big belly right up until my due date.
Today, things have changed. The Estonian state rewards motherhood fairly generously and cafes now have dedicated play areas for children. On the surface, attitudes toward motherhood seem to have improved significantly over the years.
And yet, women are having their first child at an increasingly older age, despite the fact that social benefits are much better than they were in the 1990s. Some suggest this is because young people are now expected to extend their adolescence — life must include not only a university degree but also an "odyssey abroad" and as much adventurous wandering as possible before settling down.
The societal pressure to satisfy one's thirst for life to the fullest before having children pushes core values to the fringes. Having children at a young age is viewed as an inconvenient obligation, a quirk of backward conservatives or even a foolish lack of responsibility.
Yet, when you ask elderly people what they regret most in life, they rarely say they regret missing a party in their youth or not advancing far enough in their careers during middle age. More often, regrets are related to family life — wishing they had more children or spent more time with the children they did have. Only those with life experience understand what the core values of life truly are. Wise young people are those who listen to them.
Unfortunately, such wisdom is rarely heeded. Despite Estonia's progress in rewarding motherhood, there is still a noticeable lack of understanding, or even contempt, toward young mothers in society.
Some of this societal disdain comes from outright militant feminist circles, which, in theory, should stand for the rights and freedom of choice for all women. However, from the perspective of outspoken Estonian feminists, motherhood does not appear to be the best choice for a woman — at least not the stay-at-home style of motherhood.
Publicly, it is often said that every woman should be free to choose whether to focus more on her career or on raising children and that neither choice is superior. Most Estonian women have indeed found a golden middle ground between children and career.
In reality, however, there is an underlying narrative that complete dedication to children and family is not a suitable way for a woman to live. This does not fit the militant feminist narrative, which mainly idealizes female leaders who successfully overcome barriers in a male-dominated world, take on traditionally male roles and use them to dismantle patriarchal societal structures.
This narrative assumes that all of society is based on a zero-sum game of power relations, where men's and women's interests are in constant opposition. According to this worldview, a woman who fully devotes herself to raising children is placing herself under a man's economic control.
Some believe that stay-at-home mothers are traitors to the feminist cause because they have voluntarily given up their independence and the pursuit of dismantling patriarchal barriers. Others view them simply as victims of controlling men. Unfortunately, this cold worldview does not account for the possibility of genuine love and a symbiotic relationship between men and women — a relationship where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. In Estonian, we have a beautiful compound word for this: abielu ("marriage" — abielu is made up of the words abi and elu or "help" and "life" — ed.), which describes a life where a man and a woman support one another.
Together, they share joys and sorrows, with each contributing to the family's well-being in their own way — dividing responsibilities according to their abilities and preferences. For some women, motherhood is such a natural and essential part of life that they want to embrace it fully, leaving other responsibilities to their partner.
You won't find stories about such women on Feministeerium's website, at least not positive ones. When motherhood or mothers of large families are publicly ridiculed, no one steps in to defend them. Meanwhile, people are quick to jump to the defense of childless career women and high-ranking executives, especially if a man dares to comment on their life choices.
For instance, I can't recall any prominent leader of the Estonian feminist movement criticizing the government's decision to eliminate social benefits for stay-at-home parents raising children up to the age of eight. This decision severely restricted the freedom of many women to dedicate themselves fully to motherhood — a role that is crucial in a country with a rapidly declining birthrate.
It's a shame that the Estonian feminist movement does not advocate for the rights of all Estonian women. By the way, many of the narratives promoted by Feministeerium are funded largely by taxpayer money. If an institution is allocated public funds to represent a particular segment of society, there should be an expectation that this representation is not selective or ideologically biased.
Society's attitude has a significant impact on birthrates. The longer people postpone having children, the more likely it becomes that they will never have them at all. Stigmatizing motherhood must be resisted in every possible way. Mothers of small children are one of the most vulnerable groups in society, particularly young mothers and those with large families.
Sadly, it has become the case that women who take on the responsibility of standing up against the stigmatization of other women refuse to do so when the woman in question is someone who has fully devoted herself to motherhood. Instead, they often contribute to the stigmatization themselves. Unfortunately, creating this societal atmosphere is one of the key reasons why younger women are increasingly reluctant to have children.
--
Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!
Editor: Marcus Turovski