7 Ways Social Justice Organizations Unintentionally Exclude Mothers

Image: Rochelle Brown @ Unsplash

Many social justice organizations continue to presume that a child-free, unencumbered activist is the default--and perhaps the ideal. In a patriarchal society, as soon as a woman has a baby, we see her as a mother first—and perhaps as a mother only. That's why no one bats an eye when meetings last five hours, protests are dangerous, and spaces are hostile to children. It’s why, on more than one occasion, a childless activist has introduced me as a mom, rather than with my professional credentials. You can't have a diverse, intersectional organization that excludes mothers. Exclusionary practices hurt marginalized mothers, particularly poor ones, the most

Eighty-one percent of women eventually become mothers. So as I've repeatedly hammered in this blog, if you care about women, you need to care about mothers. Most social justice organizations don't intentionally exclude mothers. But as caring activists should know, if you're not being intentionally inclusive, you're keeping people out.

Addressing the many unintentional ways social justice organizations exclude mothers makes activism accessible to a much broader coalition. That means more effective movements and more rapid change.

Needlessly Making Spaces Child-Free

People think spaces need to be child-free because they think welcoming children makes an event less serious. That notion derives from the idea that women with children are less serious--which is a baldly misogynistic idea.

Children are people just like adults. Some are disruptive and destructive. Some are quiet observers. Some are eager to be active participants. In almost all cases, there is no reason to exclude children as a matter of course or policy. Instead, trust parents to assess whether their children can tolerate a space, then notify participants that children will be welcome.

Ignoring Childcare Concerns

Childcare is expensive and hard to access. Women are still the primary childcare providers in most families, and men almost never act as primary caregiver. That means that, if you ask a woman to come to an event, you're almost always asking her to find and pay for childcare.

This is a real expense, and a potentially taxing demand. If you don't want children to come to your event, consider offering free or subsidized quality childcare (since childcare is worthless if it comes at the hands of an unqualified or dangerous person). If you can't or won't do that, then respect mothers by:

• Sticking to the schedule you promise. Going over by an hour or two means a woman has to either pay her childcare provider more (assuming the provider can stay late), or leave early.

• Giving people as much advance notice of an event as possible. Few meetings actually need to be held with no notice. Calling something an "emergency meeting" might feel good, but it excludes people who must seek childcare.

• Realizing that pro bono work often costs women more than men. Men may rely on wives to watch their children or find childcare, while childless people face no such demand. Women who work for free may do so at a significant deficit--both of the time spent finding childcare and the money paid to the provider.

These policies aren’t just inclusive of mothers; they make social justice spaces better for everyone.

Demanding Video Conferencing

Video conferencing rarely serves any purpose except forcing people to get dressed up and find a clean place to sit. For mothers of infants, video conferencing may make a phone call impossible. I regularly and happily chat with my clients on the phone while nursing my baby. When they request video conferencing, I can't nurse during the call. That significantly reduces the amount of time I'm available.

This problem isn't just limited to nursing mothers. Few professional women want their children to be visible in the background of a call, so video conferencing may mean waiting till the kids are in bed or a baby-sitter arrives. It's usually a small inconvenience, but why inconvenience people when you don't have to?

Parent-Unfriendly Scheduling

We consider it normal to schedule most work-related events during working hours, and to schedule other events outside of the work day. That tells you how heavily we have bent our society toward the 40-hour workweek.

What about the parental work week? Office hours can be changed, but a child's need to eat or sleep typically can't. Social justice organizations that really want to be inclusive should avoid scheduling events very late in the evening, since that interferes with bedtime. Smaller organizations may want to consider asking parents which times are best. Just as your organization caters to people who have workplace demands, it should also cater to parents. It's just good manners.

Ignoring Meeting Agendas

Once you create an agenda, stick to it. Going an hour over time because competing egos all need their voices to be heard creates an unfair childcare burden for parents. Set realistic schedules, and don't be surprised if people bow out when you can't stick to them.

Judging Women's Parenting

Do you know my child as well as I do? Do you have advanced degrees in medicine, developmental psychology, and education? Do you understand the full picture of my parenting and family life? Did I ask for your opinion?

No?

Then butt out. It's trendy to judge women's parenting. Most women can't leave their homes without hearing a cacophony of advice and criticism about their parenting. It's hurtful and demoralizing. It's also a way for society to control women.

Motherhood is hard enough without being told you're doing it wrong. Everyone has to go through life seeing things they disagree with, from fashion choices to workplace behavior. The fact that someone is a mother does not mean she is now public property waiting to be judged. Do what you do at other times when you disagree with someone's lifestyle: keep it to yourself.

Treating Child-Related Demands as Trivial or Unserious

If I have a meeting with a client or a looming deadline, most folks see this as valid reason to change a scheduled appointment. But if I have a childcare conflict, watch eyes roll. Somehow arbitrary deadlines and meetings--things that can be changed without anything horrible happening--are more serious than a child's need to eat on time or be monitored by a competent adult.

Seriously?

When a parent in your organization has a childcare-related demand, take it seriously. It's not up to you to determine what someone else's child needs and doesn't need. It's up to you to take those needs as seriously as any other conflict and work around them.

When my daughter was a newborn, I had an editor who liked to schedule conferences around noon. He thought he was being flexible by sending me several potential days for one such conference. When I finally told him it was never going to work because that's when Athena nurses, he actually apologized for not knowing this--going too far, in my opinion, but still a welcome contrast to the usual dismissive attitude working mothers get.

So now guess who gets first priority when I have a scheduling conflict. The editor who takes my child's need to eat seriously. He treats me with respect, so I give him a bit more of my time.

It's a win all around. That's what inclusiveness looks like--so simple, so easy to achieve with a few tweaks, but so profound in its potential effects on social movements and society.