She wakes up before everyone else in the family to sort out the household work. She ensures her kids are fed and ready to leave for school. And then, she gets ready for her workplace, to officially start her day as a part of the formalised labour force. While at work, she juggles just as much work as her peers are assigned—but unlike the others, her workday doesn’t end with her colleagues. This is because she goes home to resume her workload as a mother, and perhaps as a homemaker and spouse, as well as a primary caregiver for the entire family.
We call this woman a ‘working mother’. But should we?
The simplest answer to this question is a big, whopping NO. The term ‘working mother’ does very little justice to the woman described above. Moreover, it does no justice to other mothers who might not be a part of the formalised labour force. Here’s every reason why.
How The Term ‘Working Mother’ Came Up
The term ‘working mother’ hasn’t been around like some ancient relic, preserved for its great value in a museum. Before the 1950s, the term simply did not exist. During the Second World War and soon after it, the world went through an immense economic transition, which allowed the entry of women who are mothers and not fulltime homemakers into the formalised labour force. These women, especially in Western countries, were inevitably white and middle-class, and had taken up jobs to meet the growing demands of inflation and the impact it has on families.
In India, the term only came into vogue in the 1970s and 1980s, when mothers stepped out of their roles as homemakers to enter the formalised labour force—mostly in teaching and banking sectors. As the roles and opportunities expanded, these women continued to balance their homes and workplaces—or at least tried their best to—and are now given the titles of ‘working moms’, even ‘super moms’ because of the sheer amount of work they accomplish.