Follow The Stir

Rahna Reiko Rizzuto Is Selfish, Not a Bad Mom

by Sasha Brown-Worsham on March 4, 2011 at 10:39 AM

In the US it seems like talking about motherhood almost always inevitably leads to a cacophony of platitudes and outright lies. We moms say that these are the "best" years of our lives and that our children are our top priorities. We almost always say that nothing is more important than motherhood. And for the vast majority of us, that may be true.

But that is not true for everyone. So when someone like writer Rahna Reiko Rizzuto comes along with the piece she wrote for Salon this week, we should stand up and take notice. To be honest, it's one of the most important pieces on motherhood I have read in a long time.

Not because I think she was right or even because I necessarily agree with her view of motherhood. No, I think it's important because it's brave. We need mothers to be able to be honest and real and say the things they know everyone will vilify them for thinking.

In the piece, Rizzuto talks about leaving her children to go to Japan for six months to work. In that time, her marriage falls apart and she and her husband must decide how to split custody, which for her becomes obvious:

It raised a little issue for me that I have neglected to mention: I never wanted to be a mother.

She goes on to say that her husband had really wanted to be the parent and so she gives up custody to him. She moves down the street and she parents the only way she can -- from a distance. The children come to see her and she is very involved in their lives, but Donna Reed, she is not.

The commenters (predictably) have had a field day, calling her everything from selfish to evil to narcissistic and beyond. I say she is something else: ridiculously, unequivocally brave.

Guess what? Not all moms feel exactly the same way about motherhood. We aren't all handed some identical set of emotions and feelings and ways to deal with our children, and quite frankly, some of us are better at certain aspects than others. Some men are better suited for the role of primary parent. Is that really so wrong? Rizzuto says:

I had to leave my children to find them. In my part-time motherhood, I get concentrated blocks of time when I can be that 1950s mother we idealize who was waiting in an apron with fresh cookies when we got off the school bus and wasn't too busy for anything we needed until we went to bed. I go to every parent-teacher conference; I am there for performances and baseball games. My former husband is there too.

In this society, we are so quick to call a woman selfish for wanting a space of her own, for pursuing her own desires, and for not always choosing her children first. We have exalted mothers as these bastions of selflessness and we hold them to these standards that would make even Mother Teresa quake beneath her robes. Mothers must never have any desire for themselves, they must never (gasp!) choose their own needs over their child's.

I call BS. I call BS because mothers are people, too. We are not all saints and we all have different ways of expressing ourselves, and that individuality is accepted in almost every other arena BUT motherhood. Was Rizzuto selfish? Maybe. A little. But so what? Why is "selfish" such a bad thing?

As she says:

My problem was not with my children, but with how we think about motherhood. About how a male full-time caretaker is a "saint," and how a female full-time caretaker is a "mother." It is an equation we do not question; in fact we insist on it. And we punish the very idea that there are other ways to be a mother.

I would argue that being overly selfless is its own hell, too. Life is short and love matters, but so do we. Why is it so wrong to say it? In the end, Rizzuto is a mother to her children in the best way she can be. She doesn't abandon them or walk out the door. She just acknowledges her weaknesses and gives them what she is able. That isn't selfish. That is strength. That is what I would like to model for my children. Strength and courage are more important that "selflessness" any day.

Do you think she was selfish? Do you think moms shouldn't be selfish?

 

Image via emmamccleary/Flickr

Filed Under: in the news, motherhood

Comments

42
  • Cynthia
    -- Nonmember comment from

    Cynthia

    March 4, 2011 at 11:10 AM
    She is not selfish, but brave and honest! She has made the best choice for her children! She knows that she will not be happy staying in that situations so she made changes to give her kids a wonderful mom who's happy to see them and spend time with them, and it gives them 2 happy homes over 1 unhappy home with anger and hatred. She's made the choice for her children to be in the best environment available to them. If that's selfish, then I guess you can call her selfish, but I think it's a very loving act to realize and accept what's infront of you and go against the "norm".
  • sassy...
    --

    sassykat122

    March 4, 2011 at 11:36 AM

    Her children are happy, fairly well adjusted. While l would never in a million years leave my child for six months thats me, my heart, my family. We wouldn't think anything twice about a father leaving his children for six months to further his career.


  • Brian...
    -- Nonmember comment from

    Briana Lerza

    March 4, 2011 at 11:42 AM
    Author of article -Are you for real? It appears that since you see yourself in her, you are justifying her behavior. Apparently, you missed kindergarten where they went over the cons of selfishness. She did abandon them - for six months! She had the right to not have children or have them later in life so she could get "fulfillment" first. But once she brought them here, she should have put THEM first until they are grown up and out (it's not forever). Then do whatever she "needed" to do. She is not brave, she is a coward. I guess if she were on the street and a car was coming,she should save herself and let her children be hit because(gasp!) Life Is Short and sometimes you have to be selfish. While that may seem far-fetched, basically what she did is let her kids take the hit in life. I do have compassion for a coward but please don't hold her up as something to be admired. If her kids are not completely screwed up, the brave one will have been their father- write an article about that...
  • Not a...
    -- Nonmember comment from

    Not a parent

    March 4, 2011 at 1:00 PM
    Is she brave? She didn't want to be a mother but she became one anyway? I think selfish or not is irrelevant. If the children are taken care of that is the key. We just call it "motherhood" when we should be calling it "parenthood". IMO I don't think a "mother" should be the end all be all of child rearing, but once a parent has taken that step, they are in it. regardless, she will Always be these kids mother. Nothing for it now
  • Shelly
    -- Nonmember comment from

    Shelly

    March 4, 2011 at 1:04 PM
    Think about these children, if they DIDN'T have a really great dad. They would surely have big issues. Her children are NOT happy, because of what she did. They are happy, because of what their father did. Let's just get that out of the way. This woman should NOT be admired. She had kids when she didn't want any. Her marriage ended in divorce, because she brought people in the world she never desired, then dumped them on her husband, so she could be "selfish." You can write anything and make someone seem brave and admirable. Lets write this story in reality and no one would like what this woman did. She did not do what as right for her kids, she did what she could to get away. Thank goodness, for the father. Can we write an article about him and how admirable he is, please? HE is the one who did the right, and good thing.
  • bsawy...
    --

    bsawyer84

    March 4, 2011 at 1:13 PM
    Good on her! So many people will accept this kind of behaviour from males, even expect it in some cases, but if a woman does it it's instantly frowned upon. Mothers are people first and foremost and mothers second. At least she knew the kids were in good hands unlike some fathers who aren't in the picture. And there is so much pressure on women to have babies once they are married, don't act like waiting to become a parent is an easy choice.
  • Memph...
    --

    MemphisSuzi

    March 4, 2011 at 5:24 PM

    Brave would have been to step up to her husband and say "I dont want children.  I dont want to be a mother.  So I will not be."  That would have been brave.  To have children and then parent "from a distance" is selfish.  No, we all dont feel the same set of mommy emotions. And yes, I believe that some moms enjoy mommy-hood more than others.  I do believe in being selfish on occasion.  I leave my kids with a sitter, my mom, my friend, and take time for me.  But living down the street and seeing them when its suits her schedule is beyond normal selfish.  And her children will suffer from it.


  • Eric...
    -- Facebook comment from

    Eric Armstrong

    March 4, 2011 at 8:15 PM
    Brave! I call B.S. on the Brave talk! The act of being brave and having courage would be to find a way to take care of your children and still have your dreams. I am not placing motherhood into some sort of a box to which "your children' are your goals or dreams and I also believe that we should abandon the typical "if a man does it" talk because we forget the fact that it is always wrong when a man does it, so why would it be considered alright for a woman? Yes she is definitely selfish. When you get married and have children you do change and part of that change is the fact that their needs become more important than your own. This is part of the reason why we should have the right amount of maturing and training before you get married and have kids because people who have not come to certain realizations should not be married or become parents! It is not non-motherly to have desires, goals or ambitions, but if any of those pull you in the opposite direction of your family then you’re seeking after those priorities do not make you brave, they simply make you selfish!
  • Heath...
    -- Facebook comment from

    Heather Swagga

    March 4, 2011 at 9:13 PM

    When you have children, you make sacrifices. You agree to make these sacrifices. She agreed to have children, knowing full well she DID NOT want children. Too late for that now.

    "Brave" isn't having children and then abandoning them so you can do your own thing. "Brave" would have been saying "I do not wish to make the sacrifices necessary to have and properly care for kids, so I will not have them" as opposed to letting her husband sweet talk her into having them, just so she can "parent from a distance". Bottom line: you can't do a job if you're not there to do it. How can you parent, really parent when you're not there?

    Imagine her trying to teach her children responsibility and sacrifice and have yourself a nice laugh.


  • Heath...
    -- Facebook comment from

    Heather Swagga

    March 4, 2011 at 9:24 PM

    And I totally agree with Eric's opinion. You can find ways to live and fulfill your dreams without shortchanging your kids.

    Once you have kids, the "me,me,me" attitude has to go out the window. Applauding acts of abandonment, selfishness, and immaturity like this is the reason why kids are so messed up now a days. What happened to standing up, fulfilling your obligations (regardless of whether or not you want to)?

    The people who think she is "brave" are probably people who'd expect their bosses to pay them even if they didn't show up. Why else would they say she's a good mother for not being a mother at all???


1-10 of 42 comments

To leave a comment, log in as a CafeMom member:

Log In

OR, use our non-member comment form: