From internet searches to People magazine the "mompreneur" is rampant. Companies like Avon, Lu La Roe, Young Living, DoTerra, Rodan + Field sell the glorious image of the happy mother, relaxing with her children; her laptop in the background assumed to be chalking up the dollar bills.
Thanks to the insidiously efficient internet advertising and marketing, upon becoming a mother, my feed was overflowing with these images.
Within my inner circle, of 6 women who became mothers in the same year I did, 4 had signed up to at least one of these get rich quick pyramid schemes and began to ask if I wanted to do the same. At times with a simple "are you interested" but on some occasions with repeated emails, invites and texts.
Full disclosure, I am signed up to one of these schemes as a Young Living wholesaler, however, I am not interested in signing up anyone below me.
In principle I have no problem with any of these companies, although I do struggle to classify any of these as entrepreneur or small business - they are barely franchises. The top dog is still a large business CEO, enjoying his third vacation this year.
Nontheless, the idea of the Avon lady dates way back, and why not, why shouldn't a mother have an income that she is free to arrange around her kids?
My problem is the way these have been packaged and sold; selling the snake oil that you can stay at home and be a full-time mother and still make enough money to take six figures at the end of the year. These cases don't exist, if they do than they are the exception that proves the rule, not the reality.
I believe our desperation for this stems back to the push of feminism to not be a mother, to keep a career, to not allow traditional gender stereotypes to define us.
I am a feminist.
I was raised to believe I could achieve anything I put my mind to. When it came to serious dating I was raised to earn enough to support myself and another. To put myself not on equal ground to, but to be the dominant partner and provider.
I was encouraged to finish not one, but two degrees ... just because. I could do a Masters, because I had time, opportunity and smarts to do it.
I was expected to pay my way just as my brother had; to contribute to my education and, when it came to getting my first job, to contribute to rent and bills (although it would be remiss of me not to point out how much of a soft spot my brother had for me and how minimal he made those contributions).
When I started on reception, making copies and fetching coffee for the boss, I was surrounded by strong, emboldened European women who encouraged me to climb the corporate ladder quickly. In under 2 years I was promoted four times and, when the opportunity arose to take my Senior Project Manager role to Denver, Colorado, I was told "good luck" and "we'll miss you". No one ever said "you can't" or "isn't it time you settled down?".
In April 2015 my daughter arrived. An unexpected but welcomed pregnancy. I was faced with a choice - would I return to my career, or would I embraced motherhood full-time.
Both were exciting and appealing.
I chose to become a full-time mummy. I knew it would impact my career and I had to turn down not one, but two, $170,000 opportunities to do it.
I negotiated a contract position to continue to make some money, and more importantly to keep my brain ticking.
At no point did I feel I would be making a fortune; but my work is just as valid and financially equal to a full time job. Between the costs of baby-sitting, schooling (with a private Masters' educated tutor), cooking and general household running, I contribute significantly to our household.
My point is not to tell working mothers they made the wrong choice; whether by pure choice to return to their careers, or because money would not allow otherwise - working mothers are phenomenal.
Rather, the fact is, we need to fall in one camp or another. And, we need to stop thinking (and being told directly or subtly) that either path is wrong.
In many cases we are actually told that both paths are wrong. Implicit in the "dream" scenario of being a full-time mother and still being the primary household provider are the ideas that (a) going back to work is selfish and, (b) being a full-time mother is not enough.
If you choose to earn a few extra bucks, that's great, but don't be fooled that you will be the next Joy Mangano.
This imagery prays on the modern woman's sense that she is not enough. That becoming a mother throws her back to the 1960s where everything she does and is, is just a little less than.
Even the word "mompreneur" is condescending - why are these two things combined? You can be a mother, and an entrepreneur. You can be a mother, and a career woman. You can be a mother, and maintain the household.
None of these things reduces the mother in you. We must not negate our biology, when we become mothers, we become. We are changed. Our lives will forever be entwined with another in a way no one else will understand. But they are still our lives.
"Mompreneur" ideals pray on our fears that we are not enough, that society looks down on us, that we neglect our children of our own selfish gains, that we laze about and 'stay-at-home' (I'm yet to meet one full time mother who actually has enough time at the house to define it as 'staying' at home).
It's time to reclaim our power as women.
Feminism is about the choice. The choice to be whatever we want. Career girl. Mother. Entrepreneur. All of the above.
Anna Louise is a full time mother, part time Project Manager, part time yoga instructor and owns a very small business TotsAdoarble. Anna Louise chooses to do it all.
