Double standard to maternity and work

“Apparently, by virtue of having ovaries and a uterus, women are automatic mommies or mommies-to-be” (Valenti, 2007, p. 151).
There are many discussions on the maternalization of the female body in terms of law and regulation. Frug (2007) argues that in society women have the responsibility to fulfill the motherhood role, and legal discourse supports the maternity issue. However, there are also many contradiction in social system upon the motherhood issue of women. Valenti (2007) perhaps mentioned this as a double standard to woman. As an example, the cultural mechanism permits and mandate women to fulfill particular roles. In these roles, women have the responsibility to give birth and to nurture the children, while labor work market sometimes pushes conflict with mothering role through industrialized and competitive system, that did not give space for a woman to fulfill this role.

 For example, in my country, government worker should be able to move from one province to another if they get mandate from the government. However, the government did not consider if the women should move, what about her husband and children? Should they move, as well? Should they try long distance family? If she did not move, it is difficult for her to increase her professional position. In this situation, the government act like a greedy industry that invade the family union, through their order and command without caring the demand from society to woman as the one who should follow husband and in the same time push them to be a “good mother.” 

Woman in this situation stuck in difficult decision and sacrifice whether the people call them as “ambitious career oriented mother” or “limited-stuck-employee.” Finally, again and again, the one that should be blamed is the woman, because she cannot fulfill all this double standards and also incapable to satisfy everyone who should get the benefit in this issue.