I was a bit uncertain about the wwoofing thing. I mean, I liked the concept, but being an introvert I was out of my comfort zone. When we first arrived I felt like a fish out of water (I wanted to run), and I was *astonished* to find that there were already 3 wwoofers here! I thought they’d never get anyone! This is probably the best thing we’ve done so far. Mainly due to the fantastic people here, who were incredibly welcoming – and interesting. It’s sort of a spiritual relief to hang out with people whose life is very different to your own. The Aboriginal overseer and his French girlfriend. The unhappily retired diesel fitter who found solace travelling around outback stations working on vehicles for board and fuel. The guy who traps feral dogs for a living. (FYI, there are 20 dogger zones in WA and there are vacancies. Wage: $325 a day, aiming to get one dog a day. Contact the WA Department of Agriculture). It was kind of fun to hang around with a group of young people – I can report from the frontline that not much has changed on the backpacker scene. Still drinking tequila and hooking up with each other.P was in his element painting dongas, digging trenches and generally handymanning around. We stayed longer than planned, and P would have been keen to stay even longer (indefinitely…. I started to wonder whether P might like a late-blooming career as a jackaroo), but I felt a bit of a spare part as I wasn’t able to do as much work as I would like - somedays nothing apart from some minor babysitting - to feel comfortable that I was earning my keep, so to speak. Luckily the station owners had two young kids themselves, so were very understanding of our kids’ needs, and I think just happy to have some kids visit. The lady of the house was a kindred spirit, into kids, gardening, social issues. How lucky can you get? And even more so, they took T for a ride in their plane! And on motorbikes and trucks! T, being reserved like me, was a bit overwhelmed by joining a new community, but it was amazing watching the kids slip into the new routine. J in particular wanted to get to the “big kitchen” for breakfast and T was always concerned that we would be late for dinner.
The lifestyle here is very appealing. It’s a little community of people working, eating and socialising together. The mail arrives once a week – and the shopping is delivered by the postie. They eat a *lot* of beef and have a great vege & herb garden with chooks. They have a cook – bliss! The station owner flits about in his plane – into town for a meeting – around the station checking things out – divebombing the homestead when no-one answers the two-way. It was a wonderful introduction to wwoofing – but also off-putting in the sense that I realised (why didn’t I realise before?) that I can’t really do 4 – 6 hours of work around the place (I can’t achieve this around my *own* place!) The only way I could do this would be for P to stop work after lunch and look after the kids, which would free me up…. but what’s the point when it’s obvious to that he is *so* much more useful around the place than me? He may as well keep going…. which leaves me with the responsibility for the kids and unable to participate in the spirit of wwoof.
While here I have been reading Germaine Greer’s “Shakespeare’s Wife”, which I suspected might be a bit dry, but is actually great, and is inspiring me to get back into Shakespeare, which I haven’t explored since high school. She quotes a scholar of Elizabethan times, saying that the role of the man was very clear – let’s call that “A”, and the role of the woman was everything else… let’s call that “non-A”. And when the man’s availability or capability changed, than the woman’s role would expand to take up those duties as well. For example, if the husband became ill, then the wife would take over the running of the business and develop/utilise those skills, but otherwise wouldn’t be involved. I was thinking that maybe not much has changed. Does the equation work in the opposite direction? Maybe.
Anyway, our small stay here has definitely got me more seriously contemplating moving to a country-type property of our own. It’s alleviated *some* of my fear of social isolation. I would need to be closer to a town I think….. a three hour drive is just too far.
Lisa Watson said,
July 2, 2009 @ 4:26 am
Referring to the roles of women and men as they possibly were and potentially are, I wonder if men are able (despite good intentions) to simply take on both roles, as a woman might be able. In those days, without support, I am quite sure they didn’t – the discipline required to run a house and lovingly care for children while surviving the predators of the work-force necessitates highly complex connections of the cerebral hemispheres. I believe that it has been proven in expensive research that women are more capable of these higher cerebral functions, and that certainly men were not. This explains the limited domestic achievements of those limited in the Y department in the past. However, I do believe that with the inevitable and presently-occurring evolution of our species, this is changing. Some say it is simply the result of the pollution of eostrogens in our food supply from non-biodynamic farming methods that are making women out of men, but is that such a bad thing? The real shame in our development in sex-related roles is that mothers increasingly feel more competent at work than at home with their babies, and are relying more and more on the dads to fill their void, otherwise institutionalising their infants. Men are becoming woman and woman are becoming men, until we meet in the middle as one united sex, when only the individual will account for their role and not the gender they were born.
janelouise said,
July 2, 2009 @ 6:19 am
one sex….it’s an interesting thought….. especially as I have read that within 10 000 years “men” will be incapable/not required for reproduction purposes….. (not sure on the credibility of this theory…)… maybe such a development would move us away from this failed experiment in isolated nuclear families and back into small groups/tribes….. with a focus on shared resources/parenthood.
this also triggered discussion with P, who believes that in fact men have shifted to pick up more of the traditional female roles, but with the exception of paid work, women haven’t done so (eg mens domestic duties are still mens: rubbish, lawn, heavy gardening, home maintenence etc) This is true for us, but obviously not for all. I guess over the years of this relationship I stopped trying those “male” tasks, as I wasn’t as good at it as P, so my efforts just petered out. (This from the girl who years ago restored furniture and did a car maintenence course) It’s a good wake up call for me (as was being on that station) that I need to start doing those things/have those skills….. which leads me into considerations of dependence/independence. I read some research within the last year or so that found a correlation between working motherhood and perception of relationship strength – ie, the women most likely to give up work and stay home with their kids were those that were most secure in their relationship with their partner. ie, they could “afford” to give up work as they didn’t perceive a future need to be financially independent. Maybe this also works in terms of keeping your hand in with “man about the house” type jobs. Maybe this is also why I’m now thinking I should get back on top of those skills…. this trip is sometimes relationship-challenging!
Lisa Watson said,
July 3, 2009 @ 4:29 am
P is obviously doing it tough in his household if he believes that! Compliments to you, hold on to him! And I like the research you’ve read. I probably do more in some areas that other women, but that is a choice and it keeps me fit and strong (gyms never worked because the bubs hated the creches) then Dad will come home and cook dinner before massaging me with love oil (not my dad, obviously…) so we find a balance that works for us.
In the paper recently, was a front page article on the state of a mother’s house, whose 15 week baby had died, and I have to say based on the picture it looked better than mine on certain days. The background story was of a mother who contracted a nasty infection, after a hospital birth, and had been bed-ridden for those months leaving dad to take care of new-born and other mass siblings ( ALSO pets, the journalist added in disgust). The lack of hygiene was the focus of the article. It should of highlighted the obvious lacking in the father, rather than repeatedly refering to the incapacity of the mother. It could be said that double standards still exist among us, perpetrated by intellectually-undeveloped and profoundless journalists which tragically infiltrate the rest of society’s values. But how reflective are these journalists of general society, and how influential can they really be? Probably not very if we stop to think about it, the danger comes when we don’t.