Family outing must-have: nanny AND bodyguard. Naturally.
I've been watching "The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills" and I want to make it clear when I say – it's AMAZEBALLS and is now my total favourite show ever in the world. Probably.
You should watch it for no other reason than to marvel at;
c) how deliciously vapid life could be if only we hadn't valued things like love and family. Ah well, lesson learned…
My ultra-fave character (because these people can't be considered real surely?) is Camille Grammer, the (ex-)wife of the actor, Kelsey Grammer. She is a deeply empty, deeply plastic vessel and therefore, excellent entertainment value. I think, perhaps, my favourite moment was when she described one of the other housewives as being "perpetulant" – and delivered it with such self-satisfaction.
Seriously, I live for this shit.
Camille's schtick for the entire season has revolved around the hellishly busy life she leads. She has small children and a large household to run, don'tcha know? Life is made somewhat more manageable, she concedes, by the staff in her employ. Apart from her household manager and countless others, she has nannies. Four of them. For her two children. That's two nannies per kid.
Here's where I rant and rave about extreme wealth resulting in extreme delegation of parental duties. It's sick! It's heinous! It's child abuse!
And it makes me so freakin' jealous, I can't see straight.
I did not have children in order to become a martyr to the cause. Fuck that! Angie is still alive and well and always looking to get out.
Now comes the bit where I tell you I love my children. And you know what? I do. They're fucking gorgeous. Gorgeous little leeches who are sucking me dry and any moment I get to spend away from them is restorative in that I can replenish at least some of what they've been draining me of.
Do I think Camille Grammer has no clue what it is to be a mum? Yes. No clue. Do I think two nannies per child is excessive and indicates that she probably spends very little time with the kids herself? Yes. Fuck all time with them. But do I think she's evil for not wanting her existence to revolve wholly and solely around her kids? No way. I get it.
She's a vacuous fuckhead but I envy her the ability to grab some personal freedom when she so desires it. And who knows? If I could take it all the time, maybe I would, too. Maybe the kids wouldn't see me for dust. Make vegemite sandwiches and wipe snotty noses or go shopping on Rodeo Drive? Yeah. I understand you, Camille. I truly do.
But I don't need to be greedy.
My utopia is this: a nanny who comes three times a week; two days from the hours of 9am-2pm when I would go and write (or shop) and one evening a week so that Bren and I could go on a date night (or shop).
I consider that this scenario would enhance the family experience for all of us. The nanny could do the fun stuff like go to the park with the boys (my personal hell), I could fulfil my need to write without disruption or guilt, and B and I would be able to connect with each-other, really connect, for a few hours a week.
It's not exactly the stuff of diva demands, is it?
But it ain't my life either. As it stands, my life does revolve around my children because it must. And I knew that it would be this way when I signed up for the gig. And most of the time? I am very content in this little life we have created.
But any time someone wants to offer me an out? Even for half an hour? I'll take it. Because guaranteed on my return, I am a better mother for it.