To feel sad some women are forced to go back to work

You have to completely restructure the way the economy works

which we need to do anyway as continual growth is a stupid concept

in the uk it’s house prices that are the problem and that’s a result of the lack of council housing , which takes the heat out of the private rental market and the private housing market. - because being able to get a secure tenancy for life in a well maintained house cheaply is a great alternative to owning and so owning is less desirable / necessary in that situation

but women have always had to work and it’s not right that women should be expected to stay at home and men go out to work. If everyone could work part time that would be much fairer all round - women shouldn’t just be the ones to benefit from improvements to work life balance

Again, how do you propose we do that?

We should live In a society where one wage should be able to afford a (basic) home, utilities, food, necessities. In order for that to happen things would have to cost less or wages would need to be higher. Currently two adults on minimum wage would struggle to afford a house.

And how do you propose they be able to?

I didn't mention wfh meaning I thought anyone can work at home while simultaneously doing childcare. It was that you mentioned a commute being part of a corporate career, and that's not always the case. Wfh can reduce the amount of childcare needed because of not needing to factor in travel time - but childcare is of course still required. I say that as someone who works from home most of the time!

I'm explaining to a poster talking about their grandmother taking in ironing in the olden days while her kids played at her feet - which is a completely different thing.

95% of corporate jobs cannot be done WFH with young children in the same way. Yes, you can do them part time but you need some kind of childcare. Even if you are WFH you are probably staring at a screen, on zoom meetings etc. You usually have fixed times you have to be online and can't just bail to take care of a baby crying.

FYI I have a senior corporate job which is "more flexible than the juniors in the company" which in practice means I'm allowed to put a calendar block in from 5-7pm to do the nursery pickup and dinner, and if the baby is sick at nursery I can juggle my calendar a bit to avoid taking a sick day.

Which is great but it's not like because I'm so senior I can just avoid having childcare or that it's comparable to taking in ironing in terms of being able to be responsive immediately to my baby's needs, which is what I think mothers of young children really want.

Some women have freelance jobs which are more flexible and I think we should promote that more as a model.

I said women because that’s the basis of the OP and thats what I was responding to.
But yes women in terms of recovery from childbirth, maternal bond and breastfeeding. Either parent aside from that.

Most families in the UK can not afford to live off one wage (man or woman’s) even at a most basic living, I’m saying that they should be able to. Not that it should be funded by anyone. A person shouldn’t have to live with a partner to be able to live independently .

Not to mention the incentives - carefully spaced with good fertility, you could have 20-25 years out of work paid for by the taxpayer

Separately women should b able to have a choice on whether they work or not when they have a young child.

Do people have any idea how much this would cost in taxation?

It would be lovely if everyone who wanted to could take five years out of the workforce to raise their kids and then have a guaranteed job at the end of it. But the country is already close to bankruptcy with far too many people out of work/economically inactive.

Proposing something like this would be electoral suicide for any political party and if it were implemented it would trigger havoc in what's left of the financial markets of the sort which would make Liz Truss's tax-cutting debacle look like a blip. I guarantee you none (of any political stripe) will mandate this.

But had far fewer rights. We're talking about a world in which marital rape wasn't a crime, when women were routinely barred from the workplace or from any opportunity for promotion and advancement, when women could be refused mortgages, bank accounts and credit cards in their own name, where sexual harassment was less recognised or taken seriously. A time when women were economically disadvantaged, made dependent on men and suffered discrimination on the basis of their sex. Why would you want to bring that back?

@RowanRed90

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, genuinely not understanding

The point I'm making is that for a lot of women there is no choice: they have to work or their children either starve or rely on benefits. And the point about having no choice is that it is a really strong motivator.

Your perspective on this, calling working women "meniage wage slaves" seems to take as its starting point the idea that its non-essential or somehow "performative" for women to have a job.

If you are the sole breadwinner, having a job isn't a "girl boss" pose or a lifestyle choice or a luxury, it's pretty much life or death. And that tends to put a fire under your arse so it makes you work hard. Of course some women breadwinners still remain in fairly low-paid jobs and that's tough and challenging.

But your high-handed "bring back the 1950s" comment implies that all would be well if women just quietly went back to their lanes and accepted that they were just playing at having jobs when their real place is in the home.

Honestly as someone who raised their child single-handedly (out of necessity) I have had to claw my way up the corporate ladder, not for fun but because it puts food on the table and allows me a bit more financial freedom. I find it pretty offensive being told I have a "menial wage slave" job or the idea of people harking back to some Elysian past where I was able to spend most of my day cleaning my kitchen.

Of course not all working mothers have rewarding careers. But their careers (or jobs, if you prefer) are what stands between them and poverty for their children and allow them freedom and agency. At least let us have that dignity.

But they do have a choice. Some women choose to go back to work full-time, others part-time, others not at all. Obviously financial constraints will come into play, but that's the same for everyone. Mothers of young children are not some special species.

Are you proposing that taxpayers subsidise women (but not men?) to sit at home and be economically unproductive for years on end?

Why should only women have that choice?

Because we live in a society where people who are not high earners can not afford to own/rent a house on one income.

Separately women should b able to have a choice on whether they work or not when they have a young child.

I love my work. It makes me feel important and valued. I have friends there and time to be “me”. I love my children too but they thrived at their nursery/school.
I don’t feel sad for women that have to go back to work. Earn money, lead by example and show your children a good work ethic and most of all, don’t reply on a man for survival

Why is it ‘unlikely’? It’s far less unlikely if a woman doesn’t step out of the workforce in the first place and become deskilled.

i agree with that but even if they get a job it’s unlikely they would be able to support themselves and their children solo. working women often can’t afford to leave either. My point was a person on one wage should be able to afford to live independently. And a family sould be able to afford the basics on one wage. Not to struggle to afford the basics on two wages.

The reason women are stuck in abusive relationships is often precisely because they are SAHMs, with little or no access to money.

Plenty of women worked in the 50s

I think we should be able to live in a society that can afford to live (basically) on one wage if that is the choice. The cost of living/housing is what is keeping single people at their parents house, keeping women in abusive relationships and yes using some women to return to work before they are ready.

Bringing back the 1950s takes away women's choice.

I haven't once suggested we should remove choice from any woman. The absolute opposite, my posts were directed at the posters who bristled at the suggestion that some women should have the option of caring for their own.

Yes I can remember mum taking my brother in his silver Cross pram ( he was always lazy lol) and cleaning offices with him parked the corner . I was taken in school holidays and had to sit quietly and read