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

Who is talking about social acceptance? I thought the OP was discussing choice?

Or you left them home alone. I knew lots of families who did this when I was a child, it's been standard forever. That's not to say it's a good thing, and I was lucky my mum was able to work night shifts and I had an older sibling and an aunt who helped. I am glad there is more access to formalised care now.

But I think the majority of the very privileged women of mumsnet would be shocked to realise how many young children are left home alone so their mums can earn money. A lot of women also take their kids with them where possible.

Back then thee wasn't general " formal " childcare. Aunties or neighbours looked after kids. Or if you were rich then you hired a nanny

There were nurseries in the 40s , they were opened for women to leave their kids whoe they did war work. However mostly closed by 1950. They did however open far longer hours than nurseries nowadays

Your experience of work might be 'grinding it out until you die'. Someone else could come up with a really dismissive description of what life at home with small children is like - they could call it wiping noses and changing nappies. Rightly, you would argue that there is so much more to looking after children than that. And in the same way, I would say that there is so much more to a fulfilling career than grinding away.

Once again, women - mothers in particular - have ALWAYS WORKED FOR PAY. Always. All throughout history. You've been watching too many American 50s sitcoms. Only a tiny number of very privileged women ever stayed home without earning money, in case their husbands whored the family money, drank it, gambled it or just would not hand it over.

There's plenty of literature out there about this. Educate yourself.

I was referring specifically to that poster's exhortation to 'bring back the 1950s'.

Women had far fewer rights in the 1950s.

I used to be so career minded. I was so academic. I felt like my whole worth was based on that.

Im now a stay at home mum. It’s literally a few years of my
(hopefully!) long life.

Im actually happy until these threads bring back those demons. There is so much more to life than work and just grinding it out until you die.

In what way is anyone “stripping my independence” by me choosing to put my career on hold to spend some time looking after my own children, rather than offering my labour to an employer?

No. Corporate careers have increasing flexibility, including part time work, job shares and working from home.

In fact, it's more likely that lower paid non corporate jobs will be fixed hours and location eg. Cleaning, childcare, shift work in care homes.

Women in corporate careers also use grandparent childcare and childminders as well as nurseries. Often a mix.

I think it's important to distinguish this from a corporate career, not to say that one is more prestigious or something, but because a corporate career tends to involve 5 days in the office a commute distance away and with the kids in full-time formal group childcare.

Ok, you just said 'many of these women are menial wage slaves' without specifying a particular subset of women. So it sounded like you were just talking about any women who work.

I also don't know that most women in lower paid jobs would automatically rather be at home with their children. That's quite an assumption. There will be women who don't enjoy their jobs who also would not enjoy being SAHMs.

And finally, you said 'bring back the 1950s' but again you are assuming that the women who would currently identify as 'wage slaves' would prefer to be in the 1950s. But that doesn't follow. Being unhappy now doesn't mean that they would be happy if we rolled the clock back and took away their rights and freedoms.

There are many things we could do to make the lives of mothers - working outside the home or not - better. But stripping women of their independence isn't likely to improve their situation at all.

In my experience educated mothers with rewarding careers are just as likely want a career break to look after their children. They may also be more likely to afford it, having built up more savings.

Really. My grandmother had kids in the 40s/50s. She always worked as well. May not have been corporate career but she did cleaning, washing etc for others around the kids. In fact her eldest often kept eyes on the younger ones while she was working This was pretty normal

16 weeks with mine. 3rd one i had a business to run so could only really take a fortnight

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

No. My point was, that it was all very well for middle class educated women to enjoy satisfying, fulfilling and rewarding careers, but not all women have that, and have work very mundane, poorly paid and menial jobs when they would rather be at home taking care of their children.

Working class women have always worked.

Yes that is my sense from reading this @everychildmatters

@sunandfizz Things have changed so much from a financial pov since then.

It was 2003, 2005 and 2008.

@RowanRed90

Many of these women are not "having a career" they're torn away from their kids to be menial wageslaves. Bring back the 1950s

What about the women who are family breadwinners, whose families depend on their salary to survive? They’re all “menial wageslaves”? All of them?

What would you suggest a single mother who wants to “bring back the 1950s” should do?

@sunandfizz How many years ago did you have your children?

I have the career-iest of "career jobs", very far from being a wage slave, very intellectually stimulating, financially lucrative etc - and I wish I hadn't had to go back to work after 1 year.

I am speaking for jobs like investment banking, management consulting, big law, senior management in corporate etc.

I also wish I had started earlier with kids but at my workplace the pace is just so absolutely full-on at all the job levels in your 20s that for many women they are early to mid-30s before reaching a level of seniority that would allow them enough flex in their schedule to be able to handle a nursery pickup. (Almost all have nannies. Many have two for extra coverage.)

I don't think it's feminist to accept this "male pattern career" (work all hours in your 20s, kids in 30s while trying desperately to stay on the career ladder, definitely don't take a career break because there is no coming back...) as a default.

We should advocate more for entry and re-entry schemes into careers later in life, for example. Part time or even 9-5 (not 9am-11pm) versions of professional jobs. Flexible independent consulting options that aren't "well, I guess I'll become a life coach for other ex-professional career women who are finding they can't have it all?"

Feminism that overlooks our biology as women is useless.

The vast majority of babies don't go all day, every day anyway. Most mothers who do go back to work, go back part time.

There you go again with 'nurseries all day every day' for babies. Totally ignoring that many working families rely on grandparent childcare and also childminders exist. So if people don't want to use nursery, there are alternatives. It feels like a very deliberate narrative being pushed here, with a very clear agenda.