Sorry - it's another link to the DM - but I KNOW this couple

I see two of the SAHMs have cleaners.
Well, that's just cheating.

No wonder I don't run a house of 'calm' and 'order' like these paragons.

It makes me wonder what they will do in 15 or 20 years, when their kids are uninterested in anything but youthful hijinks, their husbands are completely used to the fact of having to do NOTHING around the home at all EVER, and their youthful energy is behind them but they're still expected to be fulfilled by domestic chores and being a "sounding board".

Won't it be immensely tiresome by that stage, even assuming they genuinely enjoy it while the kids are at home?

It also reads like there's a bit of fantasy-homemaker stuff going on, where the love and romance in the relationship is really dependent on the women playing this role and being fragrant and lovely. I don't know how that will pan out for them as middle age tightens its grip, either.

Oh, whatever, I'm allowing the DM's version to shape my thinking - need to remind myself it's almost certainly half-made-up and not how their lives really are.

Going back a bit to Darlene's point about being penniless if their husband left, in fact most of those women will probably have the savings in their name, as from a tax perspective that makes sense. Am currently a SAHM and this is what dh and I do as I don't pay tax on the interest (sadly we have nowhere near enough savings to bring me close to my personal allowance - I wish!).

Also, surely the point about it being their choice is partly true. Eg a friend of mine could not go back to work as she and her dh's incomes didn't cover the additional cost of the childcare in the short term (now she can as school covers some of that) whereas these women have the choice of going back ft, pt, or sahm as money is no object. I agree it is not a choice many people have, but it is still a choice.

Bit off topic, but I couldn't cope with the pictures, it reminded me of some hideous 50s magazine.... Bet they are cringing when they see themselves

"would those women be so happy to stay at home if their husband was on a teacher's wage say? It's all about grabby materialism too."

No - it's just about basic economics.

(I know that is a fairly shallow reaction btw, I am just too exhausted at the moment to address the more serious issues at play)

Even if they didn't take the DM shilling with a full understanding of how badly they would come across, they still basically took it to show off how awesome their life choices supposedly are. Look at us! LOOK!!!!! Everyone!

I will never understand why people think this is anything other than the height of tackiness.

i mean they do less housework than men whose wives earn less than them, or SAH

Ineterestingly, research shows that men whose wives earn more than them tend to do less around the home, something to do with masculinity...

FWIW, I think outrage can be in order when both a man and a woman in a relationship WOH and the woman also takes on the full domestic burden (sock drawer sorting etc). But not when a man is supporting a woman. Not that there are any rules at all - it really is up to couples how they distribute the workload.

no, but before I met DH for example, he worked all hours for over seven years while he lived a bachelor. He didn't lose the ability to load the washing machine, cook and tidy up upon marrying me.
After having kids, we divided the labour: he has able to push forward in his career with free wrap-around childcare (me) and I've been lucky enough to be able to stay with my little ones while they're small.

it's got nothing to do with housework though. I do what I can around the house, I cook more than him at the moment, but I put my energies into things that will enable me to return to a satisfying job in the future.

It seems like a perfectly reasonable trade-off to me: husband out working all hours, wife taking on domestic chores for her husband. What on earth is wrong with that? It's a private arrangement that is not immoral or illegal or dangerous.

x posts with dittany

but that Rebecca (or at least the DM version of her) is a slave/servant. What has tidying the sock drawer and laying out the breakfast got to do wiht being a SAHM? I'm at home for my children not my husband.

dittany - what's your problem? If a man is happy to be a breadwinner and a woman happy to be a SAHM, that is a perfectly valid life choice.

I am a SAHM but they make me hate all SAHM! So smug and full of themselves.

Kate, I don't think feminism is fundamentally about choice, but that's def for another thread

it could be a fun discussion, then, when you get together!

oh dear, Daily Mail, not doing yourselves any favours, are you?