Justifying long term SAHM to DDs?

capsium regarding the buying your way out comment.

I think everyone should do what suits them, but I wish the result was that there were equal numbers of men and women in all sorts of different roles in the workplace.

YY Romann. I do also wish everyone on all sides would finally lay off the insults in the meantime.

I never said it was 'morally' wrong - please don't put words in my mouth. You are implying that I think that a woman who is financially dependent is amoral. Not true. She is however in a perilous financial situation. In my view, accepting or placing yourself in that perilous situation is wrong and that is what I will teach my DC.

Women with investments, inheritance or other financial capital at their disposal are not financially dependent.

Who are you responding to MrsCripps?

It really pisses me off that there is this idea that if women are interested in financial security then they are greedy and selfish or buying their way out of what ?????

However if your DH earns it then its fine !

Marriage confers legal rights,yes.upon divorce many women are financially less well off
If a marriage ends,the female is often then financially less well off.fact
It's minority who earn 6figures.thats fact

@ "Marriage is enshrined in law. This gives you the T&Cs."

Scotttish Marriage is enshrined in law. This gives you the T&Cs. Income can be generated, from savings, investments and property, without earning it.

Again you are assuming stereotypes when not many people fit into the stereotype. We don't even know for sure what the stereotype is, but I am betting many SAHPs, who do this by choice have a healthy enough family income, property and perhaps some investments.

Comparable, (to employment involving finances) it is. The same it is not.

I think everyone should do what suits them, but I wish the result was that there were equal numbers of men and women in all sorts of different roles in the workplace. The lack of women in senior positions in my professional life is something I find disappointing. I would like to work with more women as well as men. If I had any daughters I would like them to join a world where women were more visible in public life. I would like my sons to join that world too.

And I have no idea why this should need explaining, but to address your question; Neither pooled nor segregated household finances, from one or two or several sources, are 'right' or 'wrong' - they are morally neutral.

Oh dear, I seem to have touched nerve. Rather than aggressively seeking an answer from me, why not explain your counter argument? Why it is right to be financially dependent on a man?

Well I was the first person to take you to task for your use of the word 'wrong' Mme and I'm the higher earner in my house, so I'm not sure what nerve it is you imagine you've touched but you're certainly making yourself sound unpleasant.

Arranging own domestic finances is incomparable to employment involving finances
Employment is subject to t&c and is income generating.it isn't sorting husband direct debit
It is stereotypical that housewife manages domestic finances and probably buys her husband clothes too

scottishmummy

sometimes the responsibility to manage the money falls to female(again stereotypical role) but it's not same as earning it. Managing someone else money isn't security

Some people do this for their employment. If a wife does it, why is it less valid. As for security, it is probably easier / less costly to sack / make someone redundant than it is to divorce a wife who looks after the family money.

Im a SAHP my DH also provides us with an income. It made sense for him to pursue his opportunity and the increase in earning potential that came with it - so practical. But there was a time when I earned more than him, . I will not likely ever earn what he does now even if I reach the top of my new career but relatively speaking I still aim to achieve the same career success

My DS knows what is used to do (teacher) he also sees me studying, he also has chores. There is more than one way to set a good example and instil a work ethic other than showing your children how hard you work. I also tell he has to work wait for whatever while i 'do my jobs' ie cooking, laundry etc. He also see DH chipping in at weekends.

I thought being liberated meant we were free to make choices rather than be expected to fulfil a narrow number of roles.

Im not well read when it comes to feminist literature so please excuse me if this sounds silly but I want to ask anyone:

Will women who take time out to have children ever overcome some of disadvantages that it brings for some women:

Pregnancy tends not o be a time to push ahead with promotions, taking on more.
Maternity leave - more time away

I think some women fidn themselves trying to play catch up whent hey return to their job at a time when they have additinal demands of a young child on them.

I also wonder if capitlism is partylt to blame the endless wants, to pursure and succeed, or is this an adaptation of 'survival of the fittest' in modern day socities that we have created.

You bet?you mean you anecdotally think it may happen
The majority families don't have a 6figure earner.thats an affluent minority
And that affluent minority housewife may have named money/assett again isn't norm though

Oh dear, I seem to have touched nerve. Rather than aggressively seeking an answer from me, why not explain your counter argument?

Why it is right to be financially dependent on a man?

but it's not the majority

What is the majority? I bet those women, who the OP was talking about, have property / money / investments in their own name.

Address your query about the post to the author mme
I'm clear on what I'm saying it's precarious and yes it reinforces patriarchy

Scottish I can't comment on those who only hold joint accounts with their husbands. I don't. We have always had separate finances.

It's precarious to not earn own money,and be dependent upon waged partner

Even if that is wholly, straightforwardlly true scottish, 'precarious' is still not 'wrong'.

If Mme had said "it is precarious to be financially dependent...." I wouldn't have taken issue with that. Can you not see the difference?

And what capsium said

It's precarious to not earn own money,and be dependent upon waged partner
Yes some may have own money,savings but it's not the majority
Most housewives are dependent upon waged partner,and have no independent means

The our money,family money is a false construct.its earned by the salaried partner spent on all.sometimes the responsibility to manage the money falls to female(again stereotypical role) but it's not same as earning it. Managing someone else money isn't security

Jane

Income is the best indicator of child outcomes so working as a mother may be one of the best things you can do.

If this were true we would have been in a much easier position. Thing is you cannot buy your way out of everything.

Jane Some of those are good reasons to consider working (some of them figured in my own decision to resume work) but none of them prove Mmes insulting assertion that 'financial dependence on a man is wrong'.

I am also more than a bit dubious about points 1 and 4.