I am a feminist and a sahm

It's always women who find a reason why in their case changing their surname is the right choice. Those reasons could always apply to men but never seem to.

I guess because it's a societal convention, women don't want to upset their husbands by not doing it, so you find another reason to fit in with you doing it. Men don't need to unless they really have a gripe with their surname, they won't go to the effort of Deed Poll to change it.

In my case, I'd like to change it anyway - I don't like my surname. It doesn't even have a nice meaning in my native language! I'm just too lazy, so think marriage will be a good opportunity to do it.

*first name - they change their first name to an English one. For example Jixian to Jason, etc.

I have friends with surnames which aren't English or European and they'd certainly never be changing theirs - one of them is one of my closest chums and as she says her surname is a huge part of her identity.

My point wasn't even in regard to any posters but a general one. It's always women who find a reason why in their case changing their surname is the right choice. Those reasons could always apply to men but never seem to.

Maybe not surname, but I think a lot of foreigners male & female feel pressured to alter their first name/surname. For example, a lot of Chinese people change their surname to an "English" one.

When I went to China, we met a host family who introduced themselves as Jennifer and Cecilia (not their real names). In their own country!

I think there was a study done that people with longer/foreign surnames are less likely to get the job over people with a short easy one. I have a 4-syllable surname so didn't enjoy this news....I guess this is a different topic entirely though.

I agree NoLoveofMine, but avoiding potential xenophobia is a better reason than most.

Interesting how it's always women who find a reason why they would change their surname upon marriage, men never seem to have issues with theirs.

I would never change my surname and were I to get married it'd be so any future husband could take mine.

I don't use "Mrs" because unless I am contemplating bigamy my marital status is irrelevant so why would I use "Mrs"?

Quite.

Also in my opinion the existence of the title "Mrs" is sexist in itself. Why is there no equivalent for men? Surely there should be "Ms" and "Mr". If people wanted to take the surname of their spouse they could still do so.

I also have a bone to pick about someone I know who claims to be a feminist but won't call herself Mrs. She states her marital status doesn't matter so she is Ms, I think by refusing to use Mrs she is stating she knows married women are discriminated against

This has to be a wind up?

I don't use "Mrs" because unless I am contemplating bigamy my marital status is irrelevant so why would I use "Mrs"?

Yes, I would have considered name changing if there were benefits to the other name.

I do agree name-changing is very outdated and a bit unneccessary nowadays.

Having said that, I'd probably do it because my "dodgy foreign surname" causes me so much grief, misspelling and "where are you from?" leading to discussions about politics I didn't want to have. Life would be easier with a short English one.

I won't use Mrs. It's nothing to do with being discriminated against due to marriage.

It's because I don't want to change my name from Miss Poe. That's my name.

I mean, what do people do all the time if they don't have kids.

You make a good point - after work/at the weekend I basically live like a retired OAP. Internet, reading, sewing, housework, gym, friends, etc.

I have to admit I kind of see having kids as sacrificing "me-time" and fun until they're 18 though (from the threads of parents here, I'm not far off) and will be prepared for 9-5 then frantic cooking/housework/playtime. Probably why I am absolutely not ready to have them yet......

I do get what you are saying, I have just always been quite career-driven and love maths too much to ever give it up, even if it means making a small amount after paying for childcare. (I say this now, idealistically)...Obviously a lot people don't have that luxury. Remembering now the famous story of JK Rowling and how going on benefits provided more money than working and paying for childcare, which would have put her at a loss.

There was a great program on R4 not that long ago that basically said that women going out to be career women has been one of the worst things for feminism, we were now expected to keep our houses cleaner than ever before, raise a family AND have a career and the position of being a housewife has been belittled.

I also have a bone to pick about someone I know who claims to be a feminist but won't call herself Mrs. She states her marital status doesn't matter so she is Ms, I think by refusing to use Mrs she is stating she knows married women are discriminated against.

Well, kids are only out of the house for six hours a day, five days a week - so thirty hours a week in total, forty weeks a year, and even then, only if none of them are disabled or never get sick.

The rest of the time - volunteering, study, seeing friends, exercising, reading, pursing hobbies etc.

I mean, what do people do all the time if they don't have kids. What do they spend all their time not at work on? They have more than thirty hours a week to themselves!

That's horrifically expensive. It's a self-perpetuating circle - because of womens salaries being on average lower, and mat leave/pat leave/childcare being crap, the woman is more likely to stay off work and therefore earn less over a lifetime e.t.c. Think the government policy is the culprit here.

I didn't say I "agreed" with 3 years of being a SAHM, I'm just saying what's what my mum did. . I think 1-2 would work for me. To be honest, I think it's totally reasonable and sensible in this country before the kid is school age, from what you've said about childcare. I just don't understand it as much when the kids are all at school or have left home - not to sound ignorant, but what do people do all day? I couldn't really imagine life without work/study/something.

[off-topic] Not that I'm all into the "rat race" - if I won the lottery, I would pay for back-to-back degrees. Maths was good but I'd love to do Chemistry, medicine, psychology, fashion design

To make that clearer, the average person (not woman) would have £185 for them and their child to live on per week after tax and childcare.

Average weekly full time wage is 510 before tax.

Average childcare cost for one preschool child is 225 a week.

Most people simply could not afford to go to work without 'depending' on someone else.

I also don't understand how you can disagree with being a SAHM and agree with three years of maternity leave. That's nine years of being a SAHM if you have three kids!

I'm not wealthy. I know childcare is incredibly expensive - really, it should be at the very least subsidised by the government, or at best, free. Then everyone who wanted to work could go back to work.

How much is childcare per year (full-time)? If it's in the realms of 20k, I can understand why someone on a low-paid job would pack it in and stay at home. The problem is, this gives them a huge career break and makes it 10x harder to go back to work, meaning they probably don't, and seeing as this is usually the woman - this perpetuates the "woman on lower wages not in the boardroom" scenario.

In the ideal world, maternity leave would be longer and better paid, and childcare wouldn't be ridiculously expensive. For example I was born in a socialist country where mat leave was 3 years paid by the government and nursery was free - so my mum stayed at home about 2/3 years then went back FT. We moved to UK when I was 6. With a solid career she could then pay for FT care for my brother 10 years later.

It's a really sad circular situation we've got going. Government really needs to do something.

'It means I can support myself '

Lucky for you. You must be incredibly wealthy.

That vast majority of men and women do not earn enough to be able to support themselves and pay for childcare for their children.

It's the right decision for my family and I don't see how having a wage gives somebody any kind of intrinsic 'worth'.

I disagree - I attach worth to my wage because

a) It means I can support myself - if my landlord kicks me out, or some unforeseen bad thing happens, I can support myself and not have to be bailed out by my parents, partner or government.
b)If you enjoy your job and find it mentally stimulating and feel it contributes to society, that adds a lot of worth and purpose into your life. Just like having children I suppose!

Not all SAHMs are dependent on a partner. Many are single parents.

TBH, I don't mean to sound rude but I don't understand how being a SAHM could be compatible with feminism. If anyone could explain it to me I would be really grateful.

You are choosing to forego a personal career, pursuing an interest etc. and using your free choice to rely solely on your partner. What if he breaks up with you or dies? You won't be able to be self-sufficient, unless he has really good life insurance or something. There's something concerning about thinking that if my partner left me and I was a SAHM, I couldn't support myself. And personally, I feel guilty living off other people's money.

Also, I see a career as a personal achievement which no-one can take away from you (even if you get fired, you have your work experience behind you). House, kids, partners can all be taken away from you in a divorce.

I am a sahm. I am a feminist, I am also a Marxist. I no more see my decision to stay at home as a free choice than I see my participation in a free market capitalist system as a choice. It is my reality. I have constrained choices. I am not immune to the problems inherent in claiming feminism while doing wife work and being financially dependent. The life I have is a compromise that we live with and works well within the framework of the world we live in.

Thank you bigmouth for articulating so eloquently how i feel about my choice to be a sahm for the first few years of my children's lives. It was the best choice available to me at the time.

I also agree with NoLoveofmine's point. Many SAHMS are single parents. This is not all about women with husbands.

I agree with others who have said it is an entirely feminist choice to be a SAHM and that being a SAHM is work.

It is not at all in the same category as activities like painting nails or shaving legs.