What's wrong with being a SAHM?

'Of course, not everyone wants a 'high flying career' (I am not even sure what that is) saint; that is a straw man argument. But everyone should be aiming to be able to support themselves, no?'

It's not a straw man argument. It's rainbows argument; I was responding to it.

And no, I don't think people should be aiming to support themselves particularly when much essential work is unpaid or low paid.

Loopy

I could have done something else, I just chose not to.
I know some women martyr themselves, do something they don't want to do.
I really don't know why, of course unless they have no choice.

"I'd had quite a successful career before dc and it wasn't compatible with family life for us both to continue in the same industry..... so I was a sahm.

My dh career continued the same and grew over the years as a result."

This is what happens. So rarely the men who make the decision to stop paid work or go PT, so rarely the women whose careers progress.

Tagging on & returning to the OP :

I love the idea of striving to be the best mother, home maker, having the tea on the table for when he gets home stuff. I love the idea of it all

It's sweet that you're so in love with the "idea" of it all. Wait till you get to the reality.

Not for nothing did most women writers writing before the 2nd wave of feminism after WW2, write about being free to work, earn their own money, and not be imprisoned in the home. Try Virginia Woolf (500 pounds a year & a room of one's own) or Charlotte Perkins Gilmore (The Yellow WAllpaper) or Kate Chopin (The Awakening) Charlotte Bronte - any of her novels, but Villette especially . And so on.

Don't underestimate your current freedom, autonomy and independence. YOu don't know what you've got till it's gone. Joni Mitchell knew what she was talking about.

I don't think the correct discussions are possible though, even if discussions are had

What parents think they want/it will be like before they have kids is often different to how it is after the kids have arrived

Also, people always think that if they do get divorced, then theirs would be an amicable separation where both parties are reasonable and considerate. Couples don't often consider how they will separate after the husband has spent years leaving the wife to do all the household chores and child rearing, whilst he excels in his career. He has had an affair and they hate each other's guts

Carl

I often wonder if some couples discuss this stuff before they have dc.
None of our kids were planned, we weren't having any
However, we did discuss what we would do with the system that existed then if we did have any little surprises.
I wasn't bothered about a career as I'd had quite a successful career before dc and it wasn't compatible with family life for us both to continue in the same industry.
I could have changed career/job, gone pt but it wasn't for us, so I was a sahm.
My dh career continued the same and grew over the years as a result.
he was lucky to be able to be round for the dc though and did/does his share if not more round the house.
I suppose if your dh works in a corporate office environment with specific hours you'd have to discuss his hours and how to make it fair for both.

gilly its chicken and the egg, innit?

If more men stayed home, if more women were part of policy making processes on a societal level, we'd probably see far more protection for parents looking after DC.

As it stands, men, as a class, don't give up work and value those that do very little indeed hence the lack of protection.

Alright, 'smart arsed comment' worthy then

Guaranteed a comment which begins 'no offence', is intended to cause offence.

Surely if more men stayed at home they too would be disadvantaged by their choice, bearing most of the financial risk.
If women don't want to stay at home they don't have to.
Whether man or woman you should choose a spouse that encourages you to choose what you want or find a man who is willing to sah if this is what you want.

Finally, not everyone is capable of their own high flying career. Many people just have jobs. It makes sense for couples to play to their strengths, maximising income and minimising expenditure on child care, if there is no financial advantage (or desire) to outsourcing it.

Obviously, no one could argue with that. But us pesky feminists just like to point out that somehow it always 'makes sense' for it to be the man that goes to work and the woman to stay at home. And that many women are disadvantaged in the long term by a 'choice' where they bore most of the financial risk. That is feminist structural analysis, not taking a pop at individual women

I'm appalled that you found that joke worthy make

It's not a joke.

I'm appalled that you found that joke worthy make;

I was illustrating that I am not coming at this from an 'everyone must have a career' POV. That the issue is being able to support yourself and your kids independently. And that the issue is culture and world-wide.

That is what feminism seeks to address. Not some MC Britain, feeling disapproved of because she chooses to stay at home and really wants to ignore the risk she is taking. And wants everyone else to pretend there isn't a risk, as well.

Painful oh I know, I don't feel attacked, it's just quite an interesting debate. I suppose I was trying to make the point that a "career" isn't always more fulfilling than SAH. Nor is a job necessarily more reliable than a DH/DW (and I do specify H or W here as marriage is vital for anyone SAH imo).

I know that I would need to return to work if DH left me. I know that that will be a struggle. I hope it doesn't happen but if it does, I believe I am resourceful and hardworking enough to return to a reasonable job in time. I know I would be financially ok for the interim.

I suppose becoming a SAHP should be a genuine free choice, and a considered choice. It is possible to protect yourself both from boredom and exploitation but givig up work entirely for a period needs the same consideration and planning as any other career move or major life decision.

She has had jobs digging roads with a pickaxe with her baby strapped to her back.

No offence, but I think the idea is that in a society with so much wealth, we will find ways so that mothers with small babies do not dig roads with pick axes. If for no other reason, it is a terribly inefficient way of building a road.

make, thanks for the explanation. We certainly need something so that women are not trapped in marriages.
Personally, I would make woh partners have to legally share their wages if the sahp has been disadvantaged by raising shared dc. It would stop men from thinking that the money is all theirs. I suspect this wouldn't be popular though.

Good post foxy. Problem is, no one thinks it will happen to them

polar whilst very interesting, and with respect, your post is irrelevant. When SAHP take the issue as a personal attack and start justifying/explaining; it detracts from the actual point

It's not about having to be 'high flying' or having a career. It's about being able to support yourself should you need to

I was never a career minded person. I left school at 16. I have had 4 jobs at times to support myself. I have been so skint, at times. My SiL is not European and is poor and rural. She has had jobs digging roads with a pickaxe with her baby strapped to her back. I'm not coming at this from a career/priveleged POV. It's survival

Of course, not everyone wants a 'high flying career' (I am not even sure what that is) saint; that is a straw man argument. But everyone should be aiming to be able to support themselves, no?

IME schools don't teach kids to 'aim high'. They do teach them to apply themselves and find their passion/forte. Probably varies depending on area/school

Even if that 'something', is no job and self-sufficiency. The most important lesson though is risk management surely. Everyone should reduce their vulnerabilities, whatever they choose to do

Sorry make, what do you mean by basic income?

Well there are various models...some which are being experimented with now.

The idea is that each person would have a basic income. So from perhaps a feminist perspective, if a stay-at-home-mother found herself in a bad position, she would find it very easy to arrange for new living conditions.

It would make part-time work a more viable option. Or returning to school. Or continuing to be a stay-at-home mother.

Rainbows, that's massively judgemental.
For a start, I don't believe that sahm claim that their partner's work achievements are 'all down to them'. But certainly it is easier to study for promotions, travel, stay late for meetings and focus on work properly, if you don't have to tailor your working life around childcare etc. Whether you consider it an anti feminist choice or not, it is a fact that having a sah partner does enable career progression. Of course it is not impossible to do it without one, but it is much harder.

I find it deeply offensive to be told I am 'living off' my husband. We are a partnership and we have chosen to divide up the essential tasks of looking after our children and earning money in the way that suits us both and made our lives easier. That phrase implies that I provide nothing of worth to the partnership.

Personally I don't see anything wrong in sah to look after one's own children (apart from the financial risk element). Your post implies it is somehow less than having a career. I disagree. I have loved my life. I used to be a teacher and while I utterly support the idea that everyone should be given the education and training to earn their own money, freedom of choice is key A person's value is not measured by whether they directly generate money.

Finally, not everyone is capable of their own high flying career. Many people just have jobs. It makes sense for couples to play to their strengths, maximising income and minimising expenditure on child care, if there is no financial advantage (or desire) to outsourcing it.

It is a bit of an oddity on MN that everyone has "careers". Some of my friends do, but some have ordinary jobs as receptionists, in retail or running toddler classes, etc. My husband has a job which has ended up progressing, but he is not ambitious towards his career. I am a SAHM because we can afford it, I want to be at the moment and we have a great quality of life as a result. Admittedly, I do sometimes have moments when I feel unfulfilled (I was high achieving at school) but I have done several courses both online and in person, I love planning educational trips (and just-for-fun trips too!) for the kids, I volunteer in a couple of roles and I read good books.

I have found ways to better myself or feel a sense of pride while being a SAHP. However this is only made possible because we have a little bit of spare cash each month, DH is a good man who mucks in with the DC, we live in the suburbs so stuff is accessible, I work hard at being a SAHM and I have a good group of supportive friends (although only one is a SAHM) and the type of personality that will volunteer for stuff like PTA. A good dose of luck, basically.

I was a SAHP for 13 years, before working part-time. Taking the 'traditional' roles played to our strengths and we were happy with this.

Until we broke up, and XH told me I 'brought nothing to the marriage' as I didn't work so didn't contribute financially.

I am a feminist. I raise my sons and daughters as feminists. I would love to be able to say to my DCs that it's a good choice to be a SAHP if that's what they want, but I just can't. It's still not a valued choice, leaves (mostly) women vulnerable and lets (mostly) men off the hook WRT childcare and housework.

I think you are being a little naive OP. If you aren't a feminist what are you? Don't you believe in equality?

But why are teachers telling kids to aim high? Not everyone wants a high flying career.

Neither of my teens want one, and I have one of each sex.

People should be aiming to do something that they find fulfilment in, which is what mine were taught at home and at school.

If everyone aimed for a high flying career, there would be a huge shortage of classroom assistants and primary school teachers.

rainbows it is much much easier all round of 1 person is at home. Takes stress out of organising childcare, finding everyone a pair of clean pants on a Monday morning etc etc

I am a SP to 2 and my career is fairly high flying. Having someone at home, doing cleaning, cooking, child ferrying etc would improve my quality of life

It's not feminist to go to work or not go to work

Feminist issues are inequality at work/with child care/support for sahp/support for women exiting abusive marriages etc

Individuals making choices is not a feminist issue. Feminism is concerned with seeking equality for women, improving conditions for women and protecting women

But OP chose to post her navel gazing here, which has somewhat distorted the issues/discussion