Is choosing to be a SAHM a feminist decision?

DIone - I have read a few articles and blogs online and to be honest found it quite confusing as there didn't seem to be anything definitive hence my post. I am still quite new to the whole thing so this thread has really helped me understand different perspectives.

I don’t think nursery workers earn enough, no. I also think teachers are hugely underpaid.

I don’t think that means when I send my son to school in 18 months that I am exploiting them. Most SAHMs send their 3 year olds to preschool same as me so I don’t see that it’s relevant.

Good for you Dione. I'm not sure everybody who works in childcare has had the same experience, though.

I've never paid for childcare. And I'm not a radfem. So no hypocrisy from me. I did work in Early Years Education looking after other people's children. I do not and did not at the time consider myself exploited as I was paid a decent wage and had excellent professional development paid for by my employers.

Bluntness No doubt that is valued in the family unit, but it gives that man an unfair advantage over nearly all working mothers. There is really no discussion to be had on that. It simply does. And that's why mothers struggle often in the workplace and fathers don't. Because mothers usually don't have a partner at home managing all the child care and enabling them to work all the hours required like their Male counterparts do all too often

Well I think your point isn't about working mothers struggling to compete with men with SAHM partners but all working parents (both male and female) without SAHPs struggling to compete not only with these facilitated men but also anybody without young children or caring responsibilities.

I agree this is a problem but there are several examples on this thread, my own included, where being a SAHM has not created a facilitated partner. Yes there are undeniably some advantages to having a parent around during the working day when your kid gets ill etc but a lot of people have wider support networks such as grandparents that can help with these kinds of things. Are these women defined as 'facilitated' women because they have this support? I think 'facilitated' man implies a much larger amount of support which isn't necessarily provided by a SAHP

splendide, are the nursery staff well paid for their work, in your opinion?

Just don't pretend that working in a high status role is categorically the most radically feminist thing you can do as a woman

Oh yes I see. I don’t so that’s ok.

I don’t agree that sending my son to nursery two days a week is exploitative of the women (and one token man!) who work there.

Why do you think that this would be easier than having a SAHD?

I didn't say that. I said that 'if' they pay into the exploitative service and care industries in order to look after their own families it is somewhat hypocritical claiming to be rad fem.

OP, you said in your OP that you strongly identify as a radical feminist. Did you look at RF analysis on SAHMs before making this statement? What did you find?

So is your position that nobody should use childcare? All families should have a SAHP? That’s quite a radical position to take.

No. Just don't pretend that working in a high status role is categorically the most radically feminist thing you can do as a woman.

liltingleaf it is interesting that you think that the way for women to WOH is for them to exploit other women. Why do you think that this would be easier than having a SAHD?

So yes, if you're the one home, doing the school runs, making sure the kids are fed, that he doesn't need to take a day off when they are sick, or during school holidays or inset days, you are 100 percent giving that man a workplace advantage over thr working mother in terms of career progression , whether it's your intention or not.

Well, if being a rad fem involves your husband doing stuff around the house, I'm probably the most rad fem of all of you in that respect. Cancer treatment

Bluntness -I know that !!!

However this would seem somewhat hypocritical if women who WOH perpetuate exploitation of women in the workplace by paying into the exploitative care and service industries in order to look after their own families.

So is your position that nobody should use childcare? All families should have a SAHP? That’s quite a radical position to take.

Grumpy So equality means being the same? We should have equal numbers of female and male SAHPs to be equal? Is this just in the SAH role or across all occupations? In the beauty industry, in the military, in midwifery?

Just because it's an undervalued role in society, it doesn't mean that as feminists we should be desperate to disown it or try to add value to it through making men take up the role. It really is just so depressing that the only way that women will see their own traditional roles valued is if they are to some extent taken over by men. Why can't we fight for female dominated roles to be given the value they deserve irrespective of whether men want to do them or not?

If you refuse to cannot see that the majority of SAHP being women and the majority of CEOs being men is a problem for feminism then I'm amazed.

Of course I recognise this is a problem for feminism.

However to solve this problem do you think it is a really good idea to stigmatise the role of SAHP and the women who do it? To minimise any skills and knowledge involved in this role and render them entirely irrelevant in the workplace. This completely alienates a whole sector of women from all types of feminism.

Women who WOH complain that SAHM work against the feminist cause as they make women's working life more difficult as they have to compete with 'facilitated men'. However this would seem somewhat hypocritical if women who WOH perpetuate exploitation of women in the workplace by paying into the exploitative care and service industries in order to look after their own families. Or if they ignore or dismiss the reasons why women find themselves having an extended period spent as a SAHP or the skills and knowledge they may acquire in the process.

By implication WOHP dont then have those skills

How can it imply this? It can only imply this if you think we don't care for our children in the evenings, nights, mornings, weekends, when they are sick, on holidays. Do you think stay at home parents lose those kills when the kids are at school?

There is no difference in the skills, it's simply the amount of time spent doing it. Implying parents who work don't care for their kids ain't a pretty one.

lilting
It was stated upthread that the skills gained in SAHP (caring for ones own DC) may be an advantage in care work.
By implication WOHP dont then have those skills (not that they are of any relevence anyway)

Chefs are highly trained-of course it helps to be interested in food .
"Cooking from scratch"😂
Ill call MN bingo and bow out

Of course it gives men an advantage. They don't need to do school runs or be at home on a day off with a sick kid, or be home to make dinner or get thr shopping in, or even go to sports days or assemblies.

I constantly see on this forum women proclaiming they supported their husbands career, that he would not have progressed if it wasn't for them picking up the load at home.

No doubt that is valued in the family unit, but it gives that man an unfair advantage over nearly all working mothers. There is really no discussion to be had on that. It simply does. And that's why mothers struggle often in the workplace and fathers don't. Because mothers usually don't have a partner at home managing all the child care and enabling them to work all the hours required like their Male counterparts do all too often.

So yes, if you're the one home, doing the school runs, making sure the kids are fed, that he doesn't need to take a day off when they are sick, or during school holidays or inset days, you are 100 percent giving that man a workplace advantage over thr working mother in terms of career progression , whether it's your intention or not.

bumpty yes they did or partners doing part-time roles. But things are changing but we’re a long way off.

"But society is just a collective of individuals. Ignoring their lived experiences and perceptions on them will do nothing to further the feminist cause."

🤦🏻‍♀️

One more try. Yes a COLLECTIVE of whom the MAJORITY of women are not in the privileged position of the OP or gilly (who have eg negotiated equitable divisions of labour and who have good chances of re entering the work force) but do not have real choices when it comes to SAH or career . If you refuse to cannot see that the majority of SAHP being women and the majority of CEOs being men is a problem for feminism then I'm amazed.

Perhaps being sahm isn’t rad fem in our current capitalist patriarchy, but if all things were equal it would be just as valid a choice as being ceo of big bollocks tech inc. The problem isn’t the sahm, it’s the inequality.

Can you blame individuals for doing what they can with what they have (law abidingly)? I’ve more earning power currently by facilitating my dh to get a better job than I do going out and getting my own job. That galls something rotten. I tried my best but the system took against me when I started having babies. I don’t blame women for their choices.

Shenanagins do all these men have SAHM partners? Even if they do, I would suggest it's not a function of the SAH role but more an attitude things. Lots of women working FT and PT are guilty of the same.

It really isnt relevent to the care industry.

When is providing care not at all relevant to the care industry? When it is done by a SAHP.

Its like saying you are suitable to work as a chef because you can cook a meal.

When is experience and in and a love of regularly cooking from scratch not at all relevant to working in catering? When it is done by a SAHP.

Also just because you WOH doesnt mean you are any less of a caring person which is the implication.

Where has this been implied on this thread?

Sorry haven’t read the thread but bluntness does make a good point about sahm facilitating their partners careers to the detriment of working women. Something I’ve noticed over my career is that the senior male managers generally all have children, yet the far too female senior managers generally don’t.
Things are changing but at a snails pace, yet everyone wants a quick solution to the horrendous gender pay gaps.