Is choosing to be a SAHM a feminist decision?

@liltingleaf but you are saying that SAHM is going against the current patriarchal capitalist system and i disagree - SAHM are facilitating a long hours (Male) worker, and perpetuating gender stereotypes. You as a family will pay more in taxes.

I have just been explaining the RL position on SAHMs.

What, as the self appointed expert, on what constitutes radical feminism?

" the skills a SAHP might acquire whilst being a SAHP have been minimised, "

I think you are on your own there lilting. Sorry, but wohp could simply argue that doing everything a sahp does PLUS working means they are even more skilled! I have seen this argument so many times on here.

I've managed renovation projects at home on top of working full time for example. And caring for children is a particular skill that is irrelevant in most careers (except sometimes managing your boss's tantrums )

people have given very sensible suggestions on this thread about how to keep up skills and training relevant to your workplace but you continue to get upset that people won't agree that sahp in itself has some kind of added value? I agree that time out shouldn't be seen as a negative per se, just want to be clear about that! But realistically time out is experience lost out on in your chosen career. That's why I'm making my DH do half of it!

Grumpy I agree.

Fwiw though women often do not help ourselves on this topic. Martyrdom, overanalysis of our own failings, a need to justify our choices, ridiculous levels of gratitude when a man is a decent human being, a snigger and "men can't multitask" and "Don's babysitting (his own) DC tonight" met with a chorus of "woo lucky yous".

I also think that for most people outside Mumsnet's white, middle class, SE England demographic, paid work is not a fulfilling, life affirming experience which of course means many women don't want to "let" their DPs have a share of the parental leave.

The bottom line is and always has been that most people are just muddling through.

That should be RF position, not RL.

Also if both parents are in part time family friendly jobs, that's hardly advantaging the patriarchal capitalist system because 1) they'd pay less tax than 1 high earner + 1 SAHP 2) they'd be sharing career and domesticity equally and 3) they wouldn't be perpetuating the facilitated worker culture

Never said it was.

Before I say anything else, I must point out that I am not a radical feminist. I have just been explaining the RL position on SAHMs.

As for what can be done? I would love to see legislation introducing compulsory paternity leave at the same rate as SMP. I would love to see more men SAH. The more men who do this, the fewer will be "lauded" as it will be the norm. I have no doubt that they would participate in competitive parenting at the same rate as mothers.

And it would be one in the eye of patriarchal capitalism as employers would be taking chances on all employees of child having age, making women a better bet. As well as showing that there are more important things than money.

It would benefit children in having real parental input from both parents and seeing that raising children and keeping a home is not something that is a parent/adult responsibility, not a woman's. And making a world where our girls can actually be whatever they want to be without having the odds stacked against them before they start.

Making it less uncool to be a SAHM won't fix that.

Neither would making it more 'uncool' to be a SAHM. Feminists should be supporting women not adding to their oppression.

Also if both parents are in part time family friendly jobs, that's hardly advantaging the patriarchal capitalist system because 1) they'd pay less tax than 1 high earner + 1 SAHP 2) they'd be sharing career and domesticity equally and 3) they wouldn't be perpetuating the facilitated worker culture

No that's not what I said. None of the policies I've suggested stigmatise sahp.

I was not referring to the policies you mentioned, grumpy, but rather the way the role of SAHP is spoken about by posters, in that it is deemed 'anti feminist' and the skills a SAHP might acquire whilst being a SAHP have been minimised, on this thread.

I have no issue with the idea of one part of a couple taking on a SAH role for a few years to support the other. I have an issue with people pretending it doesn't matter that men continue to wield most of the economic power and senior positions in business and politics because women are still held back from equality by child rearing responsibilities- KIDS ARE BOTH PARENTS responsibility! Making it less uncool to be a SAHM won't fix that.

No that's not what I said. None of the policies I've suggested stigmatise sahp.

@SweetheartNeckline we've got to start somewhere. Educate girls properly, support women returning to work, make meaningful paid paternity leave compulsory, etc.

I would like my daughter to expect her future partner to do 50 per cent at home whether that's at the same time or at another time in their children's lives. My husband will take the same amount of time off work as me when our baby is born. He may go part time afterwards.

The day there are equal numbers of sahd as SAHM is the day I'll say women have a proper choice in the matter and we've made some progress. Simply saying how brilliant being a SAHM is isn't feminism.

You have to make men do it too.

And how do you do this? By stigmatising the role and the women who do it? Don't think so...

But they don't, mostly women do.

But not exclusively. So I used the term SAHP. So shoot me..,,

Lilting I don't think that encouraging and valuing solely women as sahp is progress for feminism, no matter how much the role is recognised as adding value to the family and society.

You have to make men do it too.

Solely advantaging your own family is not Radical Feminism.

I meant as opposed to advantaging the patriarchal capitalist system.

" talk about SAHP because it is a role either sex could take on."

But they don't, mostly women do.

Dionne, neither is paying into the patriarchal capitalist caring and service industries which exploit those women who work within them, in order to ensure your family is cared for, radical feminism.

Neither is being exploited, as a woman, within the workplace, radical feminism.

Neither is alienating women who have spent some time as a SAHP away from radical feminism, by devaluing their knowledge and skills, radical feminism.

Solely advantaging your own family is not Radical Feminism.

Dionne, how do you think that radical change could start? Compulsory paternity leave at a good rate of pay? I still feel men will be lauded for, in many cases, providing mediocre childcare and not taking on the lion's share of jobs like nearly all SAHM / pt women because "looking after DC is a full time job", and the woman won't be "lucky" fpr being allowed to luxuriate at home, she'll be "lucky" for being able to have a career in addition to all the shitwork

Sometimes the radical option just is not feasible at any kind of pace.

women to engage in 'wifework'. Typo omission.

Where did I advocate paying others to do 'wifework' in terms of radical feminism?

My point was that being a SAHP, unpaid, means that the current patriarchal capitalist service and caring industries are not supported. Thus engaging in 'wifework', as a SAHP unpaid, solely to advantage your own family, in one way, serves to dismantle the current patriarchal capitalist system and paying for women within the patriarchal capitalist system serves it.

No, it's not liltingleaf. It is about bring a radical change to society. Paying other women to look after your children and do wifework is not radical or even new and will not dismantle the patriarchy. Putting fathers into this role will.

Dionne, it is certainly about paying others when the patriarchy is a capitalist one. You cannot separate the current patriarchy from capitalism.