Is choosing to be a SAHM a feminist decision?

This has been a relatively nice thread with people being heard on both sides of the argument. I'm in agreement that SAHM isn't a feminist decision bluntness but I think you're being quite goady.

@Bluntness100 or you outsource it then.

@Bluntness100 I am not a million miles away from you on this but I disagree that there is an "either / or" in this situation. It isn't as simple as being "forced" to stay home or "having the option" to work. Many women find that the juice is simply not worth the squeeze. Should their health and well-being and their families also suffer because they should be "better feminists"?! I think if you are in a privileged situation then you can make incremental active choices to go against the stereotype but it's very few women who are actually able to do this without great cost..

on the other hand if we had no gender pay gap i think you might find that there were naturally more sahd , less bias in the work place and more real free choice for women and families

Bluntness, I honestly can't see the point in 2 people working full time and outsourcing childcare, if one of them wants to do it themselves and they can afford to.

Assigned no, you're wrong I would consider myself one.

You get to wear a cocktail dress of a Tuesday evening. Just like every working mother

I'm at a four day meeting in Europe. I have three evening receptions to attend, I wore a trouser suit, had two glasses of wine, my dinner, which was a buffet, socialised a bit, and am now back in my hotel room.

My daughter is twenty and in her last year of uni. What's your point? And why the old fashioned attitude, why the fuck would I wear a cocktail dress? It's not the 50s.

What would posters propose as a method of valuing child rearing?

I agree - the current corporate / capitalist setup is not conducive to good family life. It rewards extreme work "dedication" / focus both mentally and practically - and the reality is that a "proper career" person cannot have a family without someone else doing all the home stuff.

This is spot on. And that’s why I wouldn’t and don’t support measures that reinforce this structure. I am 100% behind respecting SAHMs and understand completely how and why that can be the best set up for a family. I would not support incentives to push families towards the one person doing all the earning and the other doing everything else.

As far as I remember, you have quite a few issues with radical feminists blunt?

Am I correct?

and the reality is that a "proper career" person cannot have a family without someone else doing all the home stuff

That's simply not true. My life proves you wrong.

*Blunt&
"I've got to get ready and go for a dinner reception"

Of course you do. You get to wear a cocktail dress of a Tuesday evening. Just like every working mother.

While the SAHMs are wiping arses and worktops.

An SAHP has a financially dependent role. I would not want this for myself or as a role model for my daughters or sons. But if people are happy that's up to them. But it's all the trying to persuade people being financial dependant as an adult is some sort of praiseworthy position. I'd say it was not.

@IWannaSeeHowItEnds I agree - the current corporate / capitalist setup is not conducive to good family life. It rewards extreme work "dedication" / focus both mentally and practically - and the reality is that a "proper career" person cannot have a family without someone else doing all the home stuff.

I'm Back, and some interesting and thought provoking comments.

For me there is a fundamental difference between someone choosing to stay home and someone who has to stay home. When that person has no option due to either the child's health or finances. And that person staying should be the lower earner. Irrelevant of gender. Then yes, that's someone who has a valid opinion, because of forced circumstance.

When someone is able to work, when the joint combined salary will cover childcare, where the work is fully available, but they chose to stay at home as soon as they became a parent, that's the person I simply will not recognise as some form of radical feminist.

You can take the discussion on that subject with me when you've walked a mile in my shoes. But when you opted out through choice, never experienced it, then no, for me, you're not a radical feminist and your views will never be as valid as a woman who has worked and raised a child.

You can though have feminist views about child care. Except when you insist on calling it "woman's work". It's not woman's work. Not any more. I've never considered it women's work and I didn't raise my daughter to see it as women's work either. Calling it women's work is offensive. Both genders are capable of child care and other domestic duties.

I think it's a bit of both unfortunately lounging. Taking care of your family is seen as more normal and acceptable a choice for women than for them to be the main earner or for men to stay at home. WOHM is actually made harder by this bias / expectation that women should and/or will step back.

And I don't think all this means you need to "hang up your feminist hat". In fact I think people who've been through this difficult decision process probably get it more than a 20 something career woman who still thinks we have equality 😆

Yes. Feminism is about 2 things: Securing opportunities for women in the workplace that were previously denied to them. And valuing the types of work that women have always done and recognising their very real contribution to history and society.

My thoughts on this are a bit all over the place, but here goes.

If sah was recognised as valuable and something which does make life much easier (and often advantageous in a career sense) to the wohp and this was recognised in divorce settlements, it would go a long way towards redistribution of power. As it is, women take the career hit and get shafted by divorce and lack of meaningful child support.

I think it's quite hard to find 2 rewarding pt jobs that pay enough to raise a family and that work cohesively, to enable both parents to work and split childcare. Which a pp thought would be the optimum scenario. When both partners work ft, it seems to be that one job is more full on than the other, so one person still ends up doing more. For me, having it all equated to doing it all (or at least more than my share). Bugger that. I don't want to. So maybe sah is my way of doing what I consider to be my share and not half of his share too.

I do actually agree that my choice impacts other women, which is something I do feel bad about. But honestly, I don't think that capitalism lends itself to balanced family life.
In the end, I recognise that all my choices are a mixed bag, good in some ways and a bit shit in others, so I did what I wanted and what made my family life easier.

@grumpysquirrel I do see the pressure to go part time or become a SAHM. Although I wonder if it is actually ‘positive’ pressure, in the sens or encouraging PT or SAHM, or whether it is that unrelenting pressure of being a WOHM is pushing women to choose to be SAHM. I am struggling with this myself at the moment- i’ve Worked so hard and for so long in my career, but it’s fibidhing me off. If I choose (for a period of time) to cut back on work and protect my own health and the wellbeing of my family, does that mean I need to hang up my feminist hat? Do I have to give up all opinions on women and the world of work (as suggested by dammit).
Possibly this is too raw for me- we’re probably saying the same thing. Society currently values wage earners more- so it is women rather than men who are likely to choose PT or SAHM when a family is struggling with two FT. I don’t know how we fix it.

@TheGrumpySquirrel yep, agreed

@Loungingbutnotforlong I agree with you. That's why I said that I understand why women often don't want to do it. In our current unfair set up is often is NOT the optimal decision for an individual family. I'd like to see the whole set up become fairer - so that there is real choice. Currently don't you see there is a lot of pressure on women to go part time or SAHM ? That pressure is real and hard to go against.

liltingleaf even if that were achievable, that will change zero, why would men give up the economic power??

It would viewed similarly to volunteering and valued. It would help employability.

@SlothSlothSloth I agree that this must come from structural change at policy level and individual women should not be demonised for their life choices - which are made within the confines of a patriarchal society. Still doesn't mean I think the "life choice" to be a SAHM is an actively feminist decision.

Why are we putting pressure on women to work outside the home, if that is not what is best for them, or their family. How is it ‘blazing a trail’ to do something that doesn’t work for you? Saying women need to put themselves last and sacrifice for others, sounds pretty much like the patriarchy.

@liltingleaf even if that were achievable, that will change zero, why would men give up the economic power?? I'm not criticising other women's decisions. I think people employ all sorts of coping mechanisms for the structurally unfair set up we as females find ourselves in.