Can you be a true feminist if you...?

@LemonRoses I have liked your thoughts on this thread. I am currently reading Liberating Motherhood by Vanessa Olorenshaw and I am finding it intriguing - you may also enjoy it.

In some families, it is not affordable for both parents to work, because childcare is too expensive to be covered by one partner's low wage. Does that make them middle class too? Frankly you are coming across as rather snide and superior, OP, and not very supportive of the choices women sometimes need to make. Not very feminist of you.

[quote Dontknowowt]@SmokedDuck Well fair play to those working class families who can afford for one parent to be a SAHP. I'd love to know how they manage it? All I know is that if either of us gave up ft work we'd not be able to manage without benefits etc. So hats off to them [/quote]
I couldn't say, I don't know how you spend your money.

But what do you think the option is, if you will pay more for working - childcare plus other employment related expenses - than you will make? You can't leave the kids at home alone.

That's me smoked duck

[quote Dontknowowt]@stirrednotshaken80 That's a somewhat middle-class view. I have a career and work ft, my partner also works ft, but if one of us gave up work we simply wouldn't be able to pay the bills (unless on benefits).[/quote]
This can sometimes be the case for the middle class more than those whose jobs are less well paying. In that instance, often childcare can cost more than the salary that would be brought in. Or close enough that staying home seems ta better option than low-cost childcare.

A lot of the SAHP I know are on the lower end of the middle classes or working classes.

I want to be with them and I find it actually offensive to assume that looking after my family is somehow living off a man or worth less than some techie job.

Yeah, I have yet to understand how it is that it's lame to want to take care of your own kids, but as soon as you take care of other people's kids for money it's all good. Or clean other people's houses, switch out roles volunteering at the school or community for pay, etc.

How is it that kicking money up to the next level in the social hierarchy suddenly makes you a better member of society?

If people need to stay wholly independent there is no point in marriage at all because that isn't how it works.

I

This reminds me of when my fil made a smug "spending my money" comment about mil. It was completely bitchy and unfair because she's sooo not one to spend anything without need.
He forgot his audience. I told him with all the unpaid labour she did in childcare she earned a portion of the household money. I also reminded him that as he retired early and she still does all the housework if anything he owes her.

She raised DH who is an absolute diamond so he definitely got his 'money worth'.

Op is very much presenting it like we live in a society where people don't have to make different choices that work best for them financially. My parents both worked out of necessity, not a feminist choice at all. I worked until maternity with D's and may or may not go back. Financially it's about the same and as I work with children I don't see how much difference it makes to feminism whether I nurture for love or capitalism.

@GoingThruTheMotions I’d second this. It appears OP would like other women to slate SAHM for some reason?

@Dontknowowt I really don’t see how I’ve expressed a “middle class” view. I have merely pointed out that feminist values have nothing to do with whether a woman works or not. We all make choices in life and have to accept the subsequent results of those choices.

I'm really, really confused about what your point is op?

Raising children is a valid and important thing to do. If it works for a family for one parent to stay at home I wouldn't judge that as a feminist.

I would however encourage women to consider their financial security and work prospects should their relationship fail.

I think setting out to marry just for the lifestyle someone can give you seems a little callous towards the other person. On the other hand, maybe if the woman offers something the rich husband values, it's a fair exchange.

I don't know that feminism really comes into it.

I think of couples as an economic unit, and I don't think it makes any difference, except practically for themselves, how they choose to divide paid work and whatever else they want to do in life. If someone chooses not to work, they should probably take some steps to make sure they can manage in a way they are happy with if something bad happens, what that looks like is also up to them.

I don't put any intrinsic value on paid employment.

[quote Dontknowowt]@stirrednotshaken80 So for the many women who don't have the choice, does that make them less of a feminist?[/quote]
No. It makes them one of the victims of inequality.

@Dontknowowt A choice in what precisely? If you’re getting at women who would like to stay home but can’t afford to... that still comes under life choices the majority of the time. But I have to say that I’ve absolutely no idea why you are equating the lifestyle someone leads to how much of a feminist they are. It is irrelevant.

I don't think many women (and certainly not ones who are feminists) set out to snag a rich man so that they can choose not to work. People do what they think is best in the circumstances in which they find themselves. Some of those circumstances are created (or at least affected) by the fact that we do not yet live in a society where men are expected to be the main childcarer. Men cannot breastfeed, so for lots of people that skews the parenting onus from early on.

I don't think anybody has the right to say a woman isn't a feminist merely on the basis that it has turned out to make more sense financially or for family reasons for her to be a SAHM.

I do have a female acquaintance (age about 55) who gave up her job the moment she got married though. Never wanted kids, never had any. Hasn't done a day's paid (or voluntary) work since her wedding. That I do find a bit... old-fashioned!

I agree with @BelleClapper. There’s something decidedly unfeminist about the tone of the OP.

It’s this nasty, judgemental stuff that puts women off. Same with plastic surgery, make up, long hair...

For all we know the Colleen Rooneys of the world could be actively teaching their kids about feminist values, anonymously supporting women’s projects in communities etc. Being at home, even when your kids are in school is still worthwhile as kids still need emotional support. It doesn’t matter if that is a mum or dad but women earn less so obviously are more likely to stay home.

I wouldn’t work if I married a very wealthy man. But I would do other types of work. If I won the lottery I’ve always said (I don’t actually play however) I’d go do a PhD in my bachelors topic. A door that was never open to me as a working class kid with crap parents. And academia isn’t well paid anyway if I had got a job.

I’m not currently working, just pandemic related so will return soon, and stayed home until kids went to school. I’m very grateful I married a decent man who I could trust not to fuck me over. Surely this is more about shitty men than whether the woman is a feminist.

An awful lot of feminists in the past were women who had the money of their husband or father. They had the luxury of time to devote to the cause. A lot of men who made scientific discoveries also did so because they had family money and didn’t need to work.

I’m with you @LemonRoses about the unique role of mothering distinct from fathering and the fact that it is an undervalued role which makes an important contribution to family and society.

Mothers and children should have greater protection in law in the case of abandonment in my opinion. As in the state should provide better support for single mothers, (I use the term mother because they are the vast majority of single parents but I include the 10% or so who are single fathers in that too).

I don’t think that the question of being financially supported is a good one to determine if someone is feminist or not.

Volunteer work or other unpaid actions can demonstrate feminism.

Making sure that you have income of your own is prudent but I don’t see how you can argue that it is feminist. It is more looking out for your interests, your own financial security.

Sure I would likely judge someone who married for money rather than love but feminism would not be main objection, rather the shallowness and greed of such an act.

I live off my husband’s money

I am a feminist and I’m a bit bored of posters deciding whether I’m a good feminist or not

I appreciate that the OP is talking about a handful of women who have gone out specifically to partner with a rich man and not work again...but I agree with PP that they probably wouldn’t say they are feminists

@LimpLettice couldn’t agree more

Posts like these are too generalising imo, and doesn’t take into account that not everyone has had the same opportunities.
I quit my job when my son was born because it was low paying and I would basically be wiping out my income on childcare if I kept working. I didn’t have a problem with it from a feminist perspective because I trusted that I could rely on my ex. Unfortunately I was wrong. He wasn’t “rich”, he just earned a bit more than I did.
Now I’m in the position of having to re-train while raising my son so that I can actually have some earning potential. Generally women like me don’t have time to think about how feminist our life is when we’re just trying to pay the rent.

Crikey. I don't think it's remotely feminist if you to assume SAHP women are 'living off' a rich man. Low opinion of some women, haven't you?

I was a good earner lone parent to my DD. Not because I was a feminist, but because we needed a home and to eat. I missed her, and no, I don't think her father would have done a comparable job. He's a crap parent anyway but he's also not a mother. I was financially self sufficient, a bit feminist, but with no time or energy to DO anything for anyone except schlepp to work and try to be there as much as I could.

Nowadays I'm a SAHP. When I met DH we earned the same, but his field is just bigger bucks and he now earns more than twice what I did at the height of my career. It was my decision to stay home with the babies, and I did push him into a higher paid role to facilitate that. Childcare would eat a lot of my salary for 3 children, but that's not why. I want to be with them and I find it actually offensive to assume that looking after my family is somehow living off a man or worth less than some techie job. It does help that our home was bought with my money, but even if it wasn't, we are a partnership and both roles enable our family income.

I'm also much more active as a feminist - my activism has taken off since I've been at hone. Partially due to time, but also like many feminists because my experiences of childbirth and motherhood have sharpened my focus on the issues that face women and attitudes towards us. Feminism is for mothers, single women, girls, aged women - no matter their status, thanks, but it is our reproductive biology / role as nurturers which causes most of the problems we face and to belittle those roles is distinctly unfeminist 🤷🏻‍♀️

I think you’re confused with what feminism is about. Feminism is about equality and freedom to choose. So women who have decided to stay home because they wish to are no less feminist than a business woman who chose to return to work. Key word is CHOICE.

Your post is actually very anti feminism. You have effectively pigeonholed an entire category of women as potential hypocrites to the cause for being housewives or SAHP just because “it doesn’t sit easy with you”

How abrasive.