Can we agree on one thing?

[Serendippy]

The simple act of staying at home to look after your children or going out to work does not mean you have the harder life. Some people enjoy their jobs, some don't. Some people enjoy being at home with their children, some don't. So 'going out to work' is not necessarily harder than staying at home and vice versa.

I hate hearing the phrase, 'Being a SAHM is the hardest job' because that is clearly not universally true. If you left a job which you hated with long hours and colleagues you didn't get on with, it can be a relief to be at home. OTOH, if you left a stimulating job with lovely colleagues and friends and that you enjoyed, it could be boring to be at home with children.

Yes, if you go out to work, lots of 'SAHM jobs' still need to be done, but the job of looking after the children during the day is not one of them, you pay someone else to do it. So although it is not a job as in paid employment, it is something that needs to be done by somebody.

I really think that how hard your 'job' is depends on the circumstances.

AIBU to think that we can agree that sweeping statements such as 'I am a SAHM/WOHM so therefore I automatically have the harder life' are not accurate or helpful?

[Serendippy]

And just to stick my par in one more time; I agree with the poster who said that having a choice to stay at home is a luxury. I also think that having the choice to go out to work is a luxury. If you are a SAHM because you were made redundant/have 3 children under 5 you can't afford childcare for/are caring for a sick or disabled child/have no qualifications or experience in order to get a job, is it still a luxury to be at home? No, because you don't have the choice. In the same way that having to return to work because you need the money is not a luxury.

It is a luxury to choose to stay at home, but it is also a luxury to choose to go to work if financially you do not have to.

Supports my argument that neither group can be bracketed as the 'hard off' ones, it depends on circumstances.

Am going to copy that last line and paste it over and over and over again as needs be

[Serendippy]

Cat I think it depends on how they are finding being at home. If they love it, they are likely to answer 'Yes, I love being at home and am so lucky to be able to'. If they don't enjoy it and would rather be at work but cannot find a job or afford childcare for working hours, they are more likely to be offended. Nothing to do with what you have said, but as people have said before, it is how secure they are in what they do, be it a choice or a necessity.

[hmc]

"if your dh finances your sitting on yer arse thats a private transaction so long as you dont claim jsa

out of interest whats the satisfaction in sitting on arse doing sweet fa all day?"

Scottishmummy - lol - I really don't think dh sees it as financing me in some sort of hard nose transactional arrangement to sit on my arse. He earns money for all four of us to live our lives in the way we see fit.

As it happens I don't sit on my arse all day precisely because I wouldn't find that particularly rewarding (although it's fun now and then) - my point was that if I was to choose to do that, then this would be my prerogative. I find it midly amusing how many people are morally offended by SAHPs not being in paid employment, and overly concerned about every detail of how they fill their time. There is some weird distorted protestant work ethic going on.

What is this jsa to which you refer? We don't claim (and based on income) are not eligible for anything (shrugs)

[mutznutz]

I have nothing to add to this thread other than the fact the front page just made me spit my wine out. The order of threads reads....

Can we agree on one thing?

To never wear a bra?

That is all