to be totally fucked off with the antisahm comments on here?

[slackers]

Wtaf are you only a good role model to your DC if you are in paid employment?
Why does someone only be valid in society if they earn?
Why should I work only to pay someone else do a job to look after my DC? wtaf is the logic in that?
ffs

no they say it because they are cross.

I do not swear if I am cross it shows lack of education and manners.

iliketherain - "and do not worry about the children" well if I were working, I would response to such an offensive comment with a pithy intelligent and very appropos "piss off" and I'm sure it wouldn't derail the conversation at all.

no it doesn;t I have both education (stacks of it) and manners (as has DS and commented on by the school how terribly polite he is) and I occasionally swear.

They're just words. Words which can be used in a sentence to make it more interesting or pithy.

You sound like Mary Whitehouse.

Liketherain- if you have left your child and he was distraught then your hand has been forced hasn't it? You cannot really work at the noment whether you want to or not.

Fortunately my children were fine in childcare and thrived.

Oh and btw when I am old and grey I won't regret a single minute spent with my children either. My kids are gorgeous, funny and wonderful company - as I'm sure you find yours are

I expect I will also look back over many interesting and fun experiences in life, including children I have taught, colleagues I've shared laughs with... As well as all the non work related memories. All part of lifes rich tapestry eh?

You seem very keen to dismiss my work life as simply 'being a forgettable number' lol. Well, sorry to disappoint you again ,but when former pupils get in touch and tell me how they are doing at uni or in their career, it's a very clear message that THEY appreciate my input, and frankly that's what matters

"Piss off" is a much more elegant and economical way of saying "please go away as you argument is really irritating and I am getting cross with your sanctimonious lecturing"

Makes much more sense to me and was much quicker to read.

Exactly kewcumber!

Donthateme the point at which 'the whole WOHM/ SAHM thing turns Nasty is when people try to claim the moral high ground and say that one way is better for the children.
Absolutely agree.

Iliketherain- you are justifying your choice by putting down other's choices.
There is no need for this and I don't agree that a working mother who is, let's say, a GP is just an insignificant number.. The DC are learning that women can also choose to contribute to society in a wider sense, outside of the home.. You are putting these people down.

NO You have lost the argument when you swear, in my book anyway.

Th pupils do not pay your wage if you left next week you would be replaced and forgotton about................please do not think you are special in the workplace.

My only interest is the children.

You have children so look after them.

and it isn;t about women only being "allowed" to work if their job wis worthwhile. We need all those working mothers - shop assitant, accountants, packaging deisgners, nurses etc etc etc.

The economy would slow down or become dramatically more expensive if women with children all chose not to work (as I am currently doing).

You should be grateful that so many women chose or have to work. Its makes your own life staying at home cheaper and viable.

Agree kitty. It's actually extremely offensive to dismiss the entire working population as 'just numbers'. I wonder if liketherain has a partner who financially supports her to stay at home, and if so, is that partner also dismissed as 'a number who is instantly forgettable and replaceable'...
Charming way to regard the majority of the adult population.

iliketherain - for someone intelligent (as you don't swear I assume this to be the case) you presumably know that staying at home with your children is a relatively recent middle class invention. Prior to the middle classes existing and wages improving, affluent families paid servants to look after their children and working class women would have paid friends and family to care for their children whilst they wrked. How did the world survive?

the entire working population are just numbers.

everybody is replaceable in the workforce.

I am not against working mums not at all..............i work but whenever my child is here so am I.

I am against full time nusery for babies pre school children.

Liketherain- your last post speaks volumes. Work is about a lot more to me than the salary and my pension (though they're nice too!)
If you can't get your head round all the other rewards of working (in my case teaching, ie having an influence on the lives and future of young people) then that's your problem. Not anyone elses.

Oh and the vast majority of parents put their children first - whether they work or not. And working parents bring their children up too you know. Clearly you don't want to Accept that fact!

KEW i am not interested in what used to happen in the old days.

I am only interested in today and the future.

The breakdown of society because parents are not around to keep their kids in order.

Oh God, has this thread reached this point already:

"won't somebody think of the chiiiiiiiildren" (wrents garments and gnashes teeth)

Iliketherain My only interest is the children.

Other's may not share your opinion. You are implying that working mums don't have their children's interest at heart and that by working they are somewhat neglecting them.
The counter argument would be that by focussing entirely on your DC in life, you are presenting them with a narrower view of the world than parents who do other thing too.

"Don't think you're special in the workplace"

Did you go to charm-school, iliketherain?

Was it closed?

"The breakdown of society because parents are not around to keep their kids in order"

No it isn't thats a ridiculous simplification. Durig the war hundreds of thousands of childrne were brought up by effectively single mothers who worked. No break down of society then.

I understand that you don't want to draw parallels with what happened in the past because it blows your argument out of the water.

iliketherain, to give your points more attention than they deserve, I'm going to take a wild punt and guess that for example the teenagers and children who got caught up in the riots and looting last month did not have either involved SAHMs or WOHMs of any description. worry about the collapse of society if you wish (but people have been worrying about this since time immemorial - over the year some people used to blame social breakdown/change on the abolition of slavery/giving women the vote/all sorts) but don't try and pin it on caring involved parents who also happen to hold down jobs.

things

If a baby is put in to someones elses care at 6 months old from 8-6 mon - fri, yes they are neglecting them.

I will never think any different so will bow out now.

And I hope you pass that gem onto your children when they start their working lives!

Fossie (can you Imagine what "manners" her childrne are learning?!)