this habitual assertion that if comment on housewifery means must have
so called "ishoos"
be thwarted and really desire to be sahm
be crushingly unhappy and projecting
oh dear god step away from the frasier box set. I mean really?
my ideological belief, is quite simply
? work is productive, good for mental health and emotional well being. numerous research and outcome measures attest this
? it is good role model for girls to see their mum work and demonstrably contribute. To not solely see work and salary as a male domain because mum doesn?t do it. to aspire to more than a life lived on someone else salary. This housewifery re-enacts and replicates social stereotypes ? quite simply one sole wage earner (usually male) works, the woman housewife and not work
? it is good to retain and maintain the vibrancy, and input women can add to workplace
? women working at all grades ,all employment sectors is a positive thing
? I think women need to maintain some work, and be autonomous and have some security other than that of a sole wage earner
? Sahm when kids at school is a misnomer. There is no actual role if your kids are at school all day.I completely get sahm when kids not nursery and are babies, that is demanding and busy.But in absence of kids your not sahm,your not undertaking any specific childcare. What people describe on mn is filling day with tasks and lots of faffing
So whilst some get all perplexed and convince self an oppositional view point is because of some unfulfilled desire, well that?s simply not case. And it?s a bit lame. It isn?t inconceivable that someone hold an oppositional viewpoint not borne from thwarted choice or insecurity
Now realistically I don?t expect everyone to concur
But nor do I think trotting out some lame lines about well if you is truly happy?.is not a balanced discussion either
and this discussion comes up a lot on mn, and yes i am an active participant.as are many of you.its a mn perennial