I wince when women refer to being a mum as "a job"

[CQuin]

It's so mimsy ish, so martyr and yet at the same time.

Our parents would never have said this, is it just the heightened expectations everyone has for everything thee days ?
Would dads say this?

Eg I have two jobs, I'm a mother (or worse "mummy ") and a hat maker." (or whatever )

Fuck off.

Catgirl, that was bang on.

yes, well said catgirl

And being a mother isn't a job. It's a fucking privelege. However you chose to do it

^THIS^

It's the

It's made me all speechy and emotional

I shall go to bed now

But it is a privilege. And there is not one of us on this thread who is not doing the absolute best they can for their children in the circumstances they happen to be in.

From what I recall virtually everyone here who says a sahm is not a job is woh.

Therefore I find it impossible not to think there must be an agenda.

There has not been sahms coming on here saying it is a fun life, they are coasting till they can get a proper demanding job, they chose to have lots of kids as sah was easier than woh.

I've worked ft pt and been a sahm. I don't have an issue with Sahms saying it is their job,- what is the big deal? If you disagree disagree but don't come on denigrating the job of sahm by 'proving' that it is not a real job, whilst explaining how vv hard your 'real' job is. Just say you disagree.

I still think it is wohms with a chip, my view like it or lump it.

Hush Drizzle

Have some lovely chrismas wine..............

Only if you say I'm right first ...........

Oh, well, seeing it's good wine

cheers!

WOHMs 'denigrating' the 'job' of SAHMs can only really bother those SAHMs who already have a niggling doubt that it really is a job.

Is there a verb 'to parent'. On Mumsnet there seems to be. There is certainly a verb 'to mother' but strangely 'to father' has a completely different meaning. I think being a parent is a state. If you or your DH goes away for a week on business are you not a parent while you are away. Of course you are. If a SAHM's child goes to stay with a relative for a few days does that mean the SAHM is not parenting. A parent is a parent 24 hours a day whether the child is in their care or not. That's my opinion

for everyone!

Drizzle, I hope I didn't offend you by asking if your partner is your boss. I presume he isn't, and had no desire to anger or sadden or insult.

No doubts here Librarian. It's just discourse.

There is a verb 'to parent'. It is used a fair bit. You hear of parenting skills and even parenting courses etc.

that is why I say I am doing part time parenting when I am working full time. I am still DS's mother wherever I go and whatever I do. However, when I am paying someone else to do the parenting - cleaning, feeding, playing, cuddling - etc that I cannot physically do when I am working.... then I am part time parenting.

When my dp has had sole care of ds for a whole week, and when I have done bathtime and bedtime after my day's work, it would be insulting nonsense to tell him that I have literally been parenting for the same amount of time he has that week.

I don't know why people have problem with understanding this.

To be fair... someone upthread pointed out that earning enough money to look after your child materially is also part of being a parent, and this is obviously true.

But I would be working and earning money for myself if I had no children. Whereas I would not spend all my non working hours looking after a child if I hadn't had one. IYSWIM.

(mildly relevant aside - among the 'preparing for being a new parent' courses ln the nhs around here, I noticed a new one on managing money - help with accessing benefits/budgeting etc. I think that's a very good thing and am pleased to see it up there with bf-ing etc)

I think that's the vital difference then, rain - I see parenting, when used as a verb, to encompass the emotional side of things, which can only be done well by a loving caregiver.

So cleaning, feeding and playing - yes, all parents find themselves doing this to varying levels. But these are typically tasks that can be done by babysitters, childcare workers, home day care, grandparents, older cousins or whoever. And these tasks taper off as your children grow older.

I see parenting as being about making long-term decisions in the best interests of your child, loving them, supporting their education and development, encouraging them to achieve their dreams, providing a stable home and financial support, building self-esteem and so on. Nothing tangible, but definitely more effective when done by a parent. And this happens all the time, it's a privilege and a struggle, but you can never switch it off, whether you're at work or not.

For me, rain, I see 'parenting' as something much more long-term, much more overarching, than you have described. Cleaning, feeding, playing and cuddling is what I would describe as childcare. Parenting is much more about a long-term goal; that is developing a child into the best adult member of society they can be. Therefore I am not a part-time parent as I never stop working towards that long-term goal. It isn't that I have a problem with understanding what you're suggesting, just that I disagree with your terminology and what it implies.

Cross-posted with fenix as I'm uploading photos for DS's school homework project whilst trying to post on here!

Snap, librarian.

just out of interest, fenix/librarian -

Would you have a problem with someone describing themselves as a fulltime childcarer, versus a part time childcarer?

If we were talking about someone who was not in paid employment because they were mainly looking after their children, versus someone who was in paid employment and relying on others (partner or paid professional) to take care of their child day to day?

(just interesting to note - I see playing and cuddling as being a vital part of a small child's development. Helping them encounter, explore and understand the world they experience - doing it in the context of a consistent and loving presence creating a sense of identity and self esteem - learning to communicate, express themselves and to speak a language etc - this is all really important, developmentally. I agree parenting is a long term 'activity' - but this is what children need in that part of parenting that happens when they are small.

and definitely emotional, yes, and yes to a loving caregiver. I suppose that makes what I am saying more emotive, not less! in that part of what I do as a parent is earn money to pay for the home we live in, and to buy him clothes and toys....but I could do that and never see him. And I would not call myself a loving caregiver responsible for his emotional and intellectual development as a person and a citizen.)

No, I wouldn't because I do think does accurately describe what they do - at home looking after/caring for the children. Working parents (sometimes) use external childcare. SAHP are doing their own childcare.

Without a doubt, rain, those things are indeed vital. I guess I see parenting as making sure that those things happen and to the best possible standard but that they don't necessarily have to be done exclusively by me to count. In fact, I cannot see anything but benefits in having had some of my children's care done by others and feel that I made the best parenting decision by doing so.

okay - anyone else object to 'full time childcarer'? Rather than full time mum?

just interested to see what parents in/not in paid employment think. As I said a billion posts ago, personally I am happy for parents to self-identify, as I am in how people choose to describe their own race/gender/sexual identity, but I seem to be in a minority!

Why not just not working. That's because it has become a shameful thing amongst certain people not to work or to admit to not working outside the home. Why should it be. I don't think a childminder or nursery really provides parenting. Childcare yes but not parenting. A foster carer would provide parenting. But that's only my take. Well I accept there is such a thing to parent. I think SAHM isn't a great expression. Surely there could be a better one.

The problem I can see with 'not working' is that you are defining yourself with a negative. An absence of activity. 'Not working' means 'unemployed'. i have been unemployed in the past - it meant I was not working and looking for work. This is not the case for those parents who are choosing to spend their time as sahps.

For parents who are choosing to spend their time actively doing something that is not paid employment - using their time to look after their own children - saying 'not working' foregrounds an absence of activity. A 'not doing something' rather than an 'actively doing something'. So I can totally see why sahp's would object. Lumping them into the category of 'not working' doesn't acknowledge the work - or activity, or contribution - they do. A parent who is engaged full time in the business of looking after 3 small children finds themself in the same category as a NEET, or those failing to find work. That can't be right.

The problem is the same one that mothers in paid employment object to when they hear 'full time mum'. They feel they are being called 'a part time mum' because they are spending less time with their children than a 'full time mum'.

The problem is how parents define and describe what they do without being dismissive of what other parents do.

I still think 'full time child carer' works. It's a bit clinical (if someone said that to me, I would wonder whose children they were looking after) but it is technically accurate, and less upsetting to working mothers than 'full time mum'.

To me "full time child carer" implies you work in a nursery or similar setting. I think it's OK to say "I'm at home with the children" (but maybe that doesn't work if children are at school?)