"Oh I'm lucky that I don't need to work, financially"

[TerraNovice]

I'm going back to work next month and while chatting with other mums about it I've come across the above phrase a few times. Perhaps IBU but it sounds insufferably smug to be - so they married guys with money, so what? There's nothing wrong with saying you're a SAHM so why add the caveat that you've got a rich husband?

As soon as a profession is female dominated, the wages drop. It will happen for medicine, as most of the applicants with the top grades are female, because girls generally out perform boys. Which certainly doesn't mean girls will earn more - god forbid - but that the professions they begin to dominate in will earn less.

I don't know which God Blankfein was talking about, but it wasn't the Christian God, or Jehovah either, who suggested in strong terms that one served either Mammon or himself.
Ditto JillyR. The god they're referring to is not one I recognise.

I think you can be a very happy person ( if by that we mean sunny/cheerful/optimistic) and super ambitious.

I'm optimistic to the point that my mates call me Pollyanna yet I've always been hugely ambitious and high achieving.

I think we need to be very careful not to convince ourselves that successful people are all miserable. That seems like a sure fire way to discourage any change to the status quo.

Indeed. Carers do important and valuable work, but I wouldn't encourage my daughters to become carers. I would hope they would be able to earn more than the minimum wage.

I have an interesting professional role that pays a decent enough wage (not mega bucks) and I would hope my girls would manage the same, because as a woman it is a good feeling to know you have the skills to pay the bills.

I count my self lucky I don't have to do physically demanding work for low wages, whilst still appreciating someone has to, I don't want that someone to be me or mine. Surely we all want what is best for our own children?

Of course carers do a good job but I wouldn't want to do it myself or want my DC to do it if possible.

It's very hard work and very low pay. Staff are treated shockingly by management, often expected to sign up to zero contract hours.

Same with check out work ( often cited on MN as something they'd be happy for their DC to do provided it made them happy ). My Mum did check out work and it's shit. Hard work, with constant RSI, crap pay, treated horribly by management and customers alike.

So no. I'd rather my DC not do these jobs actually.

Not because I do t value the people that do them but because I want my DC to avoid being treated like that if humanly possible. What sort of parent would I be otherwise?

The reason that carers are paid so poorly is because it's a predominantly female job.
As mentioned previously, work considered female centric, like teaching, nursing, childcare, typically attract poorer salaries.
That's the real problem; qualities viewed historically as feminine are deemed unimportant, low status, poorly paid.
The real issue isn't simply encouraging girls to enter 'male professions' but to pay carers and teachers and child carers a living wage.

meech there is certainly some truth in that. Though supply and demand also plays it's part.

But let's be honest; there is not going to be some magical turn around in pay for these jobs. Particularly if the same sort of people (men) make all important decisions via politics, law, media, board room etc

In addition, caring is relatively unskilled, so will always be lower paid than something that requires professional training & qualifications, like engineering or accountancy, for example.

Although I agree that professions with a greater concentration of women tend to be lower paid, unskilled jobs will always be paid less than skilled jobs, regardless of gender. I can earn a lot more than a labourer, for example, even though he is likely to be male.

It seems a tad ironic that both 'sides' in the WOHM/SAHM debate use the same message to support their view.
Very frequently on MN some pro-SAHM poster will use the argument that 'many jobs are really menial and dull', or describe workers as 'wage slaves'... Presumably they're referring to carer type jobs- menial, low status but oh so necessary. So it strikes me as a bit ironic to criticise a high earning poster like Jilly for describing jobs like this, unless you're Also going to criticise SAHM posters who are equally scathing about certain jobs.

I guess at the end of the day a little more honesty is required. I bet hardly any of us want our daughters or sons to aspire to this type of work, yet it's quite possible to feel that way while recognising it's a necessary and valuable job.

I posted upthread that many paid jobs are dull. I wasn't criticising wohms, I've never done that, I was simply referring to the oft repeated mantra that being a sahm is mentally unchallenging, when the reality is that a lot of paid work is mentally unchallenging. I've never had a job that I found challenging, and the jobs I've done have all been office type jobs - finance, bookkeeping etc. I'm smart and well educated but I'm not a genius. So I'm guessing lots of people must feel the same? That they don't find their job interesting, or challenging?

With regards to low skilled jobs and pay. The infuriating thing about it is that traditionally male low skilled jobs pay better than female ones. A labourer is paid more than a carer.

My parents said when we were teenagers first pick work which is intellectually challenging and interesting. Obviously pay is important to many too. They would have supported us in any career or job we chose. My work is intellectual interesting. It is a bit like being paid to solve crossword puzzles. I don't think now is the place to argue about who most does God's work if there is a God although religion has spent a huge amount of time suggesting women serve God best in the home of an ISIS fighter or serving their man in a Christian household. So perhaps looking beyond the religions to what is a worthy good role for women might do us more good.

treacle, but that is what lawyers and the law have been stopping. The most recent equal pay cases are not top lawyers wanting the same pay as male ones. It is cleaners in local authorities wanting the same pay package and male dustbin men etc. There is an awful lot of litigation on that and guess you you need to thank for that - lawyers and politicians who indeed do in that sense God's work unless one thinks God wants women in homes serving men as the Bible and Koran say and therefore equal pay in that sense does the Devil's work.

WordF is right that many ambitious high paid women are happy. What is not to like in that and who would not want it for their daughters. Let them aim high and then pick what they choose rather than aim low and take only the left overs from the master's table.

Anyway I suspect most of us are in agreement on this thread that ensuring daughters do well in exams and know the range of jobs they might pursue is a good thing rather than just allowing them to dream and get above their station so we are all ad idem and I can get back to my huge fun Sunday thinking and work at my desk and others can do whatever other women do on Sundays when their teenagers are sleeping in and anyone with a small baby whether the parent is male or female has probably been up from 5am already and are thinking about lunch.

I wasn't criticising your posts specifically treacle; i was referring generally to a point which is made quite regularly as a criticism of WOHM, usually in a scathing tone and along the lines of 'well who wants to be a wage slave anyway....'
I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of posters who say that when they want to have a pop anoutt WOHM, but then take the moral high ground when a poster like Jilly is basically agreeing and saying yeap, there are a lot of menial low status jobs out there.

The likelihood is that most work (in and out of the home) wil have elements which are repetitive, or menial or not madly exciting. And I think if we're all honest, we want our children (daughters every bit as much as sons) to aim for a work life which is rewarding and fulfilling. That way, any decision about working part time, or even stopping work for a while, is made from a position of strength, not the default position of finding work dull so giving up is a more attractive option.

There is even a very tiny minority of posters who state that they don't work and intend to never work again. My reaction to that is always to think 'what the hell was your previous work life that was so mindless/ menial/ lacking in any useful contribution to society, to make you feel like that?

I don't think its just about ensuring our daughters do well, I think it is also about how we raise the next generation of men

I have a ds not a dd, he understands that both my dh and I have degrees, he knows that I work and that I enjoy it and most importantly he sees dh supporting me and doing his share of housework, childcare etc

Ps- and the other thing I always think when i see these posts, is what work does your husband/ partner do that is clearly so interesting, useful and higher status that he's happy to indefinitely be the sole breadwinner? And how has that situation come about? Are there really in 2015 that many women who can only do menial boring jobs yet are partnered to men with stimulating high status jobs? If so, it just seems a million miles away from my experience and what i aspire to for my children

I do intend to go back to the world of work, but not because I enjoyed it, just because it's something I'll have to do. My main experience of the workplace was of a boring job where the culture of bullying was deeply ingrained at every level, where it was impossible to book leave as there was always some excuse why you couldn't have it, and where there was no end in sight because I wasn't doing anything that any other employer was interested in. When I think of work, I can only imagine it like that and I feel sick at the thought of having to return to it. But I will, because that's what I'll have to do.

Treacle

That sounds awful, no wonder you were miserable

is there anything you are particularly interested in? Perhaps you could some volunteering just now which might equip you with some new skills for a career change when you are ready to go back to work

But why do you care Lines and why is it any of your business what the high earning partners of sahms do for a living and if they're content to continue doing that? Are any of us privy to all the subtle nuances of every relationship we see around us?
Would many morewohms choose to be sahms if they had that option? Oh yes they bloody would! Numerous surveys and mumsnet threads consistently back that up!

Actually the research shows that parents of infants would like to be able to have a longer maternity leave. And women in high status positions are more likely to be able to secure this than women in low status jobs.

Parents of school aged children consistently say they want to work but women often find this difficult.

The single biggest concern raised by parents is always the cost of child care.

I didn't say I particularly care! I was pointing out how strange it seems to many people in 2015 that there are partnerships which seem to be based on such an unequal footing, ie male has an interesting, fulfilling high status job, yet woman only has access to boring low status work. And yes, I can see why if one is in that situation, giving up work is a more attractive option for the woman.

I just shudder at the thought of any of my children aspiring to that, though thankfully they haven't pigeonholed themselves into believing in it

Lines I don't think I've ever heard or seen a SAHM criticise WOHM on the basis that jobs are menial. Really. As treacle says, I've seen SAHM respond to the criticism that being at home is menial by saying that jobs can be boring/repetitive/menial as well.

It's a very idealistic view of the world to believe that all women or men are fulfilled in their careers all the time. Even though I was in a career and role that many would find highly aspirational, I still got bored sometimes and had to deal with people that I'd prefer not to be with. I had an enormous degree of autonomy within my role but I still loved the freedom I had when I became a SAHM to two preschoolers. And I do consider myself lucky to have had that opportunity.

So Lines , what you're saying is that you shudder at the thought of a so called traditional set up for your children, ie. the high earning husband with sahm or part time earning partner in perceived lower status role? How would you feel if someone said to you that they'd shudder at the idea of a child in fulltime daycare so both parents could work fulltime? Because both those statements are as judgemental as each other!

yet there are definitely posters who say work is for schmucks. That it's all dull and pointless. That it's morally superior to want to SAH than work for hand bags and Sky TV .

The reality is that all jobs have boring bits, bits we don't like. I'm very honest with my DC that no life is perfect.

However I also tell them that there are lots of great jobs out there for the taking.

The same group are currently keeping them for themselves but they shouldn't be fooled into thinking that this is because that group are better at those jobs inherently or more suited or that those jobs are all boring and stressful or any other myth that simply protects the status quo.

I don't know why you're trying to make this personal meechimoo

What I always aspired for my children (daughters as much as son) was to aspire to be in a position of choice. And someone with qualifications and skills to do interesting and fulfilling work has more choices open to them than someone who doesn't. The so called traditional set up of high earning husband in a fulfilling job partnered to wife who hasn't got access to that, is by definition a situation where the woman as Fewer choices. How my own children live their lives is their business but Im glad theyre not starting from A position of limiting their options.
As for parents who use full time day care to enable them both to work- why not, if it suits their family? Just because I didn't do it doesn't make it wrong.

partnerships which seem to be based on such an unequal footing, ie male has an interesting, fulfilling high status job, yet woman only has access to boring low status work. And yes, I can see why if one is in that situation, giving up work is a more attractive option for the woman.

My dp is a scientific researcher and I'm a SAHM. We do not have an unequal partnership. I ran my own business before I had ds, I didn't earn a lot of money but I loved it. I didn't give it up because it was menial or low paid, or purely because we could afford for me to, I gave it up because I want to be at home for my children whilst they a small. It's like it's assumed that you didn't go through the same decision making process as WOHPs just because you didn't come to the same conclusion.