To ask why women financially dependent on men are viewed as morally superior to those dependent on the state?!

[Primarkismyonlyoption]

Just that really, my experience and something I see everywhere.
Having a baby on benefits? Irresponsible. Single mums? A drain on society raising kids without fathers who are growing up to be uncontrollable. A government document citing such women as raising the 'psychopaths of the future'. Women to blame for a cycle of poverty which never ends.
What scroungers. Lack of morals. Less so than married women whose husbands work. Why?
Why are women in relationships where men provide financially known as SAHMs but single mums are just that. Implying thay staying at home is only a morally acceptable choice if you have a partner. The single parents are pushed to find work by baby aged 2. Housework for them isnt seen as work at all but sitting on their arses all day.

Instead of the moral segregation of women based on their relationship status why can we not view their lives as equal in the case of any woman whom cannot be financially independent in their own right, and start to look at how more women can become independent of both men and the welfare state?
And to stop double standards as if mums hide what money they have in order to claim money for their kids they are done for benefit fraud.
If men do it by hiding capital in court for maintenence or divorce, the woman is still gets judged for having to live off benefits whilst men get off scot free and go on to impregnate more whomen whom may or may not stay together. Worse, imo, the judgement of women recieving welfare assistance is doubled if there are more than one father, the children are mixed race, the more children there are or the fact the woman dares to have a sexual relationship with another partner whom she cannot afford to live with because most men cannot or won't take financial responsibility for children who aren't theirs just because they love their mum. And why should they?
As it happens I had babies on benefits and have fucking grafted to get to where I am. I work equally hard as I did then but in a totally different way. Yet the difference in how I am treated is astounding.
AIBU to ask for your views on this and what can we do to change it?

I don't think Natalia is suggesting that people shouldn't pay their taxes. I think she's making the point that almost all of us are dependent on the public purse, whether that takes the form of benefits or not, and we should therefore not get on our mile high horses about it.

Absolutely so. (Thanks, Yorick ).

The man doesn't pay double the taxes though does he. So she's not directly taking but isn't herself paying for healthcare etc.

Depends. One earner pays far, far more tax (due to the progressive nature of the tax system) than a couple earning the same amount between them.

No-one is scrounging off husbands. The couple make a choice to get married, have kids, and have the mother stay at home to raise THEIR kids and SHE usually does the lion's share of the housework and childcare.

You sound very bitter @maleficenty

Are you jealous of married women? Does it bug you that they have a man to look after them? Your bitterness is quite breathtaking.*

😂

Jealous of married women?!
That they have a man to 'look after them'?!

You're so precious 😂

She usually does the lions share no matter what she is or does. Wonen are more responsible for childcare most of the time.

I hate the popular mumsnet idea that you need to catch your man and marry him so he has to pay for you. It’s gross. The same men who claim men are responsible for all the ills in the world.

If you decide to be a SAHP (a privilege) then you are also deciding to assume responsibility for yourself should it go wrong. You still have yourself and half of your child to pay for alongside your ex... it doesn’t all fall on the evil men.

That said, relationships go wrong and take a flying fuckadoodle elsewhere if its the woman’s fault for not being skanky and making sure she doesn’t have to pay anything if they break up. Again, it’s gross. It is not smart to ensure your ex has to pay for you, it’s down right embarrassing you need a man you used to be with to fund your life. If you use the excuse you gave up your life etc etc etc... you shouldn’t have had kids anyway if you resent them, or you should have carried on working and had child care, or you should have made him do it. It’s all a choice.

You break up then you try to find a job and support yourselves, being on benefits during this time is acceptable and expected for some women but it’s not a lifestyle and you aren’t entitled to stay this way

The same women who claim*** not men

Interchange man / woman ... How are SAHD viewed?

I think how SAHD are viewed is a like the proverbial trees falling in the forest and no one hearing the noise.

DH does all of our term time childcare as he has home business. I am sure as far as everyone is concerned he is a SAHD. I never ever see him on a parenting site learning about all of his failings as a SAHD so he just does not encounter the same prejudices/pressures experienced by women.

The couple make a choice to get married, have kids, and have the mother stay at home to raise THEIR kids and SHE usually does the lion's share of the housework and childcare

Am now wondering who the hell is raising MY kids and doing all of the housework & childcare, seeing as how I don't 'have a man to look after me'.

I thought it was me doing it all, but I must be wrong as people like me aren't as worthy as people like you (in your skewed worldview).

Farty I get your point
But what about those who were on benefits, tried to get off but nearly lost their home as housing benefit was cancellef but they had to work a month in hand. And used food banks. And had no heating. Do you not think at some point people just go fuck it. Why not.

Agree op.
There’s nothing morally superior in being dependent on a husband, you’re still dependent on handouts essentially.
You never hear of single dads being labelled as scroungers.
There’s an assumption that women become single parents as a lifestyle choice.
Ultimately, no children should be growing up in abject poverty no matter what decisions their parents have made so I don’t understand why anyone begrudges single parents their tax credits etc.

A married SAHM not on benefits doesn't cost the state more than a working married mum (tax credit apply regardless, correct?)

Not strictly true - I'm a married working mum and I get nothing from the state, so a SAHM not on benefits does cost the taxpayer more than me as I assume she'd receive child benefit and tax credits?

*Some people have got some massive fucking chips on their shoulders. The bitterness in some of these posts is horrendous.

Don't take it out on women who are happily married SAHM's just coz it didn't work out for you.*

😂😂😂
You're too funny!

Bless you.

I don't know if you're aware, but some people are happily single....!!
Not everyone needs 'a man' to validate their existence.

Totally agree with you OP.

Only read up to page 5 and got bored.

I know PLENTY of single mothers who are claiming everything they are "entitled" to while claiming £100s in maintenance (which doesn't count, apparently) Out on the piss EOW while "Dad" does his duty. The have great lives and are also in the gym most days on their tax credits from their menial waitressing or whatever jobs (but heaven forbid they're asked to work more than 16 hours! 😂😂)

Plus what about the never having claimed a thing, single childless (whether it be by infertility or choice) woman who works 50 plus hours a week paying a higher tax rate?

Benefits cap

so a SAHM not on benefits does cost the taxpayer more than me as I assume she'd receive child benefit and tax credits?

Totally depends on family income. As it does for working parents. (I think! If you do claim child benefit when your spouse earns above a certain level, then he has to declare this on his tax return and pay it back....)

Plus what about the never having claimed a thing, single childless (whether it be by infertility or choice) woman who works 50 plus hours a week paying a higher tax rate?

She counts as a net contributor. (If she's reasonably healthy!)

No maintenance doesn’t count. Do you know why or do you just judge? That would be child maintenance to which a child is entitled to receive from their other parent. And yes of course, we all work 16 hours only in menial jobs. Jesus fucking wept.

Sorry you got bored live
Seriously though, if these single mums are having such a whale of a time cashing in then what's stopping you?
And out on the piss EOW sounds fantastic, but I have had one night out in 12 yrs, and that was a work party.

Ah sorry @NataliaOsipova didn't mean to misunderstand your viewpoint. I think we are probably in agreement!

ohreally so what are the tax credits for if the absent parent is providing for the child?

No worries @squishy. Not sure I expressed it very well and it's late....!

*child tax credits that is.

I completely agree with you OP.

The single mums 'costing the state' argument is a load of rubbish as most mums (actually parents) also cost the state rather a lot of money in the form of child benefit and even more so in the form of state education.

If I'm a high earning single mum who puts my child through private school, does that make me morally superior to a SAHM who state schools her kids? For me the answer is 'of course not', and I suspect most people would say the same. However, that reveals the financial/state support argument against single mums for the lie it is.

As if anyone would live on "handouts" from their husband. Either it's family money or it's not. If you don't have a husband with this mentality, then don't give up work.

I feel like I'm in a parallel universe on here sometimes.

A SAHM with a DH who financially provides need not be a source if great consternation and controversy - it is a totally normal state of affairs and always has been.

If women are left by feckless, useless men with no sense of responsiblility for their own children, then yes, of course they should receive state support and not be judged for that.

Women should not have children in order to become eligible for state assistance. Again this is obvious.

What more is there to say? What is the point of comparisons?