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?

Yorick the respect comment was in response to the OP saying that sahm who are married are respected or seen as better than single mums doing the same thing.
I don't believe sah is deserving of any special status - as you point out, people choose it for their own reasons, but it would be nice not to be called a leech or told I'm living off a man etc. Because the truth is, dh and I are co dependent when it comes to our roles. We both get something out of it or neither of us would do it.

The other thing is that bring married affords some protection but not anywhere near as much as it should. I have friends whose abilities to work are severely hindered by having to be totally responsible for the kids, while their ex h pay as little as they can get away with, can move where they want to (no pesky school runs or needing to be near a support system), work whenever it suits, go on holiday whenever. Why are they not made to alter their lives to do their share of care for the dc they produced? At the very least the mum should not be financially held bslack on account of having to do her job and his wjen it comes to child raising.

Poor yorrick the flaw in that logic is that men hold more power. Men have no biological clock. They earn more. They arent shamed for being single or pitied for being childless. Therefore women often end up backed in to a corner, biology/love made them have a baby but the man's lack of incentive to marry leaves them screwed. Even without a baby, far fewer men seem to actually want to get married.

Yes charismam!

Completely agree.

Ex has never been interested in helping more than the bare minimum, he earns a decent wage and pays a pittance in maintenance. I however have been told many times that I should be thankful as I'm lucky to get anything. Lucky fucking me.

Job centre lady was a knob. She was far nicer to me when she found out I used to work 60 hours a week pre DS, and had a degree. Hmm.

Yes often being married just brings ugly court cases

In answer to the original question, because if you and your DC are dependent on their father it's been a mutual decision and he has agreed to it. The taxpayers haven't.

Also there's a big difference between finding yourself dependent on the state and activity choosing it.

Yupp, pickledparsnip, my x pays a thousand a month for two dc but i severely reprimanded a mother i know who told me i was lucky! Years ago but still, we both remember!

My xh is paying for about a third of the cost of raising each of his children. And we arent living in luxury! And it was my grit and resilience that found us this place to live and dealt with son's SENs
I have gone without a lot. Freedom too. Never thought id be 95% responsible like this.

Primarkismyonlyoption I was responding to a posters comment; my comment was relevant to theirs.

Good to see how much ‘wifework’ is being valued. I see thread after thread of women complaining that their partners take them for granted leaving them to do all the chores, sorting bills, organising, childcare etc and everyone agreeing that there’s a lot of unseen work that mothers do yet when a thread like this pops up ‘wifework’ suddenly loses its value in the ‘who has it harder’ gameshow of single mum vs sahm.

Well done Charismam. I fucking hate the insinuation that we should be thankful for getting anything. Utter bullshit.
Ex's mum always told me I should be lucky as her daughter doesn't get anything from her ex. Wow. Ok.

He's also in a much better financial situation. He married someone who owns their own house, so am guessing that's half his now? I rent and have no chance of owning. He can also work full-time with no childcare costs.

You know what though? I feel fucking free. I am in control of my own money, and make all the decisions in mine and ds's lives. That in my opinion is priceless. To raise my son in a happy loving house is just amazing. We're poor but we're happy!

Sorry for slight thread derail.

Re SAHD and working mum my focus isnt on the man. I suppose that mother is superior to both SAHM and single mum as she is actively doing work of value to the state.

Not really what as that poster was referring to the op whereas you were referting to another thread entirely. Not going to discuss further

Being a SAHP is completely different than being a single parent on benefits. The reason is as others have pointed out, in the former at a family unit level the family is usually working and contributing into the system (sometimes even net contributors) whilst the latter family is completely dependent on the state. Assuming the family with the SAHM can pay their way and don't rely on the taxpayer to fund their decision then what has it got to do with anyone else?

The old chestnut about partners leaving and this leaving the SAHP dependent on benefits relies on the SAHP not making changes to reflect their changed circumstance. If left a single parent the SAHP may seek employment in order to maintain their contributor status whereas a family dependent on benefits (single parent or not) obviously has not managed to do this for whatever reason. Barring disability etc then society in general obviously needs to be wary of having too many families dependent on benefits in the long term as the pot has to stretch far and wide.

Basically don't assume that a SAHP's decision to stay at home has been made in a vacuum and thayythey would be unable to adapt to changing circumstances to avoid being single parents on benefits. This may be the case for some but certainly wouldn't be for all and therefore these two groups are not the same.

Well that is another point. As benefits do not take maintenence into account. So you can be on income support with a non paying father and income support getting 750 a month maintenence. This needs rethinking. But in a way where mothers are not disadvantaged if one month it isnt paid.

notanotheremma
Where have i asked people to fight?? Why is it a goady question it's bloody true!

*Because my husband and myself made this choice together as a team. He has chosen the responsibility of earner. I have chosen the responsibility of carer/cook/cleaner/educator.

The state hasn't chosen to be financially responsible for you or your offspring.*

Smuggy McSmug posts like this just make me wonder how much responsibility you accept for perpetuating the gender inequality that is prevalent within the workplace.
Women 'choosing' to support men to work keeps that cycle going on and on and on and on and on.....

Or alternatively, I could wonder what would happen if your husband upped & left you and you found yourself a single Mum through no choice of your own.

Women really are their own worst enemies aren't they?
And our place is always in the wrong it seems.

I fucking hate shit like this. A women makes the choice to stay home with her kids with the support of her husband and she's wrong cause she's supporting the patriarchy or something. A woman goes out to work and she's wrong cause she's not looking after her own kids.
women are their own worst enemies only if we continue to drag each other down for the choice that we have made.

Still in this day and age many women atill subscribe to patriarchal expectations of them as wives, mothers and employees.

Really interesting thread & tbh I hadn't actually thought about it that way but I do agree with you to certain extent OP.

I'm a sahm & I'm financially dependant on DH at the moment. He is dependant on me for everything else except the monetary side.

Prior to starting a family I worked full time for 15 years, DH & were both classed as higher earners & paid a lot of tax. We chose for me not to return to work after maternity leave. We receive no benefits or subsidies at all, no child benefit, tax credits etc.

Do I think of myself as superior to someone who's relationship has broken down & had to live on benefits? No absolutely not anyone could find themselves in that situation.

Do I think of myself as superior to someone on benefits already whose chosen to have a child without means to support them? I suppose I probably do.

In our family, there is no concept whatsoever of anything other than family money - never has been. DH may technically earn the money, but that's just one role in the whole scheme of things. Everything has always been in both our names - or often in the DC names too. We haven't had separate bank accounts since we became engaged. DH doesn't "give" me money. We're a team and we've built up our assets over many years through mutual support and decision-making. It's nothing like claiming benefits . He pays a huge amount of tax, if I was working too the additional tax contribution of our family would be negligible.

Great post OP!!!
I volunteer at a local food bank one day a week and I regularly have a chat with a woman who has fallen on hard times.
She has two young children. Her husband has been sectioned under the mental health act due to the collapse of his business. Nobody knows what the future holds for this family, there is no money in the pot, she is soon to lose the family home, she was dependant on her husband financially, frankly I think she is on the verge on a mental breakdown. She has sold every valuable item she has in order to survive, she hasn't got family to help and the husbands family invested heavily into his business and have lost out massively so have no desire to help this poor woman out. Slowly Friends have also turned their backs on this family and now she has turned to the government to help her. She is waiting for certain benefits to come through as proving she didn't have any money was a challenge with her husband being in control of all finances.

She has gone from driving a Range Rover to now being reliant on public transport, having the best of everything to now nothing.

She has effectively became a single mother through no fault of her own.

From my conversations with this lady I no she had certain views on unmarried single mothers on benefits etc and now she is effectively one of those women that she herself used to look down on.

Moral of the story- Anybody can become a single parent. Nobody can see into the future.

I broke up with my ex and so I got a job, as I was financially dependent on him after I quit my career to be a SAHP.
I dont think a SAHP and being dependent on benefits is the same thing... I think you have to make decisions depending on your circumstances. Sometimes it’s inconvenient and not what you want, but you shouldn’t be depending on benefits. It’s supposed to be a prop up until you speedily make plans to become dependent

Teller that is interesting that you say he is dependent on you for childvcare etc. But if he were to choose to leave, he is the working party so not dependent on you financially. It is financial dependence which I am referring to. If he left you would be dependent, in the worst case, on benefits at least for a while.
Whilst unlikely for you (i hope) for other women this is the case. So my question was, who is viewed more favourably? Married you? Or separated you on income support?
Your answer I suspect is true of most. That to find yourself in need is superior to having a child consciously whilst in need.

Fresh
Thanks.
Poor family. I wonder....if she has a daughter, if the impact of that will affect her choices. Insofar as that since she has learned growing up that financial safety is not found in marriage, hat relying on the state is more safe and protective. Not being able to eat does a lot to a person. I wonder what she will encourage the kids to da? Rely on a husband because that's best? Because obviously, for her, it isn't?

I'm pregnant with my first child and intend to be a SAHM once she is born. Sure, I could go back to work, but the portion of our income that would be eaten up in childcare it wouldn't be worth it, in our opinion. We're not wealthy by any means, but we'll be able to afford to live on DH's salary alone because we have chosen to make sacrifices, ie: living in a modest house with a low mortgage rather than climbing the property ladder and getting public transport instead of running a car. We have never claimed benefits and wouldn't have planned a family if we knew we couldn't cope without being reliant on handouts. I'm 39 and we made a choice to delay starting our family until we were in a financially secure position to do this.

DH and I are a team and all money is family money. We don't view it as crudely as me being dependent on him - he is dependent on me too, because without me looking after our child for free, we'd have to pay someone else to do it. People can judge all they like, but for us, the time I will get to spend nurturing my child is invaluable compared to having a higher income.

I certainly don't judge single mums and people on benefits who find themselves in those circumstances through no fault of their own - I'm sure they're doing the best they can to make a stable life for themselves and their children, whether they are able to work or not.

I think society's perception of women who actively choose to get pregnant when they don't have a stable relationship or the means to support their child either through work or the family unit is far worse. I don't think these women sit on their arses all day by any means, but I do agree that it's irresponsible of them to expect society to provide for them and struggle to see how you think this is comparable to a situation where a couple decide that it's best for the family for the woman to be a SAHM. Whether the money is brought in by the man, the woman or both is irrelevant - the key difference is that the family is self sufficient.