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?

What a daft thread.

I can't believe any poster would ask such a dumb question, as what is the difference between a married SAHM financially supported by her husband, and a single mother supported by the taxpayer.

Words fail me.

As someone said further back in the thread, I can't believe you even need to ask!

Just quit with the single mother stereotyping, we are all different and not a bit like the tory portrayal

www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/oh-just-fk-off-say-women-20180125143116

Anyone posted this yet?
Probably.
But here it is again!

My bugbear is that a married sahm is deemed worthy and a goid mum whereas a single sahm is seen as a scrounger...and a single working mum for that matter is seen as a scrounger if she gets help too.

As a single mum with a dp kiw i am way past worrying what the patriarchy thinks!!

I used to be desperate to get married....now i feel that its a complete waste of money . I wouldnt wear a white dress either if i did get hitched as im not a virgin!!

And I am, at the moment, in the latter category of sahm to a well paid husband. Or stay at home scrounger as some may say grin

Now here's a thesis for you. Your DH is one of the net contributors; i.e. he actually earns enough to pay enough tax to be actually paying into the system after all the costs of his family have been met. There aren't many of those. You faciliatate your DH in making this money and paying this tax, which is supporting all sorts of others who work but don't actually make enough money to pay enough tax to cover the cost of their families.

So who's the scrounger? You - playing a crucial part in all this tax being paid to support others? Or the basic rate taxpayer, who doesn't actually earn enough to pay enough tax to pay for his/her family if you properly costed their kids' school places, healthcare for the family etc etc....?

I see it as different when you consider the family unit. A family which has taken the decision to have one parent working and one at home is self-supporting, especially when the working parent is on a higher than average salary.

A family with no parent working - however many parents that means - is not supporting themselves in any way at all.

It depends which direction you're coming at it from - do you believe that families (however that unit is made up) should be striving to support themselves, or think that expecting the state to support you and your kids for many years is absolutely fine?

Typos....again!!!

I mean why arent sahm who are married seen as lazy scrounging off husbands?

A married SAHM is not being funded by the taxpayer.

Cannot believe people can't tell the difference1

Does it occur to you that many single mothers did not plan to rely on the state?

That all kinds of unexpected shit can happen in life?

What's your alternative: See kids starve because their father died without life insurance?

See kids go without shoes because their father fucked off and wont provide adequate financial support?

Force abortions on women who become accidentally pregnant?

Or take them all into care? Like that's cost effective!

I mean why arent sahm who are married seen as lazy scrounging off husbands?

Probably for similar reasons why basic rate tax payers aren't seen as scrounging off the rich people who actually pay all the taxes that enable the country to run. Because life's a bit more complex than that.

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.

What nasty mean-spirited comment.

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.

Probably for similar reasons why basic rate tax payers aren't seen as scrounging off the rich people

Single mums who pay basic rate tax are very much seen as scroungers. No respectability whatsoever.

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

I did this. I still do all the housework and childcare 10 years post divorce. And I pay for it. Yet I am still called scum. Usually by people like you.

Straight CP won't do much to reverse the problem of women being left high and dry without legal protection. People who know enough about marriage to be interested in CP instead usually have some understanding of the legal situation, as opposed to those who think they don't need a piece of paper to validate their live and/or think common law marriage is real. And as such they're more likely to have something in place as an alternative, even if imperfect. Straight CP won't do much to help people who get left high and dry now unless it becomes automatic after a certain point. Which creates issues of its own.

Oh bore off FFS, I never called single mums SCUM.

If that is what you think you are, that's your problem.

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.

By choosing the take handhouts you are knowingly deprived by others of their property

What an appalling attitude

If everyone hates single mothers on benefits so much for being jobless, then why the fuck won't they hire them over, say, students, in entry level jobs?

I have been looking for jobs now my daughter has turned 3 and noone has even offered me an interview. I'm trying to get out of this benefit hole but there aren't any hand ups about

If that is what you think you are, that's your problem

Someone said it to me not 48 hours ago. I am fully aware of who/what I am. I wear my single parent scum badge with pride.

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

You’re not happy. Not by a long shot.

Wow at some women viewing other women as draining the state. Where else should funds go? Because sure as hell, for each single mum who then goes to work that money isnt redirected into the NHS or education system.
Women at home do the same thing. One lives with a man who pays for everything. One lives alone where a man refuses to pay. Why is the latter the morally inferior?
To those asking how am i so stupid needing to ask. Reread the thread. Because attitudes like that, based on gender role expectations that women should be married to be wholesome ruin lives. Why is the woman blamed?

....let's take this one step further. Look at all the threads on here about grandparents providing free childcare and how so many people can't afford to work without that. Or who wouldn't want to work if their children weren't looked after by a family member.

So why are women dependent on their mothers seen as morally superior to those dependent on their husband and the father of their children?

I pay my taxes to support the vulnerable.

Not to support life choices.

And no, not "everybody" should be supported to have children. I certainly dont pay my taxes for that either.

I am registered disabled, have a chronic painful illness if i could choose i would choose not to work but i cant - so no i dont want to be paying for other peoples children - apart from those who are vulnerable which is exactly what the welfare system was set up for.

Some women marry wisely.

Some women contribute to the financial well being of the family in ways other than paid employment.
And yes, marrying someone wealthy is wise.

I pay my taxes to support the vulnerable.

No, you pay your taxes to support yourself. And your family. Only if you're a very high earner will any of your tax go to support the vulnerable....