I think DH is upholding the glass ceiling (not DIY). WIBU?

[Pa1oma]

DH has a company which employs maybe a thousand people, of which probably about 40% are women. It’s not a traditionally male industry like construction, however, in 15 years, there has never been a female director. Whenever I’ve asked him why this is, he says he would like this to change but no women seem to apply.

Then last night I heard him in the phone to someone discussing restructuring the board of directors and his words were, “She’d be worth consideration, but she’ll probably have a baby or something soon” . When he got off the phone, I told him what I’d heard and asked him if he knew for a fact that this woman was pregnant. He said, “Well I wouldn’t know but she’s in her late 30s and I think she’s been discussing it”.

His argument is he’s not going to risk over £100k on someone if he’s not sure they’re going to see “the next phase” through. My argument is, he is not in a position to presume anything about anyone. WIBU?

OP, earlier you said, "No he isn’t one of those who believes family money is his money. He’s not weird about money at all. If he was, I wouldn’t be at home!"

Well, maybe he doesn't need to be weird about money, because, by being at home, you are reinforcing all his prejudices about women being unfit for the workforce (certainly after they're married/of childbearing age), unreliable, etc etc.

How do you think he'd react if you got a high-powered, full-time job? Not in a few years when the children can look after themselves, but now.

I completely agree with you time. Background gives a lift but it doesn’t overcome ingrained gender bias. NYC candidate has relocated is trying hard. And a man won’t promote on basis of gender. That’s rough

Lipstick OP Being a sahm you’re reinforcing patriarchy. He works.you don’t.traditional set up You’re reinforcing that whole man works,women at home social model
No I’m not surprised a man like that has a sah wife. He has not vested interest in women working

Dumping on SAHMs is not going to solve anything. My own wife is a SAHM because given the choice, she would rather take care of our children herself then take a job she doesn’t want to earn money we don’t need while paying someone else to take care of our children. That does not mean she is “reinforcing patriarchy.”

Also, I think your "men like that" comment is sexist and counterproductive. Having a SAHW is not the problem in and of itself. Whether he has a SAHW or not, any man who gets his head out of his arse should be able to see that some of the most talented professionals are women.

Finding ways to attract and retain these women is a way for firms to gain competitive advantage. That requires accommodating their female biology-based needs (ie childbirth and breastfeeding). It also requires making it clear that spending time with one’s children does not put a person on a “mommy track” or “daddy track” with slow and limited career progression.

At the same time, some jobs do require require irregular hours and/or business travel. Women and men in those types of roles are more likely to succeed if they have a partner who is able and willing to be the primary caregiver (e.g. backup childcare when a DC or nanny is sick, doctor’s appointments, school holidays, etc.). There is nothing wrong if a couple decide together that the individual with lower earnings potential would rather take on the role of primary caregiver and enjoy a higher combined income than if work and childcare were each divided 50-50.

This is not a theoretical argument. In my own firm, probably 35% of our most senior two layers are women. Despite having flexible working hours, an understanding attitude when childcare emergencies arise, etc., we could not eliminate irregular hours, occasional long hours, and business travel from these jobs, plus it’s just easier and less stressful for them if they have a partner who can step up in most of these instances and take care of the family needs. Because of that, and because these women are so successful that their families no longer need a second income, many of their husbands have moved into less demanding professional roles, or stopped paid work entirely.

Call this what you will - but - some jobs just don’t fit well with 50-50.

I am personally grateful to my talented, creative and committed female colleagues who have made my firm much more successful, and also a better place to work, than it could possibly have become if we had only men in senior roles. I am also grateful to their husbands for enabling their contributions, which will certainly have come at the cost of being judged by some men and by some women for having given up what is traditionally the male role in a family unit.

If people judge SAHMs this badly, you can bet they’re judging SAHDs even more....

YamkeeDad
I’m dumping on no one,I’m observing how male privilege benefits male career
You are also the beneficiary of such advantage by having a sahp.your progression is unencumbered.and consciously and unconsciously it reinforces domestic and work stereotypes
From op, This is a man who doesnt accommodate or support working women in his work or personal life
Whether he has a SAHW or not, that’s the whole point. Patriarchy reinforces working male, sahm. The sahw allows a lot of men to progress unencumbered
At the same time, some jobs do require require irregular hours and/or business travel. Women and men in those types of roles are more likely to succeed if they have a partner who is able and willing to be the primary caregiver (e.g. backup childcare when a DC or nanny is sick, doctor’s appointments, school holidays, etc.)

and there’s the rub, the institutional belief that successful people need a primary care giver aka sahm who’s given stuff up to be home
You and I know, tasks are commoditised. No one needs a sahm/sahp. It’s a societal and cultural preference how do successful single folk manage
Dry cleaning & Shirts, that can be laundered, pressed ,delivered to work
Childcare can be purchased
Groceries delivered
The patriarchy habitually reinforce someone (woman) needs to do all the domestics

Men like him comment,I stand by that and you reinforced it by need primary caregiver
I’ve met these men,and they unfortunately view the world through a small prism.they expect all women to be home,like their partners

I supppse what’s most interestng is op had no idea her dp possessed such odious views,or enacted them on female employees. She assumed he was a good guy..

I feel so weary of the narrative that dinosaur men like this will have a great revelation about inequality when it happens to their own daughter. It is saying they do not have the empathy to understand experience unless it directly happens in their family. Ridiculous.

Yes,like when Jay-Z decided he’d no longer call females ho’s after they had a daughter
Years of rapping about hos, he never twigged it’s offensibe
Has a daughter, and hey no I’m not saying that

@YankeeDad 🙏 👏

I feel so weary of the narrative that dinosaur men like this will have a great revelation about inequality when it happens to their own daughter.

I don't think they do at all. The important thing is to warn young women to not take for granted that men will treat them fairly just because those men are what society calls "nice".

JayZ may not use that word any more but I doubt he has had a road to damascus revelation as to why he should never have used it in the first place. Or more important, why he shouldn't have thought it at all.

He just doesn't want someone calling his daughter a whore and understands he can't demand that without stopping calling other people's daughters hos. very practical - no new ideology.

Do you want to elaborate Kay?any particular points of note?why 👏?.
What are you agreeing with

yes,jayZ only got uncomfortable with word ho’s when it reflected upon him,his daughter
No regard for fact he been saying it and other terms for years with no reflection

Lipstick, you wrote
OP Being a sahm you’re reinforcing patriarchy. He works.you don’t.traditional set up You’re reinforcing that whole man works,women at home social model

I took this as meaning that you were blaming OP and other women who choose to be SAHMs for the behaviours of mostly male leaders who fail to hire or promote women into high-profile roles. That is what I called "dumping on SAHMs.", and it's what prompted me to post in the first place.

OP Being a sahm you’re reinforcing patriarchy. He works.you don’t.traditional set up You’re reinforcing that whole man works,women at home social model

I did write that,it’s not blame it’s observation and fact .being the stay home partner to business owner alpha male is patriarchal. And she’s only just twigged he has unsavoury views

he's a man who’s unsupportive Of working women,with a non working partner.i see it as no coincidence that such a man has a sahm. It would sit with his view of the NYC candidate and working women,Op said there was never discussion of her returning to work.funny that. So no his wife isn’t to blame for his Odious views he is

but no surprise he’s got that set up. And it is patriarchal to have man sole earner,woman at home for all childcare

And yankeedad you said
At the same time, some jobs do require require irregular hours and/or business travel. Women and men in those types of roles are more likely to succeed if they have a partner who is able and willing to be the primary caregiver (e.g. backup childcare when a DC or nanny is sick, doctor’s appointments, school holidays, etc.)

I’ll challenge that as institutional sexism. The Belief that successful people need a caregiver at home doing the domestic/childcare

If these people are that successful they can organise or delegate tasks. In your example tasks can be commoditised. Two adults working so....
Buy in child care
Send out laundry
Groceries delivered

I simply couldn’t be with a man who needed a primary care giver or expected me to give up work

I read on mn a lot the my partner is top of his game ( they always are) but needs wife to
Get laundry
Buy his clothes
Open and deal with correspondence
Sort the kids
...really?your man kicks ass in deals but can’t pop in a retailer or hpgo online to buy clothes.

I am also grateful to their husbands for enabling their contributions, which will certainly have come at the cost of being judged by some men and by some women for having given up what is traditionally the male role in a family unit.

Huh? Are you saying every successful woman in your company has a husband who stays home? Weird. Most very successful women I know don't have a husband who stays home. They have a husband who is equally successful. It isn't an either/or.

Do your female colleagues tell you they feel grateful to your wife for enabling you to go to work? That's a new one on me.

Most lower-paid workers don't have the luxury of someone being home to support the other - both need to get out there and work 40 hours a week so as to keep the ship running.

If it works for your family to have one person stay home, great - it can work really well for a family. But it isn't essential. You could actually get yourself to work, feed yourself, pay your bills and rear your children without someone at home dedicated solely to that task - it is a luxury not a necessity. You might have to leave a few meetings early or work more at weekends or scrub a few more floors but that's life.

YankeeDad despite your grandstanding about sahd enabling women you have a sahp, the caregiver is..woman. Wage earner is you
So you’re completely unencumbered in your career progression,because partner at home

In your work all the successful women have sahd to support them?how unusual.
Anecdotally,that’s not my experience of corporate seniors and their homelife
Sure thing I know women who are successful & travel etc.partner in unrelated field
I don’t know any men who have the hey,on balance,because I earn less I’ll stay home conversation

Who wouldn’t want to be able to give up work to stay home with their children, even once they’re at school?

Most men don't. Funny, eh?

YankeeDad, being successful doesn’t require a primary carer at home. I know a lot of successful women, v few have a sahd. Obviously I know a lot more men with SAHM.

some jobs just don’t fit well with 50-50.

Whether or not this is true, why are male employers assuming thar women will be doing all the childcare and be unavailable for more than 50% of the time? It shouldn't be part of the recruitment process, particularly if it's only applied to one sex.

What DH sees is lots of brilliant women who could be running the firm but they are not quite able to do full time AND it is those women and NOT their lower paid DH's who are doing all the nanny liaison, extra childcare etc on top of a hard job which starts at 8am and often runs on well into the evening. This is one firm in consulting.

I told him it flies in the face of everything he claims to be - ie inclusive eg. he says he’s made great efforts to introduce flexible hours and good maternity packages.

FFS so he sees all women as breeding machines? I would not benefit from these practices because I have never wanted children and it boils my piss when I'm treated as though I will.

Women have what 1 or 2 children mostly, time off that is planned and a return that is planned.

Good morning! This debate has got me mulling my situation over in the early hours. I gave up work when pregnant with DS1 and he’s 15 now. At that time, DH was coming out of banking (options trading) which was long hours, but nothing compared to the hours he’s put in to getting the businesses off the ground over these 15 years. It’s a lifestyle, more than a job and it impacts the whole family. Neither of us wanted to use childcare and I admit I would have really struggled with that. That’s just me. At the same time, I could never rely on DH for things like taking time off, etc, so I knew that would fall to me. As for housework, he’s not generally here at times when you would do that. I have a cleaner and if I need more help, I would ask her, not him. So yes, he’s been hugely facilitated and I will not try and pretend otherwise. But so have I and so have the kids in another way because we have a lifestyle I could never have funded and they have different opportunities now because of the way we’ve structured things.

All that said, I do think about the “model” we reflect to them. I hope they have the sense to see that all families are different. They do obviously have friends whose mums work. Come to think of it though, they don’t know anyone who has a SAHD or even a dad that works 9-5 and no more, for instance.

Of course my DH is just as supportive of our daughters at school as DS. DS is in Year 10 and just finished his summer exams and I was quite surprised by his attitude this year tbh. He’s always been fairly laid back, but this year he was saying, “I don’t want to be someone who had every privilege and made nothing of it.” “I don’t want to be just ok, that’s not good enough. If dad can do it with his background, I need to as well.” This is what he’s actually saying and he’s in a school where they’re all high achievers and I’m worried it’s all a bit much at times. Neither of us have ever pressurised him to go down a particular career route, but maybe he’s internalised certain “norms” regardless. I don’t know if the girls will be talking like this at 15.

I was hired when 5 months pregnant and with 2 children under 4 because I am very gooda t my job and could prove easy that I had godo childcare already in place

Xenia you shouldn't have to "prove" you have good childcare already in place!

Men do not have to sit in interviews justifying how their family arrangements work. They spend the interview showcasing their skills and experience and giving employers every reason to want to recruit them. Women shouldn't put themselves on the back foot by talking about DC arrangements in interviews They should stride in, give the recruiter every reason to hire them because of who they are and what they bring to the party then leverage structures in place that should put them on a level playing field. We have Equality Act rights, we need to maximise them and make it difficult for employers not to take us seriously. It should be the sword of Damocles.

I also work in banking and am a bit miffed by this as most female directors in the industry follow the US model and only take a maximum of 8-12 weeks off for maternity. It’s widely accepted by most good companies. If this woman is good enough to apply for promotion she is prob good enough to get snapped up by competitors. He’s going to definitely lose her.