..to be worried that 1/3 of women aren’t in employment and economically vulnerable?

[windygallows]

ONS stats (latest from 2013) state that women of working age (16-64) only 67% are in the labour market, therefore 33% of women not in employment. That’s 1/3! Moreover of the 67% working, 42% of them work part time.

So that means it breaks down like this:
Women 16-64
Not in employment – 33%
Working part time – 28%
Working full time – 39%
Total - 100%

www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/datasets/alldatausedinthewomeninthelabourmarketreport

Now I know there are a million reasons for these stats from women’s role as primary childcare provider to challenges women face finding flexible working, the glass ceiling, lower paid roles for women. I get it. And many on MN will inevitably remind me about the beneficial role women obvs make outside the labour market, from voluntary work to caring. And that work is not the be all and end all. And nor am I advocating for a life of constant work either.

But what these stats mean on the most basic, practical level is that the MAJORITY of women probably cannot cover their cost of living (either they don’t have an income or a limited income through pt work) and are probably reliant on someone for their sustenance – a partner, a parent, the government, family savings, their savings. This means the majority of women are economically vulnerable. Wouldn’t you say so?

Of course there will always be anomalies to this rule - the highly paid IT consultant who will say she can survive on her part-time salary or the woman with a trust fund. But these people are outside the norm. These stats tell me that the majority of women need someone else to support them financially. It’s scary!

PS - As an aside In 1959 52.9% of women were in the labour market and it’s now 67% - not a hugely dramatic difference

Blah

I know you speak from huge experience as seen on other threads, I certainly wouldn't belittle this at all. I know you know your stuff.
I suppose my point is that we all have different priorities, values, and situations.
I think more women should make decisions for themselves and their family, rather than just going with the easiest option, or one that suits others in the family, but not themselves.
E.g in our case I know that me working wouldn't have been right for any of us, so we made the right decision for us. It wasn't an easy decision and wasn't always plain sailing and life would have been much different if we had chosen an alternative.
To some people I was mad, and I can see their point, but we are all different.

I know two other sahm and both have little craft businesses. I have a little business and hopefully a Pt job in the new year! I’m in average land though, where if people sell gold, it’s to cash converters!

We’ve barely had a couple of generations where women were not forced to rely on men’s goodwill to feed and clothe themselves and the dc so I suppose it takes time. Being totally reliant on a man is not how I was brought up and it feels uncomfortable and alien to me.

baa your research sounds fascinating!

Thank you Romany I really appreciate that. I know we've spoken before 😀

You make an excellent point about what should be considered when making a decision like this.

I've spoken to some women who feel the decision was taken out of their hands and they have been left in a very vulnerable position.

golden it is. I'm very lucky!
I'm very careful not to judge people's individual decisions. I do see the impact of these decisions though which can bring it in to stark focus sometimes.

we have free choice already

As a whole, women don’t.

This is called patriarchy.

This is why we have feminism.

Women’s choices are limited as a political choice by men as a group.

A few individual women break free.

But that’s like saying why look for a cure for cancer when not everyone dies from it!

The underemployment of women costs the economy billions.

We are all paying for this cost.

Free universal childcare would pay for itself very quickly.

According to this www.womensbusinesscouncil.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/DfE-WBC-Two-years-on-report_update_AW_CC.pdf

Over a million women want to work more hours than they do.

This report estimates that this would increase GDP by £600billion.

Blah

That's it, those that don't have any choice seem to be the vulnerable ones to begin with. Not that choosing not to be employed makes a woman vulnerable.
Would I be right in assuming these women came from abusive backgrounds as children/ or abuse/dv as adults, perhaps with lack of education as well?
It seems like a lot of us choose the wrong partner if we are allowed no choices.
Maybe we should look to educating our daughters on choosing the right partner because then they can have the life they want.
I am constantly aware of the view of my own dd, the complete opposite to me and driven., at 14. Already she sees that having a family and partner would be detrimental to her career if she makes the wrong choices.
I can't claim any credit for her views, it's not upbringing.

No not always . One example was a couple that got pregnant - unplanned and decided to keep the baby. She was a nurse and he worked in IT, both were graduates. While she was on Mat leave his career soared. They lived in the Midlands but he started working lots in London. When her mat leave ended she couldn't go back to work because he refused to alter his working patterns to accommodate her shift patterns - his reasoning was that he now earned 3x what she earned as a nurse. She inadvertently ended up as SAHP. He assured her she would be looked after financially but he was essentially financially abusive. She harboured a lot of resentment towards him.

Unfortunately her story isn't that unusual.

Suggesting someone considers their long term financial security is not judgement - it's common sense.

Suggesting that women who consider their long term security will reach the same conclusion as you is not common sense. It’s stereotyping.

It's also deeply patronising and insulting.

"Worried" on our behalf?

Why- because we are too fluffy headed to make active choices for ourselves, to decide which risks are worth taking.
We need people like the OP to be concerned on our behalf as we are likely to muddle the whole thing up?

Women who become SAHMs generally will make that step with their eyes open, and really don't need this pity and faux concern.

OP maybe increase your working hours or join a gym if you have so much time on your hands to fret like this,

Maybe we should look to educating our daughters on choosing the right partner because then they can have the life they want.

How about educating men not to be toerags? Then there would be more good choices.

As a whole, women don’t
They don't? How? Girls go to a hool and have the exact same opportunities than they brothers. As a matter of fact, now girls have more chance to evolve in higher warming careers with uni and companies offering better deals for women trying to get into engineering or physics. Why are women not choosing those career paths?

I think it is exactly the opposite, woken have plenty of choices but opt those that bring immediate gratification rather than investment or invest in marrying a well off man.

I think anyone is entitled to make the choices that suit them or later however, everyone has to assume the consequences of their own choices, that be the mum who worked long hours in a demanding job and realise that she's not as close to her adult children as her sister who was a SAHM, whose children are her best friends, or the SAHM whose husband cheated and left her for her younger version who is left with a house but little chance to earn enough to continue with the lifestyle she was accustomed to.

Personally, if I had a choice, I would have opted to marry a rich man who thought I was the best thing on earth and loved me devoutly for ever, and I would have just volunteered or try a business for my own pleasure but life didn't turned this way and being so dependent on my husband, I think I would have found it hard to cope with the constant nagging 'what if'.

Maybe we should look to educating our daughters on choosing the right partner because then they can have the life they want

Likewise then we should educate our sons to watch out for partners who only want them for the finances they bring.

Agree with swin in the point that men and women have the exact same choices. Their education is the same, their job opportunities the same it appears to be the work ethic that is different though for many. Boys are brought upto believe they need a career as they are male and a shockingly number of girls are encouraged to marry for money so that they don't have to work.

Most women don't want a man that opts out of working as they are seen as lazy, unambitious, failing to provide etc yet it doesn't seem to apply the other way round.

Well obviously men can't bear children.

Augusta no. You don't understand stereotyping. There have been some examples of stereotypical attitudes on here ( see IAte's post) but mine don't fall into that category.

By saying people need to consider their financial security when making decisions I'm not saying women (or men) must work. However, if you choose not to work you should ensure you have long term financial security whatever that may look like for you.

swing the reasons girls don't choose certain professions or earn as much money despite matching or out performing boys in education is far more complex and multi-faceted. It is still an issue though - the new statutory guidance for careers education in schools and colleges makes specific mention to challenging stereotypical attitudes because it's they are still evident.

Again stereotyping but are women more risk averse than young men? After I graduated from uni I considered doing a postgraduate master's but ultimately the fear of taking out a 10K loan with no guarantee it would help me get a better job put me off. If I'd been a man would I have been more willing to take a risk?

However, if you choose not to work you should ensure you have long term financial security whatever that may look like for you.

How many people are in a position to do that though?

Are you suggesting that only women with large savings or a private income should become SAHMs?

The first decade of my adult life was planned, ordered- or so I thought.

It left me widowed, homeless ( due to OHs hidden debt) and worse things I won't disclose.

By the time my " second chance" came around I wanted to embrace it and follow my heart.

So when my first child was born I jacked in my career and became a SAHM.

Things have worked out for me so much better than I could have imagined.

I am very glad I followed my heart.

Blaa of course the reasons why girls don't go into some well paid professions is multi-faced but my point was about choice and the fact that on the dace of it, girls have the same options of a career. The fact that they don't aspire to them is another matter.

snuggy with regards to student loans and loans for education your social class is more influential than gender.

swing but why don't they aspire to them? There structural and societal issues that are deeply ingrained. Gender and social class are hugely influencial when it comes to career decision making behaviour.

speakout again, where did I say that? I'm assuming you didn't 'jack in' you career with no thought to your financial situation?

It's not about being extremely wealthy it's about long term planning and risk management. It's a damn sight easier if you're wealthy but isn't life in general?

I feel like I live in a parallel universe sometimes. Life’s not an all you can eat buffet where you simply walk up and get to choose what you please to eat. It’s more like a canteen where you get in the queue and for many different reasons, some of the options will have sold out by the time you get to the front, your place in the queue being determined by lots of things, some of which are out of your control.

It’s not patronising to suggest that women in general are more financial vulnerable than our male peers because the majority of us are working pt or not at all.

Of course it's not patronising to suggest that women are more financially vulnerable but every time this is stated these voices are drowned out by people claiming 'it's not our business' and that 'theylll do what they want in the end.'

I'm finding the response to a rational and obvious concern very weird.

I'm finding the response to a rational and obvious concern very weird.

The thing is it’s not YOUR concern so people see it as a dig and then they’re bound to become defensive!