..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

I don’t disagree though. People asked me a lot when I was first pregnant ‘will you come back?’ I wanted to say ‘I didn’t get all that education to only use it for 4 years!’

I suppose I am an exception as I’m part time and have a good wage with good conditions and prospects. I could live comfortably on my own wage.

I do think it’s important to be financially independent. People do alsorts of mental gymnastics to justify giving up work but you’re better off staying in work: financially, prospects, if trouble hits.

I did a lot of shit jobs when I was a teen and it really taught me the benefit of education.

OublietteBravo As a female who went to a top tier boarding school and am from an upper middle class family, what is shocking is how many of my female friends who have careers live abroad, beyond the EU. The ones who stay in the UK marry well and don't work.

If I lived in the UK I would have stopped work because at the beginning I didn't earn enough to cover childcare let alone the cost of me getting to work. In America I was able to earn enough to put the work in to earn promotions and get qualified while my DC were young. I took short maternity leaves, which if in the UK I wouldn't have been able to. In the past 7 years I've had 3DC and taken 48 weeks of leave in total. I took an additional 16 week sabbatical which wasn't considered leave as it was sold as career development.

The biggest issue is that it's really hard to change culture. At school, careers advice wasn't good. I was basically told to find a DH at university. It was fathers who were helping their DDs figure out what they wanted to do. Very few of the mothers officially worked, the ones that did were lone parents, and the mothers didn't want the same for their DDs so pushed their DH to make sure DD had a career. It was shocking that so many mothers did work to help afford the fees but this was hidden and the facade shown to the outside world was that dearest wife doesn't have to work.

Personally I didn't have a choice to not work when I graduated. I was kicked out at 18 and had to figure it out. I hated being poor and wanted to have the choices that money brings. DH is 4 years older than me and makes a lot more than me. He didn't go to university so actually has 8 years on me in terms of work experience. He also has had opportunities that I have never had because of the gender bias which exists and is extremely strong in most companies. If I was a man I'd probably make more than DH does now.

I think no one should do more than 3 days a week, job shares should be the normal among men as well as women. Twice as many vacancies in one fell swoop! Work-life balance problem immediately sorted.

World changed: done.

Yes, a lot of women are in a vulnerable position. However, everyone is reliant on others for their sustenance (unless they are a hermit living in a hidden cave in the Garden of Eden) and nobody is immune from financial vulnerability (unless, see above...). Nobody would have paid work if they were not reliant on someone else - to buy their goods and services, provide them with goods, services or infrastructure which they need to run their own business, or to pay their salary. Aiming for a society where everyone thinks, "I'm alright, Jack," is an unsustainable pipe dream. Learning not to be destructively greedy, controlling and selfish and to recognise the value of people's contributions to society in non-monetary terms might be a good idea, though.

@Want2bSupermum It is very unusual to be sent to a top boarding school and then be chucked out of home at 18. Well done on your career development. It is great that you have made choices that work for you.

I am grateful for the 52 weeks maternity leave I was able to take for each of my children. It allowed me to parent in the way I wanted to. For me this was exclusively breastfeed, baby-led-weaning etc. I am grateful that I was able to go back to work on a 3 day week. If I had to go back full-time I would not have returned to work, as spending time with my kids is more important to me than career progression. My balance is different to yours and right for me.

I have an Oxbridge educated friend who had a high flying city career before children, but now home educates them. She is an excellent Mum and an excellent teacher, making a choice that is right for her family.

So before you get married you should sign a pre nup, to protect both parties finaancially and then work your butt off so that you can leave your dh if you need to - limit the number of kids you have as more kids will leave you more economically vulnerable. Get someone else to look after your own kids and clean the house - it's too dull, it'll rot your brain and you won't have enough money to survive if your dh leaves you for another man or woman - pay someone else - usually a woman to do these jobs - don't pay them enough though for them to have enough money to pay other people to look after their kids and clean their house - after all you have your security to think about, your cleaner/nanny/childcare worker's economic security is their business - they should have worked a bit harder at school - like you did - like we all can because we know all of us can get a really well paid job - if we all just work hard enough. Bull shit!

Nothing will change unless society norms change that means no gender pay gap better pay for more traditional women job roles ie care work childcare etc.
Men are still seen as the family providers thus are paid more and jobs which are traditionally male dominated ie construction plumbing etc are paid so much more than female dominated jobs.

The norms have been changing. Women are having fewer or no children and doing more paid work.

And it it still more socially acceptable for men to walk away from a family with minimal contact leaving the women (mostly) to run single parent households.

Totally agree with Smoke. It’s ridiculous to think that men, as a group, are going to step up and take equal responsibility for kids any time soon. A few will do yes, if they are SAHDs, for instance, but this is nowhere near the norm. If men were equally adept at childcare of young DC, why are there so few who choose jobs as nursery workers, nannies or in early years teaching? It’s not all down to social pressures, or the fear of allegations. It must be because it appeals less to men or feels less natural. Why do women nearly always get custody of DC, except in extreme circumstances? It’s a bit daft to pretend women and men are in the same frame of mind as to the impact of DC. The difference reduces, I think, as children get older, but insisting men and women would act in the same way were it not for social constructs is a bit disingenuous. Far better to recognise differences and strive for equality of opportunity and work / life balance on this basis, rather than obliterate difference and force everyone into the same box. To me this kind of attitude does women a disservice.

If men were equally adept at childcare of young DC, why are there so few who choose jobs as nursery workers, nannies or in early years teaching

Because if they do, they must be paedophiles, innit.

So they don't. And they can find better paid work elsewhere, which takes us back to the fact that traditionally womens' work tends to be lower paid than traditionally mens' work.

traditionally womens' work tends to be lower paid than traditionally mens' work And someone still has to look after the kids and clean the house - and that person will always be low paid and financially vulnerable.

insisting men and women would act in the same way were it not for social constructs is a bit disingenuous.
Where's the proof that it ^isn't^ social constructs though? Why are you so sure that the differences between men and women are biological?
Women mostly get custody of their kids because they were the primary carers in the first place, and their exes usually wouldn't want the kids full time anyway. That's the sad truth.
I think the reason so many women are in part time jobs or don't work at all is because that's simply what society expects of them. It is perfectly obvious how strong societal pressures are when we try to imagine a couple where the woman earns well, and the man wants to stop working and stay at home. Most women would be very unhappy with this, yet it's perfectly fine for women to want to sah (kids or no kids).

Fwiw, I grew up in a family with a sahm and a father who earned well, and I don't recommend it for many, many reasons. I am doing all I can to avoid this set-up with my own children.

F1ame you only have to look at the threads on here discussing male nursery nurses to understand why large numbers of men don't choose those careers.

Career decision making is complex and multi-faceted but social constructs and stereotypes play a HUGE part. These need challenging but unfortunately we're still a long way from young people making career decisions from a level, equal playing field.

The reality is that we don't know how men and women would behave if societal contexts and expectations were different, and we cannot say how much is down to biology. F1ame's post is every bit as full of unverified assumption as the attitudes she's critical of.

But there is a plethora evidence that social constructs, stereotyping and unconscious bias exist..... especially around career decision making behaviour. So much so it is specifically mentioned in the recent government statutory guidance on careers education in schools and colleges.

Well personally I'd guess the big picture is probably a mixture of nature and nurture. But any time you attempt a sweeping explanation of a phenomenon as broad as f1ame is attempting, as opposed to some of the more specific aspects, inevitably you'll start making stuff up at some point.

No guess work on my part. I'm an academic and this is my specialist area of research.

By 'this' you're presumably talking about the specific points on career and subject choices you mentioned, things that actually can be verified, rather than f1ame's broader claims. Because there's not an academic on the planet who knows exactly how much of the difference in typical male and female behaviour is innate. That's why I differentiated the two.

My specialist area is career decision making behaviour - specifically women's career decision making behaviour and social mobility.
Although you can never say 100% based on evidence and my own personal research you can see the impact of societal norms, expectations, stereotyping and unconscious bias. There's some interesting research looking at pre-school children and how they construct ideas around gender.

Promoting a narrative which claims people choose careers based on biology is dangerous.

@Wordthe I just had to pop in to say that I completely agree with some of your early posts about the value of a role in society and how we view higher earners as the more important role, and how we need to review the way in which we value roles.
I thought some of your points were really well written and put my thoughts down a lot more eloquently than I could at this time. It was enjoyable to read.
( sorry just had to comment, it also marks the thread for me to read thoroughly when time permits 😃)

Oh thank you very much @Tigger 🌞
Right now I can't even remember what I said 🤭but I'm glad it made sense 😁

Yes I thought it was probably something like that blaa, and I quite agree on the biology alone point. One just cannot say.