To think you are very lucky if you dont have to work?

[malificent7]

Dp is amazing but not a high earner and also i want to be a bit independent howver i haul my butt out if bed to work a 12 hour shift where i get told off as i havn't been trained properly...i am very jealous of those who don't have to work.

do those of you who support high earning husbands harbour any resentment or often feel that you're oppressed?

Never. Neither of us are resentful of the other; I have a huge amount of respect and pride in him and his success, hard work and dedication. He takes equal pride and pleasure in my staying at home with our child and sorting all the house and admin out, taking care of him. But I have old fashioned and traditional values and so does he. Together we are a well-oiled machine and it really, really works.

But this is not for everyone.

Why do people always talk about how sad it is for working mums to miss out on 'firsts' but don't mention the working dads? Aren't they going to be equally sad?

I'm a sahm, I love my girls to bits (have 3 girls, youngest is nearly 2) but I've had enough of being sat at home looking at the same walls and watching the same Peppa Pig cartoons every bloody day.

I would love to be able to find a job but 1) there is no way I could afford childcare (can't get any help with that unless both parents are working) and 2 it is hard trying to find something that will work around my husband shifts pattern. I've actually just signed up to Totaljobs website and been searching any type jobs in my area (don't drive) I've actually had a few calls already for care work and straight away asked how soon I could be available.... but soon as they find out I have no experience, I'm no good for the job (everytime I hear that makes me feel f**king useless)

I was a SAHM until DS started school so I was there for his first crawl, his first steps, his first words.

I still don't remember any of it. Vastly overrated.

IME dad's aren't as upset about missing "firsts", I don't why but its certainly true in my relationship and in those of my friends, of course they will be exceptions.
Equally you could miss your childs first steps while out shopping/getting a haircut/in the shower however you will spend a lot more time at work than doing those activities so statistically it would be far less likely to happen . TBH when I was a SAHM I rarely got any time to myself without DC!- had a haircut every 3 months, took DC shopping with me and had a shower when they were in bed.
To go back to OPs question I think the problem is your job and its understandable you feel jealous , if you found a role that was more rewarding with less hours your opinion might be different but it was lovely not having to juggle work and parenting now I'm back at work its really hard when dc are sick or need medical appointments, or there's a school event, just covering the school holidays is tricky enough, thinking about it i probably did it the wrong way round should have worked for the first 5 years of their life and taken following 5 years off when they were at school- would have got some time to myself then too!

Women work for independence. Unless you are financially sorted it’s absolutely essential.

I think choice is essential, providing it's an Informed choice I think that's essential.

I was a sahm for a while and we had to cut back in all ways, no hair cuts at hairdressers etc, no make up! Rarely new clothes... One car very cheap to run, cut back on everything, kitchen falling apart, no flash holidays, a few nights here and there in 30 a night Premier Inn, no family to stay with, no extensions, new kitchens.... Reduced food from supermarkets, free toys, charity shops, free cycle...

It was v hard and grueling and certainly not a lady of Leisure but I wanted to be at home with them as vulnerable non verbal small dc.

So it depends doesn't it.

IME dad's aren't as upset about missing "firsts", I don't why but its certainly true in my relationship and in those of my friends

Because they haven't been socialised to think of their careers as optional and to be expected to drop them when they have children. No one has suggested to them that they can't work because as a recent Mn poster said with apparently total earnestness (1) their child's primary school had lots of events that happened during the day, and (2) their child would die friendless and alone unless they socialised during the working day with the other SAHMs of his classmates, because otherwise no one would invite the child on playdates.

Or in case your child might take their first step when you were in a meeting/ploughing a field/teaching biology/removing an appendix.

I LOVE being a SAHM.

My son is only a toddler but I've been really surprised by how much i enjoy it, seeing as I was never the maternal type.

I don't get bored, as I'm out with son a lot as he is very active. Plus I get some time to do my hobby which I very much love!

Husband likes me being at home with son too, so no resentment either side.

The number of posters on here moaning at op and saying they wish they could.

OP clearly said in the title people who don't have to work which means people who have a choice

It's not about you fddn

I have linked repeatedly to the definition of bullshit, pointless jobs but let's try again.
And the idea of UBI is not that everyone gets the same whether they are employed or not, but that everyone gets a basic income, and can then work the hours that suit them in the job of their choice.
What's that? "Waah, waaah, waaaaah, in that case people won't do the Important Jobs?" Well, yes they will, but people who want to attract staff will have to pay them better and treat them properly. Wages will be on top of UBI. And, of course, many people will still want to work because they find work rewarding for reasons other than financial - job satisfaction can come from making a useful (or beautiful) thing, from performing an essential service, from knowing that you have made someone's life better or easier, or made the world a better place.

Of course, the other problem, more relevant to this thread, is that all the structures of paid employment were set up to function by exploiting unpaid labour on behalf of women. So men earn wages for working at a workplace, while women provide them with domestic service, children and childcare, in exchange for being fed and housed, but do not have access to money, wealth or assets as these belong to men. And the structure only functions properly when it is backed up by unpaid labour provided by women.

I'v never had to work a day in my life, and realise I'm very lucky. I do sometimes have fleeting moments though where I wonder what it would be like and whether I am missing out on something.

I stopped working when I had my first DS who is 20 now. I've always enjoyed being a sahm and had enough other interests to keep me occupied without needing work to provide social stimulation or a sense of fulfilment. I raised DS as an only child, then when he was in his late teens I decided to have another dc, as I wanted to continue my sahm lifestyle.

I'm not financially dependent on anyone and we're financially comfortable. In some ways I've been lucky, but then again I do think my options have been down to certain decisions I've made and the people I've chosen to surround myself with - I didn't come from a very wealthy background at all, but I've been shrewd with my planning and as a result ended up with a very financially secure situation.

I used to feel a bit guilty for not needing to work, but then I realised that most people enjoy their jobs and thrive on the social contact, so they probably wouldn't want to be in the position I was in anyway. But if someone asks me what job I do, I mention my creative business although it's very part-time, because they just assume I'd have some kind of job. I think there is a social pressure for women to work, especially where we live.

Never. Neither of us are resentful of the other; I have a huge amount of respect and pride in him and his success, hard work and dedication. He takes equal pride and pleasure in my staying at home with our child and sorting all the house and admin out, taking care of him. But I have old fashioned and traditional values and so does he. Together we are a well-oiled machine and it really, really works.

But this is not for everyone.

Thanks for replying (and to the other posters who answered my question).

Right now, me and my partner earn roughly equal salaries, but there is definitely the opportunity for me to 'step up' in my role as my employer has hinted several times at further training and fast track-esque schemes - most of the senior management are promoted from within. However, given the business I work in, it would likely mean some unsocial hours and possibly being on call, or maybe something like a rolling 4 on/4 off shift pattern - but would have the potential to almost double my current salary.

We're both in our early 30s and not sure if we want kids (defo not in a hurry), but if I were to progress into the above role, it'd severely limit my ability to carry out, for example, childcare duties or a school run as I could be called in at short notice and would likely be working some unsociable shifts.

That's partly why I continue as I am, but if we do have kids and my partner wanted to take a step back, then I'd be happy to 'step up' at work. But I doubt I'd see it a 'priviledge', more a way to provide for my family. If I were single I really doubt I could be arsed with the stress/responsibility as I'm fairly comfortable already.

So men earn wages for working at a workplace, while women provide them with domestic service, children and childcare, in exchange for being fed and housed, but do not have access to money, wealth or assets as these belong to men.

Even when they share a joint bank account like many couples do?

IME dad's aren't as upset about missing "firsts", I don't why but its certainly true in my relationship and in those of my friends

And why is that? It is because, right from when they were tiny boys, they have not been socialised - by families, toys, educators, the media- to want such things. They’ve never been taught that not wanting to put out fires and instead wanting to rock a baby is an option they might have, or a role they should bloody well learn to play. Throughout their childhood adolescence and youth - through gazillions of subtle and unsubtle socialisation- they are taught to be Protector Provider Supporter. Stoicism is valued to the extent that their need to be strong often comes out in funnily non ideal ways. We know by now how masculine socialisation works.

But women on the other hand were socialised from babyhood in opposite ways. And hence why so many women find it unbearable that their child might have a first poo on the loo whilst they were taking out someone’s brain tumour.

So men earn wages for working at a workplace, while women provide them with domestic service, children and childcare, in exchange for being fed and housed, but do not have access to money, wealth or assets as these belong to men

I don’t need access to funds as Dp transfers me all bar the cost of his commute and some money for lunch each month.

I look after everything financial as I don’t trust Dp to make sure we aren’t paying over the odds and he agrees I am better with money than he is.

In regards to “family assets” I own more than Dp.

Sounds a very old fashioned attitude that sahms don’t earn anything so don’t own anything

Look for a more enjoyable job. Have done both and really work gives you a purpose, and colleagues to socialise with.Children grow up and leave home too before you know it.

@christmaslscoming wait.... you've never worked a day in your life? Why don't you feel like you're missing out on something? Work is great (sometimes.) Today I'm off to sell raffle tickets for my patients Christmas dinner. Then I'll be back to make that things to sell at the Christmas fair (fudge and salt dough decorations.) It's honestly very rewarding and I would do a lot voluntarily if I had the means to. I hope you're volunteering.

I love working. I enjoy getting up in the mornings and looking forward to going work. I love my son as well and we do a lot together but there's only so much you can do! I also like working and it gives me a well needed break and socialisation with other people as I don't have any friends / introverted anyway. I am no longer working though as we have relocated due to my husbands promotion so I am going to be bored stiff. I am looking for a job but it has been years since I have done my cv or been to an interview.

Of course I'm aware that women who have no waged work may well have access to money these days. And the SAHM/WOHD set up functions OK for some people. But that doesn't change the fact that that the structure is supposed to depend on women's unpaid labour, and please bear in mind that within living memory women were not allowed to take out mortgages or loans without permission from a man. If a woman was married, her husband was considered to be her owner (as far as taking responsibility for her finances went) and he was the one who had to give permission; if she wasn't married, then her father was her owner, and if her father was dead, she belonged to the nearest male relative.

Now we live in a world where most people can't afford to house and feed a family on one person's wage, so both partners are expected to find waged work - yet wages are low and childcare is expensive (though guess what - child care workers are on very low pay). As several PP have said, if you have DC, particularly if you have more than one DC, you need to be either a high earner or married to one to be able to afford adequate childcare, or the wages you earn barely cover the cost of the childcare. And don't forget how little possibility for 'career progression' there is in vast numbers of jobs these days.
The whole system is a mess.

I've been in both these situations and count myself lucky. When my children were very young my husband left and left us homeless. The only thing to do was get myself out of it, retraining at uni, working and bring a single parent was really hard. 13 years later I met a lovely man, after 3 years I moved in with him and sold my house, hard decision being on your own for so long, he then asked me if I would still work. We had the discussion about me not wanting anyone else to be responsible for my children and I continued working. I was made redundant from my job 6 years ago, my now husband suggested I just give up, I did try but I still had more to give and continued in a new college, I was a lecturer. I gave it another 4 years until the system pushed me out. I am now a lady of leisure and spend my time looking after our home, cooking, gardening, I don't have time to lunch. Having been through a tough time where I needed to work has made me really appreciate where I am now and know I am very lucky, I wouldn't change anything and never felt envious of people that didn't work when I was struggling. I looked at my sister who did nothing but moan about the long hours my brother in law worked so she didn't have to when her chikdren were young and vowed never to be one of those miserable people.

@ReanimatedSGB or be a low enough earner to get tax credits. DP is on £10 per hour and I was working 30 hours in a shop and we had enough in tax credits to pay for two children to be in almost full time nursery. Now I've got a better job we don't get anything so it's not worth me working (although I do still as my dd has started school and my ds gets his 30 free hours in January) but this year has been very very hard to take that cut. There is no incentive to get a better job or get promoted in you get tax credits so it's a bit of a trap.
Women shouldn't have to give up their career because of childcare costs. What a waste of all that talent and education? My friend is a very clever woman with 20 years experience in healthcare procurement and is currently working for minimum wage in a school kitchen as it fits around her sons school. He's got SEN so wouldn't cope with breakfast and after school club as well. It's such a waste of a woman's potential!