So where does it go wrong for women?

[Falalalafishfingers]

I'm sure this has been asked a 1009 times!
Read so many times in threads that it makes more sense for woman to give up work/ cut hours as dh/dp earns so much more. This suggests that men are already earning more pre-children?
So where does it go wrong? My guess is university.

The link I posted is comparing women who work vs women who stay at home.

How many of them?

Being single isn’t a profession (even if some try and make it one).

It's not about being single just not married.

[quote wonderup]www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/may/25/women-happier-without-children-or-a-spouse-happiness-expert[/quote]
It could feasibly be the case that juggling work with motherhood is one of the biggest causes of stress/unhappiness. That could explain single women being happier in general but the small number who don’t work at all being the happiest of all.

How many of them?

It references three separate studies with the same conclusion - i.e. that housewives are the happiest.

I don't particularly have an issue with SAHPs but I'm sure the internet all through up research that points to the other way.

The findings reinforce the results of large-scale research on well-being carried out by the Office for National Statistics, which has shown that stay-at-home mothers believe their lives are more worthwhile than their counterparts in work

Shame nobody else thinks that isn’t it? Many men treat their wives as skivvies and tap out of any and all housework/childcare once they agree to stay home.

I really believe that when it goes wrong for women, post childbirth, it happens because they chose to have children with the wrong man. If a career and progression and earning potential is important to you, then you need to choose a man who is willing to take, or at least share, the hit. So so so many women choose to shack up with men who, deep down, view their careers and ambitions as being more important.

For decent earners, I generally think giving up work to be a SAHM is risky and shortsighted, there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that having a SAHP benefits children, but there is plenty to show that being a SAHM disadvantages women. Which is fine, if you're willing to take that risk, but you are then putting your children at the corollary risk of being disadvantaged if their dad walks out or dies, and they're left with a mum who will likely really struggle to support them. It just never feels like a sensible choice, in terms of the economic stability of the family, it's almost always an emotional decision based on the needs of the mother. Obviously doesn't apply for NMW earners, as career breaks don't impact potential and salary rarely covers childcare.

Interestingly, a man who takes a career break to raise his children does not generally suffer the same loss of position and earnings as a woman.

will throw up,
my phone doesn't work!

I think that sometimes sticking to one’s principles doesn’t always result in the greatest happiness.

For example, my parents offered to buy me a house in my 20s and I said no as I wanted to be self sufficient. I later regretted it as my cousin from abroad came to live with them after I moved out and they ended up buying her a house instead to get her on her feet.

I look back at all the things I could’ve done in my 20s had I been mortgage free and speculate that the government will now just get a bigger chunk of whatever is left of my inheritance.

There is an interesting article here about the the 'leaky pipeline' for women in STEM - American but still some relevant observations www.graduate.umaryland.edu/gsa/gazette/February-2015/The-Leaky-Pipeline-Women-in-Life-Sciences/

The 'leaky pipeline' is a meatphor for a system designed to channel something that is flawed in such a way it loses the quantity of what it carries before it reaches the destination. To summarise, women are more likely to want a life-work balance while men are likely to expect their female partners to make career sacrifices on their behalf.

In that context, you can see that even if your daughter does do science at school and go down the much vaunted STEM route, society still stacks the odds against her having a family and a senior post. What feels like individual choices are made in a complex web of economic, social and political expectations, many unspoken and so much harder to challenge.

@Stay123

I went into admin as I am not that clever. I couldn’t have done a science degree, the vast majority on my uni course, arts, were female. Crikey, if I’d tried to do a physics degree I would have failed. I had 2 maternity leaves during which women I worked with who didn’t want children got promotions, note I said child free women got promotions, not the men. Fair enough as I went back part time and want my kids to be the priority.

I have a chemistry degree...didn’t stop the unconscious bias shit and assumptions when I had a brief period of reduced hours. It happens in many jobs, many levels...zilch to do with which discipline or having a degree

A woman has a uterus therefore gives birth to babies. A man doesn't.

Shame nobody else thinks that isn’t it? Many men treat their wives as skivvies and tap out of any and all housework/childcare once they agree to stay home.

Well, tbh I do roll my eyes a bit at the suggestion that it takes 10 hours a day to do the housework. I mean exactly how much ironing can one family produce? The SAHP probably isn’t going to go into the other’s workplace and help with their workload, or assist with proposals on those late nights before submission deadlines, so really they should be doing the majority of the housework. Otherwise they’re just a female cocklodger.

@PurelyRidiculous

I'm sure someone will be along to shoot me down for saying this but I think a lot of women like to play the victim when it comes to things like giving up careers, staying at home with the kids etc... When in reality its what they wanted and they wouldn't have wanted their husbands to do it instead of them.

That's why we see so much 'I gave up my career so he could work on his' as if it was a completely selfless sacrifice that they didn't actually want when really I usually read that and think...Hmmm... I wonder what you would have said if your husband had wanted to be the SAHP.

And I think it's often because we know that it goes against what we are all supposed to be fighting for so we want to be seen as not having a choice, being made to do X, Y or Z, it's all down to the patriarchy and nothing to do with us.

In reality I think a lot of women are happy with the way things are in terms of childcare, staying at home, giving up careers to care for kids etc... It's only when it comes back to bite that you see the 'I made this huge sacrifice for you!!'

This, 100%

@whatkatydid2013

OH and I have similar education & work in same sector (2:1 degrees in maths/law, qualified as accountants at similar age). He’s in practice doing audit/tax. I’ve always worked in industry and currently do a mix of accounting and IT. I’m 2 1/2 years older and currently earn more than him. We have crossed back and forth but generally earned similar amounts and I’ve been on a bit more most of the time. In my personal experience what has made a difference for me not losing out overly I went back to work after 6 months after first child and 8 after second and used keeping in touch days to stay up to date with what was going on at work OH & I both went part time briefly when we had 2 pre school kids to help our work/life balance (4 days a week each) and only for about a year. During that year if one of us needed to work our usual day off the other took holiday. OH covered most of the kids sick days between maternity leaves and first 6 months after I went back. In his words I haven’t just been off for months so no ones busy thinking I’m not invested at work and besides everyone thinks it’s so awesome I want to look after the kids where for you there are definitely people who are more likely to think it’s a negative. On the flip side neither of us earn as much individually as we could (& likely would) have had we not taken any time out/adjusted for a good work/life balance. We’ve both deliberately chosen employers with family friendly policies. In my case I stayed somewhere I knew I wasn’t earning as much as I would elsewhere due to excellent paid maternity, flexible working policies & the fact I’d worked there 10 years and built up a good reputation with lots of management so felt I’d do better there long term than somewhere I had less equity. In OHs case he left somewhere he got huge bonuses to go somewhere without one but with lots of flexible working options. Overall as a family we are probably better off with what we’ve done than one of us having got a higher paid job and the other one taking time out. I feel like it’s more secure as one of us could lose our job and we’d still be able to pay the mortgage and it’s definitely more tax efficient. I’m always surprised more people don’t take a similar approach.

When I had kids (90s) maternity leave was 6 months max not the 12 months it is now. There was no entitlement to parenteral leave or asking for part time roles . It did not stop the holding back of women’s careers whether they came back FT or PT, so I do not think that is the answer. You were perhaps seen as more committed as you came back “early” ?

Why is looking after children seen as "going wrong"? It's a hugely important skill that ensures the future of humanity.

@Sheleg

Why is looking after children seen as "going wrong"? It's a hugely important skill that ensures the future of humanity.

I don't think people are suggesting the actual act of looking after children is going wrong.

Just that when things, i.e. marriage breakdown 'go wrong', it can leave you in a much more vulnerable position than others.

But I really don't think the responsibility of that is solely on men or society. I think a lot of women choose it without considering the possible future implications of things did 'go wrong'.

It’s fine if you don’t want Shared Leave with your partner... but then you can’t expect that to come without penalties and to be treated equally when the father isn’t treated equally. You can’t have it both ways!

So so so many women choose to shack up with men who, deep down, view their careers and ambitions as being more important.

I’d say that many women actually intentionally seek out successful men - see the current thread called ‘How to Bag a Rich Man?’. The issue is that these men are much less likely to give up their career than a guy who isn’t financially driven. However, the downside is that your quality of life may suffer in other ways if you struggle financially or don’t have a good safety net.

Also, removing men from the equation....would it really be fair for a woman to return from maternity leave and be on equal footing with the other women who’ve worked their arses off for the last 18 months, possibly covering some of her work as well?

I’d be pissed off if I’d put in extra hours etc to gain recognition only for somebody to swan back in after 18 months off and get the same recognition.

@GodOfPhwoar

I think that sometimes sticking to one’s principles doesn’t always result in the greatest happiness.

For example, my parents offered to buy me a house in my 20s and I said no as I wanted to be self sufficient. I later regretted it as my cousin from abroad came to live with them after I moved out and they ended up buying her a house instead to get her on her feet.

I look back at all the things I could’ve done in my 20s had I been mortgage free and speculate that the government will now just get a bigger chunk of whatever is left of my inheritance.

I this narrative of independence and self-sufficiency is strongly pushed on women, especially on places like MN. Not just ‘be financially independent’, but also not to rely on anyone, make your own way, do things on your own merits, don’t be a CF.

That doesn’t strike me as the way a lot of successful men get along in their careers. In fact they are more likely to leverage their professional networks, their personal connections, and to leap on the shoulder of anyone who will lend them one, including their spouses and families. Call it smart or selfish (or both), but the narrative of always be independent, don't rely on anyone, ironically doesn’t always serve women.

You just need to look at the sheer amount of posts on Mumsnet and see the number of women also working from home yet they have taken on the entirety of the home schooling and housework. Martyr syndrome strikes again.

Women have to take responsibility for how they’re allowing themselves to be treated.
In my marriage and my life I am extremely assertive about what I want and what is and isn’t acceptable. As a result my husband and I have a 50/50 split in all things. We do the same amount of housework and have the same amount of responsibilities.

GodOfPhwoar - its interesting because yws on one hand the person in the office has proved their work ethic and gained experience over that 18 months and the company should value that. But the woman 'swanning off' may well have already proved her work ethic over many years, already have that experience as she has managed plenty of projects and now has new skilks which might be relevant to the next level but currently that is rarely valued. I came back from my 8 month mat leave much better at managung distractions and dealing with conflict.
I have two (male examples) ones career was stagnating so he asked for a sabatical. Went off, learned to sail and 6 months later came back and was promoted very quickly after a break. Gave him a different way of dealing with things in work. Another man took a 3 month break to drive a car in some long distance car race thing. He also got promoted swifly after his return.

@HeelsHandbagPerfumeCoffee

Why you do t consider it a joint cost if there are two wages? Housing and utilities are usually sHared costs as couple ,why isn’t child care

Ok so as you say 12k pa Net and one of £22k pa Net and the FT nursery bill is going to be 14kpa
Why aren’t they sharing the cost from the respective wages?
Why does it make the female wage the dispensible one?

Exactly. That is said so many times on MN “it would use up all of my salary if I PT my kids in nursery” well no it wouldn’t. It would use up 50% or whatever % you contribute to the joint funds just like the gas bill. Childcare bills are always women’s issues.

I this narrative of independence and self-sufficiency is strongly pushed on women, especially on places like MN. Not just ‘be financially independent’, but also not to rely on anyone, make your own way, do things on your own merits, don’t be a CF.

That doesn’t strike me as the way a lot of successful men get along in their careers. In fact they are more likely to leverage their professional networks, their personal connections, and to leap on the shoulder of anyone who will lend them one, including their spouses and families. Call it smart or selfish (or both), but the narrative of always be independent, don't rely on anyone, ironically doesn’t always serve women.

I agree.

Another philosophical debate (which likely has no ultimate ‘correct’ answer) is whether we should live our lives in fear of ‘the worst happening’.

Also, say a child keeps hitting his classmates....do we try and teach the victims to take the punches better or do we try and stop the bully punching them in the first place?

Admittedly, there is no easy answer to the second one when the punch takes the form of a husband’s betrayal, but if an individual would be the happiest at home with their children, then they’ve already lost out by working just to prepare for the worst happening (as opposed to at least having a fair shot at their ideal life, which in most cases wouldn’t leave them destitute if the marriage failed so much as just affect their potential earnings, which some may see as an acceptable risk in order for a shot at what they desire).