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.

@GodOfPhwoar you posted a long post with lots of examples from SAHMs with high earning partners. Do you think the partners may have felt under stress & pressure?

[quote wonderup]@GodOfPhwoar you posted a long post with lots of examples from SAHMs with high earning partners. Do you think the partners may have felt under stress & pressure? [/quote]
I don’t doubt it.

Silence
Of course it's a man problem. Most of women's lack of choices histirically were a man problem, or a collective men problem, and rather sums up what the fuck feminist is all about. Are you looking for a way to blame women, because that would be highly original?

That’s just in the private sector though. In the public sector you are paid according to your grade regardless of work area or sex

I think the public sector is better but there is still a wage gap/more men in the senior roles.

@CounsellorTroi

hav asked myself many times why roles in functions like HR and Communications and Marketing, all female dominated, are always the least well paid within big corporates. These roles are as important.

That’s just in the private sector though. In the public sector you are paid according to your grade regardless of work area or sex.

But even in the public sector, the system downgrades the entire pay scale over time when a particular sector becomes 'feminized'. Look at the disparity between, say, TAs pay and conditions compared with a similar male dominated sector.

A male TA might earn the same as an equivalent female TA, but the pay scales aren't comparable.

I would not describe social work as a “nice” job.

Me neither. But it is definitely a job that people do for altruistic reasons, as compared with say working on an oil rig for nine months of the year, which is almost always done for the money.

In fact, one of my brothers best mates was I think a gas engineer or something. He worked away for most of the year and it ended with his wife having an affair and then taking the kids.

@CouncillorTroi not at all nice to perform, no, but people go into it "to help people."

All that "helping people" gets you a pittance of a paycheck and crippling long hours. Until people eschew the profession standards will never rise, but you see threads on here every day of people going 'well I've decided to get a job now, but it seems only social work will take me. Guess I'll do that.' It's just preying on people who want to 'help'.

Look at the disparity between, say, TAs pay and conditions compared with a similar male dominated sector.

good point

Up to 25 women on average earn more than men. By 30 it's about equal. After that men start earning more than women. By the time you get to retirement age there really is a big gap between men and women.

It's largely down to having children and the societal view that childcare and upbringing is the responsibility of mothers or at least to do it properly.

I mean how many adverts have you seen where the dad is doing child care and it all goes hilariously wrong only for the mum to come in and fix it / clean up - amusing not and harmfully and wrongly promotes the view that looking after children is something women simply do better than men.

The gap in much later years has a lot of baked in strong sexism in the work place from the 1970s, which clearly still exists but is much much less, thank G - "thinks Benny Hill and shudders"🤮

The solution in my mind is for child care and child upbringing to firmly be the responsibility of both parents. This requires more women to let go and willing share childcare and not complain if it is done differently to how they would do it. And it requires more men to simply step up to their responsibilities as a father and do more childcare.

I think another key point is that people always seem to downplay the fact that a wife usually benefits hugely from her husband progressing in his career.

The risk you take in becoming a housewife is offset by the possibility of a life of leisure - having loads of free time and yet still being financially solvent in a way that few single women can be. Yet it is indeed a risk and the way to avoid it is to make your own money, at which point you sacrifice the possibility of an easy life.

Tbh o think the issue here is seeing earning less money/being less career focussed as "going wrong".

Being financially dependent on your husband - that I'd see as going wrong, and why I could never be a SAHM unless I was independently wealthy. Because you can't trust anyone to never change into a cunt.

But going part time, staying in a relatively low pressure/low paid role, earning enough but not loads, not being obsessed with progression over security and stability, having time and headspace for DC - this, for me, is my life going right, not going wrong.

I don't want to be a "high earner", or the "main earner" in my family. I want to make enough money that I know if I had to I could go it alone with the DC, and to still have enough time with them to feel like we are all benefitting from it. That's where I am now and that's where I'll stick until they're both in school (if I'm lucky enough not to get made redundant!)

The idea that competitiveness, maximising warning potential etc are the one true way is very macho - the reason a lot of women still shy away from professions where this kind of backbiting and long hours culture is the norm isn't just because of social conditioning and prejudice (although this does play a part) - it's because, objectively, unless you enjoy swinging your status around or are very materialistic, why would you want to live like that in your one short human life? I mean for people who get a kick out of it fill your boots and don't compromise; but I don't consider it failure to have different priorities, as long as you make sure you maintain financial independence suitable to your circumstances if your partner was suddenly removed from the equation.

When things go tits-up, you hear so many women say that, by staying at home, they enabled their husbands to have high-earning careers.

That’s bullshit.
If you have two wages coming in, one high, you can buy childcare.

In so many cases, women are enabled to stay at home due to their high-earning husband because the woman wants to stay home.

You see so many threads on here saying “I take home £1,200/month but childcare is £800/month so it’s not worth my while working”. Yes it is. It’s £800 out of the family pot and £1,200 in. Plus NI contributions, plus pension etc.

I honestly believe that women choose to have children more often than men do.
If Richard Branson lived in a world where he couldn’t have had children and a career, which do you think he would have chosen?

If given the choice between children and successful careers, many men would remain childfree.

@MiladyBerserko

Silence Of course it's a man problem. Most of women's lack of choices histirically were a man problem, or a collective men problem, and rather sums up what the fuck feminist is all about. Are you looking for a way to blame women, because that would be highly original?

Eh?

How is saying it's a man problem blaming women?
How did you work that one out?

The solution in my mind is for child care and child upbringing to firmly be the responsibility of both parents. This requires more women to let go and willing share childcare and not complain if it is done differently to how they would do it. And it requires more men to simply step up to their responsibilities as a father and do more childcare.

And what if the man loves his job and the woman hates working and would rather be a SAHP? Or the reverse.

Do they have to commit to a life of unhappiness, despite having the opportunity to create the family setup they desire?

Also think it sucks how many on here are slating women who become focussed on parenting as "becoming boring" and excusing their husbands for banging their assistants because "they fell in love with someone interesting who then became a boring mother".

I definitely think it happens. But I think that reflects incredibly poorly on the men who fail to value the mother's of their children who are evolving in their own way and focussed on their own passion - for lacking the imagination to be able to conceptualise this and accommodate this change. Anyone who "falls in love with" a static idea of a person and expects them to stay that way forever (in personality, looks or interests) is immature and doesn't really know what love is at all.

Not every family can 'buy childcare'

When you have a child with a disability it really isn't that simple. It is not as black and white

I do think for some women it goes wrong when they make a commitment to children which is not shared by their partner who carries in as normal and whose life doesn't change, refusing to get married and insisting on a 50:50 financial co tribute on from the mother and primary cared of their children.

I think this is the absolute crux of the matter today.

The "glass ceiling" has not been eliminated by any stretch but the barriers to women's advancement in the workplace (requirement that married women stop work/unequal pay etc) have been significantly dismantled in recent decades.

What has barely shifted is the understanding on the part of men that a double income family requires sacrifices on their part in order to support the family.

Most men are more or less comfortable with the idea of their wife or partner working and bringing in money: I would be surprised if a man told me he didn't want his wife to work.

But very few of them have made any real concession towards lifting the weight on women in the domestic sphere and removing this "double shift" issue that women face, where they are often doing full time professional roles and then an entire additional job on top of this at home (childcare and housework and increasingly now home schooling as well).

It simply doesn't occur to most men I know that their failure or inability to support their partners on the home front is limiting their ability to work and earn money. If they are challenged on it they may have lightbulb moments. Some will push back, others are progressive enough to be able to make the right adjustments. But it still isn't a natural thing for them. I am still routinely asking male colleagues about this and am surprised by how unaware they are of this.

The next really significant hurdle for equality between men and women is this. It's not so much about encouraging more girls into STEM subjects (although that's a noble and worthwhile idea). It's about really getting men to engage with the impact that their lack of domestic support has on their partner and by implication on their whole family.

I'm not under any illusions that this is going to happen quickly.

I know a circle of highly intelligent , motivated women in their early thirties ,had high flying jobs, got married , first child and are now sahms . They have part time self employment businesses in marketing , teaching pilates or yoga or dabbling in internet businesses..none of which make any money at all , the women are all totally financially dependent on their husband salary . The children are often put into daycare too so the women have a large chunk of the day to go to classes ,go running, 'network' etc..what they dont see is the sometimes seething resentment their husbands have ..a lot of men would like that lifestyle too but feel they've been bounced by patriarchy and female judgement into having to work long hours in jobs they loathe . It's great that things are changing and the Scandi model is a good example of how it could be here...
I remember an unhappy male colleague saying "at least women have a choice..I have nothing but work.." We discussed that but its quite a prevalent feeling among some men .

And what if the man loves his job and the woman hates working and would rather be a SAHP? Or the reverse.

Do they have to commit to a life of unhappiness, despite having the opportunity to create the family setup they desire?

It's a tough one, I think dc can benefit from having both parents involved. DH does most of the picks ups & the dc love it.

The other consideration is....what if it’s your children who turn into cunts and you end up estranged from them after having sacrificed your career? There are loads of situations on here where parents go NC with their parents.

I don’t think you can let fear govern your life outside of avoiding obviously bad moves like marrying an utter cock.

I remember an unhappy male colleague saying "at least women have a choice..I have nothing but work.." We discussed that but its quite a prevalent feeling among some men.

Indeed. Somebody made a good point in the other housewife thread when they noted that most men work for over 40 years without ever having more than a fortnight at a time away from the office.

@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.

Do you honestly think arts degrees are easier than science degrees? They're different, and draw on different types of skillsets and interests.

It's a shame as that speaks volumes about the fact that in general we unconsciously place more value on certain subjects, certain types of work, that we think men typically do over women.

Men is where it goes wrong.

It's about really getting men to engage with the impact that their lack of domestic support has on their partner and by implication on their whole family.

Definitely.

I think I benefited by having a nanny even though mum didn't work. My dad has the big city banking job but if he was here then he would cook for us on the weekend, play & take us out. My DH had a SAHD which was unusual in the 80s but I think he has different expectations as a result.