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.

I don’t think young women are seen as serious players in the world of work. They are not always identified for long term roles and invested in as young men are

Absolutely spot on. I had the advantage of living my life backwards and I’d recommend it. I had my first pregnancy at 21 and graduated at 33, at which point I started my career with no childcare issues and a complete family. My career progression was meteoric and I rapidly overtook numerous women who did it the conventional way.

My career changed in my early 50s to working as a contractor. I was far more desirable as a short term hire than women 20 years younger with small children. The bottom line is that we can’t have it all, my eventually successful career was at the price of some very lean times with small children.

Excellent post by BlingLoving.
We need to hear women's individual stories but unless we can also take a step back and see the structure, we'll never be able to understand why we all make different ''choices'' (/s)

Overall, women are disadvantaged in the workplace because we are not taken seriously when we are younger unless we can prove we are one of the boys, we aren't as well paid, our jobs are not as secure and we have to pay too much for childcare. We are more likely to be the default parent so juggle responsibilities and work part time, our career takes a bashing and we don't earn as much.

Pitting us against each other is genius. Its yet another way to use up our resources working against our own best interests.
If we could just get on with working out how to change the structure and assist each other, maybe we could effect some real change.

@CounsellorTroi

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.

This is true of childless/childfree women too.

I'm child free and would really push against this. Life is what you make it. I don't just have work. It's a bit of a sad view of what you think child free life is.

Depending on how much you earn you can make the choices regarding flexible working parents make. Many people don't make those choices because of the drop in pay and status that comes with it.

I agree with pp that said the gap appears at maternity. Dw was only able to take 6 months with our dd because her director and her mat cover were trying to push her out. They were both unmarried childless women in their 40s...

She left a year later anyway after being told unfairly that she's ineligible to apply for a directorship in a very related department. Typically directorships in that part of the organisation become available every 10 years and so it was a massive slap in the face. It was a large public sector employer and she likely would have got the role because of the way recruitments have to be 'fairly' scored but they used a technicality to prevent her from being considered. They made it an internal recruitment with specific tracks and she is the only one in her track who had the competency to apply so they effectively excluded her alone. (The equivalent is an NHS trust deciding to open recruitment for a Workforce Director post internally only to heads of nursing and the HR department. But then decide to exclude the recruitment department knowing that the current head of recruitment is the most qualified person for the role as she has HR management experience and her department is closely related).

She has had 2 compromise agreements with other employers in the past so she knew how to fight and win and she had emails forwarded to her that were proof of breaches. But she was just too tired of 'the fight' to go for a third. Plus we had dd and a couple of property projects on the go at the same time.

She's stuck at 'head of' level and is torn between doing short term consultancy posts for triple the pay but no progression, or dealing with sexism and racism in perm posts for a slim chance at breaking the glass ceiling.

@RantyAnty

The work world is set up for men.

The reason it doesn't change or become more family-friendly is that men don't want that.

Men don't usually go PT, become SAHDs, etc. because they don't want to.

But for those that do want to it’s a battle. Financially, societally, and sometimes within the relationship.

I'm sure I've read that studies show men are more likely to go for promotions where they don't meet all the criteria, whilst women wait until they are overqualified for the position.

This is correct. Women tend to only apply for jobs when they are confident they match 80-90% of the criteria. Men will apply if they think they match 60-70% of the criteria. We are currently reviewing how we write our job ads for this reason.

It begins in the womb. Boys that kick a lot will be good at football, girls that kick a lot will be a pain.
Kids get socialised to play with certain toys that are split by sex so they gain skills related to those toys.
They pick uni based on the skills and interests they have which have developed from the toys they played with as a child.
Uni leads to careers based on those subjects, directly or transferable skills.
Some jobs are higher value than others, the high value ones are mostly done by men.
Therefore in general men are getting paid more than their female partners so the women give up their job or go part time.
Additionally, low value work is more likely to have part time or flexible options.

Note its not me who thinks they are high value. I think nursing should be much better paid than city jobs.

@GodOfPhwoar

And does a housewife get more that a fortnight away from her 'office'? Even on holiday, is she allowed to drop all of her work duties?

Well, many believe that a change is as good as a break.

Ultimately it would depend on the individual circumstances. A child with SEN could be extremely testing but my sister said she found it much easier than being at work - I used to be envious of her taking the kids to feed the ducks on a nice day whilst I was stuck in the office.

And then there’s the housewives who never return to work like the ones from the thread I posted earlier whose children were grown up, meaning they could pursue their hobbies and see friends all day.

This doesn't address the point. Unless feeding the ducks is your adult hobby, taking your child to feed the ducks is not the same as a life of leisure.

And I have no idea what SEN parenting has to do with it - other than making it 100 x more difficult job. You know very well that when a family goes on holiday a housewife couldn't stop doing her 'job'. She'll still be the one packing, unpacking, washing, cooking, shopping, feeding, cleaning, looking after hygiene for kids. SEN or not.

Your point was that a man will work 40 years with only 2 weeks off - mine is that a 'housewife' won't even get the 2 weeks off. Nor will she get evenings and weekends.

@BillMasen

I keep coming back to the shared parental leave issue

If we can move thinking to become that this is the norm then that would help a lot. But I see resistance to that both on here and in real life

When I was married and the kids came along I wanted to discuss sharing the leave. I had massive resistance from my wife, and financially it would have been much harder as she got full pay, I’d have had none

So. Make parental leave fully shared, as a matter of course, and the same financially.

I think there’s a lot in that @BillMasen

I’ve often thought (and said to my son recently) that if two parents could each work three ten hour days each per week during the pre school years, a pattern would be set of the parents being equally “parental”, neither CV would be badly damaged, the financial hit wouldn’t be huge, and the children would benefit from only needing a day or two per week in childcare, and high would also keep the childcare costs down. However, that kind of pattern needs to be officially encouraged, as parental equality is in Scandinavia.

You’re right, of course that looking even earlier, to maternity/paternity leave would set the tone from the start.

*I'm child free and would really push against this. Life is what you make it. I don't just have work. It's a bit of a sad view of what you think child free life is.

Depending on how much you earn you can make the choices regarding flexible working parents make. Many people don't make those choices because of the drop in pay and status that comes with it.*

I'm childless - at least originally - and of course life is not just work. But I had planned to have children and was looking forward to some time out of the workplace. Instead I had 38 years of full time work and it did feel a bit relentless and samey. I was averagely paid and where I worked requests to work part time were extremely unlikely to be approved unless you had small children. Career breaks and sabbaticals for all did not really come about until late in my working life. It's moot now as I was able to take voluntary early retirement at 58.

This doesn't address the point. Unless feeding the ducks is your adult hobby, taking your child to feed the ducks is not the same as a life of leisure.

And I have no idea what SEN parenting has to do with it - other than making it 100 x more difficult job. You know very well that when a family goes on holiday a housewife couldn't stop doing her 'job'. She'll still be the one packing, unpacking, washing, cooking, shopping, feeding, cleaning, looking after hygiene for kids. SEN or not.

Your point was that a man will work 40 years with only 2 weeks off - mine is that a 'housewife' won't even get the 2 weeks off. Nor will she get evenings and weekends.

Oh please, feeding the ducks does not compare to a day of high pressure sales presentations to clients or a day as a surgeon.

And no way is a housewife with grown up kids doing anything close to a full time job's worth of hours (and certainly not the 80 hours which many of the women in the linked thread claim their husbands do to facilitate them staying at home).

It how many women actually want to share parental leave?

I know I wouldn’t have.

It killed me going back to work when they were 9-12 months of age and being apart from them at such a young age - never mind doing it when they were younger.

It how many women actually want to share parental leave?

I would have loved to. I found maternity leave incredibly lonely and isolating and I know I'm not the only person who felt like that.
I

I’d have happily shared I went back after 6mth and Christ mat leave was dull and all the excruciating baby groups

@ThornAmongstRoses

It how many women actually want to share parental leave?

I know I wouldn’t have.

It killed me going back to work when they were 9-12 months of age and being apart from them at such a young age - never mind doing it when they were younger.

And this is the problem

It killed me going back to work when they were 9-12 months of age and being apart from them at such a young age - never mind doing it when they were younger.

And this is the problem

A mother not wanting to be away from her young infant is a problem?

It kills a lot of dads to go to work after 2 weeks, then work hard and see your kids evenings and weekends with no option to split this time at home.

@ThornAmongstRoses

It killed me going back to work when they were 9-12 months of age and being apart from them at such a young age - never mind doing it when they were younger.

And this is the problem

A mother not wanting to be away from her young infant is a problem?

No the refusal to consider sharing the leave. I know it’s tough. It’s tough on dads too not being allowed to take an equal share of that time, of that load

But it’s not the problem. The problem is there’s very little choice. For every woman who’d refuse to share parental leave, there’s another who’s bored shitless at home and would love it. And some men won’t want to do it either.

@VinylDetective

But it’s not the problem. The problem is there’s very little choice. For every woman who’d refuse to share parental leave, there’s another who’s bored shitless at home and would love it. And some men won’t want to do it either.

I don’t disagree. I just think making it shared as a matter of course would help address the issue at hand, that being lack of women’s career progression due to mat leave

I would have shared maternity leave with my exh in a heartbeat. I found it mind numbingly boring.

I’m probably going to get shot down for saying this but the bond between a mother and the baby is different to the bond between father and baby, hence why so many mothers (not all) don’t want to go back to work because they can’t bear the thought of being away from their infant. A mothers instinct to be near and protect her infant is intrinsic to nature.

I don’t think it “kills dads” having to go back to work when the baby is two weeks old in the same way it would kill a mother being separated from her baby at 2 weeks old.

Oh please, feeding the ducks does not compare to a day of high pressure sales presentations to clients or a day as a surgeon.

No, a lot of SAHPing or unpaid caring is more akin to dreary minimum wage roles, without even a minimum wage.

I feel like this might be becoming less and less common tbh. None of my friends have given up work after having kids, and only one couple has a big earning discrepancy as the woman is still a student.

My husband and I earn basically the same wage, so it would make equal sense for both of us to give up work; neither of us wants to. He also wants to split some of the mat/pat leave which I am happy with. I honestly think this will level out in the next ten years.

I honestly think this will level out in the next ten years

Ten decades perhaps. The Equal Pay Act was made law in 1974, the real world still hasn’t caught up.