To think it's a bit sad that both people nowadays need to work to afford a household?

[Lowef]

I know this isn't a popular opinion on MN but was thinking how rubbish it is that today mostly both parents need to be working to be able to afford the basics of food, clothing, rent. mortgage etc for the family without being on the breadline.

I have really fond memories of playing with my mum in the garden planting pots, watching her cook whilst i sat on the worktop. She'd collect us from school everyday and on fridays she'd have baked some warm muffins, sweet buns which were still warm and fresh from the oven. She'd give some to my friends too. She taught me so many things like sewing, cooking, gardening (she was very green fingered), growing veg. She spent alot of time with us kids and i look back at those days really fondly.

In comparison I am nothing like this with my children - I just don't seem to have the time and energy for the things she did. I can't bake cupcakes in time for the kids school pick up as they're in the after school club. Dinner is a quick whisk up whatever I have in the freezer / fridge , I'm too frazzled and tired for spending lots of time with the kids. DH is the same.

In an an ideal world i would love to be a SAHM and have more energy and time for my family and myself too instead of just rushing through life. The years are going by so fast and most of my energy and life is taken up by work. The children are growing up so quickly.

Not sure if anyone else feels the same too or if ill get an MN roasting!

However much I love and trust my DH there is no way on this earth I would give up my autonomy by being a sahp. Would it be lovely in a perfect world? Yes, of course! But should the worst happen, I earn a decent wage and have a good career so could support me and DC alone should I need to. Plus I will have a decent pension when I retire! I work full time (but TTO). Yes the weeks can feel busy but I hire a cleaner and try and get as much fun stuff as possible achieved on weekends and in the school holidays!

You sound like you have a very idealised and romanticised view of your childhood OP which is lovely but I’d be interested to hear your mum’s take on those years.

My mum was a SAHM for most of my childhood and teens, yet wasn’t emotionally available for me at all. Just being physically there for your children isn’t everything.

Yeah I suppose. It also mean more opportunities for women who want to do other stuff. We can afford for me never to work at all, but I'm so completely caught up in people wanting me to work, and finding it interesting, that I do.

Ok well giving up my car ,hair appointments and a (twice) daily shower is just not happening Totally fair enough! I wasn't saying anyone ought to give it up. I also like showers and holidays 😊

I don't want people to live any particular way. I just think that people fail to realise that standards of living have risen hugely and that all these things we are constantly being sold as essential were not enjoyed by previous generations, and that is why they were able to live in a single salary. Housing has always been a large proportion of the cost of running a household. That hasn't changed. What has changed is the extra things that people now view as essential.

I totally agree with this, but when you mention it on here, you get torn apart. People view things like tumble dryers, dishwashers, two cars, new homes, new furniture etc. as perfectly normal and expected, but that's only a very recent phenomenon.

@SnackSizeRaisin

So you want people to live as they did in the 1940s but not reduce the cost of housing?

I don't want people to live any particular way. I just think that people fail to realise that standards of living have risen hugely and that all these things we are constantly being sold as essential were not enjoyed by previous generations, and that is why they were able to live in a single salary. Housing has always been a large proportion of the cost of running a household. That hasn't changed. What has changed is the extra things that people now view as essential.

Except that’s complete nonsense - the standards of living hasn’t raised costs above wages, housing has. And wages haven’t increased along with housing costs so people are now in the position of having massively disproportionately income vs outgoings on very basic things like ‘somewhere to live’. That won’t change if people stop having showers because their gran didn’t.

If a family benefits from having one parent at home then society in general benefits - the next generation of human beings benefits
I am not sure there is an automatic advantage though. Are you saying that children from families where the mother works are disadvantaged to the extent that it impacts on the rest of society, compared to a family where the children attend a nursery or childminder?

I guess it depends on your priorities. I'm a single parent, work full time, take and pick the dc from school 4 days a week, take them to and from their activities, help them with homework and bake with them (albeit probably 1 a week) and cook about 80% of their dinners from scratch. I take them on outings at the weekend and holidays on my own. It is a lot of work, I don't generally sit down before 9.30-10pm and I draw the line at gardening because i hate it! Having said that i dont have to pander to a husband or clear up after them so that saves me a lot of time

You can have your own opinions. Personally I prefer to be financially independent and that if you both have careers is what it leads to later on. We would survive on one but shock horror choose not to. My dc are older though so maybe that’s more acceptable.

I agree OP. Me and my partner were talking about this today. We both agreed that if women had come into the workforce and instead of having everyone do full time roles for less overall, everyone doing 20 ish hours a week for the same pay (so 40 hrs between a couple) would have been brilliant. Unfortunately, one wage not covering the basics is not something that anyone predicted, it’s just such a shame that this couldn’t have benefited everyone.

I'm currently a SAHM to two toddlers and am spent- physically, emotionally and in every other way. I can't wait to go back to work for a bit of 'me' time. Mothers don't just return back to work for the extra income (which helps massively), it's also about doing something for themselves/reclaiming their pre-child/children identity. For me anyway.

for those of you where you both work FT and are happy with this, don't you feel frazzled, aren't you knackered?! I dont have the energy or the mindset to be playing/ baking or whatever with the kids

I would have way less energy for baking and whatever with kids, if I had spent my entire day cleaning and cooking and running after said children.

I grew up in the 70s and 80s. Once I was at school my mum worked 2 days a week.
But we had one bathroom with no shower and a weekly bath.
A coal stove for the whole house no central heating.
A twin tub washing machine, no tumble dryer.
No car.
No TV until I was about 12.
No phone till I was about 8.
Never went out for meals or had takeaways.
Only holidayed in this country ... camping, youth hostelling or staying with relatives.
No extra activities beyond after school clubs.

Expectations are much higher now .... it's not just about affording a home.

My DM worked FT my whole childhood and I am utterly delighted that she did (so did DF). She would have been miserable at home, intellectually completely dissatisfied or making us all do a million projects and we all would have been much more miserable. Choice is a good thing and I know plenty of folk who’ve chosen to forego luxuries and have a SAHP. I choose to work because I am very like my DM. We discussed DH staying home but he also didn’t wish to. I don’t feel frazzled and am genuinely happy with my luck in life (and yes, much of it is luck) working FT with primary aged DC (I did the maternity leave but went back FT with great delight).

@OnlyFoolsnMothers

user1487194234 sorry but I disagree, I’m the main bread winner, fair enough my husband does equal baths, food shops etc but trust me the mental load of a primary school aged child is on the mother- or did we all dream that the pandemic shafted working mothers?!

I have 3 DC so understand the demands My DH and I shared it all equally Our choice and it worked for us ,and in my opinion was a good example to the children If women choose to take all the responsibility so be it Ours are all grown up and doing well and don’t seem traumatised 😃

children can wear hand me downs

That doesn’t really help support women in their retirement does it? 🤦🏻‍♀️

My mum worked part time when I was a child (from about age 9 onwards) but never full time, my dad had his own business and worked long hours, me and my brother spent a lot of time entertaining ourselves during school holidays. I do have memories from when I was small of having mum home all the time.

I think it would be nice to have the choice. Of course it’s great that there more and more good work opportunities for women and it sets a good example to our children that women are equal but I also think it’s a shame that children are put in nursery from 6 months old and don’t spent that quality time with mum/dad.

Women had their independence forcibly removed. Had test lives forcibly restricted and limited. Suffered significant mental suffering as a result. And you think it's sad society has moved away from that?

Your op is quite clearly bemoaning that women work outside the home rather than having no choice but to stay at home - despite your disingenuous thread title, you've not once said how sad it is that men are missing out on being at home instead of working. It's just women you want out of the workplace.

So quite how you can then say that sex equality hadn't even occurred to you escapes me.

Some of these posts are actually pretty sick when you consider what having no rights to exist as an independent human being used to mean for women.

@SnackSizeRaisin

Hand me downs from who? And of course it is, the more people having a shower, the more it costs to heat the water. Or are showers also a luxury in this weird puritanical fantasy?

You are proving my point that what is seen as a modest lifestyle is what has changed! Things like a hot shower every day are exactly the kind of thing that would have been an unimaginable luxury in the 50s. A modest lifestyle would not necessarily have included hot running water or an inside bathroom. If you want these things then they need to be paid for, but yes they are luxuries. Ask anyone over 70 if they had a daily hot shower or bath when they were young.

Mine did but they didn't live in backwards Britain.

@MiddlesexGirl

I grew up in the 70s and 80s. Once I was at school my mum worked 2 days a week. But we had one bathroom with no shower and a weekly bath. A coal stove for the whole house no central heating. A twin tub washing machine, no tumble dryer. No car. No TV until I was about 12. No phone till I was about 8. Never went out for meals or had takeaways. Only holidayed in this country ... camping, youth hostelling or staying with relatives. No extra activities beyond after school clubs.

Expectations are much higher now .... it's not just about affording a home.

How much did your parents buy their house for or how much was their rent, and what were their salaries?

@Asdf12345

It’s a sad state of affairs but ultimately is a casualty of massively improved equality. Once enough women take up the opportunity to earn with effective parity with the male workforce the market sets the cost of living at what most households can afford to pay.

Nope, it's a casualty of an overinflated cost of housing. That's been created not by market forces, but by government policy. In a country like Sweden where the housing market is strictly regulated both parents can work and have time to do the baking and school run as well as spend the first year of the child's life at home before sending the children to small scale, cheap and excellent childcare.

In an ideal world we would be in a situation where a couple could share the working hours equally, i.e. both working part time, and have enough money to run their household. I wouldn't want to go back to the model of one person does all the working, the other stays home - that's risky.

My kids had two full time working parents and we absolutely did bake, grow things, play in the sunshine - it's just getting your priorities right for the time you do have at home with your family.

So the value to society of a parent staying home to look after their child is zero and the value of a childminder, nanny or nursery worker looking after that same child is ..... ?

I don't really understand this tbh. Mothers who stay at home are only out of the workforce for a small portion of their working life, and many women aren't mothers at all.

Loads of people choose to live alone, and it's rare to find couples who stayed at their parents houses before moving in with each other. These changes are surely as much a contributor to house price rises as women entering the job market.