Why is MN so horrible to SAHMs?

[Sweak]

I'm sure this will go down like a lead balloon, but it's been bothering me.

Every post I see written by a sahm, no matter what her issue is, has at least 5 posters telling her she must get a job Or implying she's lazy and even worse 'contributes nothing.'

Lots of posts under the guise of telling women they need to protect themselves financially are criticising this choice (not always but many). I would never dream of criticising a mother for working so why is it acceptable to criticise those who decide to stay at home to be with their children? (I claim zero benefits fyi in case that's a suggestion). I accept that a very very long period out of work will leave you vulnerable if you split due pension, but 5 years or so? The pre school years...I don't think so. Obviously being a sahp is only going to work if you have a decent partner who shares income.

And finally so many posters implying that by being a sahm you are making it basically impossible to be employable ever again unless you run the PTA!

Full disclosure...I'm a sahm, and have been for four years, but I've decided to return to work. I've secured a job for sept (teacher), and got the second job I had an interview for so the suggestion sahm are making themselves unemployable for having a few years out doesn't ring true! However due to MN my confidence about getting a job was so low.

Can't we just support each others choices in life even if they differ to our own?

But my thoughts on the topic:
It is truly terrifying (no exaggeration) to read on here about a woman being deeply unhappy in a relationship (sometimes abusive) and saying she can't leave because she has no finances. 😥

It's suffocating to read. It must be awful to feel so trapped

Also, can’t you see that ‘these comments’ (which anyway didn’t have the meaning you ascribed to them) are not made in a vacuum - they are in direct response to the accusations that those who are not SAHM and advise caution about being so, are automatically jealous.

don't buy that anybody on MN has 'concern' over a random stranger from the Internets financial situation. That's just nonsense.

And yet we have to support each other according to your OP.

Personally the main issue for me is that I had an interesting career and I really didnt want to be the default child carer/ housekeeper.
I watched my DM life chances dwindle , she was a very intelligent woman who bitterly regretted giving up her career.
She wasnt a very good parent as a result
She was financially abused and controlled, not at the start but boiling frog etc

DH and I shared WOH/ SAH so we did both and didnt use CC.
We both managed to have interesting flexible careers and bring up our DC.

Women are constantly pushed into " caring" when its time men took responsibility.
Calling the attitudes to SAHP " misogyny" just reinforces the actual real misogyny which is calling any caring role womens work.

@FloconDeNeige

You’re making a leap there... I didn’t say that SAHMs are ‘hard-of-thinking’; you’ve made that link yourself.

I was referring to those whose seem incapable of imagining that some mothers may not wish to SAH and are thus jealous of those who do. And those who can’t imagine that anyone urging caution at SAH can’t be anything other than jealous.

You are right you didn't actually say that. Hence it wasn't an overt dig.

I had a well paid career before I stopped work when my younger son was 2. I stopped because it was clear he was autistic - he had problems in every basic area of his life sleep eating bowels speaking - it was awful and he has absolutely no signs of autism now.

But It’s totally a lifestyle choice once your kids are at school. Nobody needs to be a sahm.

I do interesting things with my time but really it’s massively self indulgent and I should go back to work really. Weekly, I learn mandarin, do pottery, play a musical instrument, ride horses and the obvious diy, cleaning - that’s basically it’s. it’s the life of Riley.

People who make out like it’s endless slog and “life admin” are completely dismissive of the fact that most people do all that PLUS work. I’m not surprised it gets peoples back up.

can afford to do so/partner is on board, isn't that their choice? If it works for their family what's the issue?

Maybe my view is jaded but 90% of the ones I know either rely on benefits to do this OR (more commonly) their DH is not really on board and they tell my DH they are stressed by being sole breadwinner, dislike being tight financially and would love a bit more money in the family budget....

I think a lot of DH are very on board with a SAHM in the pre school years when childcare costs really are prohibitive and the parent at home really does have their hands full with young children at home all day, but don't think its reasonable when there's far less to do with kids at school.

I won't lie either. I don't care if its judgey, I think it's kind of bone idle to not work at all when children are at school for 30 hours a week.

Calling the attitudes to SAHP " misogyny" just reinforces the actual real misogyny which is calling any caring role womens work.

This is absolutely right. We’ll never achieve true equality of the sexes until this happens. More men need to take on the role of SAHP, if a family decides they want a SAHP.

@FrozenVag

I had a well paid career before I stopped work when my younger son was 2. I stopped because it was clear he was autistic - he had problems in every basic area of his life sleep eating bowels speaking - it was awful and he has absolutely no signs of autism now.

But It’s totally a lifestyle choice once your kids are at school. Nobody needs to be a sahm.

I do interesting things with my time but really it’s massively self indulgent and I should go back to work really. Weekly, I learn mandarin, do pottery, play a musical instrument, ride horses and the obvious diy, cleaning - that’s basically it’s. it’s the life of Riley.

People who make out like it’s endless slog and “life admin” are completely dismissive of the fact that most people do all that PLUS work. I’m not surprised it gets peoples back up.

I do agree with that and can see your point. That is annoying but I haven't really seen these posts when women suggest they are really busy with life admin?

Perhaps someone will be along in a moment to suggest you should get a job as you are leaving yourself vulnerable...despite not knowing your financial situation, your relationship or your understanding of the implications on pensions etc.
Or even if you stated you have a problem!

On the vast majority of threads on which SAHMs are told to get a job, it's because they have posted about the instability of their relationship, and they really need a job. They need financial support. For most women, being a SAHM is a major gamble.

You are in an incredibly privileged situation: your partner supports you and the DC; you are financially secure; you have a good education and qualifications; you have a highly employable skill set and can return to work almost at will. I'm happy it's worked out for you.

But even in your situation, you have missed out on 4 - 5 years of pay rises, of career advancement, training, and possibly jobs at senior management level in the medium term. You have not been contributing to your pension. All that could turn out not to matter much, or it could come back to bite you. (All life choices, to work or stay at home, have their potential consequences.)

I don't think MN is awful to SAHM. I think it rightly recognises that it's a gamble that goes horribly wrong for a lot of women, and does exactly the right thing by advising women in vulnerable circumstances to seek financial independence.

Also, I can only assume that someone with children in school who spends their days riding horses and learning Mandarin, has money behind them in their own right. It’s otherwise a precarious ‘carefree’ existence.

If DH spent his days skiing (we live in a ski resort), fishing and watching Netflix whilst I were the breadwinner, I think I’d get pretty sick of that fairly quickly. Even if someone loves their job, carrying the burden of being the sole provider does introduce an element of stress. That’s one thing if the other person is at home with a baby as childcare is too expensive, but quite another if they’re doing nothing other than pleasing themselves.

@Grumblesigh

On the vast majority of threads on which SAHMs are told to get a job, it's because they have posted about the instability of their relationship, and they really need a job. They need financial support. For most women, being a SAHM is a major gamble.

You are in an incredibly privileged situation: your partner supports you and the DC; you are financially secure; you have a good education and qualifications; you have a highly employable skill set and can return to work almost at will. I'm happy it's worked out for you.

But even in your situation, you have missed out on 4 - 5 years of pay rises, of career advancement, training, and possibly jobs at senior management level in the medium term. You have not been contributing to your pension. All that could turn out not to matter much, or it could come back to bite you. (All life choices, to work or stay at home, have their potential consequences.)

I don't think MN is awful to SAHM. I think it rightly recognises that it's a gamble that goes horribly wrong for a lot of women, and does exactly the right thing by advising women in vulnerable circumstances to seek financial independence.

I agree it isn't going to work out for everyone. I agree some women might need the sort of advice you are describing. However it is literally on every sahm thread no matter what some sort of criticism. Or even when a sahm in a difficult position acknowledges she might need more financial independence various posters keep piling on, having a go at her decision at the time...what do they want..her to get in a time machine?!

Yes I acknowledge I've missed out on progression etc..I knew that at the time and didn't (and still don't) care

Just wait till you are back at work op, then you will start only noticing the 'you clearly don't love your children if you are choosing to work' comments. There are a lot of them.

Honestly, before I had children those comments used to really upset me. I always knew I could never afford to be a SAHM as I was always the higher earner. The comments that used to grate me the most were sahms telling wohms that they were part time parents.

Now I have DC I am in a different situation, my dp got a better paid job so the need for me to work was not as important as before but I actuslly chose to return to work full time. I got promoted whilst on maternity leave and I love my job. I am now not bothered at all by the comments, if people want to think I love dc less because I think they will benefit from a childcare setting with other children, especially after this year with so little interaction with people outside of the home, so be it.

@FloconDeNeige

Also, I can only assume that someone with children in school who spends their days riding horses and learning Mandarin, has money behind them in their own right. It’s otherwise a precarious ‘carefree’ existence.

If DH spent his days skiing (we live in a ski resort), fishing and watching Netflix whilst I were the breadwinner, I think I’d get pretty sick of that fairly quickly. Even if someone loves their job, carrying the burden of being the sole provider does introduce an element of stress. That’s one thing if the other person is at home with a baby as childcare is too expensive, but quite another if they’re doing nothing other than pleasing themselves.

@FrozenVag

PP has done as I predicted

**Also, I can only assume that someone with children in school who spends their days riding horses and learning Mandarin, has money behind them in their own right. It’s otherwise a precarious ‘carefree’ existence.

There's your warning...you are in a precarious situation despite knowing nothing about your life and not asking for advice!

This proves my point...these comments on vulnerability are stated constantly when often not appropriate to the posters comments

@Fatladyslim

Just wait till you are back at work op, then you will start only noticing the 'you clearly don't love your children if you are choosing to work' comments. There are a lot of them.

Honestly, before I had children those comments used to really upset me. I always knew I could never afford to be a SAHM as I was always the higher earner. The comments that used to grate me the most were sahms telling wohms that they were part time parents.

Now I have DC I am in a different situation, my dp got a better paid job so the need for me to work was not as important as before but I actuslly chose to return to work full time. I got promoted whilst on maternity leave and I love my job. I am now not bothered at all by the comments, if people want to think I love dc less because I think they will benefit from a childcare setting with other children, especially after this year with so little interaction with people outside of the home, so be it.

Yes it would appear women can't win!

I think it goes both ways with some SAHM's looking down on working mothers as being parents.

Its very personal. Everyone should be free to make their own choices for what works for them. Personally, I would hate to be a SAHM, I love my job and think theres a lot of social and mental health benefits to going out to work. We could afford to live comfortably enough on my husbands wage alone but it wouldn't be the fantastic lifestyle and freedom we have now with 2 good wages coming in.

"You're just jealous" is such a facile, puerile argument that I'm annoyed with myself even for acknowledging it in this one sentence.

it would appear women can't win!

Ooh, you noticed. Yet you started yet another SAHM/WOHM thread...

@DrSbaitso

"You're just jealous" is such a facile, puerile argument that I'm annoyed with myself even for acknowledging it in this one sentence.

it would appear women can't win!

Ooh, you noticed. Yet you started yet another SAHM/WOHM thread...

No my thread wasn't a sahm Vs wohm thread at all. Its very clear from my op I think both are fine choices.

The voting is 50 / 50

I reckon we do see the posts that attack our position and the site feels against one group

It’s pretty though both sides feel got at

Even

I literally said that I’d assume the person has money behind them in their own right. Because if they don’t then it’s utterly and patently obvious that a life spent doing leisure activities funded by someone else, is the definition of a ‘precarious existence’.

I think a lot of DH are very on board with a SAHM in the pre school years when childcare costs really are prohibitive and the parent at home really does have their hands full with young children at home all day, but don't think its reasonable when there's far less to do with kids at school.
I think the issue here is often the working parent wants the other parent to return to work but doesn't want to pick up a share of the stuff the SAHP has been doing.
For all the comments on SAHP threads by working women saying "I do all of that and go to work" there's a thread by a woman doing it all and complaining about it because their DH doesn't do anything except work, the odd bedtime or bath time and usually partake in a time consuming hobby.

I won't lie either. I don't care if its judgey, I think it's kind of bone idle to not work at all when children are at school for 30 hours a week.
Too right I took the option that was easiest for me, and easiest for the family. According to MN wisdom my Husband is going to leave me at some point for some interesting working woman anyway so why make life hard for myself in the mean time?

I am a huge advocate for choice but what concerns me sometimes are the factors influencing these choices. In some cases societal expectations and stereotypes play a part - which is one reason why we see so few SAHDs.

I also agree about the impact on career - in most sectors taking years out of work ( for whatever reason) will make it challenging to return. Not impossible but challenging.

Its very clear from my op I think both are fine choices.

It is rarely a topic that goes well.

@FloconDeNeige

I literally said that I’d assume the person has money behind them in their own right. Because if they don’t then it’s utterly and patently obvious that a life spent doing leisure activities funded by someone else, is the definition of a ‘precarious existence’.

I just don't think it's necessary to constantly go on about this. The poster is clearly intelligent and actually knows her own circumstances so can work out for herself.

I'm afraid whether it was your intention or not I read your comment as yet another one in patronising tone telling a woman she's vulnerable. It reads as faux concern.

@DrSbaitso

Its very clear from my op I think both are fine choices.

It is rarely a topic that goes well.

So let's just never mention it?

As I said it's not a sahm Vs wohm thread at all.