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?

DelBocaVista - Well your research sounds fascinating to me and it’s often something I’ve wondered about in terms of my own life.

I grew up in another European country which is more traditional than the U.K. and it was a remote farming community, so practically to survive, women were SAHM (as there were not a lot of options) and men worked outdoors. So, I sometimes wonder how much my early experiences kicked in, once our own children came along. I really couldn’t say even in terms of my own life, let alone anyone else’s! Also, my husband is from a culture where, even today, people would shame him eg “Four children and you’re sending your wife out to work.” They’d is a huge male identity issue involved in financially providing for your family and that’s hard to shift.

On SAHM threads, the conversation will inevitably turn to “what value do you expect as a SAHM?” ... “It is of no value to society as it’s not taxable” etc etc, It just goes round and round, but what I do find interesting, is that countries where you would say women’s rights are more restricted, they do seem to have a deeper understanding of the value of mothers being at home home, in the sense as it feels more respected, rather than called into question as it is in these threads.

OP you are very lucky to be able to take time off while DC is young and return to a professional job without too much difficulty.

I know many women who were sold that idea, work hard and get a good job, have babies and stay at home until they start school, return to said job. It hasn’t worked for anyone I know. That’s not to say don’t be a SAHP but presuming that you’ll be able to come out of it with the confidence and relevancy to resume your career is foolish.

@thepeopleversuswork

**But I do think that those in the camp that say SAHM is the best case scenario need to take on board that their fundamental case, which draws on a lot of moral guilt, vague feelings and old-fashioned judgement, is actually pretty unscientific.

Just to be clear this thread was not started to suggest being a sahm is best. It's not always best, it depends on individual circumstances

The thread is about the negativity on here and a lack of acceptance of people choosing to live differently from the majority (as the majority of mothers work)

@Piepinkie

OP you are very lucky to be able to take time off while DC is young and return to a professional job without too much difficulty.

I know many women who were sold that idea, work hard and get a good job, have babies and stay at home until they start school, return to said job. It hasn’t worked for anyone I know. That’s not to say don’t be a SAHP but presuming that you’ll be able to come out of it with the confidence and relevancy to resume your career is foolish.

I think it will depend largely on how long you take out. For me I'm going back when my eldest starts school. If I wait for my youngest daughter to start school I think I would have problems returning to teaching.

I think if you are a sahp and want to return to the workplace you need to consider your length of time out for sure

*It's motherhood and apple pie to say there should be less negativity about people's choices. Of course there should, that's blindingly obvious.

The question is why these choices are still so emotive and why people find it so difficult, on both sides, to be non-judgemental.

What's interesting to me is that the primary argument made on the SAHM camp (to put it crudely) is a moral one: ie that its at some level neglectful or risks damage to leave your children in the care of others. While the primary argument on the WOHM camp is an economic one.

From my perspective as a WOHM what it boils down to is that I think the argument against us is primarily unsound. Its based on vague moral hangups and suspicion. What upsets me personally about the charges are that the argument that we are neglecting our children is made routinely but without any real supporting evidence, despite numerous studies having been done into the topic over many years. It's all based on vague "it stands to reason" logic.

And the motives attributed to us are often just that we want a bigger car/nice shoes etc. Which, if you're someone who has no choice but to work, is actually quite offensive.

On the WOHM side there are a lot of goady comments about how being a SAHM "rots your brain" etc which are just nasty and unnecessary, I grant you. But there is a genuine issue about women being made vulnerable by being over-dependent on their partner. Which has a potentially severe knock-on effect on the children.

Net/net, there's a not of kneejerk, emotional reactions on both sides and we probably all need to take a step back a bit.

But I do think that those in the camp that say SAHM is the best case scenario need to take on board that their fundamental case, which draws on a lot of moral guilt, vague feelings and old-fashioned judgement, is actually pretty unscientific.*

An outstanding post that needs repeating. 👏🏻

On SAHM threads, the conversation will inevitably turn to “what value do you expect as a SAHM?” ... “It is of no value to society as it’s not taxable” etc etc, It just goes round and round, but what I do find interesting, is that countries where you would say women’s rights are more restricted, they do seem to have a deeper understanding of the value of mothers being at home home, in the sense as it feels more respected, rather than called into question as it is in these threads.

You admit that those countries oppress women. Do you not see that they do not value or respect women for being at home, they just say they do to keep the women quiet? Do you think there is no connection between your understanding of the nebulous concept of "value" and the oppression of women?

I grew up in a religious community; irrelevant which one because they all do this (on the conservative denominations). Women were not permitted to do various things in the community or take any of the status in the household, and were expected to stay home with kids, and it was ALWAYS claimed that it was because that role was SO HIGHLY VALUED AND RESPECTED. Try arguing with them about it and see how much they value your input then, how much respect you get.

I'm sure that those communities and cultures really do believe they are showing so much RESPECT and VALUE but it's quite clear that they're deluding themselves.

I still don't know what this "value" is supposed to look like, but if it looks like one of those cultures, I don't want it. Doesn't feel like any respect I'd care to have.

I don't want financial incentives for sah. To me, societal value would mean not being called lazy or boring or hearing that I'm a setting a bad example to my children. Stop saying that my choice makes me inferior to someone who is in paid employment. I don't tell total strangers that I would be bored stiff if I did their particular job all day - it's rude and unnecessary.
Don't assume at dinner parties that a sahm has got nothing of interest to contribute to a conversation. Realise that not everyone is defined by what they do - having a ft job does not make a person automatically more interesting to talk to or of more value to society. Lots of people contribute to society in other ways besides the financial.

@stickydancefloor

It’s not being horrible. There’s a huge number of parents on here and many will be coming from a place of experience. Experience of being a SAHP and potentially experienced financial difficulties because of it. It’s almost like a warning system and a very valid one at that. I do think you leave yourself extremely vulnerable if you lose all financial independence. It’s all very well your partner covering everything while you stay at home but what if the worst happens or they leave for someone else? Where does that leave you?

I do think it’s a shame that highly educated and successful women do give it all up to SAHP. There’s so many opportunities out there nowadays and encouragement for women in the workplace it just seems like it’s wasted

I agree with a PP who mentioned the busy managing life admin, dentist appointments, paying bills. Really how much time a day do you spend doing those things? Most people nowadays have all bills on direct debit and unless you have a chronic condition it’s unlikely you’re ringing the dentist every day

My experience is that it all went well staying home with small kids. I suspect most of the time it goes well for other women (and some men) too. The doom and gloom seems to be coming from another place, projecting their own insecurities about their relationship or ability to trust their partner perhaps. I rightly trusted my DH but understand this isn’t possible for some people.

I’m degree educated and due to childcare costs I couldn’t afford to work, or rather I’d be out of pocket working by hundreds each month. Unplanned pregnancy so not deliberate. I didn’t enjoy it and found it much harder than any job I’ve had. Again this varies and some enjoy it or find it easy. I retrained in another career while off and volunteered before going back to work.

I’d support state subsidised childcare for all women as that would help many like me have the choice. It’s also a net benefit to the economy. I’d also like to see more flexibility for both parents to work part time or flexi time and from home. Kids do benefit from time with parents. Full time childcare isn’t the ideal, even when the kids are in school. Having a balance of work and parenting that is the choice of the parents is the ideal.

[quote Sweak]@thepeopleversuswork

**But I do think that those in the camp that say SAHM is the best case scenario need to take on board that their fundamental case, which draws on a lot of moral guilt, vague feelings and old-fashioned judgement, is actually pretty unscientific.

Just to be clear this thread was not started to suggest being a sahm is best. It's not always best, it depends on individual circumstances

The thread is about the negativity on here and a lack of acceptance of people choosing to live differently from the majority (as the majority of mothers work)[/quote]
I understand that... but you have to put this in context.

For a very long time being a SAHM was the default - for middle class families at least -- and we still have a long moral and social legacy that says its optimal.

The debate seems to have shifted a lot as women have taken on more financial autonomy. So very few people will openly say its bad for a women to work outside the home nowadays, but its always couched in the context of "of course you have to do what you have to do but its best if there can be a parent at home". There is still an assumption that SAHM is the best case scenario and working is a necessary compromise.

Therefore the rhetoric around it becomes that its OK for a woman to work but non-optimal and you get the whole discussion about people scaling back their outgoings and living more frugally etc in order to facilitate there being a parent at home.

There's still very much an article of faith that a woman should remain at home if she can do so without damaging her economic security.

So I find it slightly specious when people come on and say "why is everyone so horrible to SAHMs." I think some women are horrible to SAHMs and sometimes gratuitously. But you have to remember a) some of us have fought long battles for it to be considered acceptable for us to work (my mother was more or less forced out of the workforce when she was pregnant) b) some of us have to work and c) there's fundamentally no evidence that having a working mother disadvantages children in any way. When people point out correctly that women who are entirely financially dependent on a man are at risk, it normally triggers a furious response along the lines of "how can you leave your two year old with a stranger" etc. It's not a fair fight. Moral judgements - with no empirical basis in truth -- are being levelled against economic ones.

The moral baseline is still a SAHM, even though SAHMs may now be in the minority. It's WOHMs who have had to do all the running here, and its still us who face the judgement by society.

Of course its totally understandable that SAHMs seek recognition and dignity for their choices and they have every right to defend themselves against people accusing them of being thick or lazy. But I'm slightly suspicious when they come up and say "why's everyone having a pop at us". We're not: SAHMs are still considered the blueprint and the most acceptable face of motherhood and its still us working mums that are having to argue our case again and again.

@MrsHuntGeneNotJeremyObviously

I don't want financial incentives for sah. To me, societal value would mean not being called lazy or boring or hearing that I'm a setting a bad example to my children. Stop saying that my choice makes me inferior to someone who is in paid employment. I don't tell total strangers that I would be bored stiff if I did their particular job all day - it's rude and unnecessary. Don't assume at dinner parties that a sahm has got nothing of interest to contribute to a conversation. Realise that not everyone is defined by what they do - having a ft job does not make a person automatically more interesting to talk to or of more value to society. Lots of people contribute to society in other ways besides the financial.

Exactly this

@stickydancefloor why do you see it as wasted if highly educated women choose to do what they see as best for their family.

I don't see it as a waste at all as I know my understanding of the humanities such as literature and history will benefit my children in terms of the activities and lessons I can plan and that my appreciation of these subjects will hopefully rub off on them just as I did with my parents. Could I use my skills outside the family? yes but I also know how much I benefited from my mother being at home.

Also though I know not everyone will agree with this. If I am able to do 90% of the chores and admin during the school and work hours it again benefits the whole family by freeing up time to do fun things and also allowing more flexibility in how we spend the time.

There some truth is your OP. However the word horrible is debatable I don’t think anybody is wrong to state once your children are able to go to school what are you doing all day? Or high school children.. and your a SAHM obviously it’s a vast difference between small children under 5 and teens.

The argument about CC is endless and we could all say that it’s not worth it which would mean most of us would be a SAHM.

In this current climate I do think your partner would have to have a very good salary to support 2+ children.

@thepeopleversuswork I largely agree with your comments. I do agree women are judged for using full time nursery.

I'm also not saying everyone is having a pop at sahms. It's MN! The vitrol on here, I have found, is not reflected in RL.

Telling a SAHM that they are making themselves financially vulnerable or asking them what they do all day implies that they are lazy and lack sense.

Telling a WOHP “you’ll never get this time back” “I couldn’t work full time, I would miss them too much” implies that they are doing wrong by their children.

You can’t win either way but I know which “insult” would hurt me more.

@Bul21ia

There some truth is your OP. However the word horrible is debatable I don’t think anybody is wrong to state once your children are able to go to school what are you doing all day? Or high school children.. and your a SAHM obviously it’s a vast difference between small children under 5 and teens.

The argument about CC is endless and we could all say that it’s not worth it which would mean most of us would be a SAHM.

In this current climate I do think your partner would have to have a very good salary to support 2+ children.

I don't understand why it concerns anyone else though what you might do with your time whilst your kids are at school. If people aren't claiming benefits then what's the issue? Or is it about not paying taxes?

@Piepinkie

Telling a SAHM that they are making themselves financially vulnerable or asking them what they do all day implies that they are lazy and lack sense.

Telling a WOHP “you’ll never get this time back” “I couldn’t work full time, I would miss them too much” implies that they are doing wrong by their children.

You can’t win either way but I know which “insult” would hurt me more.

I think both are equally offensive. I don't like having my intelligence insulted any more than my parenting skills questioned.

@Piepinkie I do agree with you there. Maybe my opinion on this subject is bias due to having a SAHM when growing up and also remembering the girl I au paired for when I first moved to the UK. She really would miss her mother terribly and get upset over it. Sadly I also found out the mother passed away when she was 14. All this has made me realize I would want to be at home with the children etc and I guess I am lucky I did find a fiancé that agrees

@Piepinkie

OP you are very lucky to be able to take time off while DC is young and return to a professional job without too much difficulty.

I know many women who were sold that idea, work hard and get a good job, have babies and stay at home until they start school, return to said job. It hasn’t worked for anyone I know. That’s not to say don’t be a SAHP but presuming that you’ll be able to come out of it with the confidence and relevancy to resume your career is foolish.

When you say it hasn't worked, do you mean these women were unable to return to any workplace and work back up to earning a reasonable salary? I'm curious as in this position, had a "good" job, will be returning after career break with no illusions of being at same level but the hope of ultimately working back to there. I reached that level after only a few years in a new industry and have around 35 years of my working life left so although I expect to have lost out financially somewhat I'd hope that I'm not a total lost cause!

DrSbaitso - when I talk about “value,” I don’t mean it in terms of any assumed superiority or judgement about anyone else! I just mean that surely everyone has value. Whatever you do, if you’re doing it well, it has value.

If you saw no value in what you were doing , you would surely make a change, wouldn’t you? Maybe what I’m talking about is motivation and self-fulfilment. There’s no prescription for this and everyone will find it in different ways.

Never on a MN thread have I ever insinuated that women who go to work are neglecting their children. I would never say this because I don’t think that, frankly. I’m sure some people probably do think that, but I’m not responsible for them.

I only get drawn into these threads because I’m fascinated (and slightly alarmed) that there do seem to be women out there who have very strong views about SAHMs and the need to eradicate any value to this. I haven’t come across this in real life, genuinely. In 18 years and four children, I’ve obviously come into contact with a lot of women in a similar situation to me - probably hundreds. It’s a particular demographic of SAHMs yes, but culturally quite varied. But I can only think of a couple of divorces over the years. Also, what I’m seeing now as we approach our mid /late 40s is that it is possible to get back into some form of work. Not the corporate world, no, but I’m surprised to see what friends find themselves doing these days as the kids get older. Life goes in phases really. I’ve done another MA recently because I will need this to do what I think I’m going to do in the next few years. Yes, it’s been a long time since I worked in a professional capacity and I’m still not sure whether I want to go back into that, but I’m keeping an open mind for now.

I only get drawn into these threads because I’m fascinated (and slightly alarmed) that there do seem to be women out there who have very strong views about SAHMs and the need to eradicate any value to this.

But there’s not been any of that on this particular thread. It’s mostly been a discussion around the risks of choosing the SAH position.

I don’t recall seeing anyone ‘eradicating the value of SAHMs.

@FloconDeNeige

I only get drawn into these threads because I’m fascinated (and slightly alarmed) that there do seem to be women out there who have very strong views about SAHMs and the need to eradicate any value to this.

But there’s not been any of that on this particular thread. It’s mostly been a discussion around the risks of choosing the SAH position.

I don’t recall seeing anyone ‘eradicating the value of SAHMs.

It's noteable in its omission though. On these threads there is rarely any discussion of the potential benefits or value of a SAHP, but the emphasis is entirely on the negative impacts.

@FloconDeNeige

I only get drawn into these threads because I’m fascinated (and slightly alarmed) that there do seem to be women out there who have very strong views about SAHMs and the need to eradicate any value to this.

But there’s not been any of that on this particular thread. It’s mostly been a discussion around the risks of choosing the SAH position.

I don’t recall seeing anyone ‘eradicating the value of SAHMs.

It's hard to think of any vocation which has been less "value eradicated" than being a SAHM. Caring for children is afforded an almost religious veneration. The prevailing doctrine, for millennia, has been to value the role of women looking after children.

In recent decades some people have pointed out that having motherhood as a sole vocation without financial agency makes women financially vulnerable. And some people can be quite vocally critical of women who choose not to work for the entire duration of their child-rearing career. But that is not at odds with valuing motherhood. These are two totally separate points.

On these threads there is rarely any discussion of the potential benefits or value of a SAHP, but the emphasis is entirely on the negative impacts.
Isn't that because people are wanting women women make informed choices, so will tend to be discussing the practical short term and long term implications of the choice?

If someone is thinking of becoming a SAHP then they've probably already thought about the benefits such as no wraparound care, having a parent on top of the housework etc, but they might not have considered the effect of 10 years missing pension contributions, especially if they're unmarried so are relying on DP's good will and his word that he'll share his.

@LolaSmiles

**but they might not have considered the effect of 10 years missing pension contributions, especially if they're unmarried so are relying on DP's good will and his word that he'll share his.

Whilst this sounds well meaning, I do think it is patronising. Being a sahm is a risk just like lots of decisions in life are. Just because you are a sahm or thinking of becoming one, doesn't mean you don't understand basics like pensions

Just because you are a sahm or thinking of becoming one, doesn't mean you don't understand basics like pensions

It’s very common to find SAHP who’ve taken that decision without thinking about pension provision. I’ve seen it time and again on here.

I mean, it’s an issue for working people also, very few of us pay enough attention to our provision. But actively leaving the workforce for a period of time has a big knock on effect. Which many are doing absolutely nothing to mitigate.

Pension poverty is a big issue for women. Their working patterns play a big role in that.