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?

@FloconDeNeige

I had a career I loved, but it paled into insignificance when the kids came along.

Good for you, but we’re not all the same. I feel my career is more of a calling really, at least personally speaking. And someone’s got to make new medicines after all. The love I have for my work doesn’t diminish the love I have for my children. In fact, I feel immensely fortunate that I have both.

Me too. I bloody love my job! Doesn't mean I don't also love DS!

Of course, I wouldn't suggest otherwise.
Was just highlighting how we are all different.
That sometimes a woman does want to give up a career, not that she should.

[quote Sweak]@thepeopleversuswork

But while that remains the "template" for the optimal marriage its always going to be problematic for those of us who don't want to live like this. It makes it much harder for those of us who really value our own financial autonomy to argue the case that men should support our financial autonomy in a range of ways. Such as supporting our right to work full time and supporting on the domestic front.

Who is viewing this as the "template for the optimal marriage"? I'm confused by this, can you clarify your comments?[/quote]
I suppose the "template" point comes down to the perspective that it is always seen as optimal for one of the parents to be at home with the children. It's rarely stated that this has to be the mother but in most cases it almost always is.

I still feel that this is something a lot of people feel and it informs attitude to sex roles within the home. Yes it may be correct that more women work than SAH full time. But there are still very few female breadwinners and it still prompts moral outrage in a lot of people when a woman works FT and "outsources" care of her children. You see it on here on a daily basis (and on this thread).

When posters like @paloma10 talk about their experience of having a husband who "prefers" that they are at home full time with the children it sounds like a fairly good deal and no doubt it works for her and her family. But in reality for a lot of people having a husband who prefers his wife not to work and insists that his primary role is as the provider would be pretty problematic. It wouldn't work for me at all. And it does concern me at a societal level that so many people still see it as the gold standard.

I don't begrudge anyone the right to live like this on a personal level. But I suppose I feel that this particular rather benign version of "traditional family values" still underpins and perpetuates a broader distrust of working mothers which drips through to perspectives on here such as the poster who assumed that nasty comments about SAHMs were driven by two-income families feeling guilty about not being able to live more frugally. And so on and so forth.

If I felt that SAHMs were more tolerant and open towards WOHMs and if I felt their arguments held more water I might be more prepared to listen to them complaining that we have it in for them. But I'm still told on a daily basis on here that I shouldn't have had children because I'm not prepared to look after them etc. So my sympathy is somewhat limited.

We may be going round and round in circles here: I'm in total agreement with you that WOHMs are sometimes pretty catty towards SAHMS and we need to take this seriously. But there is still a lot of judgement towards WOHMs so I think SAHMs moaning that they are the victims of the piece is in fairly poor form.

Tbh, I think it's narrow mindedness, assumptions and misunderstanding.
If you tell your story/ side/ philosophy, there is always someone telling you how you are wrong, from sah and woh.

I chose to be a sahm for quite some time, however, I'm bloody glad the mainly female nurses who cared for my dh recently didn't make the same choice.
That's one example as it's close to home atm.
The female teachers who also had a calling, and the thousands of other women doing jobs that we need them to do.

@thepeopleversuswork

But in reality for a lot of people having a husband who prefers his wife not to work and insists that his primary role is as the provider would be pretty problematic.

I think any husband insisting would be problematic. That's controlling. Again there's a difference between having a preferance and insisting.

If I felt that SAHMs were more tolerant and open towards WOHMs and if I felt their arguments held more water I might be more prepared to listen to them complaining that we have it in for them. But I'm still told on a daily basis on here that I shouldn't have had children because I'm not prepared to look after them etc. So my sympathy is somewhat limited.

Just a reminder..I started the thread that MN is horrible to SAHMs...so I'm complaining I, yet I have been wholly supportive of women's right to work and not once said anything negative. We aren't all slagging off wohms. I actually don't believe it's always best to be a sahm. If I did I wouldn't be putting some of mine into childcare in sept.

I'm not sure why you feel sahms need a "watertight argument" to justify their choices?

If I felt that SAHMs were more tolerant and open towards WOHMs and if I felt their arguments held more water I might be more prepared to listen to them complaining that we have it in for them. But I'm still told on a daily basis on here that I shouldn't have had children because I'm not prepared to look after them etc. So my sympathy is somewhat limited.

Plenty of them are. I'd say the predominant view from the SAHP on this thread is positive towards WAHM. SAHM are the minority and the negative viewpoint from some isn't the standard for all.

@5zeds

Comparison really is the thief of joy.

Exactly! I couldn’t care less what other women do. I’m happy and secure in my choices. My husband and kids are happy too. I’m really not interested in the snotty opinions of others. It’s mostly just projection anyway.

I think the answer is not to jump to conclusions so quickly and take responsibility for what you type.
Case in point
My "treating SAHM/ WOH as domestic appliances" was jumped on unfairly but only towards SAHM.
I clearly mean that abusive men do that to women whatever their employment status but no doubt it will be rehashed as being nasty to SAHMs on another thread.
Op clearly only saw the bit about it relating to SAHMs as thats her focus.
I havent received an apology either.
Lets own our defensiveness and stop pushing our own buttons.

Hands up
I would never be a SAHM due to my concerns about my own financial security.
Its my issue.
Hell would freeze over before I gave up my job.
It doesnt mean that I think others shouldnt be a SAHM.
They are adults and can make their own choices.
If one woman says they WOH because of this and another is a SAHM because of that, lets accept that their choices relate to them not us
My focus is that there are so many lazy arse men who are not pulling their weight in parenting.
Lets all get behind that.

A very good friend of mine who works in childrens services is adamant that under fathering, abuse/ DV is the biggest issue we face after child poverty.
Lets pat our selves on the back, as mothers we are doing a fantastic job and its time to hold men to account.
No not your good husband and father if thats what he is but the those who are lacking because they have had poor role models.

@Templetreebreeze

I think the answer is not to jump to conclusions so quickly and take responsibility for what you type. Case in point My "treating SAHM/ WOH as domestic appliances" was jumped on unfairly but only towards SAHM. I clearly mean that abusive men do that to women whatever their employment status but no doubt it will be rehashed as being nasty to SAHMs on another thread. Op clearly only saw the bit about it relating to SAHMs as thats her focus. I havent received an apology either. Lets own our defensiveness and stop pushing our own buttons.

Hands up
I would never be a SAHM due to my concerns about my own financial security.
Its my issue.
Hell would freeze over before I gave up my job.
It doesnt mean that I think others shouldnt be a SAHM.
They are adults and can make their own choices.
If one woman says they WOH because of this and another is a SAHM because of that, lets accept that their choices relate to them not us
My focus is that there are so many lazy arse men who are not pulling their weight in parenting.
Lets all get behind that.

I am sorry I misinterpreted your point. I shouldn't skim read.

@Templetreebreeze

I think the answer is not to jump to conclusions so quickly and take responsibility for what you type. Case in point My "treating SAHM/ WOH as domestic appliances" was jumped on unfairly but only towards SAHM. I clearly mean that abusive men do that to women whatever their employment status but no doubt it will be rehashed as being nasty to SAHMs on another thread. Op clearly only saw the bit about it relating to SAHMs as thats her focus. I havent received an apology either. Lets own our defensiveness and stop pushing our own buttons.

Hands up
I would never be a SAHM due to my concerns about my own financial security.
Its my issue.
Hell would freeze over before I gave up my job.
It doesnt mean that I think others shouldnt be a SAHM.
They are adults and can make their own choices.
If one woman says they WOH because of this and another is a SAHM because of that, lets accept that their choices relate to them not us
My focus is that there are so many lazy arse men who are not pulling their weight in parenting.
Lets all get behind that.

I'm sorry people took your comment wrong. Didn't myself, and I've mostly been a sahm. If I see it rehashed I'll argue it.

I consider myself very lucky with my dh and it does astound me the stories I read on here.
There are useless men because they are brought up that way, both parents are responsible for their outcomes in life, not just the mother.
This is what needs to change.

Thanks @Sweak

consider myself very lucky with my dh and it does astound me the stories I read on here.
There are useless men because they are brought up that way, both parents are responsible for their outcomes in life, not just the mother.
This is what needs to change.
The problem is that its often used as a stick to beat other women.
We need much stricter laws as regards coercion, control and DV.
Also child maintenance-some of the stories are shocking.

I absolutely agree that fathers need holding to account much, much more. They only need to take the kids to the park once in a while and they’re ’amazing’. Bollocks to that.

@FloconDeNeige

I absolutely agree that fathers need holding to account much, much more. They only need to take the kids to the park once in a while and they’re ’amazing’. Bollocks to that.

If I had a pound for every. " you are so lucky" Nah raise your standards !

I get shot down in flames sometimes when I say this, but the bar is getting lower by the generation.
We had our first ds in 1991 and even as a sahm I got more respect, love and comitment than so many on here now, it's so sad to read.
Are fathers really that crap now?

Honestly? Mothers are.

@Templetreebreeze

A very good friend of mine who works in childrens services is adamant that under fathering, abuse/ DV is the biggest issue we face after child poverty. Lets pat our selves on the back, as mothers we are doing a fantastic job and its time to hold men to account. No not your good husband and father if thats what he is but the those who are lacking because they have had poor role models.

This is so important it bears repeating. Instead of turning on other women just doing their best, why don't we use that energy to criticise men who just won't step up. Any mother raising her child, whether at home or working, is worth a million of the many dead beat dads out there.

When I worked, in my previous life (!), it was in a role connected to child protection. There were babies being born addicted to heroin and we’d have to find emergency foster placements for them. So much child abuse and trafficking. Gang culture is hard to penetrate. I remember one boy who was claiming to be 15 (through I suspect he was older but there was no proof as he was from an African country with unreliable papers) - he had already fathered 4 children with 4 different girls! What kind of role model can these children hope for?

There seems to be an emerging culture in the U.K. now where men can father children and take no responsibility. If they can get away with it, they use “equality” against women - ie the entire burden of having children (practical and financial) falls to her because while they are quite happy to watch her get back to work at the earliest opportunity, they also don’t step up at home or take on any of the caring. They just remain in their own selfish “headspace” and let the woman do it all, while patronising her that she “has it all.”The whole separate finances thing, the way I see it, is misogyny dressed up as “women’s independence.” Couples may start out on equal- ish pay in their 20s, but its invariably the woman, as the childbearing sex, who takes the hit once children come along and by their 30s the pay gap has widened. The woman who is likely to be the lower earner, spends more time (and therefore money) with the children and is just more tuned in to their needs. Some men are barely impacted by having children at all - they sail on smoothly with “their” money, while the wife takes the financial hit of childbirth and juggles childcare with returning to work. There is a basic lack of integrity with these men and where this scenario exists, I don’t see it as progress at all.

@paloma10

When I worked, in my previous life (!), it was in a role connected to child protection. There were babies being born addicted to heroin and we’d have to find emergency foster placements for them. So much child abuse and trafficking. Gang culture is hard to penetrate. I remember one boy who was claiming to be 15 (through I suspect he was older but there was no proof as he was from an African country with unreliable papers) - he had already fathered 4 children with 4 different girls! What kind of role model can these children hope for?

There seems to be an emerging culture in the U.K. now where men can father children and take no responsibility. If they can get away with it, they use “equality” against women - ie the entire burden of having children (practical and financial) falls to her because while they are quite happy to watch her get back to work at the earliest opportunity, they also don’t step up at home or take on any of the caring. They just remain in their own selfish “headspace” and let the woman do it all, while patronising her that she “has it all.”The whole separate finances thing, the way I see it, is misogyny dressed up as “women’s independence.” Couples may start out on equal- ish pay in their 20s, but its invariably the woman, as the childbearing sex, who takes the hit once children come along and by their 30s the pay gap has widened. The woman who is likely to be the lower earner, spends more time (and therefore money) with the children and is just more tuned in to their needs. Some men are barely impacted by having children at all - they sail on smoothly with “their” money, while the wife takes the financial hit of childbirth and juggles childcare with returning to work. There is a basic lack of integrity with these men and where this scenario exists, I don’t see it as progress at all.

Totally agree. I dont see the answer as women giving up work because her DH wont do his share though. If hes already financially abusive and domestically abusive ( leaving her to do everything home and child related) then she will be even worse off as a SAHM. The answer lies in the work place. Less presenteeism and more flexibilty. Making it acceptable for men to care for children. Educating young men and women Addressing inequality While men hold the power ( money) nothing will change .

If you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree...

The whole premise of judging a persons worth by their career progression or pay packet or how little domestic chores or hands on child rearing they do makes these conversations impossible.

@5zeds

If you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree...

The whole premise of judging a persons worth by their career progression or pay packet or how little domestic chores or hands on child rearing they do makes these conversations impossible.

No one is judging worth based on careers or money but financial security and personal safety is a basic need that all of us have whatever our beliefs about child rearing. Look up Maslow I zero respect for men who are loaded but abuse their wives. Men who have money are deemed rich, powerful successful and providers Women -money grabbing, hand bag buying bitches.

I think its risky to allow another person the power over whether you have financial security/ personal safety.

The issue is women are conditioned to put love before their financial/ personal safety which leaves them open to abuse.

• No I dont think all SAHMs are in this position, many have secured their financial/ personal safety.

I think its risky to allow another person the power over whether you have financial security/ personal safety. as risky as centring them as the main carer in your children’s lives or just a different risk?

@5zeds

I think its risky to allow another person the power over whether you have financial security/ personal safety. as risky as centring them as the main carer in your children’s lives or just a different risk?

Centering them as the main carer? I think we can see " how risky" that is to these men. Such a risk eh? Get divorced and they swan off, pay the minimum and leave everything to the exW. The minute they divorce they get another woman and before she knows it shes doing all his childcare in his contact time. Read the threads!

Best thing I read on here was these type of men described as "10p a punnet"
Looks nice but totally rotten.

I do think we are coming from different angles 5zeds
You see SAH as a womans choice, I see it as a choice but also a risk if you are not fully financially protected.
My level of financial protection would be joint account,equal share in house, equal savings in separate accounts, full pension for me .
That would not have been feasible on one salary for us and I like WOH so...