To wonder why MN is so unpleasant about SAHMs?

[crinklyfoil]

While I know there are cases when women aren’t married and don’t own property and are in a vulnerable position, I’m not talking about posters who are concerned about women.

I’m talking about posters who believe that SAHMs have no say in finances, should ‘get a job’ and are somehow lazy.

A FT childcare place costs around £800 a month. If you have more than one child, realistically for many women, ‘getting a job’ will mean working at a loss. Not to mention problems with shift work at the lower paid end of the spectrum (retail work and care work.)

Is it really so awful that having a SAHM might just work really well for some families? That some women might thoroughly enjoy it and that it’s part of a mutually beneficial relationship in the context of the whole family?

Or should everyone just get a job, regardless of how miserable and poor it makes the whole family?!

@rubbletrouble

In answer to the post I did quote: yay, you've factored the risk, you're happy with it, brilliant, your decision. It is brilliant, thank you. Most women IRL do factor in the risk as well. On here there are obviously lots who haven't, but my no means the majority of the population. And then there are those who don't have a choice, and I'm sure they appreciate you labouring your point, again and again when they can't change their vulnerable situation.

Please allow us to address the other women who haven't thought it through the way you have without you telling us we must have the worst possible motives for it
Your point is irrelevant as soon as you lie about what I have said, again, I have never said one has bad motives. If I felt that, I would have said it, please don't read my quotes and interpret them with a deeper meaning you may be feeling.

and, in so doing, downplaying the issue whether you intend it or not. It's not a personal attack to speak in general terms about a very common problem.

I have never downplayed the issue of being financially vulnerable, again you are misquoting me, please stop.
It is absolutely not a personal attack to give general opinions, but I question the need for one to keep reiterating that point to people who have cleared heard you the 1st time, but are choosing to disagree with you. Is the point to try and change their minds ?

Of course not. How can you change the minds of people who are just trying to silence you with accusations of "being invested" and "reiterating", even when they're doing the exact same thing themselves?

I'm hoping that silent lurkers who are reading might be able to take something away from it. Sometimes a discussion is held for the audience.

I certainly hope that I can convince readers that even if they are already vulnerable and it's doing harm, they do still have a choice. I really dislike that line of yours about them not having one. It's rare not to have a choice at all, even if it is a hard or limited one. I find that a bit defeatist and fatalistic. Would you really tell someone in that sort of situation that there couldn't possibly be anything they could do to improve things?

2- childcare will take all my wage- nope it’s a joint expense

This makes ZERO sense if it all goes into the same pot ffs

@moneyistheroute

2- childcare will take all my wage- nope it’s a joint expense

This makes ZERO sense if it all goes into the same pot ffs

Surely it makes more sense if it goes into a joint pot? . Might have misread it, but it seems that the poster is disputing the much spouted 'no point working as it uses all of my wages'. If all money is shared, including the woman's income then it is a shared cost. Presumably people mean if I work it doesn't make much odds as I don't earn more than childcare costs at the moment. Although that's a simplistic rationale anyway as pension contributions and the greater chance of progressing and earning more in the future etc doesn't seem to be taken into account much!

I certainly hope that I can convince readers that even if they are already vulnerable and it's doing harm, they do still have a choice. I really dislike that line of yours about them not having one. It's rare not to have a choice at all, even if it is a hard or limited one. I find that a bit defeatist and fatalistic. Would you really tell someone in that sort of situation that there couldn't possibly be anything they could do to improve things?

I have read through and i didnt see anywhere at all that you gave advice to a struggling SAHP, you just kept saying they would be vulnerable and not be valued unless they earnt.

So what is your advice to someone who has given up their career and are now financially vulnerable?
What do they do if worst case you keep mentioning happens and they have no access to money and are at home with a baby ?

Cant afford childcare as they are being financially controlled, whats your advice ? You know as your being so helpful.

Note Because if I earn £800 and H earns £2000, but £1950 is bills and food shops with hardly anything left over, and childcare is more than the £800, it is a problem

I'm hoping that silent lurkers who are reading might be able to take something away from it. Sometimes a discussion is held for the audience.

Oh come on now!

@mafted

I'm hoping that silent lurkers who are reading might be able to take something away from it. Sometimes a discussion is held for the audience.

Oh come on now!

That is very public spirited!

I’d like to thank the audience for making this possible...

There are some very self righteous people on this thread…

Shout out to the peanut-munching SAHMs in the cheap seats...

@cosima8

I’d like to thank the audience for making this possible...

🤣🤣

See comment like that about the audience, really do make me gag.

I think I am fairly on the fence with this one. That I think both sahm and wohm get shit. From both sides.

I think both have their good points and bad points. When it comes to money both have their benefits and downsides. Risks and rewards.

But then I read about it being for the vulnerable audience and other shit. And I think fuck it. That is really condensending bullshit and I am hoping the sahms will make some room so I can sit with them

Advice to follow.... or has it all been said? Repeatedly.

cosima8

I don't think DrSbaitso will return.
They are like the littlest hobo, just movin' on each day posting where needed to reach out to the silent lurkers.

@pinkfanman
I think the advice is to never be a SAHM because you’ll be vulnerable and resentful.

Regardless of what you want, think is best, your own personal (DH aside) financial situation, etc.

There is no valid reason for being a SAHM.

I’m so glad I stumbled upon this thread, I’m changing my entire life based upon it. I’m starting my job hunt today so that I can earn £25k before shelling out £36k in childcare…not sure who is going to look after DSD but all that’s irrelevant because there is no valid reason for being SAHM. This thread has really opened my eyes to the point of epiphany…I am born again.

This thread has descended into the usual childishness I see.
To answer the thread title.

Essentially its Cognitive Dissonance .
Sahms start these types threads in response to perfectly valid discussions as to why WOHMs return to work, throw in that someone somewhere said something nasty and repeat.
Its not exhausting to consider your financial future, its sensible.
Anyone other than the wife of a multimillionaire who thinks they are financially sorted, especially those who say they cant afford to work ,needs to read the CII report on the risks women face over their life time.
Grim reading for all women.

So its Cognitive Dissonance
Turn your anger onto other women who made different choices rather than onto the men who wont step up.
After all you can hardly bite the hand that feeds you, can you?

Especially now the retirement age is higher. A lot of SAHM's will face an impoverished old age.

I read that late last night. It was a lovely reveal of the vibe I was picking up on yesterday. It made me laugh out loud.

You lot had all gone to bed :D
For @Katedanielshasakitty

I've been a career woman (22yrs) and a SAHM (8yrs), in case anyone's bothered.

Cognitive dissonance - are we playing MN buzzword bingo today?

Well if I was going to vote on either “ cognitive dissonance “ on one side or “ jealousy” on the other I know where my money would be.

“Sahms start these types threads in response to perfectly valid discussions as to why WOHMs return to work.”

Oh, I must have missed that perfectly valid discussion

FYI, this thread was started on the thread by the woman who asked if she was BU because her husband had given £10,000 to her sister without consulting her. Cue poster after poster telling her that she had no right any financial decisions because she was a SAHM and it was “his” money. The thread had to be taken down.

Cognitive dissonance indeed. More like an inevitable response to patronising, ill-informed twits.

@mafted

I don't think DrSbaitso will return. They are like the littlest hobo, just movin' on each day posting where needed to reach out to the silent lurkers.

😂😂😂😂