Why are people on here so pressed about the existence of SAHMs?

[DaffodilsandCoffee]

It’s fair enough to point out the existence of certain downsides are risks, but there seems to be so much spite and resentment on here. Why are some posters do angry at the existence of women who prefer to do all the childcare themselves rather than outsource some of it? Also, are they equally as angry at SAHDs? (I know it’s not as common but I personally know 3)

8 hours a day... 8 hours asleep... That's 16 hours gone. There are only 24 in a day, so only 8 hours left free, the morning ones usually spent getting ready for work and preparing kids for school, maybe some cleaning or walk the dog.
Home time gotta get dinner ready and help kids with homework and do laundry or whatever, wash dishes...

It just doesn't sound like much free time at all.

I know we have to pretend on MN that life admin is as time consuming as being the CEO of a FTSE 500 company but personally 8 hours (or 16 in total if there’s two of you) is more than enough to get things done, cook, clean and do homework and play with the kids, with enough time for a TV show on an evening.

and sometimes just leave the dishes if you can’t be arsed - we don’t have to have sparkling clean homes 24/7. If you want to of course then that’s fine but it’s not absolutely necessary if you are very short on time.

TopGub - why di you have a 'negative view' of a SAHZm lifestyle though? So much so, they you feel the need to extol that on here.

Fair enough, if you don't want to be a SAHM. Nobody is asking you to be. But if women who are SAHMs tell you they have made the right choice for them and their children / families, who are you to say otherwise? Do you think they have no agency, or are a bit thick or something? Your notions of feminism sound like something straight off page 1 of a GCSE textbook. But not everyone wants to live like a flaming textbook. Human beings will live the way they want to live - especially when it comes to their children - and there's nothing you or anyone else can do about that.

@Whatafustercluck

Yes mine does this too and I also find it highly irritating. And I out earn him by about three to one and he still assumes that all the life admin is basically my job. And he is, relatively speaking, one of the good ones.

This is why, while I totally support a woman’s right not to work outside the home, and understand many families choose to organise like this for practical reasons, it does piss me off that so many women bang on about the need to “support their husband’s career”. It just perpetuates these sorts of assumptions.

I was part time before my DS was in school and now I’m FT I find that the house is much easier to clean when no one is home all day! Unlike when I was on maternity and it felt like it was a constant shit tip

I’m not reducing women to only reproducing. In 2022 women are of course much more than that and actually are completely undervalued still.
But to deny that has been the main role of women in our history until only recently is to blind yourself to why women have the struggles we have today.
It’s not defining us (although they do on many occasions I agree) It’s our biology defining us. Some feminists would like to get away totally from the idea that women (and only women) can carry a baby. That only women have particular hormones to have a particular bond with there baby. Men may also have some hormones but these are in no way comparable to those released by a woman following child birth.
I think it’s a shame that what feminists set out to do (give women an equal choice in working or child rearing) has actually now done the opposite and forced many women who would rather rear their children themselves than go to work but are forced to work due to now needing two wages to afford to live.
Its swings and roundabouts. Many good things have happened as a result of the change but also some not so good.
With regards to bf. Yes In the past it would absolutely have affected your bond because your baby would have likely not survived or thrived had you not bf successfully or been able to find another women who could.
Now however with safe formula to give babies this is no longer the case and it doesn’t have a bearing.

now I’m FT I find that the house is much easier to clean when no one is home all day!

That's a different way of looking at it, I guess! I quite enjoy doing some chores at home while everyone else isn't in it though, it just feels peaceful and the only time anywhere is quiet! Can't think when there's noise everywhere.

If it weren't for our dog, I could probably do more outside of the home, but he can't be left all day, even if the kids are at school etc, he's like an extra baby... And sheds constantly (crying), German shedder than he is

@AccessibleVoid

Yeah I didnt say that.

Fact remains, most sahms aren't volunteering.

@mijas

I thought the whole point of this site and these threads was to 'extol'

Why are you being so rude?

I haven't said woman are incapable of making the right choice for their families or even that they shouldn't. If thats what they want and they can find a man to work so they can do it, crack on.

I have a negative view if the role/lifestyle because its inherently sexist and holds women back. I see no benefit to it.

I'm entitled to that view, even if you dont like it.

@Silverswirl

Men do produce oxytocin and they produce more of it the more direct childcare they do.

Its not denying biology to say men and women can both be good parents.

How am I being held back TopGub?

@mijas

By thinking you cant parent and work.

By thinking its normal and desirable for only men to be entrapanuers or to have careers while women, who by your own admission, are just as capable, dont.

By reducing mens role in parenting to just the financier.

By your sexist views.

I don't see how everything fits in, work chores AND the children. So, I would feel to spent the time after work with my kids, the chores will suffer and the laundry and stuff won't be done

And yet we working women somehow manage, we don't actually live in a squalor while wolves raise our children. And you would manage as well - you will become more efficient.
A SAHM friend of mine was going back to work recently and agonising over the decision, because how will she get her weekly shop done then?? I was WTF at first, but then I remember when I was on maternity leave, I was bored so was trying to fill my days with activities and stretch them out - a trip to supermarket was easily an event that would take half a day. Now I can do the same weekly shop in a fraction of the time. You fill the hours you have with your task list, that's all there is.

And yet we working women somehow manage, we don't actually live in a squalor while wolves raise our children. And you would manage as well - you will become more efficient.

I still feel like I'd have less actual free-time to just do what I want to do. That's a huge negative to me. The more free-time I have, the better.

when I was on maternity leave, I was bored so was trying to fill my days with activities and stretch them out - a trip to supermarket was easily an event that would take half a day. Now I can do the same weekly shop in a fraction of the time.

See, now I could be the same. Take longer than I need to in the supermarket because I get distracted looking at books and the clothes section etc. But then, do I want to he more efficient if it means losing that time I have to just... Do what takes my fancy? I quite like being able to just mill around looking at clothes while also shopping, I don't want to rush. So, yes I'd be more efficient, but I'd lose the time I have to do the things I do now, be them looking at clothes in the supermarket or reading books in-between batches of ironing

Where did I say I think people can't parent and work? How peculiar.

Of course I CAN parent and work, but in my particular circumstances, I didn't WANT to. Can you see the difference?

The fact that I happen to be married to a man who became an entrepreneur while I did not, doesn't mean I have sexist views. It just means I'm not the entrepreneurial type. And why would I be?

Are you saying we should only marry people who do the same type of job? Good luck with that.

You seem to think I must strive to be the same as my husband in all areas - otherwise it's not 'equal.' I can't relate to that at all and it's not my concept of equality. I don't want that kind of relationship. It doesn't appeal to me and it wouldn't appeal to him. What would you like us to do about that?

And who said my husbands role is "just the financier." Honestly, this is so very odd. Talk about putting one and one together to make three.

If that's a fact you haven't demonstrated it by saying people in the age range where most children aren't even in school yet don't volunteer much, and that's a pretty blanket statement compared to what I said that SAHMs of teenagers will have other stuff whether its a part time business, a few hours of work, volunteering, political and social involvements or whatever just because they've got the time and bar some kind of disability or mental health problem that prevents them having the energy they'll just need something to do.

I grew up in a home with a SAHM and a high flying business exec Dad who travelled a lot for work. I've mainly worked part time since having kids, one sister with 2 kids is a SAHM and the other with 1 kid works full time.
My Dad respected Mum and she was absolutely an equal in their relationship, with equal access to finances etc. We moved countries several times so it suited the family for Mum to be a trailing spouse. Mum was an amazing and creative SAHM, and always busy involved with local groups and charities, the house was usually messy as she frankly didn't have much time on her hands to tidy it.
Despite having a good life with Dad Mum impressed on us very early on how important financial independence was, she had seen too many of her peers struggle. Then Dad fell ill and eventually lost his job, my parents split some years later when Dad met someone else and Mum was left in her early fifties with nothing and had to start from scratch.
Dad wasn't bad and my folks remained amicable, but the years of ill health swallowed up all their savings. Mum had completed an OU degree but still struggled to get work as she hadn't enough experience or was too over qualified.
She is heartbroken that one of my sisters has chosen to be a SAHM and left herself so financially precarious (husband is a high earner and prefers for her not to work). Obvs not every SAHM is in my sister's shoes, but she has no private pension, a couple of A-levels and next to no work experience despite being in her mid-thirties and Mum is really worried for her if the marriage fails.

OTOH my full-time working sister didn't have a choice but to go back to work when baby was 6months as her partner wasn't prepared to support her on unpaid mat leave (both on decent, similar incomes).

I feel so lucky to have best of both worlds working PT since having my kids with a DH who is as involved with the housework and hands on parenting as I am, and was happy to support me when I talked about a career break when I was unhappy going back after mat leave with DS2. I stayed in work in the end - glad I did as DH went through ill health and leaving him with all the pressure for family income would have made me feel very selfish. But that doesn't mean I feel my best friend who hasn't worked for years is selfish - we all do what is best for our individual circumstances. It's all about having the choice.

@AccessibleVoid

I missed the bit about you saying only sahms of teenagers in your first comment.

And tbh I wouldnt really have considered a mum of teenagers as a sahm. Just unemployed.

A sahm to me is someone who specifically doesn't work to look after small children who aren't in nursery or school.

Was there a pre-nup? Because if they divorce, wouldn't she be entitled to a share of the house and any money anyway?

I can see why many women (especially those with poorly paid mundane jobs) want to opt out of paid employment. But it can (and usually does) lead to inequality in the relationship. Women opting out of the workplace (or opting for lower paid or part time roles) after children is the main cause of the gender pay gap. It also contributes to harmful gender stereotypes at a societal level if the majority of women are still going along with these roles (and men of course- they could choose to work part time or be more involved with children).

so at a societal level there is an issue that continues to affect all women individually.

@mijas being a sahm doesn’t make you an expert on it! You’re one person with one experience. As I said, I also didn’t work for a while when my kids were young and I could claim benefits.

Topgub - for the sake of argument, if there is a man, who started up a company in his early 30s and then, at age 45, sold it and received say £80 million - then invested it in various schemes and properties in his and his wife's and his children's names - and basically never needed to work again, is he then 'unemployed?' Fine if you think he is, but he's not exactly queuing at the Job Centre is he? Nor is he actively looking for work. But I guess, if he has teenage children, he must be 'unemployed in school hours?'

I personally wouldn't consider someone unemployed if they had no desire to be employed in the first place.

What if a couple had one partner who worked full time bringing in £2000 a month, and also co-owned passive investments that provided £2000 a month? What if for tax efficiency purposes ownership of and the whole income of their investments was drawn via the non-working partner (as income up to the NI limit and then as dividends thereafter)? Would it depend where the initial capital outlay came from?

There's the smugness from some sahms, and those who also do it while the children are at school (my near neighbour spends her days playing the radio and shouting down her phone outside while her plumber husband works).

But I think it's more sensible to have financial independence (you see the threads here where people don't have that) That's the most important reason for me.

I'm a sahm and I totally get what the OP is asking , I've read some absolutely mad stuff on here in relation to sahp. In real life I've met lots of sahp and in the vast majority of cases it's something that's suits that family for a while and it's no big deal but on here sometimes you'd swear we were all vulnerable idiots. I know I mentioned this before but a few years ago on a thread one woman actually in all seriousness said that if she or her friends met a sahm they wouldn't even be able to hold a conversation with her as they would have so little in common with someone like that. This poster actually couldn't understand that her comment made her sound thick as pigshit rather than some high flying intellectual. Again I'm repeating what I said on another thread but we have had women educated to PhD level at our toddler groups and they decided to stay at home for a while and when I was in hospital having DC3 one of the doctors was another woman who recognised me from toddler group. She had been at home for a while with her DC after the family relocated and had just returned to work. @DaffodilsandCoffee sorry I'm not answering your question but it bewilders me as well.

Fact remains, most sahms aren't volunteering.

I'm a sahm who is a trustee of two charities (I'm the chair of one) and volunteers for a third in a different capacity. I'm also studying for my third degree and learning another language in my spare time. Most sahms of my acquaintance are between 35 and 45 and fit a similar profile. My youngest child is 3 and will be getting more preschool hours after the summer so I have my eye on two more charity volunteering opportunities.