To wonder why some people don't work full-time?

[donniedarko89]

I was part-time myself while DD was very young as I wanted to spend time with her. I know many mums however who have stayed part time even after the kids go to school. They only work 2 or 3 days a week. The thing is, they're not loaded, on the contrary they keep complaining that finances are tight and they can't afford stuff - then why not increase your work days (they could all easily do it)? Some of them even have a cleaner. No hobbies on the side either. It genuinely puzzles me!

*How many people can afford to enjoy life without working?

Who is paying them to enjoy life?*

People who have worked hard, have built up successful companies, have invested their money well etc etc

@Lilacsunflowers

So retired people?

The key point here is that @ambermorning was writing specifically about stay at home mums. Not parents. Which perpetuates the idea that somehow mums are 'better' at caring for children, and being the ones to compromise their work/ life to fit around the children.

Also, this isn't a binary situation where people either SAH because they don't like working or WOH because they don't like being at home! I'm sure I would have been fine being a SAHP. I enjoyed being with my kids, I'm pretty self sufficient and can find things to stimulate me mentally outside of work. The fact is (like many others) I enjoyed being a parent and maintaining my work life. Lots of us don't see it as an either/or situation. And as the parent of an adult dd and an adult ds, I'd like to think they don't see themselves as pigeonholed into stereotyped roles.

Generally people who have had help from family. Support that meant they could do that PHD. Help with childcare that meant they could work unsocial hours self-employed, an inheritance that meant they could start up a business. A family guarantor that meant they could borrow for a business.

But the working parent "role" and the SAHM "role" are essentially the same role except for the fact that someone else covers during periods when the parent is working and the child is not at school (which are fairly modest once school starts).

There's no intrinsic "SAHM quality" which is conferred on a mother who doesn't work. There may be some mothers who are more fired up about craft or baking than others, but that's not correlated with whether or not they work.

There isn't a gene (to my knowledge) which links whether you work with your appetite for playing board games or sewing. And its not necessarily even the case that women who want to do this avoid work, because a lot of us don't have the choice.

So that comment about "not having it in you" was not only bitchy it was completely illogical.

I work 0.8 and have children in secondary and uni, absolutely no interest in increasing to 5 days, 4 days means I get a day a week to do general catching up, I can flex my days so I don’t need to take leave if something comes up, I can keep on top of house stuff, I know I’ve got one day a week in the holidays to be around for the kids, I don’t think it’s fair to work FT in the holidays and leave them to their own devices. I can afford to and I have never entertained full time yet have been regularly promoted and have a great career

@Thepeopleversuswork good post

Generally people who have had help from family. Support that meant they could do that PHD. Help with childcare that meant they could work unsocial hours self-employed, an inheritance that meant they could start up a business. A family guarantor that meant they could borrow for a business.

Or people who have worked hard to fund their education, who have made many sacrifices to build their own company, who have chosen to have children later in life etc etc

It’s a bit depressing that in main the reasons are my husband earns more is it not? This isn’t an individual family thing but why are women still earning less, still expected more to need flexibility in working etc? Or as someone pointed out still expected to do everything and work if they do?

Does that not piss you off? It totally pisses me off on your behalf. Whether you realise it or not it’s a reduction of woman’s choices pure and simple.

@RJnomore1

It’s a bit depressing that in main the reasons are my husband earns more is it not? This isn’t an individual family thing but why are women still earning less, still expected more to need flexibility in working etc? Or as someone pointed out still expected to do everything and work if they do?

This. In giant neon letters in the sky.

No one in the world begrudges a woman who wants to work flexibly or work less to fit around her children's needs. I can totally understand that and would probably do it if I could afford it.

But why does it still tend to default to the woman having to do this? It's got sod all to do with biology or being more suited to the "SAHM role" as various people have suggested. It's because patriarchal society still prioritises men's needs and approaches to work over those of women and expects women to make all the sacrifices.

Woman take mat leave, men ask for payrises.

It's probably that simple

@Lilacsunflowers

Your comments don't make sense.

None of things you've described involve not working or working part time.

So aren't at all relevant to your first comment

@facefit

It's not that simple.

I took mat leave x 2.

I still progressed my career after.

They could have health issues which you don't know about.
They may make the choice of having less money but having more of a life which doesn't revolve entirely around work.
Husband/wife may be main earner
Inheritance money
Loads of reasons. If they are complaining about money then that's one thing but generally, work isn't everything and if people can get by, by working less then good for them. Doesn't sound like this is the case for the people you know though.

This debate is very interesting but too many posts to follow up.

I have a question to women who follow the homemaking role- if you have daughters in secondary school who are about to do their leaving cert: Are you happy for them to study hard, be ambitious for their own good? Or would you rather tell them to look for a man instead who makes lots of money and look after them?

Some women fail to realise that being at home to "raise" them, and "be there for them" does not foster independence in our children. There are values they learn by example.
It's a contradiction when what we say and do are different things.

@RJnomore1
Spot on. With giant neon letters in the sky too!

Indeed.

Also mothers that do work full time are actually statistically more likely to do a few things that men dont do. They dont seek promotion, they change to easier jobs roles, they get jobs closer to home, request condensed or flexible hours.

So even full time working mums make more adaptions to life when having kids at a population level..

This is one where i think the patriachy for want of a better word should ease of fathers and say work the way women do when you have young children. Or work the way the danish do.

I haven't worked since Dec 2008, not part time, nothing. I was temping at the time, contract ended, we went on holiday and a few weeks later found I was pregnant with our first baby. We agreed that I would be a SAHM, and that's what I am. I don't want to work as well, I want to be with my children. We have spent our entire relationship living off the one wage, and we've not suffered for it.
I understand the questioning if they're complaining about their lifestyles, but if a family is happy with it's one working parent set up, why is that not enough for others to just accept?

Sorry, what about my comments confuses you?

@MrsNowAndAlways and I don't think anyone is taking issue with what you're doing. You're being completely upfront that you're a SAHM because you want to be and your partner is happy being sole earner. No problem.

That's very different from some of the comments on here, eg @ChangeOver22 was spouting about how she knows that all children with working mums are miserable and mean and grow up emotionally damaged! That's just completely nonsense and shows what a nasty, bitter person that poster is.

@Lilacsunflowers

The contradiction between people should work to live and no one should have to work if they don't want and people who work hard all their lives shouldn't have to work if they don't want to.

How is working hard all your life working to live?

You're one person.

@facefit

Indeed.

But it goes back to societal conditioning.

I'm still not convinced that we live in a patriarchy, either.

@facefit

Lol.