To not understand the nastiness that being a housewife provokes

[AMorningstar]

Not just on MN. I don't even use MN that often but I see this on other social media websites too. If a woman shares something positive about being a housewife it's full of comments about how "being controlled by a man, couldn't be me!" "No thanks, I love my independence" or "just wait until he leaves you, then what". If a woman shares something negative about it its "see, this is why being a housewife is TERRIBLE" (yet no one would say "this is why having a career is terrible!" If a person was complaining about their job)

I saw someone earlier say they'd be devastated if their daughter wanted to be a SAHM.

Why does it provoke such vitriol? Other women choosing this doesn't force anyone else to, I don't get the complete lack of respect for people's decisions and lack of understanding that different people enjoy different things.

Unpleasant is your opinion

There's loads of reasons to be critical of being a housewife. None of which include jealous.

Very few are unpleasant. You consider hearing opinions you dont like as a valid reason to be unpleasant.

The only reason to think someone is jealous of you is if you think your doing ir have something better than they do.

I am categorically not jealous of anyone who chooses to be unemployed.

It is not a value or ideal I aspire to. I find men who think women should aspire to it pretty awful.

Absolutely nothing to be jealous of.

I'd you have to pretend others are jealous of you to make yourself feel better, you really need to be asking why that is.

Well done, OP, you got us all going. I did have my suspicions at the porn loving kinksters who don't believe in divorce, but now you've also thrown in casual sex as sinful, it's well and truly shot.

You strung it out well, though. Applause.

Thanks for being honest - people are bitter that not eveyrone has to be as miserable as they are.

Op you've completely misunderstood me.

We aren't bitter. We think you are a lazy fuck for opting out of the social contract that most humans live by.

All the while moaning that she shouldn't have to be forced to be like others.

Like I said, hypocrites anonymous

🤣

And if we're dead she'll have her inheritance.

Obviously it depends on the size of the inheritance, but I've seem plenty of people dependent on them left high and dry due to care cost, tax bills, disputes, property crashes, etc, etc.

Not a choice I'd make for my child, but you do you of course.

Only read small bits of this thread, but I see some real sexism in the belief underpinning some posts ( lots of posts) that SAHMs are dossers taking advantage of the poor stressed out working men.

My H was the SAHD for a period when he was out of work and it was bloody brilliant! I loved it. I thought, ‘wow, I totally get why men have hung onto the breadwinner thing for so long’. Kids looked after, housework done, meals made. When I get home I get time to relax. As well as, if I am honest, the good feeling of being the breadwinner.

Most men love having a SAHW. Having two working parents is hard - I live it, it’s tough. Having a SAHP just makes the working partner’s life so much easier. Nearly all that burden of children, domestic chores, mental load, just gone! The husband is not been taken for a ride, he’s getting a bloody good deal. I’d love a SAHD again if we could afford it!

Its really sexist to deny the benefit and bloody great deal men get through a SAHW.

It’s only when they divorce their wives, when the kids are grown, that they start moaning they’ve been sponged off and start talking about ‘their’ money. They quietly enjoyed the benefit for years before that.

The fact you think humans ate obligated to waste their lives slaving away is depressing.

Really well said , life in a nutshell 👍

You think your oh should be obligated to slave away.

How is that not depressing?

Do people really think it's only SAHMs that are financially vulnerable?

To the poster above... if your daughter decides to be a SAHM for a given period, it doesn't actually matter one jot what you think and there's nothing you can do about it anyway, is there? She will feel how she will feel if and when she has her own kids. You don't live her life for her.

In my experience, SAHMs are SAHMs precisely because they are NOT financially vulnerable. In fact, a large proportion of SAHMs will be among the least financially vulnerable women in the U.K. Which is precisely why and how they have the choice to take that lifestyle. It's a choice not as many women have these days, but if they did, more would take it.

If anyone honestly can't understand why they wouldn't want their child to be a sahp, I suggest they read the relationships board

I don't think he should have to - if we had more money he'd quit on the spot.

How would he get more money without having worked?

@cagliari

Anacdata is not data or fact.

Unless you can show the stats that backup your point?

Most sahms are involuntary and would not choose to be

Most sahms are trapped by finances or disabled children

Citation needed

It’s just the contradictions for me, on the one hand their husbands are so happy to be the financial provider, they love being the only one to work full time to make up the family finances and they enjoy the pressure of not losing the only income … but then any women who work are capitalist slaves who don’t value themselves enough, have no hobbies, don’t see their kids, are constantly exhausted and “waste their lives”.

Which is it??

Why are women who dare to work wasting their lives being slaves but the husbands of housewives are not, and are ‘free to build their career’?

That might be your experience but that is not the majority.

There is a reason there is more women pensioners in poverty than men.

You do you and all that but the fact is unless you have your own money you are making yourself financially vulnerable but being financially dependent on another person.

Anecdata doesn't not trump actual data.

👏🏻

And here is the hypocrisy of this thread exactly!

Why do you think a career is a positive? If we had the money I'd love for my husband not to work and so would he. We don't see a career as a positive for either of us, rather a burden to bear. He thinks it's more beneficial rhis way and so do I but being very clear we'd rather neither of us had one.

You've not answered how your oh isn't obligated to work?

He chose this structure as much as I did - I've offered in the past to work a few hours so he can cut his even though he knows I don't want to. He's said no, he doesn't want me to do something I don't enjoy and hed rather it was him.

Do people really think it's only SAHMs that are financially vulnerable?

No, but having the ability to earn a reasonable living is always a goo precaution

To the poster above... if your daughter decides to be a SAHM for a given period, it doesn't actually matter one jot what you think and there's nothing you can do about it anyway

I never said it there was, but it wouldn't change how I feel about it. As I say, I don't have daughters, but all my friends who do have impressed upon them the value of independence, just as it was impressed upon our generation

In my experience, SAHMs are SAHMs precisely because they are NOT financially vulnerable

Statistically that's not the case at all, though the very small cohort you're talking about are over represented on here I find.

I simply don’t recognize this poor enslaved man forced to support a lazy wife.

I’ve known a lot of men with SAHWs and all but one were active in encouraging/ supporting their wives to stop working. One was quite strong in his advocacy for it as they both had high pressure jobs and were constantly arguing over who had to take time off after they had kids. All of these men saw clearly the benefits to them of a SAHW and were keen to acquire those benefits.

And frankly, the idea that a man with a high paid, high status job, with a live in housekeeper, cook, nanny and friend, is somehow being taken advantage of, is bloody laughable.

Lol exactly. I bet my husband would get a laugh out of some of the career oriented ladies on mn thinking he's being oppressed 🤣

All this "what about your DH" line of questioning spectacularly misses the point.

There are couples who function better and feel happier when they have more defined roles. Yes, on one hand, you could look at it as 'carrying all the burden'. But the flip side of that is you get to focus more without feeling like you have to be all things to all people all the time. For some people, this is a kind of freedom.

Some couples are all 50/50 everything, but others just really are not because people have different personalities, inclinations snd motivations in life. 50/50 would be very stifling for some couples. I don't know why that should be surprising news to anyone.

If there is a woman who, when all is said and done, would rather be available for her kids without the added demands / distraction of a job as well, then so be it. If she gravitates to a man who has a defined provider ethic - then all good. Ax kong as they are happy and doing what comes naturally to them, what business is it of anyone else?

It's not relevant to be asking "what if the DH wanted to SAH." The point being, if the DH was resentful about the setup, you wouldn't be a SAHM full stop because it wouldn't work!