To not understand the nastiness that being a housewife provokes 2

[Alondra]

Apologies for making a second part to this thread but I feel strongly about this issue.

Topgub

Possibly because there aren't any benefits

Few countries have a government system caring about women and children. The majority of our governments don't care if all have to work for a pittance to pay mortgage, bills and food when children are small because average couples need both wages. A system where nursery fees are stratospheric and eating half an average wage, and worse still, because parents working full time, making an average pay to be able to survive, have few serious tax concessions. Those tax concessions go to multinationals.

It's a system that only cares about productivity attached to $. If you are an engineer with projects worth a million dollars, your salary will be minimum 15% of that money annually. If you are a carer or a parent, there is no quoted money attached to your work, so you are in a low wage or no wage at all.

A woman with two kids working full time for an average salary has not gained much from my mother’s time. Working full time, taking care of the kids when they are home and doing the lion share of housework and rarely free time at all.

With housing costs, bills and health systems collapsing, I really fear for women in the next few years. We will get the short straw as we've always done, but it'll be a plus if, at least, we don't turn on each other.

@FlamencoDance

Sorry. You just can't compete with me

🤣

If you don't want to stop people being SAHM, why so negative about it? Do you want to see less people being SAHM?

It's also seemingly impossible for sahms/housewives to justify their choice without putting down wms.

I can agree with this. I think if you are happier working, that's great, and if you have the option not to work and you find yourself happier that way, also great. I don't think anything else really needs taking into account.

As I said, when the kids were young, childcare was crippling and it essentially wiped out one wage, so we tried doing shifts around each other. We both hated it, yes we saved money on childcare, but we hated not seeing each other the majority of the time.

DH has always found pride and motivation in his work, he has that drive, I never really found that. I earned less due to sector I was in anyway. Also with the shifts, it seemed we really struggled with keeping the house to a standard we wanted and life admin always seemed rushed and stressful. That's not to say other people can't manage, but we were always feeling too tired or stressed to really relax and enjoy any time as a family for us.

I'll be the first to admit I don't deal well with too much "going on" in my head and it just seemed never-ending at the time.

My DH has ADHD and while his area of work doesn't get in the way, he does struggle with life admin and kids and housework on top of his work. I felt the other way, that work was too much for me on top. We found a way that allowed us both to get things done optimally and feel happy.

I don't look down on anyone who does things differently because I'm not them, I can't know what is best for them.

@AMorningstar

I dont see any value in it

🤷‍♀️

If women want to be one and promote inequality then obviously I'll view that negatively and obviously I think it would be better if less women made that choice where able.

That doesn't mean I think women who want to be sahms should be forced not to be.

To be honest TopGub, your whole outlook on life is so alien to me I wouldn't know where to even begin. I've never genuinely never met anyone with your mentality which is why I engage with you at all, I guess.

I agree sahp should have their pensions and NI paid into by their OH to ensure security be that man or woman who stays at home.

As for the codswallop about better relationships for being a sahm/housewife because you have time to look pretty or time for your relationship sorry hut that just shows your own insecurities.
Not many women enter marriage going you know what I don't fully trust him hut what the heck. You never know what life curveballs will throw at you from serious illness to affairs to getting knocked down. It's always a good idea to have a fallback plan of how you support your family in those circumstances.

But you can understand that others do, right? You understand that others find value in it even if you don't?

@cagliari

Considering you know fuck all about me or my mentality that's quite the statement

To be honest I find your posts bizarre as well. Aggressive, rude and a complete inability to understand different peoples priorities in life.

@AMorningstar

Have literally never said otherwise

@AMorningstar

Coming from you thats quote the compliment

If you get that others find it valuable, what's your problem exactly

All this "societal inequalities" talk seems to translate to "I'm a woman who wants to work, and housewives make it harder for me personally, therefore I don't like them"

I'm amazed that morningstar has been able to post continuously for the last 24 hours with young children. Are you not making those delicious home cooked meals? Picking them up from school? Talking to them at all?

Or someone as smug and naive as yourself about yourself and your relationship.

It says something about the state of other people's relationships if someone being happy and confident is "smug and naive"

@AMorningstar

No it doesn't.

I have no issue with individual sahms. I'm sure they are all lovely. Or not. Being a sahm is not a personality trait.

The impacts pf sexist choices don't go away because you don't want to acknowledge them

@AMorningstar How's been raising your kids for you these past 24h that you've spent almost continuosly arguing with us?

Who*

Its not a sexist choice though. thats the thing. I am an individual. I never asked to be a woman, I never chose to be one, why should my choices be classed as anything other than mine by virtue of me being female? That's radically unfair. If a man can choose to be a SAHP and it not be sexist, then so can I. Otherwise what you're saying is there's no way for a woman to live her life a certain way without being sexist, yet a man can. Which ironically is sexist.

More assumptions and interrogation about my life from a nobody online who I owe nothing to? Colour me shocked.

"If women want to be one and promote inequality then obviously I'll view that negatively and obviously I think it would be better if less women made that choice where able."

If something is an active choice for women it's not necessarily 'inequality.' It may just be the basic reality that when all is said and done, many women want slightly different things out of life than men - or you. If feminism can't tolerate that, it's dead in the water.

If "equality" is measured by this binary notion of earning / not earning, I suppose women shouldn't make the 'lifestyle choice' to do low paid work in the public sector? They should all only ever strive to be high earners in banking or whatever - to boost the 'statistics' on a societal level? Never mind they had a burning desire to teach or be a nurse. No, Wrong!!

Maybe women should be made to feel bad if they have more than one child as this may put them
at a disadvantage in the workplace (compared to women who have no children or just one and therefore less demands).

If you can only equate 'equality' with earning potential, it's a pretty grim outlook really, isn't it.

As if it wasn't immediately obvious these threads were skits. ...