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.

Didn't expect anyone to make another thread but here we are. Nice to see some of my original comments have been misrepresented.

Which ones?

I strongly disagree with you. Stay at home parents do not provide value to governments, and having a child is , in the majority, a choice.

People should check they can afford a child before engaging in sexual activity. Clearly if it was rape etc then it’s different, but having a child is not a right that the rest of society should pay for you to do.

But this is a different OP. Gotta give it to @amorningstar for keeping away from this sequel thread. For now.

@RandomMusings7 I hadn't noticed the change of OP! Whoops.

Though I think she's found the thread now

About me saying comments about employed wives and sex. Someone asked me why families where one partner stays home might have happier relationships and I said it was an advantage to a) have less strwss bwcause both partners arent having to do everything in the evening and b) more time to invest into the physical side of the relationship. Nowhere did I say that employed people don't have time to have sex lol.

This is where some of the fundamental disagreement comes from, I think. For one I believe everyone should be able to have kids if they want to and it shouldn't just be a luxury of the rich, but I also think society should encourage family life and the role of community and family on a wider scale. You don't. Our ideal societiea probably look very different. Hence we will be unlikely to ever see eye to eye on this.

No but you did say if you didn’t work then you’d more time to invest in your appearance. A comment I particularly enjoyed. 😂

I said its an additional advantage that can contribute towards a happy relationship. More time for yourself and each other rather than time being stressed at work, away from each other. I don't see why that's particularly controversial.

7 comments in and there goes the jealousy argument 🙄

He doesn't have to spend his evenings cramming everything in, so he has time to spend on his appearance. We actually do some of it together - we do weekly face masks and I show his eyebrows for him lol. I bet someone will somehow take offence to this like with everything else!

Well, I’ve found it stems from jealousy ‘oh so your husband earns enough that you don’t need to work? That’s alright for some’

We’d be much better off if I worked, but I don’t because it’s better for our family. And works for us. And yes he earns enough. I’m not going to be shamed for it. We’re not incredibly well off but we manage and we’re happier for it.

I’ll never apologise for choosing a path that works for us and makes us happy.

Shape his eyebrows. Not show.

I completely agree with this. Women experience judgment every step of the way. Men are applauded for working and providing and also given a massive pat on the back if they stay at home to look after the kids. It’s massively unjust.

The only role that society seems to accept is that of a part time working mum. Sadly flexible jobs are few and far between and invariably pay less, adding to the problem of the gender pay gap and a lack of financial independence.

I really agree with this. This was my other objection to the framing of the issue in the OG thread.
employment was also being framed as a “preference” or “lifestyle choice”, one that some people were more naturally suited to! One woman explained how she would go to work at 10pm after putting her kids to bed and sleep while they were at school. - response “good if that worked for you but that wouldn’t suit me because I’d be too tired”. 😵‍💫😵‍💫.
In reality these “choices” are of course a function of structural factors and privilege.

@AMorningstar

You keep applying you problems to everyone else.

Other people don't need to be unemployed so they can keep pretty for their ohs. Other people don't need to be unemployed because their ohs are too stressed out to cope with general life (on that point you've gone from he does 50/50 outside of work and all the night feeds to he does very little so as to have enough time for sex)

It might be an added advantage in your relationship.

It's not necessary for everyone else

time for shaping eyebrows- the key to marital bliss !

The original OP said that people saying that housewives/SAHM are financially vulnerable was being mean. It’s not. It’s the truth. I’m overweight, I’m at a higher risk for health conditions as a result of my weight. It hurts hearing it because it’s beaten into me as a reason that should be something simple but it’s the truth. Something hurting you when it is a fact is not being mean.

Now, if SAHMs can recognise that financial vulnerability and own it. So if they choose to be a SAHM there should be a discussion with their partner. They should both agree to protect the SAHP through marriage or put the legal framework in place that marriage provides. The working spouse should agree to make pension contributions for the SAHP. The SAHP should be given ample opportunity to ensure skills and employability aren’t lost whether that is through training, volunteering or freelance. I also think that the SAHP should have a fuck off fund that is solely accessible to them. They are then not tied into a relationship which could be abusive by the simple fact of not having access to funds. I also think that with SAHPs there just still be oversight from both parents as to the finances, who the bills are with and accounts should be in both names. I’ve seen a number of working parents be widowed before 40 and they have no idea who the gas and electric is with, when the bills are paid, when the swimming lessons are. It’s an extra level of stress in already stressful situation.

Now if we approach SAHPs in this matter, that working parents need to provide these protections for the SAHP then we can start to value the role of raising children. We stop women leaving the workforce just because they earn less and their job is seemingly less important. We stop women being financially dependent on men and them inevitably getting the short shift over and over again. Being a SAHP becomes an actual choice rather than just falling into it because it’s easier.

My kids don't need night feeds anymore, they're not babies. He did them when they were little. He shares the chores when not at work e.g the weekend. This isn't difficult to keep up with.

There's no problem here. If other people want to spend their relationship being a scruffy exhausted mess that's up to them. Hilarious when these same women caution me to be wary of being left though lol.

Who is a scruffy exhausted mess?

Women - and men - have the right to choose whether or not to be in the workplace. This is regardless of whether or not they have children, and assuming that they don't expect taxpayers to fund their lifestyle. However, most people surely accept that referring to a woman as a "housewife" is reductive of her abilities & choices. It smacks of 1950s attitudes that label a female as a second class citizen and implies that one can have a "career" doing unpaid housework. No woman of my age (over 50) would use "housewife" to denote their status - it belongs to previous generations.

If other people want to spend their relationship being a scruffy exhausted mess that's up to them.

Do tell us more about how working women fail their men... 🙄🙄

I like the posts from the last thread that sought to create distance between a the different types of SAHP. Some are more vulnerable than others and some might have had a fabulous career before making the choice to remain home for their kids. I think this is where the term 'housewife' complicates matters, as they might not have children to consider.

In the same breath, not all parents who work do so out of necessity. And it's certainly not true that the majority who work identify themselves based on their job.

Do tell us more about how you can't read the context of the previous comment I was replying to.

She said not everyone wants to spend their time on their appearances. I said okay then. I have never, ever, said everyone should share the exact priorities that I do. What I've said is women shouldn't be insulted for being SAHMs or housewives.