A 23 year old wants to be a stay at home wife?

[Ludlow2]

Friend's son had a girlfriend and both are 23.
She was keen to marry. Friend's son not so and his parents agreed.
Told him sort your career out,save up, find somewhere you will live. He agreed.
They split.
Both his parents work. My friend, his mother has always worked full-time and has a side business too. She is a great role model an although she is the breadwinner the father also works considerably hard.
Their children have and will benefit from this. They have also instilled good work ethic in their children too.
The friend's son and his ex girlfriend remained friends. She is keen to be with again and said she is happy.to wait and will continue with her studies maybe get a masters etc. She has then said that after marriage she does not want to work.

She thinks work is a want and not a need?

Obviously son Friend's son has run for the hills.
He did tell her it is impossible to survive on one income bla bla. But she just responded with we can move to a cheaper area and I'm not materlistic?

Im.just surprised at this attitude.

The girl's father left the family (Mother and siblings) whilst they were young.
Mother found another partner who comes and goes. Maybe it this why she is craving to be looked after by a man.
However, it sounds all so sad.

Can you really see no flaw in your reasoning? Nature's green is gold - young women are desirable. Unless a woman has something more to offer than her youth and looks she is unlikely to secure a host who will agree to fund her living.

I can't imagine that any person is attractive if they're scrabbling around looking for a meal ticket for life - and if they do find one (for the short term), they will forever be beholden. What PP says about men being cocklodgers, this is exactly the same only the other way around.

Women have so much to offer. I'm hoping that this 23 year old is going through a phase and will wake up very soon before she really sets herself back.

@Kolakalia

what reasons would a man prefer a stay at home wife?

Very true. I imagine the same can be said for the friends too.

I think your perspective is skewed because you only know one person who is working full time with children. I suspect that gives you a pretty limited insight into how it is for many of us.

Working full time, I inevitably come into contact with many other women who are also working full time - many of them in senior roles like mine, which also enables them to work more flexibly. Many of us out-earn our husbands too, which may help to ensure a more equal balance of responsibilities at home.

I think your situation is a bit different because you are caring for a disabled child, and inevitably, that will make life more complicated. I can certainly see why it would make more sense to have one parent at home in that scenario, but I don't think your situation is representative of the majority of families where disability isn't a factor.

I knew two women when I was in my 20s who stopped working when they had their first child and never went back, just kept having more children. It seemed odd to me even in the 80s but their mothers never worked so I suppose it was all they knew.

I don't really see the point of your post @Ludlow2 partly as you aren't giving the full picture.

I've asked a few times if this woman works and you have not replied.

You said you wanted to ask for opinions so your own children don't become like her.

Really?

Why do you need advice on that?

Aspiration comes from multiple sources-
school, certain teachers, friends, parents, extended family, role models in the media...

If you work and it's a career rather than just a means of putting food on the table, then you will set your daughters a good example.

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves

With having an only child there is significantly more freedom and less financial outlay thus facilitating career and quality of life.

I did not “gravitate” to my children’s classmates mothers, or family members or friends of friends etc… I just know what they do.

There is no free childcare so perhaps that impacts women’s rights and ability to work full time here. In England it is probably easier.

I can’t think of any reasons why a man would prefer a SAHW unless he had extremely traditional and sexist values and/or was very controlling.

I used to work with someone who's wife never wanted to work. Her parents paid for her to train as a doctor as it was the longest period of education required. Once she qualified she had their first child and never went back to work and doesn't want to.

If it was an option I'd happily be a housewife. But my husband would need to earn a lot of money in a comfortable job.

Sadly, we have bills to pay and I wouldn't want my DH under the pressure of being our sole income. I don't earn as much as he does but if he ever loses his job or gets fed up and wants to leave, we'll be ok while he gets back on his feet.

Middle class women might have ceased work on marriage, northern working class women didn't generally - they were doing menial work in the factories & mills!

The more I read the answers to this discussion thread, the less sympathy I have towards the women who post on here about being shafted by their husbands or partners when the relationship breaks down.

Coming home to clean house and a warm meal? His free time is actually free time. Not juggling annual leave around each other's schedule. It's not for everyone, but it's not difficult to imagine why a man might prefer it.

But you yourself have said that you only know one person who works full time with children. (I assume that you meant one mother as I'm guessing that you know many fathers who are still full time with children!) So it seems that you do gravitate towards people who are in similar situations to your own.

And yes, having one child almost certainly does make it easier (yet another reason why I'm actually hugely grateful for secondary infertility!) but I know plenty of women with multiple children who manage to make it work.

And yes, funded childcare probably helps a lot as well, though we never actually made use of that ourselves.

If you're a couple with no children, there is not a huge amount of housework to do. Certainly not enough to warrant one person not working. You could both work full time and come home to a clean house. You could use a decent meal service or order a high quality take away or make yourself meal in 15 minutes. Financially you'd be much better off both working and hiring a cleaner. But even without, this isn't the 1900s we have washing machines, robot vacuum cleaners, dishwashers...there's not that much to do in a modern home if you are childfree

Are people saying only a career is valid. Working to put food etc on the table is not valid.
I have a job not a career. I only work for the money.

@SouthLondonMum22 Yes of course I have, and I studied part time on top of that!!

I am looking after a disabled child and elderly relative now which has put the breaks on things, it takes time to get care plans in place.

What I’m saying is parenting a baby, who is cared for by others while you work. Is different to coping with a child with academic, extracurricular and social activities and 14 weeks off school where you can’t always get a “holiday scheme” or similar to cover, and certainly not up to 6/6.30pm like you can with early years care.

I'm likewise increasingly of the same mindset. On their heads be it.

There's also a good deal of ignorance upthread about the 'marriage bar' people are so fond of mentioning; not least that in the UK for one this legislation came about in response to a very specific set of circumstances. The aim was to prioritize returning male combatants in the workplace and put women back in their boxes when they'd (very successfully) kept the economy, munitions factories etc., afloat whilst men were fighting. There's a great, if now old, book by the historian Deirdre Beddoe, Back to Home and Duty, which talks interestingly about the nuances surrounding this and the sort of discourses employed to keep women in their place: the accusation of 'selfishness' being about the worst thing a woman could be seen to be. The Mass Observation Archives in The Keep give a fascinating snapshot into that world, not least responses to the fact that the bar was kept in some instances until the mid 1970s, when it was eventually usurped by the Sex Discrimination Act.

It's also noteworthy that as you rightly say, the marriage bar wasn't universal. It was far more of a problem in the white-collar occupations than elsewhere, and of course it would be: gods forbid a woman should want a proper, professional career. But this whole idea that women working out of the home was ever a 'new' idea is patently ludicrous; based, I suspect, on prejudice rather than anything approximating the real historical situation.

We are more regressive in 2023 than we might like to think, and the problems with inequalities in the workplace have by no means gone away. Unlike the more defeatist stance, however, I don't believe the answer to this is to retreat with our tails between our legs back to the kitchen sink.

Incidentally, women have breastfed in public since the year dot as well. The horror!

Tbh if she has a wish for it and plans for it she may very well be in a better position than people who almost accidentally stumble into being a SAHP.

One of my DDs would love to be financially solvent enough to Potter in museums half the week and join me in my voluntary role the other half. She has no desire to have a career - she’ll have a job to cover the bills and do what she wants to do.
The key is that she knows the vulnerabilities of being at home. I’m a SAHP because my youngest needs full time care. My older kids are all aware (mostly from DH as he was talking to DS about how far his salary did/didn’t go) that I have a pension, that I have the same ‘spends’ as DH etc. But they also know that it would be harder for me to get a job after a gap etc.

Choice is the biggest privilege we have. As long as she’s properly aware of the consequences of her choice she’s as entitled to wish for that life as someone who wants to have a high flying career imo.

And yet there are plenty of us who have happily managed just that. With multiple children. It's different of course, but it really isn't that difficult if both parents share the load equally.

I know of two women (not close friends but close enough for me to know their circs) who don't work and never have since they married.

Both are married to men who are controlling.
They prefer their wives to be at home as it makes them feel top dog in the marriage.

One of these couples has now adult children, the other no children through choice.

Surely if a woman wants to spend her time not doing paid work, then a man has that right too, within a relationship?

But if this was a 23 year old man with such an 'aspiration', there would be uproar.

I do find it hard to believe that there are 23 year old women who have been to university and think like this.

I've never met any at all.

I have met girls who became pregnant on purpose to try to get a man to stay with them, or at least a foot on the social housing ladder. (I used to work with teens.)

I can believe there are women aged 23 from aristocratic families or very wealthy families who see their role as a 'housekeeper' who doesn't work.

I find it hard to accept there are many 23 year olds whose only aim is to bag a rich man, then spend their days swanning around while he works his socks off, unless they are moving in the WAG circles.

I've always worked F/T and I enjoy working - I'd be a bit lost without it, tbh. I'm now self-employed as I need flexibility around my caring responsibilities.

I understand the concerns re safe-guarding the future and being too reliant on another person financially. And it's a relevant point.

However, we get one life. We're here for such a short time in the grand scheme of things. People should live in a way that makes them happy, if that can be facilitated.

If this girl really wants to have a more traditional wife-style role, and is willing to sacrifice some of the luxuries of life to do so, then there's no judgement from me. There are couples who have these more traditional gender roles, with the man earning and the woman running the home and doing the chores (with or without children) and they're very happy.

Obviously this girl needs to find a man who's as happy with this arrangement as she is. And it's perfectly valid for a man to be unhappy with being the sole earner - it's not for everyone.

Wanting to be a full-time home-maker isn't necessarily indicative of "laziness" - it's a different way of life that might just really appeal. Yes, there are risks and it certainly won't suit every person, but I think it's a valid life choice for those that want it.

Incidentally, I know a couple where the man has stopped working (late 40s) and is now the stay at home person, running the household. The woman is happy with the set-up, she works and enjoys it. He's just sick of the rat race and wants to spend his time at home doing chores etc. They're both very happy with the new set-up - it can and does work very well for some people.

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves

The school allocated my DC to classes.

My employers, when working, employed colleagues.

I did not “gravitate” towards people - I know all the Mums in my children’s classes and what they do because I attend birthday parties and do pick ups.

I know what colleagues did because I’d know when they were in work and they’d talk about their children/childcare predicaments.

Personally, before having to come out of work I was full time and then some, having to work until 2am at points. So your assertion is incorrect. I’m ordinarily lumped with the academic friend in terms of commitments. It’s actually not much better now being a carer/SAHM!

I agree op - it’s very sad that a 23 year old girl wants to be a “housewife”. There are no children involved so she’s not a sahp.

what would we think of a man who wanted to live off his partner and not work? That’s exactly how I feel about women. It’s no different