To literally BEG women to set themselves up, financially?

[CallieRedux]

Typed out a long post full of personal details, then deleted, but, honestly, the specifics don't matter. What DOES matter is that you save every tiny bit you can, because having FUCK YOU money is - by far - the most important thing you can do for yourself.

It's saved me from everything from wrong relationships, shit jobs, from natural disasters... I have both made lots of money, and not, but having savings, and the ability to walk away is having POWER, and the best "self care" a woman can have.

Shit happens. Things change. Even to you. Yes, you can save - even a little - when you are poor.

Do it. Please.

I'm sharing my experience, that's all.

Perhaps I misunderstood. Do you mean your life is harder than some SAHM you actually know?

I think that's the point the pp is making. Take a step back and ask yourself why there's so little give in the system? Why is there no possibility of taking some time out to have small children or look after sick or elderly relatives? Who is this system set up t

Set up to benefit? What are the assumptions behind it?

SAHM has to cook, clean, laundry and take care of her children. WOHM have to do that and work. Have performance review meetings, handle projects and improve their career progression. Stress of paying bills and redundancy etc. Cost of living crisis.

Blame the patriarchy.

Alternatively, if you personally make the choice to be a SAHP, make sure that you are jointly named on everything, that your state pension contributions are kept up, that you have a joint account to which you have free access and that you are named as beneficiary on pension policies and insurances and main beneficiary in will. Has worked well for us for 35 years.

How does the role of a SAHP last 35 years? Once children reach their teens there's no need to be at home all day and it's possibly to work again and take a break from household chores etc.

Exactly

"All that education and training just to become a SAHM, what a waste."

Well I don't know what education you've had but you come across as very insecure, whatever it is you do @anonymousxoxo.

In life, as I'm sure you must have grasped by now, some families are more wealthy than others. I'm not talking about income, I'm talking about assets and financial security.

You see no value in having a SAHP. Well that's your take on life and if you don't get it, you probably never will. But some families obviously do understand the value of it. Some families have greater financial security than others and that enables choice. The point of financial stability is CHOICE. Again, you would not relate to the choice to have a SAHP because you can't even grasp the concept of family / money at all. This much is clear.

The truth is, most SAHMs who have given up jobs as lawyers, bankers, etc - the type of roles that you evidently prize above all else in life - do so with their eyes open and because they have a certain level of self-confidence and family financial security to enable them to make their choice. They are less insecure about their finances than you, and that's the bottom line. That is because they operate as a family, not two separate adults who happen to share bills.

Believe it or not, some women do not contemplate using 'childcare'. They don't want to and it's out of the question. They feel they have more to offer their kids than anyone else and they are entitled to feel that way. They have totally different priorities and values to you. End of. You don't have to understand. They don't care whether you understand or not and all this petty wittering on about SAHMs because they know what they're doing and so does their husband and so do their children. When it works it works. That's all you need to know. Also, many SAHMs will be way more financially secure than you anyway and hardly need your 'advice.'

Excellent post.

It is a waste because the training and education could have gone to someone who would have made it worthwhile. Doing laundry, cooking and cleaning is an average life which everyone has to do.

SAHM is much easier than having to work full time

I absolutely disagree with this.

I've done both, and working full time outside the home is much easier than being a SAHP.

Mind you, DH and I shared all the housework and childcare equally. We still share the housework, even though we're both retired now.

If a woman has a sexist husband who believes that the cooking, hoovering and childcare is his wife's concern only, then I expect your premise that SAHParenting is much easier than having to work full time is correct.

For those of us whose husbands shared the domestic load equally, this is not the case at all.

I do that and work. We share childcare/household chores and manage to work full time. No need for SAHM.

They don't leave work to do cooking, cleaning or laundry @anonymous. No more than the next person. The fact you keep saying this shows you have no grasp of the most important reasons women may decide to leave well-paid jobs to become a SAHM (clue, it's not housework).

When I was a SAHM (and later a basic rate tax payer) my now exH put all his cash savings in my name for tax purposes 😂 And he paid for my pension and gave me a half share in his business. My own solicitor said he was an idiot!
He was still adding to the pot 6 months before he left, which was one reason I was so blindsided by it.

There’s absolutely societal influence. It isn’t a coincidence that the vast majority of SAHP’s are women.

But, everyone else manages to do that and work full time. But ok.

You've come across people in your own experience who stay home just to do à bit if laundry ans cleaning?

It is not a question of need.

Some couples choose to have a SAHP for a while, when their children are young.

I certainly stayed at home until the babies were about a year old. I was a midwife so I could also pick up some shifts at the weekend when DH was at home.

I can honestly say that being at work (i.e. paid employment) at the weekends was a good deal easier than being at home with babies; even though I actually thought that being at home with babies was very, very important, which is why I did it.

@anonymousxoxo you're spectacularly missing the point that many couples prefer to have one of them (generally the mother) at home when their children are small.

If it can be done from a financial point of view, and the couple believe this would be beneficial to their children, that is absolutely their choice, and shoudl not be denigrated by you.

I pushed my DW to get a career and good job for just this reason (DW wanted to be a homemaker with child). Everyone must have their own income for their sanity and protection.
P.S. Though oddly, I still pay the mortgage and all the bills (except food). So maybe something has gone wrong...

100% yes yes and more yes you are right.
I have a good job, good salary and got a retention bonus that I saved despite my partner being angry that I was "hoarding" it. We later broke up and that money has saved my ass and then some. It is a lifeline for me and your advice here is absolute gold. Thank you for posting it.

What else is there to do?

That's not the point, the point is more women are in poverty in old age and dependent on their dh.