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.

Why?

Why would I be joking? As a SAHM, they wouldn’t be ‘getting’ your children at 6 months or 12 months anyway.

Well exactly. That would not be happening.

But it didn’t happen for you anyway and it wouldn’t no matter what.

Ah people are different, aren't they. I was totally tunnel-visioned while looking after my baby full-time, and starting daycare helped me come up for air and look around a bit. Maybe some people are more relaxed mothers than I am.

I genuinely feel daycare is great for our family as my baby gets a well-rested, engaged mummy when we hang out

Firstly no childcare worker "gets" your kids as you're well aware. That's an absurdly histrionic way to characterise it. Your kids are your kids.

Secondly, many of us don't have a choice in the matter. Being able to remain with your children is a luxury some of us literally can't afford.

Thirdly, there is literally nothing to back up the idea that putting young children in childcare is dangerous or damaging.

You are totally entitled to want to look after your own children if you can but there is no objective basis for this over-dramatic reaction to the idea of childcare for young children and it's unpleasant for those of us who have to use it. Your remarks are tone deaf, ill-informed and borderline offensive.

Sorry for follow up post but just to apologise for going off topic: the thread is about making sure women don't get trapped in bad situations. I think that's important for all women (whether woth or sahm), so no need to start getting into the ins and outs of judging each other's parenting

Nursery is beneficial for us too, parents and baby. He gets so much out of nursery.

Don't worry, I think the thread got derailed some time ago.

It's a shame. I think it was started with a genuine desire to try to prevent other women finding themselves in vulnerable financial situations but it seems to have been misinterpreted as being an attack on SAHMs and has descended into the usual SAHM/WOHM argument.

I couldn't agree more and have consistently insisted that women should have the right to do what they want and need for their children without judgement or criticism.

But when people who have the luxury of not needing to use childcare characterise childcare as some Dickensian horror to which they would only submit their children on pain of death I will call it out as the judgemental bullshit it is.

It is a joke on childcare, because there are nannies, childminders and nurseries and depending on what class you are then all or only some are acceptable.

A few generations ago people with money had nannies raise their children and then they went to boarding school. That is still what happens to some. As such, the challenge of child rearing is just ported out.

The above is a brutal way to raise a child but because it is done with money, and willfully done, then no questions are asked.

I don't know why it's offensive to say that you would not use childcare. It's the truth for many and it's no use pretending otherwise. Some people wouid only be a SAHM on 'pain if death' and there is a tendency for certain posters to be overly dramatic about that. Some women don't want kids at all and can't understand why anyone would. Nobody's preferences need to be taken as a direct criticism of your own.

I wouldn't have a nanny or au-pair either and nor would I use boarding schools at a later age, fwiw. Plenty do though.

It’s offensive to some people because some people don’t have a choice.

Some people don't have a choice but to be a SAHM either. Doesn't seem to stop people criticising them.

@Thepeopleversuswork yes, I notice people can be extremely judge-y about all things related to motherhood (breastfeeding, co-sleeping, sleep training etc.). They get really prickly and I think it must come somewhere from defensiveness, i.e. not realising that just because someone chooses to do something different to you that doesn't mean they are critical of what you're doing. There's this sort of brittleness that makes mothers go on the attack.

I do wish social media (and I include Instagram etc) would be less judgey. It makes motherhood harder and less pleasant to feel judged all the time. You can probably tell I'm new here!

Steer clear of the boarding school threads then Islandermummy!

Sorry, but that doesn't wash.

I've gone out of my way (as have other working parents) to say that I would never, ever judge any woman who stays at home with her children and to recognise that many people (on both sides of this discussion) don't have a choice in the matter. Many women are both forced to work and not to work, which is part of the problem.

Pointing out that women who never work are financially vulnerable is not a criticism, it is a demonstrable fact. Most SAHMs recognise this.

Throwing up your hands in mock horror at the prospect of having to use childcare settings, when you are perfectly aware that you have that choice and most don't (and that some are anxious and upset about not having the choice), is rude and goady. Its a bit like driving through a poor area of town, clutching your pearls and exclaiming in horror at the ghastly way the plebs have to live.

I've tried really hard not to personalise this debate and to make sure that both sides are treated with compassion and dignity. And up to that point, so had you. But that remark about "no one is having my child" was mean, spiteful and completely without class.

Er, you have said you judge women who are SAHMs beyond a certain age @Thepeopleversuswork. Most if your posts read something like "I would never judged but..." and then you do just that in some detail.

How do you think SAHM who can't work because if disabled children - or all sorts of issues - feel reading your comments that their lives are boring, lacking purpose and, more than that, they are holding women back in the workplace.

If dh and I were to share childcare and both of us would work reasonable hours to achieve that, we would go from being financially very, very comfortable to being financially stressed. I enjoy my type of work, plus having time to be there with my dcs, and despite being Oxbridge educated, never fancied a career in the city. In fact, I got onto a banking graduate scheme and lasted 3 weeks, I hated it so much. Dh enjoys it and would hate what I do (I'm a manager of a retirement village with a hands on roll in pastoral care, community activities and end of life care). By supporting my dh in his career by doing most of the housework/childcare and working reduced hours, we can have almost everything we value, happy children, a lovely home, music lessons, instruments, art, holidays, pets, a nice car, a private education for our dc, a cleaner and gardener, pension savings and investments. If both worked say 30 hours on a median wage, we would lose a lot of life satisfaction and about 80% of our income. Most of all, my dh would lose the joy that comes from being successful in his job, and I would lose the joy that comes from knowing I can choose a job because of the meaning and joy it brings, not because it pays the mortgage.

You're mischaracterising what i've said: I don't accept that I've judged SAHMs. I said three or four times I don't judge SAHMs and I have never said their lives are boring or lack purpose. I've not said anything about the parents of disabled children but I have been very clear that many women don't have a choice and obviously these women would fall under that category.

I did say I think spending an entire supported by your husband is a questionable decision and I stand by that. I think its incredibly risky and reckless to build a life spanning multiple decades, and beyond the point where your children require it, on financial dependency on another person. But I was very clear that I completely understand people who choose to remain at home with small children.

There's a huge difference between identifying a lifestyle as likely to make you financially vulnerable and judging people.

But your remarks about childcare seemed calculated to imply that there is some moral superiority attached to your ability (whether by accident or design) to avoid having to use paid childcare when you are very well aware that many women have no alternative.

It's not just you @Thepeopleversuswork. But in general, this is an opinions forum. Of course some people will be shocked and horrified that some women don't work. It produces an emotive response in many, as these threads show because women equate it with inequality. I can understand that. But also, other people will be shocked that babies as young as 12 weeks can be in childcare all week. People must realise this - it can hardly come as a surprise. Both situations could be described as quite rare, even extreme ends of a spectrum.

Maybe. There is certainly a lot of anxiety and defensiveness and people do certainly say unkind and unworthy things about SAHMs.

But I do also think if you're in the (extremely lucky) position of not having to worry about these things at all, a bit of sensitivity and empathy when wading into a debate with women who have had to make these choices wouldn't go amiss.

But these are myths that women can't do any of the below.

I mean, I send my children to private school, they have pets, holidays, I live in a nice area, but I did it. I mean, this is just a function of money. I suppose I could have got a man to do that but I didn't.

I was raided totally differently with the big house, father with the job and mother at home. Once we had reached a certain age then she had little to do: yes lots of voluntary work but she was bored. I never wanted to be like her, nor did my sister or brother. We have made our own arrangements for childcare much more equal as a result.

This is what I mean when I say the social norm is changing. I expect my daughters will have more tools and ideas to ensure they keep their independence as they go own to have families if they want to.

And fwiw, of course I don't judge single mums or women who have no choice. All my posts have been in direct response to the narrative from certain posters in here that, in an ideal world, all women should be pushed into STEM; all should prioritise career over all else; 'just get childcare' asap; don't rely on a man for anything; don't expect anything of him financially; your money is your money and don't share with him or anyone ever. I think this is all a bit extreme and would make for a very anxious, restricted kind of society where, yet again, women and children would suffer the most.