Women end up being losers no matter what

[doireallywanttostartthisnow]

Situation A: well educated woman meets man, marries, has child, feels overwhelmed by childcare cost/ options, gives up work, has another child, finds it hard to get back into wink place now eldest is at school, needs to be around for the month of half days, sick days, strike days, nursery closures and so as not to interrupt husbands career so he can earn more 'family money'. Husband ends up resentful, doesn't pay into pension for dear wife, moans about work stress that she doesn't understand. Wife feels too belittled to return to work or goes into something way below her level of experience. She used to be a marketing manager but now she works at a local toy shop as it's shorter hours and flexible (but MW and business may go bust/ no room for progression).

Situation B: same woman does not give up career, goes back after mat leave, faces judgement, works for free due to childcare costs until eldest is 3. Uses holiday club and wraparound childcare. Feels like a hamster on a wheel and knows none of the parents names as she's never in the after school park club. Still has to deal with all the house/ life admin. Resents husband. Leaves the bastard. Now officially does everything alone (woohoo?). Ex DH pays a minimal amount which only covers some childcare. Woman may be financially better off but is exhausted and also faces judgement due to leaving the marriage.

The problem is that hardly anyone is in situation C meaning happy, less stressed, supported, financially independent and in a truly equal marriage. I know about three women who are.
So what do we teach our daughters? Don't have kids? Choose better men? So few men appear to be bellends when we first meet them at art school? None of them appear to be moany, vindictive, controlling, feeble, martyr like or miserly?
How do we ever move on from the fate of being either supported ('kept') or independent ('exhausted')?

Could it really be that women aren't planning well? Why are children and relationships any different than a DIY project? If you jump in and just 'do it' because it's your right, no wonder you fail.

I don't buy ANYTHING until I have the money in the bank... but people seem to have kids and then have that "oh sh!t" moment. Or those people struggling now who spent 10k+ on a wedding??? It's selfish and irresponsible to put a relationship into debt for one day.

Kids, relationships and divorces are expensive. Don't enter into any of them before knowing they can be afforded.

I agree with OP, but much of this is either self-inflicted or avoidable with planning.

@Zipidydodah

You worded it better :)

Finding that balance of doing what you want and being secure is a tough one,, especially now. I had over a decade at home with the children while dh worked and still was very present at home. It was such a happy time. I did keep up skilling and training though and this turned into some consultancy so when dh became suddenly very ill and couldn’t work I was straight back in at my old level and soon promoted. It’s not just planning for wankers it’s planning for life and supporting women in having the confidence to invest in themselves. One friend didn’t want to do the final qualification that would double her income post degree as her and her dh were very short of cash and it wouldn’t be fair on him yet he only does four days a week as he doesn’t like doing five. He doesn’t like being left with the kids or cooking for them - boo fucking hoo. Women need each other to make these sorts of inequalities clear so we can all put ourselves at the top of our agenda.

You only mention facing judgement in scenario 2. You always face judgement, as long as you know you made the right choice so what?

Smug or what?
Firstly there aren’t that many well paid professional jobs around,for every one there is probably 100 minimum wage jobs. Then realistically not every woman would be able to do them.
Then it’s fine to talk about things before you marry / have children but that’s just words. Most people don’t actually understand the reality of children until they are here and then it’s too late.

My advice to dds is work hard at school get professional qualifications/ experience under your belt when you are young and unencumbered then you are always employable even if you take a few years out. That’s what all the women in our family have done anyway and most of my friends. Everyone who took a few years out has got back to good jobs.

C1N1C ‘planning’ is also about capacity, education, culture and society. It’s not as accessible for all women which is why there needs to be more discussion and more modelling if this. A colleague who married within her religion but not legally was wondering allowed whether there was any benefit to a legal marriage (as she prepped to go part time after mat leave). She is bright and independent but this type of furtive planning hasn’t previously been part of the conversations that surround her.

@Nevermay I reckon you are roughly ages with myself, except you are from a middle class background. Makes a BIG difference when it came to getting a mortgage as a single parent years ago. I couldn't get a mortgage large enough for a three bedroomed for my two opposite sex children 18 years ago. And I was on a reasonably okay wage. Didn't have much savings though. No family backup. Also knowing about fostering and adoption, you wouldn't have been allowed to adopt unless you had financial security behind you in those days, so you definitely had some sort of inheritance or something you aren't telling us. A working class girl would not have been allowed to just adopt children randomly like that, unless it was caring for extended family members' children. And none of us are losers by the way. You just had an easier time because of your privilege.

This might be an unpopular opinion, but to be honest I think the reason women get shafted is often because they want children much more than men do. A lot of men have children because the wife/partner wants them and if they were asked if they wanted children if it meant they had to do what women do (i.e take at least 6months off work, go part-time etc) then they would say no and just wouldn’t have children. But a lot of women are so desperate for babies that they’ll have them despite knowing how hard it’ll be be whether they give up work or juggle a career and kids.

I think it comes down to the societal attitude of women having to have it all, and one that, at the same time, allows men far more freedom with far less pressure.

Women are under societal pressure to be perfect, Barbie-like: perfectly toned body, high-flying career, doting mother, caring family member, perfect and sparkling house, social butterfly. Anything less than perfect in any aspect gets openly judged, talked about behind their backs, critigued.

I don't see men being under nearly as much sociatal pressure to be perfect. The dad bod is a thing while a mum bod is seem as frumpy. Careers, yes, men get judged on that. Fatherhood: there are minimum expectations. A man who, say, does the school run, is looked up to, while for a mum it's just normal and expected. A father who leaves their family is not judged nearly as harshly as a woman who does the same. Men are often not primary carers for family members, usually because the pressure to be a high earner is larger than the pressure to perform a caring role. Men who live in a pigsty are laughed about, but no one would make the scathing remarks they make about women whose places are a mess. Men don't have the same pressure to be nice and liked by everyone.

I saw a concert the other day. They have a main, female singer and had a guest singer for the male role. The female singer was perfectly dressed up, performing to her usual, high standard - singing, dancing, entertaining. The guest singer had an awesome voice and sang his part well, but he was on stage in a band shirt, tucked into his jeans, stood there with a hand in his pocket, beer belly bulging over his trousers. Everybody lauded his performance, but all I could think at the time was, she'd never have been able to get away with appearing like that on stage.

For as long as there is so much more pressure on women to be perfect and we conform, rather than telling people where to shove their opinions and happily accept that we CANNOT be perfect, the situations in your OP will not change. Where is the pressure on the man in situation B to parent at least 50/50 after breakup? Where is the pressure on the man in situation A to fully provide, not just for family money in general, but also to simply look after his wife? Why does the woman in situation A feel the need to go back to work?

Honestly this is some gnashing of teeth; there are single women raising children with good jobs and those jobs were secured because they got a good education and kept up their work.

Staying at home and part time work is a ticket to disrespect. And poverty if the marriage does not work out.

Societies that are better for women, better salaries and quality of life also have happier children. The UK model of SAHM is based on some post war patriarchical fantasy which no longer exists. Yes you have to work but you get the freedom to live your own life and not trailing around after a man who will do all the providing.

This matters because if I want my own children to have good lives I will be telling them to look for families with working women as part of that set up. Men raised with that are at least less likely to have the expectation that the person without a penis is always head cook, bottle washer or if wealthy, co-ordinator of cooks and bottle washers...

I really loathe this narrative around women should choose their husbands more carefully or choose a man who "shares their values".

Firstly its victim blaming of the first order to blame a woman for failing to spot the fact that her husband was going to cheat or become a man child or a controlling arse.

But more importantly it just misses the nuance of the way married life tends to slowly skew towards benefiting the man at the expense of the woman.

I mean yes obviously don't marry someone who you know is cheating on you or abusive or who you think has controlling or misogynistic red flags. That's just obvious. But it's so simplistic and smug to say: "I picked a man who shared my values!" Well done, me, have a biscuit.

Someone wanging on to you in the courtship phase about what a progressive man they are and how much they value women's empowerment and plan to do half of all childcare is not something you can take to the bank. It may be a very different story indeed when they are on a promotion track and you're at home with two kids, bored out of your tree and want their help. There's an awful lot of men who talk the talk here but don't actually walk the walk.

Obviously a (genuinely) progressive man who does actually support domestically as is close as you can get to a silver bullet and will make your life a lot easier. But there's still no substitute for not having to rely on this man in the first place. By all means find yourself an impressively credentialled progressive man: it's much better than being married to a caveman. But don't count on this being enough on its own to stop them valuing their career over yours.

And she still get pension and NI contributions as well as get to keep her career going

which is fine if you don't want children, but if you do, there is another common factor between A and B, which is being in a relationship.

My solution for avoiding A and B for women that want children is "don't have a partner"

True imo. Certainly for me.

Almost all fathers don't do as much wife work as woman. I personally know none. Also I lived in Denmark for 15 odd years where care is most shared of any country in the world and I still don't know any. If you picked one, very well done, but it is basically luck - not by excellent pre-children vetting or getting a great profession. The vast majority of woman have to shoulder most the burden of children. We as a society should do more to support woman in this task. Saying that these things can be mitigated by picking the right guy or getting the right job is short sighted imo.

I don't think I have ever seen a heterosexual marriage that is equal in terms of the division of domestic and caring labour. Not one. And I think the stats on housework do bear out the contention that this is gendered as an issue: even where women work more hours in waged jobs they still also tend to do more socially reproductive labour when it is all calculated up.

It is a major cultural and employment problem that is structural, I.e. it goes way beyond individual choices.

Absolutely!

When I had my children I went back to work part time which in turn reduced my income and meant I missed out on career progression.

But this is what I chose for myself.

I didn’t feel forced into this decision or that I had no other option.

I wanted to be at home with my children.

I know this option is incomprehensible
to most Mumsnetters though…..

The only genuinely equal heterosexual marriage I know of (equal in terms of income and the amount of labour put into the home) is one with no children. I know of one other where the couple have taken turns to be the SAHP (the wife was for 5-6 years, now she is working and the husband is very part time but is the primary carer).

There are other marriages which are more or less equal and where it's fudged enough that the wife is comfortable. But when children arrive its almost impossible to have total parity here.

This is why it irritates me when people tell single mothers that they should have chosen better. Most men do not present like this at first and this is why so many young women I come across are not only chosing not to have children but they're also choosing to be celebate or have a handy fwb.

Yes I think the scales are tipped against women. We are more likely to be impoverished by parenthood and more likely to be judged for any choice we make.

My DH and I both work 4 days a week, but I seem to do more housework. We earn about the same, even though I am far more educated.

It's close to equality, it's never perfect. But I feel I have been able to be a present mother and have a good career.

I agree. When I was considering having children I knew I’d more likely end up in either situation A or B rather than C and neither A or B seemed appealing so I didn’t have children. But I appreciate the maternal desire is so strong in lots of women that they have kids knowing they’ll end up in A or B anyway. For me it seemed more of a ‘choice’ so I chose not to. Lots of women don’t seem to realise that life is full of hard choices, and they can choose to not to have A or B at the sacrifice of being childless.

Your post is full of biais to fit your narrative.

Many women go back to work because they want to. Because they enjoy their job, or at least enjoy working and being around working people. Because they find looking after children full time not fulfilling. Amazingly, these women manage to find ways to do it.

Many si gle mums also work and don't cry every night because their lives are miserable. Yes it is hard, but can also be fulfilling emotionally and psychologically. Knowing that you solely support your family and manage a career makes you feel quite good about yourself.

I find that working women are not judge anywhere as much as women who stay home.

Women do have many choices but that often entails some sacrifices or efforts that many women are not prepared to make.

We all swim in an ocean of misogyny that we're often barely aware of. The kind of misogyny which you've described, where woman are always in the wrong. If they work, they're neglecting and damaging their kids. If they don't work, they're sponging off their husband. If men work they're heroically supporting their family; if they're stay at home dads, they're heroically giving up their career.

So men may start out with the best of intentions, but they live in a society that constantly and subtly excuses their behaviour, whatever they do. And women's work is invisible, so they ignore it, or pretend to themselves it's unnecessary. It's a kind of tidal pull of entitlement and obliviousness.

@Zipidydodah · Today 00:17

How about option D where women aren’t ‘victims’ and ensure they have an equal partnership with their husband. They secure a well paid professional career first. They only stay with partners that prove over time that they can contribute fully and equally to household chores and finances. Then they discuss AT LENGTH with their partner BEFORE they get married let alone pregnant his finances and workload will be split and do not go ahead with marriage/ pregnancy unless they are met with unequivocal enthusiastic agreement to this equal role. It really isn’t difficult.

Genuinely one of the most breathtakingly naive and clueless posts I have ever read on here. I don't even know where to start! 😬 You're living in dolly daydream land.

No, they are really not living in dolly daydream land, women can choose NOT to be victims.