'I do all these things AND work FT'

[Bumpitybumper]

I see this on Mumsnet a lot but have just experienced it in real life. I have two friends (A&B). Friend A is a SAHM to school age kids and Friend B works FT in quite a stressful job. Friend B was just lamenting that they don't understand how Friend A fills her time as she manages to work FT AND do everything Friend A does.

The thing is, Friend B has a much smaller (yet lovely) house that is pretty chaotic in fun energetic way. It is never the tidiest or cleanest but it's not disgusting either. Friend A on the other hand has a much bigger house that is pretty immaculate most of the time. Friend A does all the school runs and volunteers at school. Friend B needs wraparound care in order to get to work so drops her kids of at 8 and collects around 17:30. Friend A cooks amazing meals for her family, has her children's friends round for fun playdates and activities and is generally incredibly on top of everything. Friend B is understandably more stretched and isn't in the position to cook lavish meals every day of the week or have friends round when she's at work. Friend B's husband does a lot (of course absolutely fair and right) so she doesn't have to attend every parents evening, sew all the badges for extracurricular clubs or assist with all the homework etc. Friend A does pretty much all of that as husband works such long hours.

I actually think both are amazing and very productive people that channel their energy, time and talent in different channels. I just struggle to understand though how Friend B can't appreciate that she isn't doing the same as Friend A or at least doing it to the same standard. Before people suggest I'm Friend A, I have my own business so don't really fit in either camp but used to be a SAHM so I guess can see Friend A's efforts more.

AIBU to think that Friend B is a bit deluded?

FWIW, I don't recognise the image of SAHM with a clean and tidy Instagram-type house. In my experience, SAHMs have homes which look as if children live in them all the time.

I imagine their husbands pay a whack in tax mind if they can afford for one parent to give up work, especially if it’s until they’re teenagers. I know this is not always the case, of course. I say that lightheartedly before anyone kicks off. 😁

I agree with you OP. Friend b’s life is probably more stressful and incredibly busy but she’s not doing the same as friend a on top of her full time job. By choice that’s totally fine. Neither is the right way to be but it does annoy me when people say they are doing the same. Yes you are both keeping your children fed/housed/alive but the SAHMs is doing more around the house/with the children as that’s her “job” and the other mum will outsource some of that as she also works full time. Friend B probably does 50% of what friend A does plus her ft job so she is working super hard, but it’s not honest to pretend she does exactly the same PLUS her job

But is that because women are 'wired' that way and men aren't or is it because we live in a sexist society where women are encouraged to be 'carers' from birth and men are encouraged to be 'providers'?

If the message you consistently get from a young age is that 'real' men provide for their families then of course you are going to be less likely to have the desire to look after children but that doesn't mean they aren't just as capable if they'd get even half of the encouragement girls do from birth when it comes to caring and caring roles.

There is a LOT of judgement towards women who choose to be SAHM's these days and I don't really know why. It's one reason I chose to be childfree as being neurodiverse there's no way I could have coped with both children AND a job. I feel like over moving forwards from Victorian times/feminism etc should be about freedom of choice for women these days, however it works for that family. Some women really need intellectual stimulation from working, others don't and have more than enough hobbies/interests to enjoy during the day "beyond the kids". Some women earn enough to make it worthwhile, relative to child care, others don't. HAD I had kids then I'd have much preferred a traditional role where I am a SAHM and the man is the breadwinner but many men aren't interested in breadwinner roles anymore, hence the rise of the "cocklodger" role often posted on here.

Personally, I think sucking up your days working for an employer is massively over rated. "But what about the gap in your CV?" Well, maybe it's a flaw in the system that needs to be changed over woman's choices? Who cares if there's a gap on a CV or not? We were born to do more than just work and then die. Society glorifies retirement but who knows if we'll even get to see it or be healthy enough? Fuck retirement. I want to live my life now whilst younger and able. An employer can replace you in an instant.

Explains why I’m so bloody tired then 😂

Also, by that token, I presume all the SAHP claiming that working mums aren’t “raising their kids” when they use childcare are also not raising their kids once their kids start school?

I don't think we are necessarily only talking about functionality as people value other things too and a lot of those other things can only be achieved with time and effort.

There is a car valet I know that is totally booked out and charges £150 a clean. He is absolutely meticulous and the cars are unbelievably clean when he has finished but you could achieve the objective of having a clean car in a functional sense by paying much less. His clients obviously value what he does enough to pay the extra and he spends quite a few hours on each car. The elaborate meals may not be more nutritious than than the simple meals but they may well be tastier, more diverse and interesting. Some people won't care about those things, other people will.

@Delt but that has nothing to do with her being a SAHP. Working outside the home doesn't stop bad parents from being bad parents.

How do you know that the majority of women have a 'visceral desire' to look after small children?

There is a LOT of judgement towards women who choose to be SAHM's these days and I don't really know why

I think it comes from a place of now being more aware of the choices women have, the fact that men (in the main) are self serving twats who are likely to fuck you over and leave you with no job, no pension and full care of the offspring.

So women not only need to contribute financially because everything is so expensive, but also they need to make sure they don't put themselves in a position where they are left with no income and a career down the swanny.

Onvs the old NAMALT adage is needed here, and wealthier families can afford to run a family on one decent wage.

But in the main - women don't do themselves any favours in the long run by stepping out of work.

This is rubbish. I do exactly the same as my sahm friends and in some cases I do more. What I don't do is have dogs that need walking twice a day or go and meet up with friends for a coffee or go to the gym. I literally work or spend time with my DC when they finish school and then get things done when they are not around eg at their clubs (if parents not encourage to stay) or in bed or with their dad.

Food for thought, @SouthLondonMum22.

My own experience was that I had no particularly caring or nurturing feelings at all, until I actually had my own children. I was fully intending to carry on working, but suddenly had no interest at all once DC1 was born. I was lucky to be able to choose either way.

It's also interesting about the 'man as provider' template. That was my own experience, growing up, and it's the one that seems to make sense to me. But it's true that my thinking could entirely be based on post hoc, ergo propter hoc logic.

I didn't grow up in a neat and tidy house, though, and am chronically untidy myself so I absolutely don't recognise the "SAHM = perfect house" trope.

This is why I will never encourage my daughter to be a SAHP. There are numerous posts on here every day about SAHP’s who “can’t leave”

I can leave my partner any time I like, because I can pay my own way. And I’d never leave myself vulnerable to being in a position where I was stuck in an unhappy relationship.

Many of us have children with men who love their children and are as competent and motivated to care for them as much as we are. And equally, many of us are just as good in the workplace, at forging a career and earning good money as they are.

That's why we don't all want to have polarised earner/carer roles. We're good at both. Hardly mind blowing!

but that has nothing to do with her being a SAHP. Working outside the home doesn't stop bad parents from being bad parents.

No, you can indeed be a shit parent either way. But some of us are better parents because we also work. My own mother was not a bad parent - but she would certainly have been a worse parent if she was a SAHM. She would have been bored and unfulfilled. Same with me, and my sister.
I'm sure we will now be told that women like us should not have children at all, clearly we are missing the hard wiring all women are supposed to have..

See, I was told during pregnancy that I’d change my mind but I didn’t. I even suspected that I’d take a short maternity leave and I didn’t change my mind about that either.

It also helps that I love my career, maybe I’d have felt differently if I hated what I do.

I've read your other posts and they are bizarre. You seem to think there is an objective standard for parenting and doestic cleanliness and that B is slovenly and inattentive in her ministrations whereas A is some kind of paragon.

It seems weird to me to pretend teachers have no role in the bringing up of children. Of course what you are taught at school and by whom has an influence on you. In what way is that not being involved in the upbringing of a child? What weird sort of a denial do some people live in? The longer you are away from your child and the more often they are under the influence of others, the more others are involved in the end result.

I’m not at all saying you don’t work insanely hard! Just that if say a sahm mum has the kids from 3pm that’s 2/3 hours she has the kids that the mum in the office doesn’t. The mum in the office may be working way harder in those hours but both are doing things the other isn’t. One isn’t better than the other they both have pros and cons. It’s just a physical impossibility (unless of course the sahm only does leisure activities and coffee 8am -6pm which I don’t think friend a does in this case) There are only so many hours in the day! Personally I think friend A has the easier life by far, but I also recognise that she can fit things in that friend B can’t, due to the fact friend B is at work for 8-10 hours a day

@FlippyFloppyShoe not sure why that didn’t reply properly to you!

@MrsF111 I have the DC from 3pm too

The thing is, people who are SAHP and people who work BOTH send their kids to school. So the role of teachers in “raising” both sets of children is surely the same?

I do wonder what on earth friends who are SAHPs do to fill their time.But would never express that to them

Well in your case then it’s different, but the majority of people in full time work at 9-5 (as is the friend B who this post is about) as so get home/pick children up at 6. If someone is only working in school hours and has all school holidays off then yes I would agree they work plus do everything the SAHM does.

Yes. And?…

Teachers and childcare providers absolutely have a role in caring for children as well as educating them but the main influences are parents because they are the ones who raise them no matter if they work outside of the home or not.

There's a difference between saying that you send a child to nursery or school for strangers to raise them and nursery/school have a role and some influence in a child's life.