To wish woman didn’t have to work

[Blueberryancakes]

I think I was born in the wrong decade.

Somedays/Most days I wish I lived in the days when once a woman got married she would give up work. Stay at home have children, cook and clean.

I know it’s such an anti feminist opinion but I guess that’s how I feel.

I enjoy cooking and cleaning. I hate going to work. I wish we lived in a time when 1 wage would pay the bills.

Anyone else think like me?
I know woman now have so many career options nowadays but house wife seems to be a very privileged one.

I was a housewife and an now a SAHM and I love my life. Can't imagine going to work and missing out on time with children, I really do feel so fortunate.

I would love to be a house husband, I generally do most of the cooking and cleaning anyway and it would be great to do the after school pick-up and walk through the park everyday.

I would hate to be in the house all the time; relying on my husband’s salary and not having much independence; however I am grateful I was able to work part time when children were little.

And on the flip side, I don't know any who stayed at home. Our personal experiences aren't necessarily representative of the whole.

So?

Who stays in the house all the time? What nonsense.

I'm not kidding myself. For me the "option" not to work is only if I won the lottery and had my own finances. Relying on a man for money is not an "option" for me and never will be. I'm not slating it by the way, I just personally don't want to do it. Even if I was married to a millionaire. I never, ever want to give the man an opportunity to be able to say to me "you only have this because of me".

Thank you for this; I have been thinking this for a long time. I think that this is the root of the problem overall. If house prices hadn’t escalated to the point that they have then we would all have more choice. Mortgages should be based on one salary and a “couple” could choose which salary to base it on. Prices wouldn’t be able to rise because there wouldn’t be enough buyers.

I don’t fully agree with your statements, but I don’t think it is good for a child to have 2 FT working parents, and think there should be more hybrid options to do this.

I had a full on career, then had fertility treatment for many years, and found that so upsetting and emotional that I gave up work when DC1 arrived to look after them, then more fertility treatment for DC2.

I was lucky enough to have a high earning DP, and I was a SAHM for a fair chunk. Whilst I loved it, I also regretted it because when I had marriage bumps I was very vulnerable. I wouldn’t do it again.

That said, I love my life now. My DC are older, I work 3 days a week. My DH works from home when I am working, and we fudge the crossover. I don’t have a high paying job, and I am not ambitious. I am happiest pottering around for, and with my family. I earn an OK amount, my state pension is in place, and I have a private pension. I am employable.

I think the days of being a SAHP are largely over, but something has to give, because our society is a massive fuck up at the moment, and looking after children better (parenting, schools, NHS) is where it all needs to be turned around.

A very thought provoking response.

oh, and buy-to-let mortgages should either be banned altogether or the rents should be fixed based on local salaries. At the moment tax payers are subsidising these BTL landlords by supporting housing costs for lower earners. It’s madness. If
people want money for retirement put it in a pension like normal people do.

Agree with this. And much more social housing should be available for lower earners who can't afford to buy.

I need to feel at the end of a day that I have done something worthwhile. Had 7 years off from a big job looking after pre schoolers which I did enjoy and felt valuable and so glad I did that but when dd2 started school I had a visceral need for more to fill my time in a worthwhile way and to earn money. No way I could have continued as sahm to school age children I would have got down.

My grandmothers both worked and looked after the home. My parents talk of washing day and it really did take all day to do by hand. Cleaning was manual and back breaking. Kids spent all their free time out with their friends in the street from very very small. You can go back to that time but you wouldn’t be doing mum and baby classes - you’d be on your knees scrubbing the step. No thanks!

Post war and up until the 1960s, being a housewife was a full time job. There were no vacuum cleaners, refrigerators, automatic washing machines etc. They were expected to make and mend everything from clothing to curtains and cook everything from scratch. Staying home has become a cushy option, but it wasn’t always that way.

Have you?

What did the poster you’re insulting say that’s incorrect? Women have always worked, and the period that wannabe tradwives hark back to as ‘traditional’ where men worked and women stayed home was only ever the norm for some women for a relatively short period of time.

The other PP you’re arguing with has a fair point too. Life is increasingly expensive and commercialised these days - nobody is saying that women in the past never went to the hairdressers, but the advertising/ (social) media, algorithms and endless clever new ways to convince everyone they need to spend more just keep on increasing. Not everyone buys into all of it, but it’s there.

But I love my job and would be absolutely miserable staying at home. I only work 3.5 days and my kids are a bit older now. I’m lucky that I have a nice balance and a husband who is also aware that he is responsible for the upkeep of his own house and parenting his children.

I understand why you might want to be at home when your kids are little, but there will soon be a time when they don’t need you much anymore.

Sometimes I wish I could be a Victorian lady where all I’d have to tell is Cook what I wanted for dinner that evening and arrange the occasional ball. And have the children bought down for one hour before dinner (only kidding, I’d miss them).
But then, women did have autonomy or many rights. Today’s world isn’t perfect but at least we have ownership over our bodies and life choices. Not working did, and still does, put women in a vulnerable position where they can’t leave toxic marriages/relationships.

Both my grandmothers worked (nurse and teacher born 1909/1915)

No one has to work if they have someone prepared to fund them to stay at home. Nothing has changed in that respect. Most families can't afford to have an economically inactive adult member. Again - nothing has changed in that respect. It is always a very small proportion of any population that don't need to work to support themselves - there are women and men today who don't have to work. Become rich enough or latch onto someone rich enough and you can be a woman who doesn't work.

I think it's a shame that some people don't have the option to stay at home if they want to, or go back if they want to but can't afford to due to the cost of childcare.

I work full time and I like being able to work. While I love being with my son and feel fulfilled being a mum, work gives me a purpose to my life that parenting doesn't and my work is very fulfilling. I like earning my own money, knowing I'm making pension and national insurance contributions and knowing I wouldn't struggle financially if anything happened with me and my husband.

I would like to work part time but can't afford to. It is what it is. My son is happy and attached well and that's the main thing. I don't feel guilt for working or for others looking after him during the day. The notion of a stay at home parent is a relatively new concept. For centuries, women have gone out to work and children have been brought up by a range of care givers.

This.

There were a lot of downsides to it, OP.

Women didn't have it easy.

I come from a line of women who stayed at home and I have also stayed at home. It is truly wonderful and I wouldn't change it. It is awful what capitalism has done to people.

In the 1950's it was much more possible to support a family on one income than it is now. It was the norm. The cost of living now means that generally both people have to work to maintain a household, kids, etc.

I understand that apprehension.

In a healthy relationship though, there IS an understanding and appreciation that each 'only' has this or that because of (I'd say with, rather than because of) the other. I know my husband values all I bring to the table, he routinely says so (and vice versa).

If a marriage is good, neither partner will be using individual contribution as a weapon. That type of thing just doesn't figure in a healthy relationship.