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.

We obviously live in very different neighbourhoods. Having said that, it was not a well to do area by any means. And not one mother worked. So 🤷‍♀️

As women are fighting to gain equality in STEM fields and other predominantly male dominated fields, why aren’t men being looked at to fill traditional female roles? Or does diversity and equality only work one way?

We really need to stop devaluing what it means and how hard it is to look after our own children. It’s not a doss or a cop out for a woman. Women add a lot to the workplace, but their role as mothers shouldn’t be devalued if they choose to have that as their primary focus.

Sure dads can stay at home but during the baby phase, it makes more sense for the woman with her body recovering and breastfeeding.

I have a thriving career in tech, but having my baby and being on mat leave is far harder for me as it’s relentless.

I grew up in very different circumstances to how I live now. You really aren't educating me on what it is to go without.

When I say some people, I mean some people. That includes men and women. If both parents want to spend more time with their children that is for them to figure out, I'm not a guru and can't suggest hypothetical ideas for couples I don't know. What usually happens is the person who is making the most money is the person who continues to work.

So what did you actually do to jump so far up the social and financial scale apart from marrying a rich.man? Might be useful for all young women to find out how to improve their lives

Sorry, what does the ‘nope’ cover? Spousal maintenance isn’t extremely rare, I’ve seen this in action. It’s simply untrue that women are ‘expected to pay for themselves’. If you support your husband to achieve their career and earning potential, you also have a legal right to access maintenance going forwards. I guess it depends on what you consider to be a ‘v high earner’….but the point still stands.

I must say though I am very impressed with your vigour for SAHM’s finances and general risk assessment.

Do you also worry about anyone else that you personally feel may get themselves into a financial corner?

Because you have, several times now, demanded that people explain what you said that belied your prejudice, when they already had.

Except nobody has been able to provide a quote that specifically proves I have any type of prejudice towards working mothers. You have just made assumptions about my meanings with no evidence to support how you got there.

The conversation shifts to working mothers and suddenly you're speaking condescendingly about materialism and people valuing it over their children..

The conversation did not shift to working mothers. I specifically said PEOPLE. Again you're adding 2+2 and getting 5.

And irrelevant anecdotes about council houses and riches aside, it does not take a genius to see why someone on 200k isn't best placed to talk about materialism

So why is my anecdote about my previous situation of growing up poor any less relevant to you than my anecdote about being wealthy now. How much a household brings in has little to do with being able to have an opinion on what materialism is, it is a universal topic.

Good God, this is getting boring. Perhaps we could cut all the crap and just ask: how does one become a money driven parent earning £200k, without also being a materialist who doesn't spend as much time with the kids as a SAHP and isn't to any extent valuing money over time with family?

(I appreciate there's a "choice of hours", as you'd expect at that salary, and the kids are teens... but presumably he wasn't always choosing his hours as he worked his way up there while the kids were younger? And anyway, unless he never sleeps, that's still time spent working. So how does he manage it?)

And comments like this is why I will call someone bitter.

Good God, this is getting boring. Perhaps we could cut all the crap and just ask: how does one become a money driven parent earning £200k, without also being a materialist who doesn't spend as much time with the kids as a SAHP and isn't to any extent valuing money over time with family?

As a couple, it makes sense for one parent to 'be money driven' and focus on their career in the knowledge that their partner is caring for and looking after the children!

So what did you actually do to jump so far up the social and financial scale apart from marrying a rich.man? Might be useful for all young women to find out how to improve their lives

What a jealous and bitter comment

I don’t think it does.

to me it makes more sense for both to go part time, or reduce hours. Then both can spend time with the children, 2x 0.7 salaries are better than 1 full time, both keep up with pensions, earning power and keep financial options open. It also reduces the risk of the earner not being able to earn, as the other is, and can pick up the slack if needed.

it makes no sense to me for one partner to leave all the kids and house stuff to the other, while one abdicates all financial responsibility. Imo it’s a better option to spread the risk.

Honestly SAHMs go on a lot about the benefits for kids and I def agree, but as above, in SAHM cases where (high earning or otherwise) husband is at work or stressed out all the time, would prob be more beneficial for kids to have close, consistent and enduring relationships with both parents

Yes it is getting boring, particularly as you're now changing the subject to deflect from your inability to address the complete lack of evidence for my alleged prejudice toward working mothers specifically. It's been a whole lot of misinterpretations and mental gymnastics which is a poor basis to make accusations upon.

Cut the crap? I never suggested that my DH or myself were not materialistic in our own ways. There is no 'crap to be cut' on that regard. Again you're assuming without any basis.

The vast majority of people are materialistic in some way shape or form, it is for the individuals involved to decide what work life balance suits them according to their preferences.

@Tartantunic is what Samlewis96 said not true?

How DID you get your cushy number? I am taking notes.

As a couple, it makes sense for one parent to 'be money driven' and focus on their career in the knowledge that their partner is caring for and looking after the children

For some couples. In some others, both parents want to be actively involved in their children's lives, then other options make sense for them.

Ok...but what prevents that person from being a materialist who is valuing earning money over time with the kids?

You and your husband are both materialistic? Then what makes you two better than the ones whom you criticised for valuing materialism over time with children? At what point does the materialism become acceptable and why?

Not jealous lol. I'm way past All the small kids stuff. And id absolutely HATE being reliant on a man Just interesting. Seeing as the poster is sooo pro SAHM. ( As long as their husband can pay for it lol) it seems they may not have actually been overly work oriented in the first place to improve their live so much

These threads are always weird.

Money is nice. Spending time with your kids is nice (or doing whatever else you enjoy doing). It's a trade off.

Kids benefit from having parental time and they also benefit (in different ways) from having more money. And they benefit by having happy parents.

Most people find their best life somewhere along this spectrum without neglecting their kids. People make different choices. That's fine! The world would be boring if everyone was the same, right?

I should add that I'm really, really not criticising anyone's lifestyle or choices here. But I think there is something to observe when accusations of materialism and missing time with kids etc get slung around when this never, ever, seems to be a problem in the case of a man supporting his family.

to me it makes more sense for both to go part time, or reduce hours. Then both can spend time with the children, 2x 0.7 salaries are better than 1 full time

If one partner can focus on their career, his/her salary is often much higher than 2 part time salaries. In many competitive industries you only progress up the career ladder by working 'hard'

I'm not saying it suits everyone, but it can work very well for some!

Yeah all these men missing time with kids due to working and they never seem to be slagged off

YANBU, although I'm too old and cynical to want to rely on a man! Ideally, family life would be affordable on one wage (and we'd be a nation of happy single mums).

And id absolutely HATE being reliant on a man

So would I.

Ideally both partners are happy and 'need' each other. Financial contributions are only one aspect of supporting each other, and I hope my partner relies on me as much as I rely on him. We both bring different contributions and skills to our family.

it seems they may not have actually been overly work oriented in the first place to improve their live so much

What a small minded and simplistic assumption