AIBU to think being a SAHM is undervalued and misunderstood?

[erereeee]

I’ve been lurking for a while and finally decided to post. I’m a SAHM to two young children, and I can’t help but feel like society (and even some people on here) massively undervalue what we do. It’s as if staying home to raise my children makes me lazy or unambitious, when in reality, I’m working harder than I ever did in an office.

From morning to night, I’m doing everything: cleaning, cooking, laundry, childcare, emotional labour, organising appointments, school runs, etc. The mental load is constant. Yet, because I’m “just” at home, people assume I sit around all day. Even my partner, who works full-time, makes the occasional offhand comment like, “Must be nice to chill at home,” which drives me up the wall.

I see posts on here about working mums and how they “do it all,” which is amazing, but can we acknowledge that being a SAHM is also a full-time job? I don’t clock out at 5pm. I don’t get annual leave. And honestly, if you added up the cost of hiring a nanny, cleaner, cook, and personal assistant, it would be way more than I’d ever earn in a 9-5.

Yet, when I meet new people, I always get that look when I say I’m a SAHM, like I’m somehow less intelligent or lacking ambition. Why is it so hard to just respect different choices?

Let’s keep it civil, but I’m genuinely curious to hear what others think.

@Bumpitybumper there is actually a book called Bullshit Jobs, which suggests half of jobs are pointless. I think it argues for universal income. I haven't read it but it did make me think of some of my roles that have literally existed to make a wealthy man wealthier with no social purpose and possibly not good for society really.

The thing is I felt valued doing it as I got paid well, and everyone talks about net contributers as being important for society which I was at that time. So I also got a society pat on the back.

I do something I consider socially useful now.(In terms of my paid employment)

@Bumpitybumper well of course it would be extremely rude and offensive to tell anyone that their choices are worthless. But I haven't suggested that at all.

My point is quite simply that it's illogical to expect external validation on a societal level for something which you've chosen to do because you want to.

If I'd chosen to be a SAHM, I would have done it because I wanted to and my dh was happy to support it. We would have respected each other's roles but I wouldn't have expected anyone else to be bothered about it.

As a WOHP, my validation comes from the salary, pension and positive performance reviews. I don't expect wider society to think 'hey, great, you've done so well in going out to work today and then coming home and cooking dinner etc etc'. Equally if I'd been a SAHM, I wouldn't have expected anyone to think 'wow, you've done amazingly well today.'

But nowhere have I suggested slagging off anyone else's choices which would obviously be offensive.

@Bumpitybumper

Many people work jobs that in my opinion don't forward society or humanity. Some arguably actively harm people e.g. betting shops, tobacco companies, petrol companies. Those people choose these roles for their own reasons and often will also seek external validation too because that's just how we are as people. You might not expect someone to thank you profusely for flogging cigarettes but you would expect your hard work to be acknowledged on some level. This is what it comes down to. We don't seem as desperate to sit pontificating about the value offered to society by other people's jobs and slagging them off for seeking external validation except when it comes to caring for small children. Something predominantly done by women and traditionally completely undervalued. Funny that!

I agree with you that not all jobs are equally valuable to society. But the point you're missing is that the choice to avoid a job, or to avoid having to work at all, on moral or societal grounds, is an extremely privileged position to be in. You say people working in tobacco or petrol company jobs "choose" these roles. Often they don't choose them. They get the jobs they can get which pay them sufficient money to support their families.

I don't know anyone who works in the tobacco industry but I don't imagine they seek to be "thanked for flogging cigarettes". They are taking the money and doing the best job they can to provide financial security for their families.

People in senior jobs at tobacco companies don't generally post long screeds about how they are "undervalued" by society. They understand its a trade-off and it is what it is.

I don't think anyone on this thread is arguing that selling tobacco (or any other corporate job) is more societally valuable than caring for your own children. I'm certainly not. But as someone who's never had the choice, I find it tactless and insensitive that people who already have the extreme privilege of not having to work are asking those who do have to work don't for "validation" of their choice as if it was some sort of sacrifice.

Particularly because its implied that it benefits the whole of society. Caring for your own children is important to you, your spouse and your children, but it frankly doesn't amount to much to anyone else and I don't understand why I am expected to "value" it any more than I "value" someone who is privileged enough to be able to afford to send their children to private school.

@Thepeopleversuswork
I agree with you that not all jobs are equally valuable to society. But the point you're missing is that the choice to avoid a job, or to avoid having to work at all, on moral or societal grounds, is an extremely privileged position to be in. You say people working in tobacco or petrol company jobs "choose" these roles. Often they don't choose them. They get the jobs they can get which pay them sufficient money to support their families
You're wrong. We all have the choice to work or not work. The privilege is around the lifestyle that you will lead if you choose to work or not work. There are lots of cases where the financial position of a family and their practical setup means that both parents working actively costs them money and causes lots of logistical issues that are very difficult to overcome. In these cases it may arguably be more sensible for a parent to stay at home. They expend their time and energy there doing a role that you admit has a similar level of utility to society as lots of other paid roles and yet their struggles and difficulties are purposely unacknowledged because in your eyes they are more privileged than you.

Plenty of people are effectively trapped being SAHPs or working jobs that they wouldn't choose to do. Neither is a privilege, yet at least the latter is respected.

This is exactly what I mean. The BS jobs are more respected than staying at home raising children. Society does pat you on the back! We have seen on this thread the judgement levelled against SAHPs and poster stating definitively that SAHPs can never work as hard as WOHPs (which is completely ridiculous when you think of the variation that exists within both roles).

Some people are doing vital jobs but many of us aren't!! Many people are supported by the state to work in these BS jobs and think this makes them superior to people (i.e. Other women) that stay at home raising their kids. It's madness really!

I don't clock off at 5pm either, my partner and I are both senior nurses working 12 hour shifts days/ nights and have to try and work opposite shifts. Outside of work we cook, clean, do normal life admin etc and just have to fit it in. I feel like I don't get enough time with my child or partner tbh, always rushing him to breakfast club/ after school club so we can afford a house and food. I don't judge SAHM's though. We're all trying our best.

@Bumpitybumper

You're wrong. We all have the choice to work or not work. The privilege is around the lifestyle that you will lead if you choose to work or not work.

No you're wrong. I'm a single parent so I do not have the choice. My child would live in poverty if I didn't work. There is no one else in the world who can help me with this.

This is one of the things that supremely pisses me off about the "value" argument. I don't have the choice. Why should I be considered of lower "value" because I don't have this choice.

You can choose not to work and live in poverty. That is still a choice! Lots of people make it everyday. I agree with you that it would be a bad choice in your situation but equally by the same logic, it's hard to argue that someone staying at home to save their family from financial hardship is making a bad choice either.

Nobody is saying the work you do has no value. People are suggesting that SAHPs don't offer value to wider society and that WOHPs do (even those in BS roles that actively harm society).

@Bumpitybumper

You can choose not to work and live in poverty. That is still a choice! Lots of people make it everyday. I agree with you that it would be a bad choice in your situation but equally by the same logic, it's hard to argue that someone staying at home to save their family from financial hardship is making a bad choice either.

I mean if I voluntarily chucked in my job the government would force me into something else fairly quickly, so no. Chucking in a reasonably well paid job when I have a mortgage etc to sit on my arse on benefits to be at home with my kid 24/7 would be an apocalyptically stupid thing to do. But leaving that aside....

I'm not arguing that someone staying at home is making a bad choice. I'm simply arguing that they don't deserve to be attributed some intrinsic societal "value" for doing it, particularly when a lot of people don't have that choice.

800 posts. Op never came back...

@Bumpitybumper being a SAHP has value for that parent and that family. And all of us with any sense on this thread agree that it's offensive and bizarre to slag anyone off for their own individual choices.

But you haven't given any explanation of why being a SAHP gives value to wider society or why it should be applauded or rewarded in some way, as the OP suggests. I also don't see any evidence that BS jobs are applauded and given the recognition you speak of.

I've already said, I work in a pretty good job (so probably not one of the BS ones you refer to) and I don't expect or need wider society's approval or recognition. The value of my job and the approbation I get is through the salary, pension and performance management. I do also enjoy the wider benefits of the experiences I've had through work, the social aspect etc but I wouldn't describe that as 'approval' - just personally, to me, a wider benefit of working.

@Thepeopleversuswork - I think you are misunderstanding the 'value' argument and getting exercised over not a lot really.

I very much doubt any woman who happens to be at home with her kids for a few years is asking for any special VALUE to be ascribed to her. It's more that she doesn't want to feel DEVALUED (ie. all the usual projections about SAHMs being low in aspiration, no added purpose other than housework, not 'useful' in society, 'living off a man,' and 'oh look she MUST be more financially vulnerable than me' etc etc etc).

It is undeniably clear that some women are very anxious to 'box' SAHMs into a 'stereotype' that makes them feel better about themselves. It's human nature to some extent. As evidence of this look no further than any thread with SAHM in the title. These always run to 1000 posts and people, who are not SAHMs, spend days and days and days on pontificating about what they deem a SAHM is allowed to be or not be.

The point about 'valued' not being the same as 'not wanting to feel devalued' is the important distinction.

It is exactly the same as a mum who happens to be doing paid work in any capacity - they don't expect a 'special value' to be ascribed to them for this, they just don't want to feel devalued (ie. the usual value judgements that they are the not parenting adequately etc etc - all the usual bollocks that gets aimed at working mums which dads don't have to contend with).

Basically, all any human person - whatever their role in life - is asking for is basic respect. That's it. Importantly - this also means not having other women obsessing, misunderstanding and / or stereotyping your lifestyle.

Can you see this?

The OP asked why are SAHMs 'undervalued'. This clearly indicates she believes that there is a value to the role that people are failing to adequately recognise. So while you personally may be merely asking not to be devalued, so, a neutral position that neither applauds nor condemns you, people are responding to the OP who is asking for more than that. Can you see that?

@outofmexico

t's more that she doesn't want to feel DEVALUED (ie. all the usual projections about SAHMs being low in aspiration, no added purpose other than housework, not 'useful' in society, 'living off a man,' and 'oh look she MUST be more financially vulnerable than me' etc etc etc).

I agree with you. I think the posts which imply that SAHMs are all stupid or lacking motivation are insulting and just as bad as the posts saying women "farm out" their children because they can't be bothered to look after them or because they want to buy Manolos. They are two ugly sides of the same coin. It demeans all of us to throw mud at people with a fake ideological "justification" tagged on. Every parent who is doing the best job they can deserves respect, regardless of how they are doing it.

The financial vulnerability point is real. It is legitimate to point out that just being married isn't a silver bullet that protects you against everything and that being a SAHM is precarious, but it isn't relevant to the quality of someone's day to day parenting.

But it isn't a "moral" or "societal" point. I think: speaking at an entirely personal level, what upsets me is when people imply, as some have here, that everyone has the option to give up their job if they want it badly enough, and everyone who can do, should do as if it's some sort of parenting gold standard to which everyone should be aiming. Firstly because it ignores the reality of life for many people and also because I think its far from clear that it is actually best so making women feel bad about it is counterproductive.

I have been on these boards long enough to understand that these SAHM vs WOHM ding dongs will probably be with us as long as Mumsnet exists, they are mainly heat and very little light. People will always have different perspectives on what "optimal parenting" looks like. I think all we can aim for is to remove the judgement and point-scoring.

The OP (who is no doubt not even a SAHM anyway) is saying she feels 'undervalued' in her imaginary SAHM world deemed to wind-up MN.

Ie. She is just asking for 'normal'. Same as anyone else. Not under value. But not special value either.

If someone who worked in admin came on and said that they feel sometimes looked down in by their partner or people at gatherings because of their daily role in life, people would just say "take no notice OP."

You wouldn't get hundreds of posts pontificating about the 'value' of admin staff - "why should they get more value than me blah blah blah."

It would just be "good for you OP, don't let anyone get you down."

Why are you assuming the OP isn't a SAHM? She says she feels undervalued and that 'society' should value her more for her choice (I'm not sure what she thinks that 'value' should look like in real terms by the way.)

As many of us keep saying, it's not society's place to be showing any particular value (or devaluing) Seems the OP has her own issues about it, not helped by an unsupportive partner - but that's not for society to address.

@outofmexico

If someone who worked in admin came on and said that they feel sometimes looked down in by their partner or people at gatherings because of their daily role in life, people would just say "take no notice OP."

Well, more likely they would be told "its all in your head, life's too short to worry about your perceived inadequacies, just crack on with it".

But if you want to adopt this analogy: if you feel inadequate because you work in admin: you don't expect people in senior management to constantly massage your ego about this. You rightly expect to be treated well at work and thanked for the job you do, but you don't usually see people working in admin drafting long screeds about "why I offer more value to society than the senior partner because I fix the photocopier and book the meeting rooms".

There's an acknowledgement that the roles are different but equally important in an organisation. But there isn't this weird moral overlay about "societal value".

I just think it's about basic respect for anyone really and live and let live. The rest is just semantics and projection. Who actually cares?

I totally agree. But it isn't usually the WOHMs who are crying out for validation. The starting point of this incredibly long discussion was someone complaining that people weren't "valuing" SAHMs and their role in society.

When I was a SAHM (which I was for over a decade), I was exactly the same person as I am now and the same person that I was before. It was a phase of life. I knew what I was doing and why. It never once occurred to me that looking after my own kids was anything to comment on. It never occurred to me that anyone would remotely care. That is because I wasn't on MN then. I genuinely think the whole 'WOHM / SAHM' madness only exists on MN.

@outofmexico we're agreed on that. Of course everyone should have basic respect.
But the OP started the thread with the premise that as a SAHM she's devalued by 'society' and 'people in general' (no evidence given for this, mind) and she wants some sort of specific validation as a SAHM from wider society.

She then also started some inflammatory wittering on about not having annual leave, and not clocking off, obviously forgetting that WOHP cook the dinner, play with their kids, change nappies etc when not at work!

The OP is clearly unhappy with her situation, maybe resentful (the annual leave comment is weird, even though utterly illogical) but ultimately that's for her and her dh to work through and if necessary, balance their responsibilities as parents and providers in a way which works better for them. It's not, however, up to 'wider society' to pat her on the back and tell her she's doing a great job every day. Those of us who are WOHP don't expect or need that from society either.

But we should value the roles of anyone in society surely? Why is this even an issue? It doesn't need to take away anything from anyone else? Basic respect is free!

Agree, and as I said it was a SAHM who started this thread and we seem to be going around in circles here but why the need for specific "extra" validation for people because they are at home FT with their children, like a service medal or letters after the name or something?

No one has said that SAHMs are not deserving of respect. Some of us are just puzzled by the idea that they need extra care or congratulation because they don't have jobs. It's bizarre.

@lolly792 - do you honestly think the OP is genuine?

Put it this way, no SAHM I have ever met (and I must have met hundreds over the years) sounds like this.

Well neither have I but I don't see what that proves! To be fair all the SAHM i know do actually realise annual leave isn't a holiday from your children!