to be annoyed at this new term of 'full time mum'

[blondie80]

i know i'm not being unreasonable.

a woman on that lottery 1-100 show on sat night referred to herself as a 'full time mum'

i take it she meant sahm instead.

i have no bones with anyone's choice as to what the do, sahm of wohm.

but... i was so annoyed i felt she was referring to wohm as - part timers??

does she forget that we do the same stuff as well as a full week at work!!

i was with my mother when we watched the show, and she has 4 dc who have left home, and says she is still a full time mum regardless.

ok rant over.

oh, and man united will probably win.

it promises to be an excellent game either way.

Said through gritted teeth, Squonk?

(The Man U bit, obviously, not the FTM bit, before we have any more misunderstandings....)

I think your DH has a fair point .

Have not read the whole thread, but what gets me is 'busy full-time mum'. Mind you, I hate the word 'mum' anyway, what's wrong with 'mother'. A mother is a description of what you are, 'mum' is what the children call you. (Hate the word 'kids' too )

rofl rusty, yeah, I thought that when op said she thought it was funny, first time she said that, I thought, but my marbles are out for polishing, so, I couldn't be sure....

and squonk, so well said, very eloquent you are...now, I wish it was the end of that, but I bet, I will come back onto mn tomorrow night and theere will still be people fighting their imagined corners

Quote Blondie "these non working mums have decided to call themselves full time mums as though they do something more for their dc than wohm."

??
Well of course they do. They are WITH them.

I have read all the posts and haven't seen anything to make me think FTM is not the correct phrase to use.

so although I work part time 15 hours a week, can I still call myself a full time worker as I am an employee of the company all the time?

this is equivalent of a mum working 50 hours out of the home a week, away from her children, calling herself a full time mum. Of course she is a mum all the time, but she's looking after her own children full time is she?

i just think wohms need to concede that they are not wiping quite the same number of snotty noses or attending the same number of toddler groups as the average sahm. You aren't magically creating additional hours in the day when you can go back and do these things after you've worked an 8 hour shift; you do what you can with the remaining time available. please don't pretend that you spend as much time with your kids as the average sahm because you simply don't, unless you have some way of manipulating the space/time continuam; it's as pointless as me pretending i'm also a CEO.

Before you hurl things this way, of course it's not better or worse, it's just a different way of dividing up time. It's not a frickin competition, you're not less of a mother; no of course you don't stop being a mother when you're at work, you're just doing a different job for the hours you are there (or so your employer expects!)

Totalmisfit, most people's children are at school.

I am sure that has been pointed out many times already.

If I was at home all of the time, it would be pointless to call myself a full time mother, as my children are out, both at school during the day, and in the evening out playing with their friends or going to clubs and getting on with their lives.

If I ever get up work it would be more sensible for me to refer to myself as a full time dog owner.

I think it all depends how snotty your child's nose is totalmisfit

As I remember, the thread started on the subject of the phrase 'full time mum'. We all seem to be agreed (I hope) that the term 'mum' indicates a role, from which we are never off duty, and for which we receive no remuneration. Therefore it's not a job. It's a role. A lovely one at that!

Most parents, in addition to being a parent, go out to work. Most also do other things, such as shopping/visiting friends/going to the cinema/going on the lash.

You continue to be a parent during all of the above activities. For many of them, you do not have your child physically with you (thank god! wouldn't be the same having a piss up with the kids in tow). Therefore some one else is physically with your child at that time. Likewise, your child will do many things without the parent. Playgroup/school/afternoon at friends (plus shopping/cinema/going out on the lash when they're older!) They do not usually want their parents on these activities! But that does not mean they stop being our children while they are not in the house!

Simple really!

(OP - why did you open this can of worms!!)

Not so MillyR - it has been pointed out by me that that the role of FTM ceases to exist when the children are at school - the teachers are then in loco parentis

< violethill>

If you are referring to me in that last post dolly, I pointed out that in loco parentis is a legal status that has nothing to do with teachers becoming mummies and daddies.

Think maybe you need to go back to school to learn to read what's in the posts!

This started out as a reasonable request of AIBU to object to this term. It was being answered reasonably til about half way through when the jibes started about mums who don't contribute financially to the world and the corresponding jibes about mums who don't spend every minute of every day with their child.

There has much over-sensitivity and some downright tactlessness on both sides.

The argument will never be answered conclusively. It's a debate that will rage on and on, because it's now become a WOHM/SAHM fight and we are all a little protective of our positions.

I have said before and I say again...we should be a sisterhood of mothers supporting each other and our respective choices. We should not be calling each other out for the choices we've made or the way we feel about said choices.

It should not matter what we call ourselves. If we cause offense by labelling others, we should apologise and retract that label. We rarely get things right all of the time, whether we're working in the house or out of it...are parents or not...regardless of class, creed or whatever. Bearing in mind the feelings of others is important, but at times, so is standing by what you believe in.

I am REALLY staying off this thread now. My Red Cardigan (or IamnotSparticus) it's been a pleasure. I've enjoyed listening to Locketts too. There are others too who have piqued my interest and made stimulating remarks on both sides of the fence. But it's really time to go. I hope you all find peace with your arguments and the labels you decide you can accept.

agree with thedolly on this one ~ if you have been a sahm from the birth of the eldest all the way until the youngest is in school,you will understand the concept.

That is a lot of hours ,every day without other people looking after your children,just you every day.I personally wanted to do it,but not everyone does.

I'm not saying its better or worse,just a totally different thing to having cms,nurseries,grandparents,dps,nannies doing a share of the work.

Also totally different concept when dcs in school as you are essentially not doing that work anymore in the daytime.

It was a joke and supposed to illustrate the cyclic nature of this thread

well, would you believe it!!!!

man united lost!

Riven, mistress of MN and spinner of words, of course. It flows from the tongue....

Riven, why don't you stick to 'mother', as on your profile page?

One of my children is round at a friend's at the moment.
So I'm obviously a mum to two thirds of my children! Or is that a two thirds mum?

It's all a bit ridiculous isn't it?

Of course we are all full time mums and dads; we don't stop being one when we're not in the same room as our kids. I don't have a problem with anyone who is a parent defining their role as a full time parent, simply because you obviously don't stop being one! If anyone feels the need to attach a proviso to it, and tell anyone else they can't be one, it's clearly their ishoo