and disloyal to womankind to NOT find this offensive?

[Astrid28]

I am now a SAHM. DH runs his own company and it got to the point where I could give up work if I wanted to. I wanted to, so here I am.

DH transfers money for the food shopping into my account and I also use the joint account for other things, like birthday presents, DD's lessons/pre-school clothes shopping etc.

A friend of mine has described me on several occasions as being an old fashioned housewife.

I laughed and said I suppose I am! She then went on to say that I shouldn't be pleased with the situation. Don't I find my life boring, and what about my life when my kids grow up and leave home - what then?

I'm still very happy with my situation, but should I be?? Am I 'letting the side' down?

nurture you finances or nurture your children?

OK, (although you can earn your own money and parent) - once dc are at school what then?

And if one partner is really raking in it at work, it's a bit odd for the other partner not to choose to care for the children/family if that is that partner's heart's desire just in the name of financial independence.

The school day doesn't cover the working day. IME, it's actually much harder to "fit it all in" when children are at school than when they are babies and toddlers at home.

I find a lot of what is being said vague. If asking for clarification or pointing out generalisations is pedantic, then I suppose I am being pedantic.

Actually, I think what I'm doing is disagreeing - and I don't think there's anything wrong with that.

I think financial independence is often the byproduct of having an interesting career. I don't work primarily for financial independence - there are far more important reasons - but it's nice to have it all the same!

violethill, I do agree with you. There are many people who don't get the support you talk of though and they can't be denied an existence. And for each satisfying job are probaly a thousand not satisfying ones. Who has to do those? Do we ignore the fact that these jobs in our economy have to be filled? the maths doesn't add up. Most people have to be in tedious employment - that's what the majority of jobs are.

kneedeepinlaundry, it is not only coming from a family that supports your education that counts. My father came from an incredibly deprived background, left school at 14, etc etc etc and he has worked damn hard, now has a good education and is in a job he is damn good at. I have an enormous amount of respect for that because not many show his determination but it shows what can be achieved with hard work.

ninah, I'll be working more when DS needs me less, or when we need to earn more.

kneedeep - surely you are saying, like me, that it's extremely important to foster a love of learning, and support our children in gaining good qualification and training, so that they are more likely to land an interesting job rather than a rubbish one?

Nothing wrong with a healthy debate. But being patronising is just rude and ignorant. Good night.

Eh?

knackeredoldhag, good for your dad! But it's still true that there are too many shitty jobs and too few good ones and not everyone has the get up and go that your old man does.

kneedeep - I do so agree that most paid employment is dull and repetitive.

Yes I am Violethill, I am completely agreeing with you. But what about the people who don't come from that background. Do we just ignore them? This is not an equal society. What you said is true, but not in everyone's grasp, and the majority of people are doomed to shit jobs to pay the mortgage/rent.

To say most paid employment is dull and repetitive is as meaningless as saying stay at home parenting is dull and repetitive.

How many different jobs are there in the world? How many do each of us experience in our lifetime? 3 or 4 maybe?

It's a meaningless sweeping generalisation.

I still think those people with such a negative view of paid employment must have led very tedious working lives!

SorciereAnna, and how many women would rather be raising their own kids when they are in dull and repetitive paid employment because they have no choice in the matter for the sake of financial survival?

I have no problem with women (or men) taking a few years off to nurture their small children. I find the idea of being a housewife once your children are school age - whether you can afford it or not - disconcerting. What do you do all day? Seriously? It doesnt sound like an enviable existence.

I agree kneedeep - but good education leading to stimulating and meaningful employment is the route out of tedium for many people, even if they don't come from a supportive family.

Have you ever worked in a call centre Violet? or in a department store? In a factory? In a chain bakery? In an office as an adminstrative assistant?

Yes Violethill, good education is. But still, the maths. Too few good jobs, too many shit ones.

I find it really odd that people worry about whether I would be bored or not.

I think it's like a gift I have. I am never bored. I am always content and see things as glass half full.

I pity slightly my friend who works only because she is so restless and unsettled that she can't sit still for a moment, she can't entertain herself! SHe wanders around the house feeling bored. Her children are exactly the same.

I've done some tedious jobs while I was a student. Good motivator to do something more inspiring.

Having said that, it's horses for courses. I know a few mothers currently working in supermarkets because they actively choose mentally undemanding work for the moment, and also have the benefit of shift work, rather than the high pressure of a career.

Violethill, good point, but at 39, it's too late for me and millions of other women to suddenly find the energy, time, vocation, intelligence to become a rocket scientist or something worthy.

I didn't think being a SAHM was boring. I loved it.

I don't buy the "it's easier being at work" line though. Um - no...

And I like my job paid employment too.