why are some women content to do all the housework?

[honeydew]

I meet lots of mums in my local area who, like me, are stay at home mums with very young children but are prepared to do absolutely everything for their partners and DH's! They slave away cooking, cleaning and washing at home with no help and at the weekends, they still don't expect
their partners to do anything! I have friends who never get a proper break from their children, even if it's only for a couple of hours. Their DH's leave them to it 24/7. Is it just me who has found that old style patriarchy is alive and well in society once a woman gives up work to raise her brood? My DH does help me with baby DS, he also puts my older daughter to bed and washes up after I've cooked each night, so we work as a team. So many women I speak to say that their DH's are not 'hands on' parents and do virtually all the chores and baby changing/feeding. Oviously, if one partner is working during the week they can't do that much, but some men don't want to contribute at all it would seem! Are they just lazy or simply 'expect' women to fulfill that role?

Working mothers feel guilty because they are "not there for their children"
Stay at home mothers feel guilty because they are "not contributing to society"
Deal with the guilt (it's mostly imaginary and created by the media anyway), do what feels best for you and your children, but please don't try to make yourself feel better by trying to prove that those who chose differently must be wrong/selfish/bad parents.

To answer the original question, some women are content to do all the housework because they enjoy it, others because they don't feel it's worth the rows, or because they don't think any one else will do it properly.

but I want to see my kids learning from the way DH and I live, that both parents are equal, both do something fulfilling in terms of career, both care for them as parents as well. I don't want them to grow up with the idea that women stay at home and look after the kids and men have jobs, I just don't... is that wrong?

Not for you and your family. My kids think that daddy works and mummy cooks. My four year old dd wants to learn how to be a mummy like me. That's fine too. However a family dynamic is arranged the only really important thing is that the children feel secure, loved and supported.

well that's true, of course the main thing is that they're loved and secure, but don't they also copy you and automatically learn that that's the right way of things? For example my DH was never taught to do stuff around the house because his mum thought it was women's work (though he does now)...and those assumptions you learn in childhood are really hard to get away from.

I'd like my daughter to aspire to being lots of different things, including a career which lets her give her unique gifts to the world, and I'd like my son to assume that some day he will help to look after his own family, including baby/childcare, everyday housework and share this with his wife..

I guess things might change as am 6 months preg with first, and think I'm going to be the perfect liberated parent with everything mapped out! (just wait I hear you say!)

Custy I said you were NOT patronising And I was alluding to us having met at the MN party So I can 'hear' your tones in your posts IYKWIM. And your posts all over MN can be legendary for their striaght no-nonsense approach.

BAWC I don't know you and therefore have perhaps found it hard to understand the tone of your posts and I am sorry if I read them all wrong. It just riled me when I felt that someone who says they 'care' about SAHM and their long term prospects, didn't appear to see that it is not such a bad thing to be. And it shouldn't be seen as the wrong choice. That's all

My son was born in 94 and I haven't worked out of the home in the traditional sense since about 98.So he has always known me to be at home although the cleaning etc is shared in our house.He is 12 now and knows that both men and women work and look after kids and many of his friends mums work so it is not automatic that he will consider our way as the only way.Why does being a sahm have to be a negative thing?TBH I didn't think it could be as enjoyable as it has been and I do a lot more with my time than clean the house!He is growing up so fast and I am so glad I had that time with him I think we all benefited from that and are really close as a result

indeed gem, indeed!

Having been following this thread like alot of people, with interest. I have seen arguments for both parties. What I haven't seen is anyone suggesting that women SHOULD sah when they have pre school children. I know this will offend. I reckon the mother , by evolution, is the best caregiver. I know there are women who have no choice and have to go back to work when they don't want to and that is awful for them. What really p*es me off is those women who CHOOSE to go back to work and put their poor kids in day care!!!
I think it's outrageous. Why did they bother having kids if they can't be bothered to give them the care and support they need. I know a woman who has done this twice and her excuse is that she would go mad looking after them. What the hell is she doing having them if it doesn't suit her. These are not pets you can leave in the kennels when you go on holiday.
I think kids suffer if there is not a parent, pref mother staying at home.
yep and I know this is really going to piss people off. I have seen so many kids 'abandoned' by working parents at school. Those parents are too busy/ tired to take part in their kids' school life and the kids look really sad about it.
Am going to get my kids ready for the day now.

also watched with interest and never thought a thread about housework would kick off altho digressed from that now.
but I do agree kittywits.
I deicded to have children and I'll look after them. Dh does more than his fair share of housework for which I'm grateful and altho I don't expect him to do it, I appreciate it.
When all my children are at school i will consider looking for a suitable job but until then they are my priority.
I understand that this is not possible for everyone but it is for me and so I choose to be a sahm

Blimey kittywits, you do sound bitter.

Oh, and the lady, black cat I think who said she went back to work after mat leave because she needed a sense of acheivemnet and missed her work mates. Has she never considered that whilst she is at work her children might MISS her? Unfortunately for them they are only little children and don't have the luxury of choice.

STE -I'm not bitter but I am , like many on this thread p* ed off by Some peoples' attitudes to sahms. I believe staying at home is much more than simply about choice, for children it is very important that their mothers are there and they are not shoved into day'care', getting very little care atall.

but why just the mother? why can't everyone, men and women, both take responsibility and say 'we had a baby, now we have to look after it?'

I'm looking forward to being a parent, and of course I will look after the child properly, but I am also a person with a career. Home life and career, both play their part. All of this also applies to my DH.

My mum worked and I didn't suffer at all; in fact it helped me to be more confident and see myself as someone who could have a career; I think kids are perfectly happy having a mum who is happy to stay at home, or a mum who is happy to work as well.

In some countries (Sweden) they make it easier for this choice to be offered to people, and they have got away from our Victorian model of woman at home, man out in the world.

And flame me if you like, but we are an ageing society with a shrinking workforce, and we desperately need people to work, so I think once the kids are at school, especially at secondary school, that there's no real reason not to work; everyone is capable of finding a job they are interested in..

Kittywit, hope you have also taken time to read the mumsnet talk philosophy along with reading this thread, especially the bit that states

'Please bear in mind that we all know how difficult this parenting business can be, and if there's one thing all of us could do with, it's some moral support'

"but I want to see my kids learning from the way DH and I live, that both parents are equal, both do something fulfilling in terms of career, both care for them as parents as well. I don't want them to grow up with the idea that women stay at home and look after the kids and men have jobs, I just don't... is that wrong?"

I think this is what the debate changed into - it's just some people are choosing to see it as a simplified SAHM v WOHM debate. I'm choosing to see it as an abstract feminist debate and really enjoying some of the eloquent posts here.

It's not as simple as women choosing to work and women choosing to stay at home. For a start, a lot of people don't have those choices to make. A lot of women don't earn enough to cover the costs of childcare, a lot of women don't have a partner that earns enough for them to be able to not work.

Also, life simply isn't about your 9 -5 geographic position. It's not a case of where you happen to situate yourself, either in a workplace or in your home by the side of your children. Everyone has other domestic commitments to fulfil in order to live a normal life. Those domestic commitments are not exclusively cleaning chores which could be contracted out to a cleaner or fit into one hour of your day (like B&WCat claims)

Society doesn't value women full stop. Mothers are bothersome to the taxpayer and bothersome to the workplace. But it is much easier to be down on women who do not go out to work, because you can't even put a price on their head. Only a cost. To the taxpayer.

Some people, who have never not worked, wonder what mothers do all day when they're at home with children. Because looking after children and taking care of the house are so menial. Men can't do it/shouldn't do it (apparently) And any woman who has been through a higher education shouldn't lower herself to this level (apparently)

So anyway, children go to school and suddenly it ought to be a level playing field again. There are no childcare costs to be taken into account (supposedly!) and women are once again able to contribute to the cash economy (which in a lot of peopler's eyes is the only way to contribute to society as a whole). Except there's a distinct lack of work with family friendly hours. There's a distinct lack of good quality after school care for those who want to do a full working day job.

And those who do return to work full time or continue to work full time are still picking up the lions share of the domestic commitments. Not necessarily because their partners are crap or don't want to help but because they are expected to spend extended hours in their places of work and v=because all that other stuff is STILL seen by men as women's work.

It's OK though (think the Employers of the men) they have their children in afterschool care and then the wife picks the children up in time to give them dinner. Everything is taken care of. Because it's so menial looking after children and taking care of the domestic commitments. What did women DO all day when they were just looking after the kids and the house and didn't have that full-time job also?!

So, for some families, the option of both parents working when the children are in school is NOT an option, especially if neither of the parents can negotiate family friendly hours because they don't won't to be running their family on a level of exhaustion that is probably not good for their health.

And, some families cope tremendously well with the above. Perhaps they are super organised. Perhaps their school has wonderful after school care which involves structured extra curricular activities and homework clubs. Perhaps they have parents living nearby who pick up the children from school or who can run errands for the family whilst they are at work. Perhaps the family have an au pair to take some of the slack.

And perhaps they are very lucky, and in too few cases this is true, and the parents both have family friendly jobs with both halves of the couple working part of the week and both halves of the couple able and willing to devote time to the domestic and family commitments. Now wouldn't that be nice for everyone?

Well, if you're going to be pedantic Crunchie, allow me, 'You don?t believe it is right for mothers/fathers of school aged children to not be working during school hours.' I HAVE NEVER SAID THIS. YOU CANNOT ACCUSE ME OF SAYING THINGS I HAVEN'T. From one of your posts tonight - agreed??

From a post yesterday -
'I personally would not be happy to pay taxes to help pay for one woman or man to stay in her or his home and clean it while her or his kids are in school. That's just my opinion and while I may change otehrs I won't change this one.'

These 2 things are not the same. Just because I'm not happy to pay taxes doesn't mean I don't think it's right. I don't think SAHMs should be forced out of the house. And I never said they 'should' be. There are lots of things and people that I don't LIKE paying taxes for and would PREFER NOT TO including sending kids off to bomb Iraq and for people de-frauding the benefit system but I absolutely appreciate that there are complex reasons why people do what they do and there has to be freedom of choice and democracy. Nobody said you had to like my opinions or agree with them but you have to let me express them without being attacked. I may not find much to ADMIRE in the fact that some women or men choose to stay at home and clean it instead of working for the greater good (and I've already added the provisos that these are people who have kids at school and do not do voluntary work etc etc) but I'm not about to start a revolution about it. I, like others, also don't like the fact that some people work in MacDonalds but that is absolutely their choice and I imagine they're not desperately happy about it either. No, I'm not comparing MacDonalds workers with long-term SAHMs I'm just saying everyone is entitled to get on with what they want to do. I never said otherwise. And whether I like it or not makes absolutely no difference.

kittywits, actually I think you will find people HAVE said that parental care in the pre-school years can be the best option. But what I have been trying to say is that all women should have the CHOICE.

I went back to work, as have many others. Should I not have been allowed kids? No I don't think so. It is a balance, and I think that for you it is the right thing to do, as it is for many others. And I applaud you for being able to make that CHOICE. However for others, for whatever reason they might have, going to woek even while the children are young is the RIGHT thing to do. I also think that is great.

I know you said some people don't have the luxury of choice, but many others are different from you (and according to BAWC mentioned research) they may end up unhappy, isiolated and depressed if they didn't work.

Now excuse me I must get ready for work, the kids have gone to teh CM and I have to go in 10 mins

gem -that is true

Tiigermoth- I have read some pretty insulting, rude and extremely unsupportive posts on this thread, far more contentious then anything I have said.
I am supporting mothers who stay at home.

isn't it possible to support mothers who stay at home without telling working mothers they are being 'outrageous'?
You said several times that you expect people to be pissed off with your post - not very supportive to mothers is it - so not much point me saying anything more.

I don't think I am exaggerating. A couple of people have said that WOHMs are selfish and Poppyflower has said she thought I was missing a couple of cards from the pack or some such. You can check if you like.

Caligula, you may be right that employers get pissed off with time taken off work to look after sick kids but surely this is something that affects dads too?? If not then it should. Last time my dd2 was ill dp took time off work because it was my last wk of term and I had stuff other people were depending on me finishing. Next time it might be me. We negotiate and we share responsibility and we try to lessen the impact on both our employers. Common sense, no?

Interestingly, at my place of work, 2 out of the 3 senior managers are women with kids (the other a man with kids), as are the people who work in personnel. They also take time off work to be with their sick kids. If anyone gave me a hard time about it I would go straight to my union. Also, there are about 10 couples where I work many with kids so the rest of us see others negotiating parenthood, work, sick kids etc. I appreciate this may be unusual. My place of work is very hot on Equal Opps etc. But this is one instance when I am quite happy to say every work place SHOULD be like this as far as it can.

And IMO and for my dp it's really important that MY kids see their dad looking after them, sick or not, as well as me.

OK BAWC I can see I was obviously reading something additional into your post, and assuming that because you don't want to pay yor taxes for this, you didn't think they should stay at home. I have simply getting a sense of this from this and another thread where you mentioned the same SAHM with school aged kids issue.

I hope you can see that I am not attcking you per se, I am attacking the stance that you seem to have, and a lot of people have (inc. the government) That appears not to value childcare/homemaking whatever you want to call it, past a certain age in particular.

I feel if we continue to push women out to work by spending loads of money on childcare provision etc (which I am all for as well) without supporting (not really financially but at least verbally) the value of SAHM, childcare etc etc This role will continue to be undervalued in 'society'.

That is what I want to change.

Going back to earlier posts implying that it all gets easier when the children start school, I would say that IME that's simply not true. I have one at school and two preschool. Because I'm at SAHM DD1 has friends over for tea regularly and has therefore made close friendships even though she started a new school this year. Because I'm a SAHM I'm on the PTA's for school and nursery and have 'contributed' by helping to raise funds which will be used to enhance my childrens educational experiences. Because I'm a SAHM I know when DD1 has had a bad day and am able to help her with this straight away, I can also enjoy her great experiences too. I know her teacher well and her teacher knows that DD1 has support at home. Because I'm a SAHM I have never missed an assembly, a sports day, a school play, forgotten a mufty day, a school trip and am able to listen to children read at school. If I went back to work now I'd miss out on all of that and most importantly so would DD.

I consider myself to be lucky that our family can (just about) afford to live on one income.

This is about debate. Debate is not worth its salt without contention. You can be p***ed off as I am about what I cinsider to be thouroughly ridiculous things that have been said here, for example "my position - really and truly regarding sahms who dont work whilst kids are at school is they are either dull dull dull to put up with that life - or they are dull.

and they should work. lazy efkkers "
NOw that is a truly rude, unsupportive thing to say.

Nulcat, every time you visit your GP, hospital, get your kids taught at school etc etc etc you are benefiting from taxes. When you get your child benefit, family tax credit, invitiation for a smear test, immunisations etc etc etc this is paid for by other people's taxes which they generate from paid work. How do you think all these things miraculously appear? And who do you think does all this work? Only men without kids? Single women?