"I'm lucky that I don't have to work"

[AnnieLobeseder]

I was having a discussion on Facebook today about bread machines and cleaners with some women, most of whom I don't know since they're 'friends of friends'.

One woman, who seems to be older than me, maybe late 40s, early 50s, said, "I hand-bake my bread and don't need a cleaner, but then I'm lucky that I don't have to work."

So, this made me want to reply that technically I don't have to either, but I choose to for many reasons including my sanity and the fact that I love my job. But since I don't know her I decided it wasn't the time for an arugument!

But now I'm wondering...

1. Is there a general assumption that women only work when they have to in the older generation? Or perhaps in our generation too? Do people still really believe a women should stay home unless there's a pressing financial need?

2. Am I seeing sexism where there isn't any; perhaps she thinks that no-one, male or female would work if they didn't absolutely have to, because she's never had a fulfilling job?

Any thoughts?

Annie, I can sort of see your point. "I'm lucky that I don't have to work" could be translated as "I'm lucky that I don't have to work. Like you do."

On the other hand I would consider myself extremely lucky if I were independently wealthy enough to not need to work. I would, however, still work.

Starlight - been there, done that, hated it! So yes, I'd have to say I'm lucky that I can work!

And we are talking about choice, to SAH or work, and the ideal being able to choose. Being shoved into either situation when you'd rather be doing the other is crap, so don't feel sidelined, please!

And I did talk about being forced to SAH due to financial reasons further down the thread!

Well, I'm 47, I have a 2 year old son and I can't wait to get back to work next month.

Spending the next 20 years doing the ironing, changing the beds and rearranging my tea towels....God, no thanks.

So basically, someone you don't know feels that she is lucky and you are trying to turn it into a feminist issue?

Ah-hem, Kathy is that your first child? Only it's rather different at say 22 making the same choice.

SMK....I'm the same and force my DH to change beds!!

Really? I'm 5' 1" and manage to change the king sized duvet and drag a chair or stepladders to the tall cupboards. I must be more of a feminist that I thought.

Yes Posie, first and only. Is t so very obvious? As lovely as he is, I can't cope with the boredom and isolation.

I do think there is a strange assumption here that a male partner will of course work, and if he earns enough, then the female partner can 'choose' whether or not she works. This begs all sorts of questions: why can't the male partner choose not to work (let's assume their earnings were compariable before kids)? what if he isn't happy to be sole breadwinner (personally I would NOT be happy to be funding my partner to stay at home full time while I went to work full time)?

I think it's 2). I know many men (but not all) who would happily be SAHD if their partner earned enough to make it possible.

I loved being a SAHM, and I really consider myself very lucky that I could be at home with my DC when they were tiny.

At the same time I considered women with high flying careers lucky.

Life's different for everyone.

OP-
1-
Older generation , yes lots of women did not / could not work when they had children, there was less childcare avalible and less flexible working practises, even 20 years ago.

Our Generation- We have more choice, so it has now become a choice, to WOH or SAH or part time both. BUT peoples choices are influenced by lots of things including, finances, liking / loathing the job they have, wanting to career change, wanting to bring up child themselves and availability of childcare and transport.

2- I think your seeing more in her answer than there was. Not every one LIKES working.

Actually nearlytoolate my dad took early retirement and has been a kept man for the passed 5 yrs. He does all the housework and cooking (which my mum loathes doing) and my mum works full time - they have never been happier.

Nearly - completely agree. I can understand why you may want to stay at home when your children are very young, but it seems strange to me that it falls to the woman to exercise the choice not to work. If a man chose to stay at home, if the children were of school age and older, then I think many/most people would wonder when he planned to work.

Starlight - 'childcare being the responsibility of both of something which so isn't workable.' Yes it isn't workable, and this is the real scandal. Our economy is based around either one partner WOHM and the other (usually the woman) providing free childcare (including school runs, half terms, sick days etc.) or a couple which earn enough to pay for childcare - which leaves low earners and single parents completely up the creek without a paddle.

It is also a total exploitation of the SAHP, leaving them financially vulnerable, and often without recognition for their work. There are often threads on MN where SAHMs say that their DH/Ps can't take the day off work to look after the kids, even when their wives/partners are on their last legs. I am sure the DH/Ps genuinely feel that it is impossible - but this is one messed up division of labour.

One of the key demands of 1970s feminists was free, 24-hour childcare. It's very striking that we have hardly made any progress towards this goal whatsoever.

I am all for people staying at home with young children, but until it is a roughly equal split of men and women taking career breaks, making a career of being SAHPs or going P-T, this will absolutely be a feminist issue.

How the hell does anyone expect there to be free 24 hr childcare? Doesn't sound economically viable in any way.