"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?

Thanks Lenin

You can pay into pensions once a year. Plenty of the self employed do that and just see at the end of the year how much they have over to add into their pension. The Government does keep changing the rules though which makes people less keen to contribute to pensions.

Lenin I agree that many woman lose out later down the line but in my opinion it is not because they choose not to work it is because of either poor financial education/planning or because they marry the sort of man who believes the money he earns is his to keep and then stays with him despite having this knowledge.

Lenin agree again...the answer it would seem is to make sure that when you choose who to have a family with you make sure you choose very very carefully....although I fear I am at risk of sounding terribly old fashioned....

Yes Nancy i agree, but sometimes things do change after kids ,i dont know how you predict that ,i def thought it was for keeps.Have joined a thread in investments and i think its best if i arrange an appointment with an IFA,thanks again for the advice.

Just be care with IFAs and keep anything you invest in very simple.

Wow - a busy thread!

I think it makes an enormous amount of difference that the woman Annie is talking about DOESN'T have young DCs at home. Once your children are older / have left home it becomes a very different decision / debate. I honestly can't imagine not working at that stage (unless I suppose we were wealthy enough for neither of us to work). What does the woman's DH think about her "lucky" choice I wonder? I'm afraid I can't see that as anything other than a patronising anti-feminist stance, as in "of course my little wife, you don't have to work if you don't want to" - surely that's infantilising a grown adult?!?

That's when they tend to turn to the gin I suppose. Their husband had 20 years of exciting working life left and they can get no work except voluntary or minimum wage and they just have emptiness ahead (not all but many feel like that). We need more women of 60 - 70 on mumsnet really who have and who dont' have careers to contrast them.

I don't think age of children/whether they are still living at home makes as much difference as those that have very young children seem to think.

Having two children at school means my childcare arrangements would be far more complicate if I worked now than they were when I worked and they were both in nursery/we had a nanny.

I have friends with secondary school age children who say it gets even more complicated - children have more places they need/want to be; traditional childcare options as in nannys/childminders become increasingly inappropriate/disliked as children approach tehir teens and they actually need your support just as much a they ever did.

This being the case it is entirely plausible that a mum of three with a gap of 5 years from oldest to youngest could have had twenty years out of the employment market by the time her youngest is doing their GCSE's.

So children are older/have left home and then what do you do? Chances of walking into any sort of job that is above minimum wage is entirely unrealsitic. Not to mention difficult emotionally if once upon a time you had a career. So unless there is a financial need to work I can totally understand why many woman simply don't, instead filling their time with voluntary work/studying/or just doing the things they really enjoy doing.

Their DH's presumably don't mind because they get the benefits of a wife at home (never having to run errands/dinner cooked/gym honed wife - am a joking (a bit!)) but above and beyond that simply want their DP's to be happy.

Nancy has hit the head on the nail!

Sure people are lucky if they don't have to work because they have their OWN money put aside.
They are NOT lucky if they are relying on someone else to provide the dough; especially if they have a 'dp' and not a 'dh' because at least with a 'dh' if they (dh) decide they've had enough of the relationship the legal courts will be involved to compensate woman for time at home being a SAHM.
Anyone who relies on 'dp' for cash is asking for trouble.
No moral judgements here on whether marriage is better than cohabitation. Just the facts as they stand legally.

So, yeah, be cock-a-hoop if you're rich in your own right but not if you're relying on others.

In fact, unless a person IS wealthy enough in their own right, I think they are asking for fate to s* on their head from a great height by declaring how 'lucky' they are that they don't have to work.
Best not to say anything, I think.

I feel lucky that I have a career I love I don't want time to bake bread or clean. It's her choice and my choice. I don't think it's a particular statement about women in general.

Mmmm, I think you might be over analysing this.

It sounds to me as if she was being self-depreciating. As in, she bakes bread, but she doesn't want it taken in the way of making others feel inadequate; she wants it viewed as a lucky break for her rather than an achievement, iyswim.

Like..... 'I always have a tidy house.... but then again, I don't have a toddler to look after".

Definately re the lady mentioned, who knows unless we actually ask her, but i think its great to talk and see other peoples opinions and experiences.

Thankyou Xenia for your advice ,perhaps it is worth me talking to close others re investments preparing for retirement .Obviously an area i need to research and sort out ,but thanks for your posts as i know nothing re investments.

Sylvanian, what if this sentence you wrote was worded as:
'I always have a tidy house.... but then again, I'm lucky as I don't have children"

Wouldn't that make you go ? Especially if you actually liked your children (like most people here like to work) and now someone is telling you that they are lucky as they don't have children/don't have to work, unlike poor you..

Of course we cannot know how it was really meant, but sounded more smug than self-depreciating to me.

I don't see why people can't say they feel lucky not to have children. It's a perfectly legitimate thing to say.

(Investments, I'm not an expert either. Some people need to be regularly forced to save to save at all or find it easier if a pension contributino is taken out every month before they notice it; others feel they lose too much in charges and "raids" by various Governments on pension funds. Most people are not that good at picking shares whether in a pension or otherwise so are better not doing it directly and a lot depends on how much you have to invest and how close to retirement you are).

I don;t see that this ia a feminist issue or even a parent issue. People who don't have to work (or pedantically go out to work in a paid job) are lucky.

Whether you choose to have a career or choose to care for your childrne full time or choose to do voluntary work or choose to watch Jeremy Kyle is irrelevant - you are still lucky that you have that choice.

Ullainga, but the adjective 'lucky' expresses appreciation to , presumably, her DH who funds her.

In the same way, I am grateful to have DHs financial input into the family, which allows me to pursue a training contract which barely covers my childcare costs, let alone the mortgage etc.

As Kew said, having choices does make you lucky, and it is nice to not take that for granted,

To choose to work would not make financial or personal sense to me. I choose not get "a" job that simply pays for child care. I am "lucky" that my DH has a good salary and can pay for our comfortable standard of living. To think that he doesn't benefit from the arrangement is just as un-feminist as some other parts of the argument.

I could have made a less "silly" career choice, but I would have been spectacularly unhappy. Equally, perhaps I was driven in my education and career but not motivated by financial gain. Does that make me "silly"?

Should I have chosen a career in medicine rather than the arts, so that I could guarantee I would be completely financially stable with or without a partner? Perhaps that would have been the "feminist" choice. Talk to poorly paid nurses and other "front line workers" about their silly career choices.

Ambition and drive in certain fields don't always equal greater financial rewards. (See the arts for details.) Some people chose their career for personal satisfaction, talent, passion, etc. Some people want to make money. The lucky few get both.

JFly if childcare was free would you enjoy 2 or 3 mornings working in your career?
ps i worked with animals for 20yrs so i think financially that comes under arts in the "down right stupid" category LOL !But i followed my heart and enjoyed my life .

Read OP and no intervening posts.

I don't work because I don't have to (and frankly don't want to).

I am a feminist - just a work shy one.

It does not compromise my equality with dh. There is mutual respect.

There is no particular emancipation involved in working for cash when it is not needed. Mugs game.

I had a fulfilling career - it was also stressful, I don't do stress.

You may work to keep your sanity. I don't work to keep mine . Meanwhile, I am studying for a history degree (I already have two others via the conventional post 6th form route, but I enjoy the stimulation)

Nothing wrong with hedonism

(and I consider myself incredibly lucky to not have to work - so there!)