being a sah is not considered a legitimate pursuit anymore...

[AliGrylls]

I am fed up of people thinking that being a SAHP is the easy option - I am a firm believer it is not an easy option. Most SAHM I know have what I would describe as quite a rough time of it. Hubbie leaving the house at 6/7 am; not getting home until 7/8 and woman is expected to do all the jobs she was expected to do 40/50 years ago, ie, washing, ironing etc - except for the fact that DH wants the children to be kept up so he can play with them and say what a good father he is.

The whole notion that being a working parent is so much harder is not true because while you are out working there is someone else looking after your children for you. You are not trying to do them both simultaneously. What is hard is trying to fit a job around your children, which is what most women want so they can enjoy their lives and their children (I think!)

A woman who chooses to SAH after children start school is not lazy, she is merely trying to redress the fact that she has spent the first few years of her children's life knee deep in nappies and sleep deprived having worked the 17 hour day that was expected of her. When her children start school she will probably be back to working 8-10 hour days that most people work.

Lastly, there is actually no shame in being a SAHP and it can be fulfilling and stimulating. It is just a question of whether one wants to treat is a proper job or a millstone around the neck. Is a job really that much more intellectually stimulating? Surely, after a few years any job loses its ability to stimulate due to the fact it becomes a process? Unless of course you are in academia or a creative job. Except for financial reasons the main reason to go back to work is to have a break from the children / have a career. Neither of which are bad reasons just please admit that this is the reason and not use the fact that you obviously believe you have the intellectual high ground over someone who chooses to SAH.

I strongly believe the above is a feminist issue and I think that being a SAH deserves the same level of respect that being a working parent gets, but it doesn't. Feminists please back up the fact that a woman has a right to choose and she should not be guilted into the modern day notion that working is all and being a full-time mother is not a legitimate pursuit.

To add, how is calling other women's lifestyles " lame" part of feminist thought and action?

I think that you are reading too much Ali into what others are saying.Personally if someone is saying Iwouldnt find it stimulating they are referring to themselves.They arent adding and "therefore you are an idiot on the end "

I wouldnt find it as stimulating -
now but I did enjoy being mostly SAH with my small DC( Excellent mat leave,returned very partime)

To ask you about cooking your DH dinner is very odd - I would ignore !

To put it another way -I am a nurse - someone else wants to be a pastry chef or a doctor -they wouldnt find being a nurse as stimulating -why would i be offended by that ????
I also like Indigo am very happy -if you are happy then just let their comments go.

AliGrylls ignoring the non-reasoned responses because frankly, I'm bored of them, the most worrying thing to me whilst reading your OP is not whether or not SAHP is a valuable pursuit or not, but more the way that people who choose this path are being treated.

17 hour days? knee deep in nappies? Being made to keep children awake in to the night so that dad can see them? This is not a feminist choice!!! It's not about which one is harder, it's about who is being treated with respect. If you genuinley feel that you're getting the raw end of the deal (and i would suggest this is because you are a woman... would your partner be as happy to do it?!) you need to readdress the balance.

I don't like to think of any woman (or person!) to feel that they are in such ann unfair and unequal situation.

I also don't think that your experience is the norm. I know several SAHMs and and working mums, no one feels as hard done by as you seem to.

Also Ali, you use the analogy of what people have said to you as being the equivelent of you saying to a working mother "I wouldn't want to leave my child with a stranger" (paraphrased - sorry) It is just as rude. But people do say that. As a working mother I've had many SAHPs say that to me.

There are rude people and there are not rude people. Offensive comments about life choices aren't only recieved by SAHPs. Maybe you wouldn't be so rude as to make a comment like that, but people do, the same as people make them to you. Challenge each incident, or just shrug it off.

I'm sorry you don't feel like you have any status. Personally, despite being 30 and having a succesful career, I don't really feel like I have status when I go to the playground. I would have more than you at a business networking event, less at a PTA meeting... I don't think that looking for acceptance and status from strangers is a good starting point for finding fulfillment.

It is an interesting thread. I'm wondering are you aware that single mothers (those on benefits!) are now treated as unemployed from when their child starts school. It is a major shift in the way the government treats those with childcare responsibilites and, I feel, a major letdown for women's rights in this country. Proof perhaps that motherhood is not a recognised role in this country anymore.

I agree with Sarah people say about it about all types of thinsg doesnt mean anything. I couldnt be a nurse as I hate the sight of blood, wouldnt want to be a chef cause its too hot in the kitchen etc. I work in a nursery practically every parent says oh couldnt do what you do drives me nuts etc. Its just conversation half the time.

Im not keen on blood either ilovedora

I am very, very squeamish sarah. Its weird as my mum has been a nurse her whole working life. I cant even take my DD for injections or have a blood test without feeling faint. Dont think I would make it as a nurse!

Hopeforthebest very interesting post -agree especially a bit the bit regarding men doing more ie their share of childcare/housework.

I personally havent come across the attitude that being a mother /enjoying your DC is wrong- to the contrary I think that the Patriarchy have sugar coated motherhood(for a reason!)! and that some women feel like they have been "had" when they find themselves doing all the childcare,all the chores-while looking at their husbands who have barely changed their lifestyles.
There was a SAHM support thread on here recently-post after post from women who felt disillusioned.
I loved being (mostly) at home when my DC were little -most days anyway.There was one occasion when we had used every last sheet,towel and pillowcase and still DD was erupting from both ends -that day I wanted to be beamed up!

The bit about equality being measured in terms of the extent women are like men- women have always traditionally WOH - babies would be taken to the fields or looked after by an extended network of older experienced women or their siblings.Of course if you came from the upper classes children were cared for by staff .
Post war brought about the "SAHM" -deliberately engineered propaganda to ensure that there were enough jobs for men returning from war.
My grandmother had 2 jobs -she was a warwidow-DM was cared for by various older relatives.
Sorry have gone on a bit ! I just wanted to address the notion that women working = emulating men !
I still think that everyone should do whatever makes them happy and ignore remarks about the choices they have made. Only you live your life

Ilovedora unless you work in emergency ,theatres or critical care there isnt a huge amount of blood -certainly not the gushing fountains that are seen on Casualty or Holby

Sorry one bit I forgot to add -during the war women were told it was selfish to SAH-they should "do their bit for the war" and they were also discouraged from visiting their evacuated children
It seems that historically women have been manipulated to suit the needs of society at that time

hopeforthebest, what you say at the end of your post rings true with me. I remember feeling as I was growing up thst I had to have a career and work really hard at work. However, I have never really enjoyed working and am certainly not career focused as I discovered when I had my kids. Of my friends I don't actually know anyone who admitted that they wanted to get married have kids and stay at home. Definitely a generational thing.

I have found that when people learn I'm not going back to work they seem quite envious rather than judgemental. I was on track for quite an high-flying career - my boss wanted me to do a professional doctorate and I was all set to get working on that when I finally stopped and thought "no, this isn't what I want, I want children and a home and that's it." When I said it to my colleagues the general response was that it was lovely and wasn't it great that I knew what I wanted. In fact my boss, who was an ultra-busy, ultra successful person, expressed guilt and dissatisfaction with her life as she had two young children whom she rarely saw. People did say they couldn't be a SAHM but I just took their word for it - that they didn't feel cut out for it, not that they thought it was stupid or pointless.

However I was still locked into the "I must have a career" mindset so I retrained as a teacher, which is a very family friendly job in Ireland. I hated the training but I do love teaching, however, now that I've moved to England and have had my DS I don't think I'll ever go back to teaching as it is definitely not family friendly in this country. Anytime I've said to people here that I'm not going back to work I've had the "Oh I couldn't do that" response, or "Oh it's great to have that opportunity" both of which I feel are not judgemental of me in any way, they're just comments. I don't need anyone else to legitimise what I'm doing, it's my life and what they think of it means nothing to me.

I have mentioned it before on the feminism topic but it seems relevant here so I'll mention it again. I read a very interesting book by Susan Pinker called "The Sexual Paradox" which looks into the disparities between men and women in the workplace. Basically she investigated why, despite all the initiatives to get women into science, engineering, and top business management women still go for the more social jobs or opt to stay at home, and what she found was that women just don't want the careers that these initiatives promote, simple as that. Even women who are given every possible opportunity and encounter no sexism in their workplace are far far more likely than their male counterparts to stay at a lower management level or leave the career altogether. Why? Not because of childcare, or the glass ceiling but because they just don't want it. You can't make someone want to be a scientist or a physicist and making women feel guilty because they're not "successful" (ie not in a traditionally "male" job) does women no favours. Women choose more social jobs like teaching, medicine, social work, because they want those jobs. Far better to increase the prestige of these jobs rather than foisting other less desirable jobs on women. However, as we have seen, when teachers try to get more recognition by demanding fair pay and striking for it, they're seen as selfish and greedy. How dare women demand to be paid for their skills!

writer I haven't read that book but unless she has studied the females from birth how canshe be sure if it is nature or nurture?

thats a v fatalistic and pessimistic synopsis if that is what pinker says (havent read it).it feeds into stereotypical women just not that into those kinds of careers and are wired differently. this notion of different gender hard-wiring holds women back and unwittingly supports "not womens' work about certain jobs/professions. and for as long as researchers promote this people cite it as if fact

ali - well put. I'm a SAHM (almost) and your description of the father working all hours and coming home expecting to find children still up and welcoming is so true. I also agree wholeheartedly with your point on trying to find work that fits around the kids. I work sporadically as I don't have any backup at the moment, and any paid work I get is not worth getting childcare for as it's badly paid and irregular. I despair of getting back into a career, even though I'm well educated and conscientious. I'm sure other mums think I'm lazy (I'm not) and a bit of a loser (I'm not).

My confidence has gone, and with it my self-respect. All I wanted was to ensure DD has someone to come home to after school, but I seem to have paid a heavy price.

Hope, the 6th paragraph of your post is a bit unclear, but it seems like you have an interesting point to make, could you clarify it?

writer I am really interested to know whther Pinker discusses the subject of how we are conditioned as young females to perceive what we want to acheive and what we are able to acheive.
But I don't have time to read it can you expand please?

hopeforthebest I also feel that I had a very equal upbringing. I work in an industry where, if anything, women are more respected than men. We have an all female board and I'm paid way over what most men in my industry are paid... I beleive I am bringing my daughter up in an equal way as well, but I can't deny that no matter what I do, the image that is portrayed of women by the media and by others around her is inherantly sexist. Therefore, when she is an adult, if she chooses a traditionally female way of life (sahm, carer, teaching, cleaner, hairresser) how can I be sure if it is nature or nurture?

I think as long as you are happy, ignore everyone else. I have been a f/t and p/t WM and am now a SAHM for over 12 years. I have helped in school and studied throughout most of that time. I have enjoyed every minute once I got through the first couple of years 'culture shock'! I think many feel isolated DUE TO the fact that they are looked down upon, if it were valued as paid work is then it may not be the case. I think being at home a long time distances you from the competetive world and I can see through things much better now. Alot of society doesn't make sense and I feel liberated to 'opt out'. I feel closer to my kids now due to the sheer amount if time I spend with them. I can always be there at school plays etc. I have that choice and appreciate that although it means sacrifices such as sharing a car and mainly UK holidays but that suits us.

I agree with the poster that said why should equality always mean being the same as men? Why are two working parents valued even if they need a third party involved to help yet a couple where one does the caring and one works, doing it all themselves, is not valued?

I have always thought that back in the 60s/70s when women burned their bras and wanted to be treated like men (vis a vis work etc) they kind of missed the point. What they should have been saying is we want the role of mother and home maker to be given equal status with that of (for example) CEO. I don'[t myself think it is possible to be both at the same time without delegating the childare role to someone else.

Women didn't actually burn their bras. It's an urban myth created to mock the work that women of that time did which means that now we can decide if to take traditionally male work or female work.

Drastic action like that was needed at that time but the very fact that women are still arguing over whose job is 'harder' or more 'important' shows that there is still a long way to go.

Berkshire she looked mainly at women who had very equal upbringings. In fact many of the women had been specifically nutured to succeed and achieve due to obvious talent. For many of them it took them years to realise they didn't actually want the typically "male" version of success, some left very successful careers indeed to start at square one in medicine or social work. They weren't naive young women who didn't know their minds, or who had been brainwashed, they were capable middle aged women who'd had time to assess their priorities. In fact, many of them commented that they'd been brainwashed to believe that their more "feminine" desires - to have a family, to have a social job - were not good enough and not worthy of their talent.

Another way to look at it is - if men are free to choose whatever they want then why don't they choose the "female" professions?

Interesting. My answer to your question at the end about men - Isn't it because they have been conditioned to be the main earner or bread winner?

I do see your point, and Pinker's, but with so much inequality around us (no matter how positive your upbringing) I just can't agree that our choices are free.

I would suggest that if she studied the women you mention, these were more anecdotale. My story is that i don't have to work in the purest sense. I don't particularly relish the thought of the lack of time I spend with my DD, but I wouldn't enjoy not having paid employment outside of my role as mother. So had she studied me, I would have disproved her theory.

Or does she use statics to back up the anecdotes?