This one is behind The Times paywall, if you can access it. It's titled, "Being the breadwinner is not quite the post-feminist dream scenario." It starts with her telling of a friend who is on a business trip to New York and who has just had a text from her SAHH to ask where the kids' wellies are.
She then burbles on at some length in a fairly random way and then includes the below paragraph, referring to the same friend as above:
"Here?s a typical e-mail from my regularly-commuting-to-New-York mate: ?Am meant to be back here again in a fortnight but may have to throw a sickie. Beloved spouse complaining I?m never around, despite the fact that me not being around sometimes was, I recall, part of the ?deal?. And I?m still paying for the nanny. But if I sacked her and paid him the same, would I still respect him in the morning?!? "
To me, of course this is not the way it should be. Quite clearly, these women value the work of their SAHPs as little as so many "traditional" men value the work of their SAHWs. And, from the first "wellies" example to a number of others she gives in her piece, it's clear that the men in her scenario who are SAHD are not exactly embracing it.
I find I am getting more and more worked up by articles like these. Always written by women ffs. Those who are the main breadwinner seem to think they should be living some kind of perfect life where their children are clean and well behaved for story time and a jaunt on a Saturday or they go so far the other way they're still the one doing all the real childrearing.
Nothing will really change until our view of the parent at home, and the parent at work changes.
Sorry, not sure what the point of this thread is except to rant.