Equality at home - Can this really be achieved?

[marga73]

There is an issue I've been wanting to discuss for a long time. It's the issue of equality inside the house.

Even though women now work and are able to gain respectable positions in the workplace, and we can say that some level of equality has been attained, it seems to me that once they have children, women lose more than men in terms of work opportunities and financial independence. And all because the house and the children still seem to be a "woman's job".

It's all great to find women who are happy being the SAHP, but don't these women feel sometimes that being 100% financially dependent on their husbands is frustrating? Doesn't this situation make them feel trapped and powerless? Is it OK for women to sacrifice their independence for the sake of their children and the house keeping?

I work part-time, and have two small children, and still feel trapped sometimes. I'm grateful in many ways that my husband earns enough so we don't have to worry about paying for mortgage, food, childcare etc - and I contribute to this too - but I feel it's far beyond from the ideal I had when I was young and it really annoys me. If I'm honest, it makes me very angry.

I would like a society where men and women work part time, share domestic tasks 50/50, and look after their children part time, and therefore pay for everything on equal terms. Is this too much to ask in the fierce capitalist society we live today? Am I naive to think that should be the case?

Women are adults when they marry and they need to make sure they are in an equal partnership. The best way is to get to know his family and see how his parents ,siblings etc operate.
It is important that women know they have choice, if they can afford it as a couple and they don't have to be defined by occupation. They can spend time with their DCs when little and still have an exciting time. They can do all those things that working women don't have time for. They can do things that stretch them in the voluntary field, they can be very creative, they can start a business from home, they can write a book, they can gain qualifications. They can enjoy being a classroom assistant, they can support a Special Needs child in a normal classroom, they can foster children , they can be a mentor-they can do 101 things that are immensely rewarding.They just don't happen to earn much money.
I find your way of thinking extremely narrow minded Xenia.

I would hate to live in a society where materialism is rife and work and pots of money come first. Who on earth would foster children, care for the elderly? Men do these jobs too-it equally counts for them.

Sorry-men make good careers too.

Carers. My computer defaults to careers-it doesn't like Carers either!

Last weekend I saw a woman who had sorted it out wonderfully. We stayed in B&B in a very off the beaten track place in a rural area. The view was amazing and we had breakfast watching the varied bird life. She baked her own bread, made her own marmalade, meets interesting people. The other couple staying lived and worked in Paris and I expect they had high powered careers.WE never mentioned it-other people's jobs are not of much interest. There was plenty of interest to chat about. I thought it beat living in a city and working in an offiice. She could have most of her day free for interesting things.

Exotic -

But why aren't you bewailing the misguided men (there are many more of them) who are wasting their time in your opinion in misguided pursuit of materialism as CEOs and corporate lawyers etc.. When they should really jack it in and become teaching assistants, become foster carers, bake bread and suchlike?

Why is it impotant for women to know they have a choice?

Don't get me wrong, all these things are fine if they float your boat and you like living frugally. But why just for women??

I do think more people should be able to do these things when the time is right for them in their lives. But that could mean mixing it up day by day, year by year by both parents.

At the moment men don't have or take the choice to do this as they know it means career oblivion. And women often don't have a lot of choice not to (or realise when it is too late that they've been suckered by the system).

It is the same for men-there are wonderful jobs and lifestyles that don't involve going Ito a city and an office. Ii is fine for those that want it-and I'm not decrying it, but it isn't the be all and end all. Lots of men want a career that leaves time for other things. Each to their own. Personally I would love to have a B&B in a rural area, bake bread, grow vegetables, keep some chickens and have time for hobbies. I don't expect everyone to want it-it would be hell for some. Xenia just seems to think we all have the same hell -and we don't.

exotic you've mentioned a few things:running a nursery, now a B&B. Why aren't you doing these things?

From Tilly: sweet - but is the men's age the cause of them earning more, or do women choose men who earn more (so are likely to be older)?

Tilly, you could view the 'choice' (probably more the 'conditioning') as the other way around: men tend to choose a woman younger than themselves. That 'feels' more like the answer (though I'm sure the reasons are complex), given the greater media hoo-hah about famous women partnering men younger than themselves.

Anecdotally, those friends of mine who are only, say, a year older than their DPs mentioned it at the beginning of their relationship in a 'oh, I'm such a cradle snatcher' way - jokey of course, but they wouldn't think of anyone making the joke the other way round with such a small age gap.

This table shows the median age for first marriage from the US since 1890 - the gap has gone from 4 years in 1900 to just under 2 in 2010, so I guess the trend is changing (slowly!).

US Marriage Ages

I don't want to word factory. I am quite happy tootling along in part time jobs that Xenia despises, and having time for voluntary work and hobbies. I am just pointing out the choice. I can see a lot of appeal in running a B&B or a nursery.

Schools need TAs in Xenia's world no one would do it. Men make good ones too. It really doesn't matter which partner does it but it is an excellent job for someone (man or woman) with DCs. It gives the same holidays, you start at the same time, get break and lunch break,and leave at the same time-unlike the teacher who needs to be there at least an hour before,hasn't time for breaks and can't leave with the DC.it also has the advantage of never being boring. I still go in as part of my voluntary work and it always gives me a lift.

We need care for the elderly, we need cleaners, we need child care,we need teaching assistants etc. It is up to the couple how they operate it but give me a TAs job down the road rather than commuting to an office any day-given a choice and if I could afford it.

I only have one point-it is choice. Xenia d hate my choice and her life would cause me to go into a deep depression. Why does this matter? There isn't a 'better' choice-just a 'better' choice for you. (hopefully one that you agree with DP)

Sorry about lack of punctuation.

I think that women are choosing younger men theses days. I was older than DH1 and it was very unusual, but I find it very common now.

Exotic

The pictures you paint of people doing hobby jobs all sound lovely.

But I think in you are assuming in each case another wage earner supporting the family.

Running a rural B&B with all the capital paid off = lovely
Running a rural B&B that has to cover the mortgage = a struggle to survive

Working as a class room assistant = great family friendly job
Bringing up a family on a classroom assistants wages = poverty

Fostering children in a beautiful spacious house, and using their living allowance to pay for clothes and outings = lovely
Fostering children in a cramped flat where their living allowance is a critical contribution to paying the electric and grocery bill = not so nice

We can all fantasise about the first option, but without a high earner in the family the reality is the second.

So when you say "more women should have the choice" to do low earning hobby jobs for which they are overqualified you are also saying (or assuming) that more men should do high earning jobs that pay a family wage and allow no flexibility.

Etc... I don't think you are really advocating a less material life, just a traditional one where the dad brings home the bacon and the mum earns pin money.

Exactly Himalaya - I am really lucky that DH wants to be the one to earn 'our' money and I can choose to do the things that are lovely to me e.g the child care. I don' t expect everyone to feel the same. I just get fed up with Xenia telling me what I should think. I am lucky. However even if I had to work full time I would opt for an interesting but lower paid career.

It gets us around the same circle. Something has to give when you have DCs-either one,or both,parent's jobs or the child who sees more of a paid employer than parents.

You are a couple - you sort it out together so it is pooled money-not my money.

If people didn't have pooled money no one could afford to be a TA and then schools and DCs would really suffer.

"It gets us around the same circle. Something has to give when you have DCs-either one,or both,parent's jobs or the child who sees more of a paid employer than parents."

This is based on the incorrect assumption that being in a paid for childcare setting is an unhappy situation for a child, or less nice than being at home with mummy or daddy.

Paid for childcare does not automatically mean that it's not nice, and hollow-eyed children are stored in crates and fed grey mush until the parents collect them in the evenings. SAHP-childcare doesn't automatically mean hours of fun with cup cake baking and educational walks through the museum.

My children are in childcare 50 hours a week. They have big grins on their faces when they enter the building in the morning and come running/crawling to me excitedly when I pick them up in the evening. The suggestion that I'm doing them wrong really really fucking annoys me.

Where on earth I said that you are wrong?!!!
People miss my point entirely. Of course some women want a job and it would send them spare at home. Some women have to work. There is nothing wrong in that. As I keep saying -we are all different. Xenia is saying that even though DH earns enough I should want to work, I am letting the side down and I must be some sort of downtrodden example if I like child care.
We need to be thankful that people love child care or there would be no nurseries that DCs love and schools woulldn't have TAs with degrees. Why this idea that the same things make all women happy?

Would someone like to explain how we get TAs (male or female) if no one wants a part time,low paid job?

How do we get high quality nursery staff if they do 'the sensible thing' and get a job that pays better-bearing in mind that nearly every job pays better?

I quoted where you said that. You said "something has to give". Either his job, her job or the children, thus implying that giving up one's job is a noble sacrifice for the sake of the children.

If you didn't mean it that way, fair enough, but then you need to work on how you express your ideas of what constitutes choice.

My DH would have had to have given up his job in London if I wanted to work full time. We could both do it but we would both have to be much more local and earn less so it seems a bit pointless to me.
I was really talking about the sort of career Xenia thinks I should have which would be city based. Something has to give if you both never get back by bedtime and you both travel for work.

I find the idea of claiming the work of qualified nursery staff is exactly the same as what a SAHP does a bit weird.

I wouldn't for a second think that I'm as qualified in all things childcare as the EYP who is my daughter's keyworker. She's got a degree in that stuff, I've only grown them.

That doesn't mean that I think I'm a bad mother. Just that I can't pretend to be as good at childcare and entertaining and stimulating children all day as someone who's trained for it.

I certainly do not look down on childcare workers, much the opposite. But I get the impression that those who think they must do it better just by virtue of being mum are the ones who look down.

If you have 2 doctors locally you can do it - or similar-it depends on the job.