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?

swallowedafly - there is no market for languages without skills. Speaking 5 languages fluently is useless for employment prospects without professional qualifications. What I am talking about (and not from a French perspective - the lawyers I know work in global firms) is a French lawyer who for example has also qualified to practice in the UK and in the US. I have a US friend who is a senior partner in a big US firm, currently heading up the EMEA offices, who has run into difficulties because he needs to pass the French bar exams to continue to work in France. His younger colleagues won't have this problem because they are all double/triple qualified (and multilingual) to start with. He knows he's in the last generation to get so senior while only being qualified in a single jurisdiction/only speaking two languages (English and Spanish).

yes but do they work in global firms in france? my sister worked for a massive multinational company and in it's french businesses yes what you were saying was true, in it's branches here it wasn't.

i'm not saying it isn't true of an international career but for a uk based one.

in legal translation which is a skill actually rather than just a language because you have to be very informed about law in the countries of both languages you are translating between and when you are, for instance, translating contracts worth millions you can't make mistakes or leave loopholes - translating becomes about far more than linguistics once you specialise at that level of a particular industry or profession. given most lawyers aren't multilingual and experts on the law of several nations it is legal translators who often fill that gap.

anyway massive tangent sorry op.

I think that we should just accept that we are all different and one size doesn't fit all.What makes one woman happy makes another one miserable.
I had the discussion when out and about today and it seemed an even split, some women loved being at home with children and some were bored by it.

I think that it is wonderful that we have the choice and women can now do anything they set their mind to do. I admire Xenia-I just get irritated by the fact that she thinks it would suit everyone and that I should be doing things for 'all women'. I am doing things for 'all women' by saying that you can have the choice and there is nothing wrong in not giving a career your priority.

I would say the same for men. I have 3 DSs, one is motivated by status and money and 2 are not-it is fine by me. As long as they all make the most of their opportunities and have a work ethic I don't see why you can't be just as happy being a landscape gardener as surgeon-if that is what makes you happy. If one of my DSs ever ends up being a stay at home parent I don't see that it matters. It is something to be discussed before you have DCs. I can't think that any of my DSs would assume that a partner would give up work-they may well be very ambitious career women. I think that I am a good role model in that I don't expect women to be the stay at home partner and I certainly don't expect them to be 'second fiddle'.

I have a work ethic-I am always busy with things that interest me and I work hard-they just don't happen to earn a lot of money or put me in a position of power.

but we're not at the stage where all of those choices can be easily/freely made - it's just that the one you want is easy to choose for a woman which maybe gives the impression it's all easy ad a matter of choice.

it feels easy when 'what you want' and 'what is expected of your gender' are in broad alignment. it's when they're at variance that things get trickier and the need for feminism clearer.

As far as I can see-having 3 DSs-women seem to be overtaking men in terms of success. Certainly DSs female friends don't appear to see any limits in what they can do.
I happen to like traditionally female careers-I just don't see why I should be made to feel that it is wrong. (I am not saying that others should)

I am very interested in child development and not in the least interested in financial markets- so it stands to reason that given the choice I would rather look after DCs than be a banker.

you shouldn't be made to feel that's wrong but you shouldn't likewise make other women feel wrong for being different to you and wanting a more equal system that takes their needs into account as well as yours.

I don't at all. I am pleased that women have the choice. I think that my mother would have been much better as a career woman. I would like to see more women in a position of power-as long as it isn't me!
I just get fed up with the Xenia view that we should all put a career first.
I can't see why women are so judgemental about each other.

you're talking like the battle is won and it's not.

pretending it is because it's alright for you as it is is disingenuous imo. as disingenuous as xenia's everyone can earn a fortune unless they're a bit thick argument.

in reality you and xenia (for example) are two extremes. the kind of extremes that these discussions attract and who reframe the discussion around that polemic.

the reality is there are few 'yous' and very few 'xenias'. the vast majority of women are in the middle compromising and trying to make things work in difficult situations that are not entirely of their choosing but what they've pragmatically found themselves doing.

very many sahms are not there as a 100% choice, many of them feel they have no choice. very many working mums aren't doing it because they love work and their job but because they have to and don't realistically see themselves as having a choice. a load more are in the middle juggling some sah time and some work.

the path these discussions end up taking are reflective of a tiny minority of women and silence the realities of the majority of women which may not be as jingoistic or fun to debate but are very real.

and focussing on that tiny majority reinforces the idea that it's all just a matter of choice which is codswallop.

Witin a marriage if you marry a richer man and you earn very little it's not surprising you end up with sexist set ups, women with no earnings and cleaning up and serving men in a way most feminists deplore. If you marry a man who earns about what you or or you earn multiples of what he does then if he doesn't earn enough to cover childcare then it is very possible he will be at home looking after the children. As long as women marry up we will have situations where most women end up as virtual servants at home, with no money or power and careers shot to pieces when men disappear with a younger model and no longer keep the woman they had been keeping.

jingle jangle polemic spangle.

In the Sunday Times yesterday it said that the new trend was for women to marry down.
I don't mean to sound extreme-Xenia brings out the worst in me when you get piffle about servants and sexual favours! We no longer live in the dark ages and women don't have to marry or even live with a man. If you chose to you can at least get an enlightened one.

I think that sadly these days the economic situation means that women have to work-whether they want to or not.

"I think that sadly these days the economic situation means that women have to work-whether they want to or not."

Try to rephrase that:

""I think that sadly these days the economic situation means that men have to work-whether they want to or not."

Do you find the second one as "sadly" as the first? And if not, why not?

Men generally have had the misfortune to be the ones to go and out and work.

I will rephrase it to 'sadly the economic situation means that both parents have to go out to work, whether they want to or not.'

It is really up to the individuals-if you want your DH to give up his career and do the child care you need to sort it first. It is a couple thing. Lots do have the woman as main breadwinner.

Anyone who is single without DCs will have to work whatever the sex-unless rich parents, lottery win, inheritance etc. I could only stay at home because we were a partnership-my bit was just as valuable and saved a fortune in not farming it all out.

I only said it because I know women who would love to stay at home and bring up their own DCs and they can't afford it. I haven't asked men so I don't know any in that position.

unless it's deliberate can i recommend losing the phrases 'farming it all out' and 'bring up their own dcs'. for obvious reasons.

it's just as bad as the 'little housewives' kind of phrases the other side like to use.

both inhibit decent conversation between adult women rather than attack/defense jingoism.

Raising your child is a valuable profession in itself. Do you view those whom you leave in charge of your child as professionals? If you do then they should be paid as such, because your children are valuable assets to society and you have both committed a lot of time in producing them (you especially). If you don't view them as professionals then you are leaving your children in what you see as a subset of work. You are devaluing your children.

If for one minute men thought that raising children was a worthwhile profession, they would be in there doing the job. Truth is they don't. They see the raising of children, our future prospects to help us through recessions, as a chore, a bore and emasculating.

Get real. Equality at home will never be achieved unless you as a woman, are earning more. That's only how it works. And he will resent you for it, because being a house parent is not seen as a good profession. Just as many women have resented being a house parent because they were not appreciated.

what do you think of the genuine 50/50 model the op likes dworkin?

"I told dh i was staying at home because I wanted to"

What would you have said if he had told you that?

What women need to do all the time is reverse the genders in how they talk (and men for that matter). WW just did it above and it really helps sexist women realise how vey sexist they are and you realise half the vitriol heaped on women who work is never ever scattered in the direction of anyone with a penis.

Amazing conicidence that all these women above on the thread happen to be the ones at home and not their husbands. Why is that? Does he earn more and if so why? How did you decide which of you would stay at home?