Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Women have their little careers till they have babies. Then they do as little as possible, preferably not working at all after that

531 replies

StealthPolarBear · 03/04/2013 13:27

I am infuriated by this attitude which seems to be prevalent. After women have had babies they only work if they have to, and go part time if they can. But I can't put into words why I work - why wouldn't I? I work for the same reasons as I did before I had children. I work for the same reasons as DH works.
Either of us could give up work and we'd cope. But that was true pre-children. Women continuing to work FT seems to be a slur on their man's ability to 'provide'.

OP posts:
scottishmummy · 05/04/2013 12:57

Because childcare jobs regulated,are income generating via tax,ni,external benefit to others
Parenting is the tasks,things we do for our kids,it's not a job,and its private act for that family.not income generating

seeker · 05/04/2013 13:05

And income generation is all, obviously. You can't be a role model unless you generate income. Well, you can in my world!

SatsukiKusukabe · 05/04/2013 13:06

search a bit on MN and you will see how many former childminders/nannies/nursery workers now choose not to leave their own children to outside care. it's almost like they think they make more of an effort when the child they care for is their own.... hmmm Isn't it odd that people take more of an interest in the outcomes of their own biological offspring.. even with out offsteds help?

blueshoes · 05/04/2013 13:17

People will and should look after their own children for free. It is their choice to have children so why should society pay for parents to look after their own children, bearing in mind not every taxpayer chooses to or can have children.

It is only where people are looking after children other than their own which they would not ordinarily because (surprise) they are not their own that should be paid for it. It is then rightly called a job. For accepting payment for that job, it has to be done to objectively acceptable standards and to a time schedule that is not of their choosing. This job also does not get lighter as the children get progressively older because these children then get replaced with others that need that high level of care for which it continues to make economic sense to pay that childcarer.

I don't see much parallel between SAHM-ing and paid childcare workers.

blueberryupsidedown · 05/04/2013 13:18

What a strange thing to say satsuki. Of course I would expect a childminder to care for my children, but I wouldn't expect that she would care for my children as much as she cares for her own.... It's a very strange expectation... As if we expect childminders/nursery workers to be overworked, underpaid, emotionally involved, and care for their looked-after children as much as if they were her own.

scottishmummy · 05/04/2013 13:18

seeker you asserted parent is same as being paid childcare worker,I've disputed that
Because parent gives calpol doesnt make make one a paediatric nurse
I've made it clear that parent isn't same as paid employment

scottishmummy · 05/04/2013 13:23

Lol,satsuki of course a parent cares more for own kid than mindee.I'd expect so
I expect childcare worker to keep my children safe,content.dont expect love
Cm are self employed for profit,and do a valuable job

blueshoes · 05/04/2013 13:34

chocspread: "The "market" only survives because of the backbone of unpaid work. Hells bells with your logic blueshoes you had better not undertake paid work at all - as by doing so you are just further supporting the patriarchy by joining the "system"."

Is it better to reform the patriarchy by carping from the sidelines that unpaid childcare work is unvalued (where has that got women? I don't see a revolution around the corner) or by actually participating in the activities that the patriarchy values and then to get to a seniority that will make a difference?

Is it better to sell cakes at the loss at the school fair (compared with the cost of the ingredients and labour) than to work for 10 minutes to earn the profit on those cakes and donate to the school. It is better to work for free at a homeless shelter or go to work to earn the taxes that could be used to support the homeless? Is Mother Teresa necessarily a better role model than Bill and Melinda Gates?

Why undertake unpaid work at all? Women can also help their cause by demanding fair pay for their efforts. That is one of the reasons binmen end up getting paid more than the dinner lady and women-type jobs (healthcare, childcare, social work) gets increasingly ghetto-ised. But that means women must be prepared to give more priority to their work - to justify the pay or higher pay - than they currently do. One of the reasons why women undertake unpaid work is because it can fit around their families, rather than demand payment for work for which they could not dictate the commitment.

We don't have to feed the capitalist machine.

BrandyAlexander · 05/04/2013 13:38

There is a world of difference between a nanny/other form of childcare taking care of a child and the parent raising a child. To suggest otherwise is quite astonishing quite frankly. Shock

If the nanny is really 'raising a child' because s/he is there for 10-12 hours per day for about 3 years of a persons life then I question whether fathers who go out to work and arent there during the day are really raising their children? Can they really call themselves a parent?

seeker · 05/04/2013 13:45

I made the point about parent/child care because I am pissed off at the suggestion that I can't be a good role model for my children because I chose to stop going out to work when they were born. A nanny would do more or less the same things with my children during the day as I would- but she is a good role model and I am not. But I would be if I was nannying her children while she nannied mine!

blueshoes · 05/04/2013 13:46

People who get confused between a nanny/cm/nursery worker/aupair raising a child v. a parent raising a child probably did not use childcare to any significant degree. Their choice, but does not really qualify themselves to speak about it.

Funny how once a child gets to school age, the teacher or after school carer is not seen as 'raising' their child.

seeker · 05/04/2013 13:49

I don't think I said anything about "raising" a child did I? Or did you mean someone else?

scottishmummy · 05/04/2013 13:51

if you worked,you'd be demonstrating employment.role model for working,not a patriarchal role
If you were nanny you'd be working,and yes by working you'd be in non patriarchy role
Housewife,not working is maintaining patriarchy.it's a demonstrable construct of patriarchy

seeker · 05/04/2013 13:53

However, if I had gone back to my job when dd was 6 months old, as I intended, her nanny would probably have done more "raising" than her parents did - both would have been out of the house from 6am til 8.30 at least pm during the week, so the parental "raising" would have been fitted into the weekend!

seeker · 05/04/2013 13:55

Housewife- I agree.

Looking after children- don't agree.

SatsukiKusukabe · 05/04/2013 13:57

I was responding to Scottisha ridiculous assertion that with out offsted a person can't be expected to stick to a standard of care for their own children

I don't know why I am defending being a sahp, why should I have to? I don't think there is anything wrong with your choices but some of the people on this thread refuse to see anyone can do any good without doing things their way. It's a bit pathetic and more than a bit insecure.

morethanpotatoprints · 05/04/2013 14:03

seeker"watching kids" Grin.

Scottish

So does this mean that a wohm isn't raising kids but "watching kids" when she is at home.
I'd be interested to find out who is raising the kids Grin

scottishmummy · 05/04/2013 14:04

Had you returned to work you'd not be maintaing the patriarchy
Housewife demonstrably reinforces stereotypical roles dad works,mum doesn't.
And that feeds into op,the expectation some have, that women give up work post-baby

scottishmummy · 05/04/2013 14:07

Satsuki you're spectacularly missing point.Ofsted doesn't regulate parents
Ofsted regulates childcare,undertaken by childcare workers
Parents are private individuals not under auspices of Ofsted.

seeker · 05/04/2013 14:11

It would be courteous of you to stop using the inaccurate term "housewife" to describe somebody looking after children.

morethanpotatoprints · 05/04/2013 14:11

How did we get on to housewife? Surely that is a different role altogether and I don't even think it exists pre 1950's. I'm sure you didn't need to have dc to be a housewife.
Can't see anybody wanting to be married to their house can you seeke?r

SatsukiKusukabe · 05/04/2013 14:17

see actually Scottish a lot of feminists see capitalism and the patriarchy as inextricably linked. but none of the sahp on this thread would call you a pawn of the patriarchy, because at the end of the day we're all just trying to get by.

and after the revolution /Mayan doomsday/meteor shower, you won't have jobs anyway and you'll all be begging me to teach you to make bread

seeker · 05/04/2013 14:23

"Housewife" "Watching children"

Anything to belittle.

scottishmummy · 05/04/2013 14:23

Am i cog in capitalist wheel,enmeshed in system that's at time unfair,irrational.yes.
Is the housewife supporting patriarchy, yes
I understand the impact of my actions and the unpredictable foibles of working

blueshoes · 05/04/2013 14:31

If WOHM are pawns of the patriarchy, why does that make the husbands of SAHMs? Are SAHMs content to live off the labour of their own pawns but condemn those of their own sex who seek to make an honest living?

I don't think that is what you are saying

Swipe left for the next trending thread