Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

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 15:40

What are you struggling to articulate seeker?
that you want paid to watch own baby?
want your child's father to pay you

blueberryupsidedown · 05/04/2013 15:40

I thought this thread was interesting, but you have completely lost me.

Being a sahp has enormous value, in society at large, just not revenue-based value. Working in a care position, childcare, nursing, teaching, social work, etc has enormous value, just not that much financial value.

To me, someone who work let's say, as an IT consultant (my old job...) has very little value, just lots of money... If you want to judge people's value just based on how much money they make, well the world doesn't make sense. I know many complete idiots who make 100k + a year...

chocspread · 05/04/2013 15:43

Richman - Can't say I agree with how you value - for example investment bankers - well some investment banks have really done all they can to capitalise profits at the expense of long term financial security for many others.

I think it is important how we define growth - GDP was only invested during WWII to pay for the war. Now is a mandatory accounting formula used by all nations. GDP counts only cash transactions, giving no value to peace and the environment.

Look again at some of the work by Waring which basically puts forward that the GDP system leaves out half the population of the planet and the planet itself.

How do you value the legacy of a truly great teacher or social worker for example??

seeker · 05/04/2013 15:44

I am not struggling to articulate anything. I am saying that to you looking after children has no value unless the person doing it is paid so to do.

I am asking, therefore, whether if the father of my children paid me formally to do it, the task would suddenly gain value.

chocspread · 05/04/2013 15:51

Excellent post pollypandemonium

Here Here blueberryupsidedown you've put it much more succinctly! Grin

Perhaps some people who undertake paid work need to limit the value of sahp's as that helps them to justify their so called "choices".

They can go on about how they contribute taxes and other stuff and feel good about themselves employing other people to look after their children and or do their housework etc etc.

SatsukiKusukabe · 05/04/2013 15:52

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?

My point is, I don't give a fuck how you raise your kids or what you do for a living. However several people on this thread seem to think I am "letting the side down" by not getting a job because I am pawn of the patriarchy, my reply is so is anyone working in the system. The difference is that my family chooses to only have one person participate and only because to opt out would mean to live in abject poverty. Is that difficult for you to comprehend?

No one is belittling you or your choices, a few people have said they stay home because they dont want others raising their children, this has only ever been said in response to people belittling their choices. I don't care what you or your partner do, genuinely I don't. You seem to have an odd in interest in how my family runs. There must be certain things at your job that you don't delegate right? That you only trust yourself to do? For me that's child care. For many parents that is child care.

Dh can go to work happily knowing that he has someone he trusts implicitly with his children, I know exactly where my kids are and who is dealing with them if anything it saves my mental health.

As for school, that will only be from 8:30 until 2:30 and then I will be with them until bed time. Dh sees them an hour a day just before bed. He hates that, but unfortunately until flexible working hours and people caring about life outside the home become the norm that's his lot.

As I have been saying for 17 pages now, getting every human who can physically work in to the system isn't going to improve things, you do understand that don't you? It will just mean more people working for less money. That obviously won't matter to those of you who are high earners, but to the fucker on the minimum wage vying for a job against another 100 people it will.

Honestly there is such a massive disconnect between some of you and the real world for the majority of women and it is the reason so many women feel feminism cant speak for them.

Would my dh be a sahp? He would jump at the chance, unfortunately he has 3x my earning power. SO I could work and he could stay home and we'd live in poverty, but hey as long as I am being a good feminist. I could also continue in my minimum wage job eating in to our family earnings by paying more than I earn to pay for child care in order to prove my dedication to the cause, but frankly only an idiot would think that was a good idea.

Now what I often hear is that, it's worth taking that monetary hit for the first couple of years because eventually you will be making shed loads right? Guess what.. the fucker at ASDA will never make shed loads, even if they move their way up to management. no they wont.

What I do think will improve things is changing the idea that working outside the home is the only thing anyone can do of value.

That means having more men working from home. Which starts with people like you respecting the position so people choose to stay home. It also means worrying about the real problems that still haven't been solved by feminism like the pay gap. More women making more money means more men will stay home.

Now stop being so defensive and listen.

chocspread · 05/04/2013 15:57

and great post SatsukiKusukabe Thanks

grimbletart · 05/04/2013 16:21

Can't bear these threads that dissolve into bunfights over SAHM and WOHM. Feminists being utterly unsupportive of each other Sad.

We all do what we do for the best of reasons at the time.

But re the patriarchy and how it marches on in the fact of all our efforts to put it in the box it should belong in.....I would bet a considerable amount of money that if ever a day comes when a high proportion of SAHP are dads rather than mums, then the 'value' put on SAHPs will mysteriously rocket.

grimbletart · 05/04/2013 16:21

fact = face (whoops)

SatsukiKusukabe · 05/04/2013 16:30

Thanks chockspread, enjoying your posts too!

We all do what we do for the best of reasons at the time.
yes to that grimble

But re the patriarchy and how it marches on in the fact of all our efforts to put it in the box it should belong in.....I would bet a considerable mount of money that if ever a day comes when a high proportion of SAHP are dads rather than mums, then the 'value' put on SAHPs will mysteriously rocket.

and big old yes to that too

StealthPolarBear · 05/04/2013 16:34

Agree grimble. I'm disappointed this has turned into the usual bunfight. Though I suppose it was stupid to start a thread about assumptions made of women and not want to discuss the rights and wrongs of what they actually do.

OP posts:
seeker · 05/04/2013 16:36

It's interesting that as far as I can see the only people on here attacking other women's choices are a few WOHMs - very odd.

BrandyAlexander · 05/04/2013 16:40

Hmm sigh.

blueshoes · 05/04/2013 16:53

Satsuki: "Now stop being so defensive and listen."

This is interesting. I was just exchanging and where necessary, challenging, ideas and entrenched belief systems. I was stating my viewpoint, not being defensive. Sorry if this debate has affected you more than it merits.

This may be irrelevant for you and others on this thread, not that you will change what you are doing any way, but it will certainly inform my dd's choices. I aspire for her to be more than just happy, to do more than minimum wage jobs and to participate in society beyond her immediate family. Of course childcare has value but women can aspire to so much more with a bit of planning and judicious advice. Why should men (patriarchy?) bag all the fun and power.

If some women are not so busy making men's lives childcare free, perhaps men will see the need to fill the breech and realise what a valuable activity it is. Why should men do childcare unless they had to? The best way to get to grimbletart's utopia of the "day when a high proportion of SAHP are dads rather than mums, then the 'value' put on SAHPs will mysteriously rocket" is in fact for women to ration/boycott childcare i.e. go out to work.

We want the same things, just have different views of how to get there.

louisianablue2000 · 05/04/2013 18:10

Why do these debate always turn into WOHM vs SAHM bunfights? Surely it's best for kids to have both parents sharing the childcare and work. That way they benefit from two (hopefully complementary) methods of parenting but also see two good role models. FWIW I think being a role model by working out of the house is only partly about earning a wage to contribute to the household, it is also about letting children know that their parents have a life beyond being a parent, that they are not the centre of the world. Obviously that could partly be demonstrated by a parent doing a lot of voluntary work (interestingly the only SAHD I know does masses of voluntary work, unlike any of the SAHMs) as well as paid work.

seeker · 05/04/2013 18:25

I am just not prepared to be told that I am a bad role model for my daughter, or that I am limiting her choices because, after a 16 year high flying career I chose to stop working to look after her. Or that I would have been a better role model if I had taken a job stacking shelves in Sainsbury's, rather than making it very clear to her that her father and I are a a partnership, we discussed at length how we wanted out family to work, and that I, frankly, pulled rank over him to get the better side of the deal.

scottishmummy · 05/04/2013 19:30

People with contrary opinion dont need narky rebuke satsuki,nor is anyone defensive

It is strident,it is heated,thats the point on a discussion topic.I'm more than willing to debate this with posters.yes thread will tread into touchy topics, it will have ouch factor. We are all adults, I Expect people if articulating strongly held opinion will give,and will get

Basically been told to shut up and stop being defensive doesn't cut it. I don't tolerate it from men,I won't tolerate it from woman. It simply isn't an appropriate response

scottishmummy · 05/04/2013 19:42

As an aside why do we diminish women strudent opinion and duscussion as bunfight

it's so dismissive,women have strong opinions,and it's a bunfight?this is significant ideological stuff,and the day to day choices we have all variously made

Im more than happy to discuss and enjoy other women opinion,I am in no way defensive at any other woman opinion.in fact I'm pretty damn interested

Let's get on with robust discussion,it has been well articulated,it has been interesting,I don't think it's a bunfight

seeker · 05/04/2013 19:43

The ouch factor is fine. Any discussion about how we best care for our children is bound to. But as I said, I object very strongly to being dismissed as a "housewife" who "watches my children". Maybe think a little before you are quite so condemning?

scottishmummy · 05/04/2013 19:56

We need to not occur then,I find neither terms objectionable.clearly you do
I don't get stuck on want to be there for kids,staff are main carer comments

I do think this is significant stuff. As a mainstay of why aren't women represented at work after babies? Why do men not do bulk childcare?

Because some women don't return, and that creates a societal expectation

seeker · 05/04/2013 20:35

You know fine well that when you say "housewife" you intend it to be disparaging- in fact practically everything you say is disparaging of SAHM.

SatsukiKusukabe · 05/04/2013 20:38

very good and very interesting the way you didn't respond to any of my post Scottish. keep on being "robust". I'm going to ignore this thread now, as I don't see any discussion, just 2 or 3posters being shitty to every one else in a way that certainly looks life defensiveness or plain old shittyness just for the sake of it. it's a bit sad tbh, if you wer really that happy with your situation I don't think you would be so bitter.

there is no bunfight to be had, because some people stay home and look after their kids in the day. And some people go out in the day and pay someone else to look after them. It's all the fucking same in the end. I prefer to do it my way. so I do. it doesn't make me angry or upset that you don't, it only seems to be you and blue who have taken issue with my life style.

it does upset me that someone will read this and think this is feminism though and close the door on the FWR section so to speak.

scottishmummy · 05/04/2013 21:09

Look satsuki,you're not paxman you dont get to tell people how to post or to moderate self
I most certainly responded to you,1930, I won't be rebuked by you in that manner
So we need to not concur, I will continue to post.your pov is most welcome too

morethanpotatoprints · 05/04/2013 21:11

blueshoes

You are not alone in wanting those things for your daughter, I find it strange to believe she will only be able to achieve these things by you being employed.
My dc are already earning more than min wage, (those of working age), they are contributing to society both in terms of tax and support in the community. I'm not sure what more than happy you refer to, but leave it with you.

I always thought that feminism was about being in a position to exercise choice in all aspects of your life. I thought wow, yes thats what it means and I'm so lucky to have those choices.
I am then told by somebody who considers themselves to be a feminist that my choices mean I am a housewife, a term I know from history which I believe really belongs in the patriarchal archive. With women belittling each others choices and continuing this 1950's stereotype and terminology, I don't really see any improvement. I don't think we need to look at men for continuing a patriarchal society, I believe its just as much the words and behaviour of women.

Easterfunny · 05/04/2013 21:11

Oddly, I do work, in a self employed capacity, but find myself playing it down big time ........

I'm yet to work out why - but clearly I have ishooos ...