Justifying long term SAHM to DDs?

[whenwilltherebegoodnews]

I have a few friends who, because their DHs are high (6 figure) earners, are able to be SAHMs, and have no intention of ever returning to work. These women are all at least degree educated and previously had successful careers.

I just wonder, in such a situation, how a long term SAHM encourages her DD to realise her academic/career potential, if the example she sets is that her education is only a short term requirement until she meets a high earning man?

I'm not trying to start a bun fight, I'm genuinely interested. My own mother is university educated, and has always worked in some capacity, successfully managing her own businesses with being the main carer, and encouraged me to be financially independent.

Personally, I feel I have invested too many years, and too much money, in my education and career to give it up forever after only 10-15 years. I like to think I am setting a good example to my DD that career and family are not mutually exclusive.

So how does a long term SAHM reconcile this? Am I thinking too simplistically?

Actually millions of people work in the corporate world, my company employs over 120,000.

I hate these discussions that just become women beating other women for their choices. Nobody asks men the same questions.

Very true

I a not sure that a SAHM to a daughter of say 14 is a positive role model. Sorry, but I don't.

Where did a 14 year old daughter suddenly spring from? And it very much depends on the circs surely?

No, I most definitely did not. I suggested that they were honest as opposed to dishonest. If someone is a SAHM because of economic issues then they should be honest about that. Not make a virtue out of necessity which then makes those who aren't in the same economic bind unvirtuous by definition AND may serve to perpetuate the conditions which crest the economic bind in the first place. Until men care about these issues too nothing will change. If we bring up our sons to think that actually, women want to stay at home, unless they are unnatural, then there will never be sufficient demand for change.

And yes, being a SAHM is not a good role model for a son IF you pretend that it's the moral thing to do. Because it isn't. Dishonesty is never moral. If you explain that some women choose to work and you can afford not to, fine. If you also point out that some men choose not to, too. If you explain that you can't afford to work because of the impact entrenched sexism in the workplace has on relative salaries, if that's the case (it often isn't) even better. Because then your son might remember that when he grows up. And he might want to be part of the solution not part of the problem. If you tell him that staying at home is the moral thing to do and that anyone who doesn't is condemning their kids to a lifetime of pseudo mothers then you are the worst role model there could possibly be.

Should be honest. Not were honest.

I haven't RTFT but my Mum was a SAHM and it never occurred to me to follow that path. I've had a great career and last year, at 40yo had DD1. I'm sorely tempted to become a SAHM because of the value I can add to the household beyond a wage (which was always slightly higher than DHs) but I'm not sure we are ready to cut our cloth quite that much yet. My career feels so insignificant to me now but I'm sure I'll feel differently again when I return.

Actually millions of people work in the corporate world, my company employs over 120,000.

Millions isn't everyone. Remarks about five years out being barmy are never prefaced by 'in certain careers' or 'in finance'. They are just announced as a universal truth. And actually, if you are a call-centre team leader, or an osteopath, or a translator or a TV producer or a hairdresser your reality and prospects might be quite different.

I mentioned 14 because trying to explain to a stroppy teenager that you must get an education and get qualifications in order to support themselves then sees the person in front of them doing the complete opposite.

I'm a bit confused by this idea of SAHMing as a 'moral thing' that you keep quoting herc, unless you mean 'values driven, child-centred' which is different.

Oh my fucking god... Pot kettle. And I don't think I was slagging off, simply stating a fact.

How the fuck am I not a positive female role model? Because I'm not employed? Because I like the main caregiver?

infact why should i give a toss what some random condescending Queen Bee on mn thinks.

handcream

I imagine you are spot on in the corporate world, I know nothing of this at all.
Having neither wanted to or likely to work in that environment it wouldn't bother me in the slightest.
I think most other long term sahms wouldn't be looking for this type of work, as they probably wouldn't have left it.

I am very fortunate that I have kept well informed and worked for dh in the same industry I worked, have continued to network and my dhs clients prefer to deal with me.
I have become highly qualified and performed several roles at operational and strategical level whilst being a sahm.
I haven't earned anything but I enjoy it. I don't have an official title or roles or responsibilities but I'm nobodies numpty.

complete opposite ?

In what way is it a complete opposite?

So you do agree a SAHM could be a positive female role model to a younger child then? Could you specify where the cut-off point comes?

I am value driven and child centred. I am also a working Mum. Yes, there are many on here bleating about the high morals they have in choosing not to work.

The OP asked specifically about 'long term sahm'; that is something worth discussing more than the tired old argument of "costa drinking lazy arse" vs "child abandonment (child to nursery)" imo.

At what point does a sahm become a 'housewife'? At what age is it a better example to be doing something other than housewife and mother?

Obviously carers, volunteering in all its forms, aiding in the family business, studying (for pleasure or future career) all count as doing something.

But what about those who are still SAHMs with children at secondary school? What example does that set daughters or sons?

A two yr old will have a different view to a 14 yr old -of course they will.

Yes, there are many on here bleating about the high morals they have

Really? Where?

Surely it is more a case of SAHMs defending themselves by insisting that they aren't lazy/vapid/thick/avaricious/oppressed and asserting that there is a good child-centred reason for their choice which reflects their own priorities and views on EY care?

Obviously carers, volunteering in all its forms, aiding in the family business, studying (for pleasure or future career) all count as doing something.

Well personally I cannot think of a SAHM with over-3s who isn't doing at least one of these.

Fideline

That's exactly how I feel
I had a good career, enjoyed myself before settling down and have continued to be the same person but a sahm.
I am married to my best friend and soul mate and my dc make me happy for them.
From the minute I gave birth I knew no way would I continue to work, that doesn't make my choice any better or worse than anybody elses.
My approach atm is completely child centred as we H.ed our youngest dc, not many peoples choice I know. My motto is "Enjoy yourself its later than you think".

As a sahm of school aged dc I constantly feel (on MN) I'm having to defend my position as a feminist. But i am a feminist - I believe women are equal to men. That doesn't mean that my decision to become a sahm wasn't influenced by patriarchy -I'm certain it was - but it was what I wanted. I wanted to stay and look after my dc, do ebf etc. It was my choice, and I'm still very pleased that I was able to.

I don't believe I'm a poor role model for my dc - I'm no drudge. I'm educated and happy. I educate my dc on politics, history, literature, feminism, music. I talk to them, I spend time with them, and I'm happy to do so. But I don't think I'm better or worse than working mums - it's just my family life.

Herc I wasn't aware my values are less worthy than yours. And I wasn't aware there's massive pay gap between male and female. Thanks for filling little old uninformed me!

Moving on
Being a long term sahp - from say 8-9 to secondary age onwards probably isn't setting a great example as there's not much scope for the genuine need or even desire to sah. There could be both financial & emotional/social implications to sah long term.

Otoh, even if not working in the long term. There's nothing wrong with deciding to rather take up hobbies, become a volunteer, help run the family business, study.for the enjoyment, etc. Those things are all good for the soul and might counteract any negative impact not earning may have.

Sabrina hear hear

here here - oops!

Time for zzzzz me thinks!

My approach atm is completely child centred as we H.ed our youngest dc

Now that is seriously hard work morethan

Being a long term sahp - from say 8-9 to secondary age onwards probably isn't setting a great example as there's not much scope for the genuine need or even desire to sah.

Woah beep! From 'pseudo-mother' to that^ in one thread - you're brave! .

If you have an alternative lifestyle, or Home Ed, or have a child with SEN, or other caring responsibilities, or ill-health yourself, or large savings and a hobby you enjoy more than work, it could well make sense AND provide an excellent example to the DC.

I educate my dc on politics, history, literature, feminism, music. I talk to them, I spend time with them, and I'm happy to do so.

Yes, this I'd have had much less time to discuss Magna Carta, Second wave Feminism, the Midlothian question,Universal Suffrage, Post-Colonialism etc etc if I'd stuck to FT PAYE commuter work. But the knockers only want to talk about changing nappies. Odd.

Scarlett

It shows you are there for them after school, to spend time with them, listen to how their day went, sort out any problems and anything else you'd want to do. Take them to the doctors/dentist/activity.

Not all jobs can allow this. Nor can all employed people manage school events, to have friends over etc.

Not that I'm suggesting this is better, or the ideal way or anything.

It doesn't imo give a negative message.

morethan you are really in an unusual situation where you can claim to be a SAHM who HEs but who also is a partner in the family business and seems to do a lot of the work in the family business. That doesn't sound like a SAHM to me, that sounds like a family where both parents share the childcare and earning responsibilities.

I really wonder where all the fathers are in these threads? Why are the mothers choosing to stay at home and not share the WOH/childcare with their DPs? Surely then the children would benefit from a parent at home and the parents would both benefit from having a foothold in the job market. Why didn't the families with a SAHM who made the ideological decision that it was worth having a parent at home all the time make the ideological decision to take the financial hit and allow both parents to have time at home?