Could we have a talk about perceptions of SAHP?

[ISaySteadyOn]

I am a SAHM and I am growing a little tired of what I perceive to be a large amount of negativity towards SAHP in general. Now, I learned from this board that SAHMing and feminism are not mutually exclusive which is why I am posting here. Ironically, given this board's reputation, I feel less likely to be flamed if I post here.

It seems, and please tell me I am wrong, that SAHP especially SAHM are often perceived to be braindead dependent freeloaders. The oft repeated quote' Oh, I could never be a SAHP, I have to use my brain' really hurts my feelings. This is because it suggests that the things a SAHM does don't require brain power and maybe for some it doesn't.

I am someone who is struggling with learning basic housekeeping as my parents thought that sort of thing was beneath them and juggling 3 small children as well. Maybe this sort of learning uses my brain differently than my failed attempts at academia did (and that really hurt as that is what counted in my family growing up), but does that mean it has inherently less value?

I suppose I'm wondering whether SAHPing has a negative reputation because women do it or is it primarily women who do it because it has a negative reputation?

Anyway, those are my thoughts, would love to hear some others.

It's a two-way street though Jill, because 'handing your child over to someone else every day' isn't exactly an unloaded statement, either.

I am absolutely supportive of women who want to take on a role as SAHP. However, I believe that, within the family unit, they need to be protected from the vulnerability that this can create in a society where individualistic claims to a wage are still used to disadvantage women structurally. That means that wages that come into the household are pooled and treated as collective property, and that appropriate protections are put in place so that separation does not disproportionately disadvantage the woman, both at a familial level and at a judicial level regarding divorce. I also think that there should be a parity of hours - so that you don't get the common situation where the SAHP is working 16 or 17 hour days (and yes, bathing and reading bedtime stories totally 'count') while the wage-earner is only working 7 or 8.

Okin's Gender, Justice and the Family for all its faults conceptually is excellent on the practicalities of this.

Sorry Dowager I was interrupted before I posted - I would paradoxically encourage my daughter NOT to end up a sahm because I do feel the loss of what might have been for me career-wise (at the time of pfb's arrival I was the one with the more promising prospects but circumstances changed and I opted to stay home for the first year - which ultimately became 14). But tell me it is not hard to hand your baby over to someone who will love your child less than you do - I know I would struggle if I had chosen to go out to work. I do not think there is a happy medium for mothers.

I think most feminists want to enable more choice and flexibility to decide how the childcare is split AND to build in financial and time safeguards if someone becomes an SAHP. I agree SAHP risks more financial insecurity longterm, compared to some earlier decades.

Those who look down on SAHP tend to believe that the worth of a person is defined by their financial worth - a political viewpoint rather than feminist / not.

I don't have a problem with how others see me as a SAHP. I'm glad that I have the choice. Nor do I feel somehow beholden to DH or like the little wifey. When we first met, I was the breadwinner for a number of years, and now he is. It's just a partnership thing.

I think it relates to the issue in wider society that a persons worth is determined by their paid employment status. SAHP-ing is undervalued because it is unpaid work and women's work and women's work is worth less.

Also, it seems that women are supposed to go to work and be good little citizens but also feel guilty about leaving their child in childcare. But at the same time, women are also being made to feel guilty about SAHP-ing.

My DH recognises that his life is easier because I'm at home. I do sometimes feel guilty that he's the one earning all the money* and I do worry a bit about what would happen if we split up, which is partly why I've gone back to studying.

*I almost wrote that he's the one doing all the work - which is not true! These thought processes are very ingrained though. We need to start including un-paid work in our definition of 'work' rather than just 'paid employment'. But we don't say "I'm going to the place I do my paid employment".

"*I almost wrote that he's the one doing all the work - which is not true!"

I think you've hit the nail on the head - this is a huge problem. In every one of those threads on here where someone asks a question about sharing incomes, you'll hear many people saying that caring work isn't 'real' work or that a SAHP MUST should do all of the housework to 'pay' for their 'leisured' life - even if that means they are effectively working for twice as long. It's breathtaking just how invisible this labour is. Marxism has been guilty of ignoring it in theories of labour and value too, which really hasn't helped.

There's often a judgement in there that someone this work is emotionally rewarding so that makes it less 'onerous'- when anyone who has had to sing 'The Wheels on the Bus' for the 17th time, or cope with the fourth tantrum of the day, knows full well that it can also be frustrating, boring, even quite literally maddening and far from being leisured or enjoyable 'play'. Equally, the idea that paid work is just 'onerous' is simply untrue.

Without wanting to disrespect the decisions of any SAHP, I do also think that the way that society is gender-biased affects a lot of these decisions. Many of my friends have gone down the route of becoming SAHM, and two of the many reasons they did so was because, as a couple, they earned considerably less than their male partners and that childcare for more than one kid was unrealistically expensive. However, those things are both hugely affected by sexist structures of power that we have all inherited, and it's hard to see how these can be changed when the system turns and turns and perpetuates itself. (I am absolutely not blaming SAHP for this - just highlighting it as an area where work still needs to be done). I do think this is what makes free childcare a potentially radical development for women.

I also think that starting from a basis of absolutely equal contributions to domestic labour and then working out where the practical balance lies as an individual couple can be tremendously useful in highlighting inequalities. In my ideal world, both parties would sign up equally for childcare, domestic chores, a job, and self-development and there would be ways of 'accounting' that would take those contributions into account.

I suppose working outside the home is working for 'the man' and staying at home is working for 'a man' - you give up your career so he doesn't have to.

Working for the man, you are protected by employment legislation against bullying and harassment and unfair dismissal. Also, you develop skills you can sell on the open market, so if you don't like one employer you can go elsewhere.

Staying at home, you are vulnerable to bullying and harassment, have little protection if your man legs it and lose marketable skills. Obviously on a personal level, it can work, but on a macro level it is very much a feminist issue that so many women make themselves so vulnerable to the ultimate benefit of a man. So that is my feminist take on SAHM.

I have been a SAHM for yonks. I can't say I've been a stellar childcarer nor a particularly good homemaker. In fact I am absolutely terrible at housework and have no interest in anything beyond keeping things reasonably clean. I have no interior design flair whatsoever, and not a creative bone in my body.

However, I like to think I'm not brain dead. Why am I necessarily thicker/less interesting/less opinionated that someone who works... anywhere? I read a paper cover to cover every day, other periodicals, I listen to the radio and am a voracious reader. I've always got something to say! A recent insult was from a woman - a consultant - who said, in response to hearing that I don't work, "Oh, I couldn't let my brain rot." Five days a week this woman's mother turns up to look after her dcs at her house. If I'd have had a quarter of that level of childcare I may have bothered the world of work more.

YY to earning less than male partners. I think this is especially true for working class women who IMO are more likely to have 'jobs' rather than 'careers'. I used to think that it didn't really matter how long I was at home for because I knew I would be going back into the workplace in the same position I left - the bottom. And I had less to lose financially. My £200 a week from working full-time at minimum wage (6 years ago) would be very useful of course, but it's a lot different than losing £500 a week, if you know what I mean? It changes the decision, anyway.

A bit of an aside here, but I also think carers of adults are even more invisible. It's generally accepted to be a SAHM to pre-school age children, but the vitriol is saved for those who choose to do it once their children are at school, even if in that time they are caring for a disabled or elderly relative, which can also make it difficult to have a 'regular' job.

I don't care what others think of sahp. I've been home prior to kids as a carer for my mil. Then I had children, so from the go I could never have gone to work even if I wanted to. She refused to have outsiders care for her even for a few hours.

I do feel guilty if I get a bit of free time. But I think its well deserved just like the breaks employees get at work if full time. I usually scoff up my lunch or miss dinner, breakfast I have standing whilst making the kids lunches.

I like the point someone made about the disparity in hours between people who work outside and sahp. I do sit down between 9.30-10pm most folks get in from worker earlier, then sit with their feet up.

Also for the large part women even if they work outside come home and prepare dinner. Some men help but the truth is it still primarily falls on women. I think it is feelings of inadequacy from themselves that makes working parents to turn to hateful comments towards sahp.

sometimes people make assumptions when they see mothers outside with their buggies shopping, they see these women as lazy, shopping having a good time rather than being productive. Or they assume they must be on benefits. It never enters their head they may need these items and their partners aren't around or refuse to go shopping on their free day?

I do agree there is an issue with being financially independent. I do worry because I don't know what the future holds, my husband could die before me, or the relationship could fall apart then I would have a hard time getting into work having not worked for soooo long. But right now I have no choice, 4 kids, mil and father to care for. I'm saving tax payers a lot of money doing the caring rather than dumping them on the state.

As for guilt I have no guilt about husband earning, I work damn hard, he can come home and put his feet up I have no such luxury.

I don't think there are any negativity towards SAHMs at all. Where do you get that from? I work full time and I know people says here all the time about full time working mums are delinquent. And that why should I have children when I don't want to spend a lot of time with them? But in real life, I only ever get surprises when I say I work full time. I think most assume mothers work in part time jobs.

Are you sure it's not you being sensitive?

I think there is negativity BOTH ways - to SAHM and to working mums.

Sexism. Damned if you do. Damned if you don't.

^^This.

I am SAHM through personal choice.

I think Capitalism is part of the problem - the view that to be contributing to society you have to be earning money.

I am not much of a capitalist. I would hate it if people asked me what I did for a living when they first met me, as if that is what we are defined by. And in turn, I am now defined by being a Mother (and not favourably sometimes.)

Some of the worst comments I get are from close friends who are WOHMs. "I couldn't do what you do, I need to use my brain" "You must be rich to be able to afford to stay at home" etc. As a feminist, it is the comments from women the hardest to swallow. It is my belief that women should be free to choose their path in life, and any feminist who disagrees with SAHMs is really undermining that sentiment.

As for earning less than your male partner. Putting my feminist hat on, I think girls are conditioned from a very young age to choose career paths that lead them to earning significantly less than males. We know females are not more stupid (in a population sense) than males. We see it in school exam results and university admissions. But when it gets to their 30s, you can guarantee that the males on average earn a lot more.

Well even if you earn more there's a perception that you don't. I earn slightly more than DH. He takes on a lot of childcare responsibilities, like pick up, drop off and sick days. His boss always make off hand comments about why I'm working. He gets upset about him not being able to go on last minute work trips etc. (The assumption is that men should put career first). His standard reply is always that I earn more and his boss seems to never remember it.

It's also harmful to working mothers because bosses automatically put you up for the mummy track.

We are very very far from the more equal society in scandanavia.

Vulnerability is something that had been mentioned on the thread. It's odd, but I don't feel vulnerable at all - if anything I feel I hold all the cards as my DH would be devastated to lose me or the children so if there was any situation in where I didn't feel happy I would walk away and he would be worse off.

(Maybe part of this is because I have opted to not have abusive men in my adult life having grown up with an abusive father.)

"I couldn't do what you do, I need to use my brain" "You must be rich to be able to afford to stay at home"

It's just offhand statements by 'bigots'. Similar to the stuff my MIL said about Chinese. "You guys don't do christmas right". "You aren't brought up properly". It's unthinking racism and very different from hate.

I have a very very long list of racists things she says. I'm fairly sure she doesn't actually hate Chinese.

I think in a lot of cases, the people that say those hurtful statements might not know it's harmful. They think they are accepted norms. Rich housewives, going out for lunches, the gym, craft, facials, haircuts, buying new clothes. I'm sure you can imagine that.

I don't look down on sahms. I feel on MN (not rl) there is a select few who look down on working mothers and feel superior and vice versa.

Why do we judge each other so harshly?

And saying that ^^ I do judge sahds. I look at them as cocklodgers if I'm honest.

I came to parenthood very late. Dp and I were both very senior high earners when we unexpectedly became parents. I had gone as far up in my career as I was likely to go, and we decided that I would look after the children because Dp had further to go and higher potential earning power. If both of us had returned to work neither of us would have seen the children during the week at all. So we decided that I would facilitate his career for the financial benefit of us both. I was fully aware of the risks I was taking- and when I was ready to return to work, I was perfectly prepared for what in fact happened- a 47 year old woman who hasn't worked for 9 years is the most unemployable thing going! I now earn "pocket money", do a range of voluntary work and continue to facilitate the money earning. When the children were small it was a very clear cut partnership- he earned the money, I made it possible. It is less clear cut now, but we have established a modus vivendi.

I'm a"sahm" to secondary age dc.

I work 2 mornings a week tutoring and volunteer one day until 3pm. I'm starting to study again in January. I used to be a secondary teacher but I can't do this any more.

I'm disabled with mobility/fatigue issues so no matter how hard I try or want to, I can't work ft.

I know that there are folks out there who think I'm a huge burden to my dh and society (I claim DLA) but I honestly do all I can to be part of the world around me. I'm not lazy (even though we have a cleaner!) and I keep on top of most things at home as dh works long hours.

And I'm delighted that I'm in when my 11, 13 and 15 year olds get in. I can hear their worries, chat, feed, help with homework etc. due to unfortunate circumstances I didn't have my mum at home (she left!) when I was this age and so I value being the sahm who is there for my teenage dc.

"And saying that ^^ I do judge sahds. I look at them as cocklodgers if I'm honest."

What- even if they have small children?

I work part time (worst of both worlds as some have said) and am currently reluctant to up my hours to 80% because I know many people who do that are basically seen as working full time and at least my absence on my non-working days is pretty visible.

I will continue to work part time once DC1 goes to school but I'm not sure about once DC2 goes. I currently earn the same as DH but he works full time having had a late life career change and gone down a few rungs (before he did that, we didn't have the DCs and we both worked full time and earned about the same).

My particular take on the feminism of working part time and/or being in the home more (whether as a full time SAHM or just a few days with me home and DH out) is that the DCs both see me doing more childcare (and inevitably more housework of the do the washing, make the tea variety - I am rubbish at cleaning and we have a cleaner so they don't know either of us can scrub a floor). I enjoy cooking with DC1 but I don't enjoy preparing tea or lunch on an at-home day with both DCs screaming their heads off at me.

And my other issue is the "who works" stereotype. Daddy "goes to work on the train" though I am trying hard to introduce the concept of "Mummy works in an office and look it's there [pointing - workplace nursery!]". DC1 asks me to stay home and not send him to nursery but he also asks DH to stay home, and it's not because he doesn't think mummies have to work, it's because he wants to be with us, and I'm the one that takes him to nursery.

The irony is that I had a quite high-paying career before I had ds, and one that was not family friendly. Had I been a teacher, for example, I could have returned to work much more easily, but because of the sector I was in I was not exactly forced to leave, but would have found it very difficult to carry on.

So could we ask is it feminist to choose a career which is family friendly, or portable, or is it in fact surrendering to one's fate? Are those of us who tried (and failed) at Man Jobs more feminist?