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.

Badds - my cleaner started just working herself, but she is very driven and organised and now she employs 3 people as well as herself and is really expanding her business. She has a background in bookkeeping and accounts which she says has given her the confidence to know she can handle that side of things.

Go for it :)

I did want to create a mutual fund based on firms run by women. Kind of like how you can buy tech funds, or Latin American funds, or Footsie trackers.

I was sure a basket of firms made up of just female leaders would beat the FTSE. It didn't. Not when looking at a long enough stretch with reasonable weightings. It was just more volatile because there were so few of them! And BAT, not my favourite company, had too heavy a weighting.

Of course, I could have massaged the data...I think that is what the big boys do...

I don't supposed women are immune to whatever foibles men are subject to when it comes to running companies? How about companies run by more diverse teams?

As a woman in corporate roles, it was no picnic. I was never the type to think I was being picked on because I was a woman. I was more the type to think I was crap, despite hitting or exceeding all my targets each year. Somehow, come end of year review it was always, "yes, you met or exceeded everything we asked you to do, but you lack gravitas, or haven't networked enough, or just made someone else feel unhappy, etc. It never felt comfortable. I never felt like I was acceptable or belonged where I was. It often seemed like I was pushing water up a hill with a teaspoon. I really assumed it must have been me

This is probably the best post I've seen to describe how insidious discrimination actually is. It's so accurate.

Heigh,
BAT isn't run by a women. It's competitor Imperial is, and it has underperformed BAT for years, for a number of factors, mainly geographic.
Doesn't stop sector analysts making jokes about the IMP CEO though...

yes, Aye that was a good point but it also shows if people can be like I am thinking you're good and if you don't get promoted out earning and beating the men by setting up in competition with them then life can be huge fund indeed. It is also the reason you need to follow the law of 3s on boards. Once you have 3 or more women out of 6 - 9 then they are critical mass rather than other or weird or different. We don't have that on the Supreme Court (only one woman) yet. We are getting there in Cabinet although even Corbyn totally messed up - no women in any of the 4 senior posts so he had to create some new non wimmin posts to make up. It is why I now support quotas for women - it gets you over the hurdle of being other or different because women then quickly get critical mass.

Hope you didn't invest in Talktalk on that basis HeighHogh!

Relevant to the thread, it's interesting how many DHs career's have rocketed due to their SAHW. I'm sure there are many with careers in the doldrums too.
Quite a lot of mothers I know haven't gone back to work after kids, even though the DCs are all 8 or 9+ now. I'm pretty sure they didn't SAH so their DHs can progress their career, but it does make it easier to work away or long hours or short notice if you have that permanent childcare at home option.

Heigh I have to agree with you. There is SO much pprejudice in the work place. I consistently achieved or exceeded my targets. I was doing well,I was doing the job I signed up for working 40+ hours a week plus some weekends. I NEVER got to see my kids Mon to Fri. Only when they were sleeping. Yet my company, who claims to be a leader in world class flexible working, there was a shocking* amount of prejudice. My numerous (and it was the female childless ones the worst) bosses were not up to promoting me. It was clear, the company was interested only in lipservice to working parents. I was managed out over a trivial issue that had no bearing on my work output.

In my company as females announce pregnancy there is an expectation in the workplace that performance will drop even when there is clear evidence on the contrary. It's unconscious bias and many workplaces won't own up to it. It causes significant ripple effect over the industry and talent drain as a whole and I think this needs to be tackled first otherwise, we just set ourselves up for failure.

Really interesting thread. I'm coming late to it: I'm in the unusual position that I work FT and DH is a SAHD. And it is unbelievable how much easier it makes my life. I can work late at no notice, go to meetings in other cities and stay overnight, be away for several days at a stretch. I'm seen as a high performer, and part of that is simple availability. If I were negotiating with DH on childcare, I wouldn't be as well regarded as I am now. So I agree with those upthread who said this is fundamentally an employment problem: it isn't possible (or at least it's much much harder) to do well in a "career" job without behaving as though you don't have a family to worry about. So it's no wonder that women find it hard to progress: very few of us have that sort of support.

(DH doesn't really do housework, by the way. He clears up the worst of DD's mess, feeds her and does laundry. I wouldn't expect him to do more than that: he's a SAHP, not a housekeeper. We have a cleaner who keeps us from descending into squalor.)

Lord agree. We did an internal survey at my company and we highlighted the perception of availability and being seen in the office as one of the main measures of career advancement. Even though loads did no work in the office and just did eBay

I have pretty much given up on promotion (public sector) because of being "mummy tracked" after going PT, because people who seem to be succeeding in senior roles all work long hours and have to drop things at short notice, and because the "go to" people in the team (generally those without children - we're not paid high wages and the men with children don't have SAHWs) are the ones who work the longest hours and do more evening networking and evening and weekend CPD.

Grazia I'm aware of the Critical Mass theory and I completely agree with you that that's what is needed. I'm uncomfortable with quotas, but I agree that if that's the only way to get to that critical mass then that's what needs to be done.

One thing though, and perhaps this is one of the 'reasons' women lag behind men in careers and earnings, setting up in competition with the men requires serious confidence in yourself.

Generally, women seem to have less of that, on average, than their male colleagues (even when they're better at their jobs). Which probably is in part because inadequate men are promoted ahead of them because of the boys club - that does shake one's confidence.

There's also the oft-mentioned "Imposter Syndrome" which women suffer more than men. And that women tend to only go for a job when they match the experience or skills 100%, whereas men do at like 60%. And yet men get the job. Vicious circle.

What's the answer? No idea! Women should back themselves much more than we do, but I'm the world's worst for it so I don't know how.

Yes. An MBA class was asked by every female gradutae earned less than men in their next job. Every man had thought he was God's gift and asked for masses of pay. Every woman thought she was not quite up to it and amazed she'd got a job and did not ask for more. A job was advertised in Wales at £50k. No women applied. They reduced the pay to £30k and women applied in droves.

I don't know why I think I'm good. It may be that I was the best in my school (very small school), top of my law class so objectively I am pretty good. It may just be if you have feminst parents as I did who bring you up to think you are good - my father was a psychiatrist and my mother was a teacher who was very into child psychology so I expect knew what to say and do to make us have confidence. I would put a lot of it down to feminism and risk taking and being the oldest child in the family. All those books on feminism I was reading when I was 14 made a huge impact on my career choice.

I suspect it also helps if you buy your daughters pen knives and help them with their tree climbing skills as children (no pink etc) as we were rather than seeing a daughter as a pretty thing you yearns only for weddings.

I wanted to work more flexible hours after having dd, my work wouldn't cooperate so I quit. I never thought I'd ever be a sahm and I'm finding it really hard. I keep telling people that I'm planning to go back to work or to study something, which is true, but I feel as though I need to justify myself to anyone who asks.

I felt a lot of pressure since having dd. Dp's family in particular kept saying I 'must' go back part time, 'can't' leave her with a nanny and so on. Yet they make jokes about how their other dil who is a sahm spends all their other son's money! I literally couldn't do right by them.

I also feel conflicted because I feel guilt that we can afford for me to give up my job. I know not everyone is as lucky. My mum, for example, had no choice but to work.

I wish society supported families more. I wish the onus wasn't on women to give up work and the expectation was for both parents to share. I should say my dp didn't put any pressure on me to give up my job. The plan was he'd work from home a few days a week too. We have a joint bank account, joint mortgage, he is more than happy for us to spend a chunk of our savings on my education. He's older than me, earns a hell of a lot more. As always, it made sense for me to give up work, not him.

I was a SAHM for eight years. I don't give a monkeys what other people think. I gave my children the best of me during those crucial early years. I have never ever regretted my decision and have never felt a moment's guilt about my parenting choices. Each to their own I say. If you're happy with your choices who cares what anyone else thinks.

MrNosey

I am a sahm of 24 years now and likewise as you say didn't decide on this route to enable dh career to progress, although it has taken him from school teacher to international acclaim.
The money hasn't improved though
I think it's inevitable if you have a sahp for the other person's career to take off.
This may not be the case for all but I've found that with friends of ours who both have growing careers one of them has had to take a back seat because it hasn't been possible for both of them to reach the top of their career.
A few couples we knew where neither wanted to do this and both wanted career to grow at the same stage ended up divorced as they just couldn't have it all, when they wanted too.
I guess that can be a huge factor when you have a family.

Sorry - not RTFT, so only responding to the original post. My only misgiving about SAHMs from a feminist perspective is that it makes women vulnerable financially. I know too many women who got dumped for a younger model once the DC were in their teens, who had no pension of their own, no savings and no recent employment history. Men can devalue SAHM. It's not inevitable, but blimey did I see DH do it subconsciously. It almost wrecked our marriage. I was determined to be around for my DC at all times, so only worked once they started school and only in school hours. Even now the majority of my work if home-based. But knowing I earn a good rate PT and, if I needed to, could support my DC single handed by working FT has been a massive confidence boost. I worry not that women don't use their brain but that the world assumes they don't if they are SAHMs. I'd advise any woman to make a priority of her own financial security. It can be modest but it must exist.

Welsh hairs, if you're not married you are even more vulnerable and if you don't return to work soon should make sure you're financially/legally protected as much as possible.

Also, ignore the in-laws!

welsh, why does your partner earn a lot mroe than you do? I earned 10x my children's father as a good few women do so obviously I didn't give up work or go on a mommy track. It seems to be a key thing. When women well out earn men they don't sacrifice interesting careers. When instead men earn more women can ruin their lives and career prospects.

Grazia I think that earning 10 times your DH is not something everyone can do, or decide to do now. Certainly not at the age of most of MN, where we have finished school, chosen and finished our degrees and done a decade plus of work. People are already on their path, so to speak.

The best hope for that is probably the next generation who are now in school. Encouraging them to pick (financially) rewarding careers that give them options. We know that they are equally (or more) capable than their male peers, we just need to make sure they believe it.

A big issue is even though women under 30 earn more than men in the UK now they choose to marry men who earn even more. That might change but for now even alpha women want alpha men who out earn them and men tend to prefer women who are in a sense under them As long as that continues women will have the secondary pin money income and therefore be the ones who put their career on hold or as second best. When women routinely marry men who earn less then you won't be getting women on £40k whose husbands are on £20k giving up work.

Would any £40k woman on mumsnet for example want to marry my £20k postman son for example?

I apologise for not reading the whole thread and if my points have already been covered, but I have witnessed some things in the past week that might chime.

Firstly, the old chestnut of women making a valid point that was ignored, then made by a man and picked up on as if it was a total revelation, with credit going to him. Allied to that, incredulity from men that a woman would know about a particular item (because they never thought to ask, or never listened). The latter has happened on 3 occasions this week to the same woman and one who was a previous "I don't call myself a feminist" type. I think she's coming round... Add all those together over a working career and how restricted is progression going to be? Along with all the other barriers faced by women, not men.

And my second point is that the choices facing mothers and fathers are not equal. I know there are plenty of equally committed parents. However I'm sure I'm not alone in knowing that there are lots of families in which the father has a choice between capable and enthusiastic child carers in the shape of paid carers or the option of the other parent going part time or full time at home and being the hub of kids & house and all that entails. How many mothers actually have that choice available? It's usually child care or working, isn't it?

I have no issue with SAHMs - why would I? - and I do think that their value is largely unappreciated and undervalued. Disclaimer - I do find that the total kid focus and playground politics stuff hard to get engaged with. I'm sure it wasn't like that in my SAHM's day? Maybe it's just where I live.