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.

jillbyeats

"But while I would hate to be handing over my children to someone else every day I do feel the negative connotations of being a SAHP and it is women who make the most hurtful comments. "

Irony is apparently lost on you.

Grazia

I too out earned my dh and had a very successful business and career before having children.
There was no way I was handing my dc over to anybody else and it was my decision to give up my career.
We could have afforded a nanny and we both could have had fantastic careers, but after dc it wasn't for me.
Not having a career hasn't ruined my life at all and family including husband are well intact, I haven't made any sacrifices.
We are all different and all have varying values and expectancies of life.

NewLife4Me, would you have "*handed them over" to their father?

*that's a bit of a loaded phrase in the context of the OP. No need to polarise, is there?

SAHPing is often just a phase, isn't it? A period out of a whole lifetime. My mum, who would absolutely class herself as a SAHM, worked before children and after we were all grown up.

Grazia1984 I didn't set out to earn less than my dp! He's 10 years older than me so had quite a head start on his career compared to me. Although our earnings were actually similar until he got given a job by a family member who gave him a significant pay rise.

And yes I would have been with my dp if he was earning less than me, but I would not have given up my job.

My previous post was a response to the 'would a 40k women marry a 20k man'. I was on 30k not 40 but yes I would have been with my dp if he earned 20k or less.

So sorry for triple posting.

Any people who have negativity towards a STAHPs or working mums aren't worth listening to. Every child is different so the only ones who know what is best are the parents themselves.

There are too many people talking through computers saying what they think is best. There are also too many people taking the comments too seriously or too worrying too much about what other people think.

My wife is a STAHM so the perception of me would be that I don't do any housework and don't spend any time with my kid. I know that's a complete load of rubbish and that's all that matters/

SAHPing is often just a phase, isn't it? A period out of a whole lifetime.

Yes, Softsnow, I think this is a good point. It is what I want for myself, and wish was more available to more parents if they feel it is right for them.

It may be impossible to "have it all," all at once. But, most of us can have a bit of everything sequentially.

It's never quite clear what "have it all" means...

It's true that SAHP is quite often a phase. But being a mother penalises you very often in the work place - you are not committed, you are nurturing (yes, that can be used in a negative sense, isn't that funny?) etc etc. I don't know if the penalising is also a phase - I'm still waiting to find out after 10+ years. But of course being a woman lasts quite a long time ... Difficult to pin down what part of my lack of progression in my career is down to which type of stereotyping ...

I didn't mean it in a "it's just a phase, get over it" way

More in a "so, why all the aggro against SAHMs?" way. And, yes, why the penalties all round for mothers?

Not enough coffee in me yet to attempt an answer to those questions.

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?

This is a really good point. Witness on this thread how many women have given up their careers, because to them it made sense for the family rather than use child care. Not a choice men seem to face, is it?

I work with a lovely young man & we were discussing whether he might start a family soon. It was all about the impact it may have on his wife's career & stop her progressing - because we both knew full well it would have no impact on his. And this is the next generation - nothing has changed.

So the lower earner married the man 10 years older... that was my point. Women marry up and often older men so when push comes to shove their earn less and give up work . Before we got engaged we agreed if one of us had to give up work it woudl be him as we were both feminists but just as important I as a lawyer would earn more. My mother supported my father working full time for 10 years back in the 1950s. Not all families have that history.

I think we can dispense with loaded phrases like "handing over" children. Asd someone else asked is it handing over if your husband stays at home? Also is it handing over when the child goes to nursery school or big school? In fact the handing over in a sense is what makes the child better if we want that debate. If you have close relationships with several people and learn different view points as a child you tend to do better not worse than a child with one parents 24/7.

whatthe - but not all young men are like that. My sons know it will be an equal decision as to who works and who doesn't and also amongst my daughter's friends.

I wonder if welsh would have married a man who was 10 years younger rather than 10 years older? That is another reason women's life long careers are worse than men's beecause they marry slightly older and slightly better earning men.

Agree that women rarely have the option of a parent at home rather tha paid childcare.

There is often a financial and career penalty to even a "phase" of time at home. And retraining is much more expensive now than in the past with higher fees etc.

My mum was a "trailling spouse" moving round and a SAHM for ten years or so in the 70s/80s, then applied for a degree for an NHS profession and joined the NHS afterwards. She says she wouldn't have got on the course (more competition, higher entry requirements) or been able to afford to do that in similar circumstances now.

Isn't part of the problem around the language of this is that it is very hard to describe a personal experience without a sensitive person on the other side reading a judgement into it when none is intended. For example:

SAHP: "I love being able to go into the eldest's school to help with reading and know loads of people through the toddler group" -WOHP hears "I can't believe you've never made it to reading time and how sad you don't know many of the local kids"

WOHP says "Working makes my brain feel used" - SAHP hears "you must still, x years on, be in that early maternity brain fog"

I think some people rush to feel judged far more than others try to judge... And then get defensive. I know I've been on both sides of this, when no harm has been meant.

"just a phase" is all very well, but after a certain time you can't just hop back into a career. The best you can do is find a "job".

Now, I suppose I'm in the "fortunate" position of being able to weigh up the money I'd earn in a job versus the hassle, and at the moment it doesn't compute.

As someone else said upthread, it also depends where you are. Long-term SAHMing is more usual if you are in an out-of-the-way place. And it depends on your pre-dcs job. I heard a (stupid) woman on Woman's Hour talking about the importance of maintaining her career - and she was a "freelance journalist" (sold two unfunny articles on the difficulties of parenting, more like). A freelance journalist hardly has the worry of what to do with the dcs when chickenpox strikes.

I think 'handing over' is negatively loaded and the people who say it absolutely know it is too.

I like to think me being out the workplace is just a phase- and I've always said 'at home' or 'not working Now.' However, the reality is trying to get back in is going to be difficult. Not impossible but quite tough- and maybe that's something that I should suck up after 6 years out or not- I don't know!

Rhoda, journalism is amongst the least "family friendly" occupations, more's the pity, and freelancing in any firld is no picnic. The freelancers I know have it hard because they often have too little or too much work, worry that declining work or not being seen to "deliver" will lose clients, and have to either fit in work when they can (eg nights) or pay for regular childcare for time for work they might not have!

Well maybe, but I was a freelance feature writer for years when the kids were wee, to fit around my family. Yes, it is hard work drumming up business. It depends whether you are trying to pay the mortgage or provide a useful second income, I think.

Well it depends- freelance journalism (like sahm) covers a massive range- I said I was a freelance journalist for a while - it wasn't hard but then we weren't reliant on just my (very low) income.

There's a difference between office-based journalism which is often completely family unfriendly, and a bit of freelancing. However tight your deadline, you can still supervise an ill child or dump a toddler in front of the television. It is simply not the same as knowing you have to catch the 7.21 and your dh is in Timbuktu.

This thread has been really interesting reading. I'm currently struggling with work and parenthood: I work 4 days per week (legal profession), with a long commute. DH is f/t (academia) with an even longer commute.

On the days I work, it's a constant battle against the clock and childcare. I'm viewed as a second class citizen at work because of being p/t, but it's not offset by a better home life balance, except on my non-working day. I am constantly exhausted, as is DH - so when we are at home, with two similarly exhausted DCs, we're all grumpy and snappy.

I feel utterly trapped, and so fed up that in my profession at least, the choice is essentially binary - work full time, or don't work at all. I feel that I'm unreasonable for wanting a job and family time! Because after all, to my employer I'm just a cost centre; my domestic circumstances are not their problem. I'm also aware that I'm lucky to have a part-time role at all, as they are rarer in the legal profession than the proverbial rocking horse shit. DH may be able to change his hours a bit, but the improvement would probably be minimal.

After much angsting, I've concluded that I can't make work and parenthood balance. So I either pack it in and leave myself financially vulnerable, or I keep slogging on and being miserable. That's a shit choice. And all of it is a feminist issue IMO.

I don't understand how the term handing over can be loaded but hey hum. It's what I believe happens when you take them to nursery and often people talk about hand over. Maybe you should complain to the nurseries.

Personally, I never felt the need to hand over to dh, if he was at home he was the parent in charge and when I was, ditto.
If we were/are both here then we are both equally responsible for them.
It isn't rocket science.

It's a simple case of what makes you happiest imo, and great that so many women get to choose these days.
For my family it has worked out far better to have a sahp, but dh would equally have been the sahp during the day. As long as he could have continued his freelance work he wouldn't have cared.
Surely everybody chooses the situation that serves them and their family best.

PS I had a mad idea last night on the journey home - if any other lawyers would like to explore setting up a firm where everyone works properly part time with no catsbum faces from colleagues, let me know....

Lots of people SAY their DH would have gone PT or SAH if X, Y and Z. But the men rarely actually do it.

Slippery jack, I think commuting makes things even harder. We coped better with work and Dc before we moved to commuterville (despite commuterville having some other advantages). Hang in there! Could your H go PT for example? Or perhaps when DC are bigger you could go FT but more locally, or move closer to work?

That's a great idea for a new firm slippery!