Likened to a prostitute for being a wife?!

[Amaia10]

This is what a female "friend' said to me today - that the fact that I don't work and depend on my husband for income means that I am totally at his disposal and basically a kind of prostitute!

Ok she's only one person and obviously very proud of the fact she works in insurance and pays for an after school childminder, but I do find its other women who are the most judgemental about SAHMs, housewives, homemakers - don't even know what to call myself!

We have 3 children and I have been "at home" for 12 years or so since my eldest was born. I'll be quite honest that when we got married DH told me that he wanted me to be at home for our kids, rather than a childcare situation and because he needed to focus in his career. I had recently completed an MA, but was working as a dancer when I met DH (ballet, not lap dancing I should say)! Then I found myself in a situation where his income meant that I didn't need to work. I love being around for the kids and it just works for us. DH respects what I do, all the more so because he was packed off to some hideous boarding school at the age of 7 and followed his father and brothers into the military because that's just what they did in his family. So he had never really had a home life until he left the marines after we got married.

But does the fact that I was also happy to be around for the kids mean that I should have no self-respect or can't be considered a feminist because I don't earn my own money?

Dozer My view is how the people fulfilling these roles feel, about what they do themselves, matters the most. Disapproving, just because they are undertaking stereotypically traditional roles undervalues and alienates people. I'm not such a 'feminist' that I would actively make people, women, feel bad, just in order to express my own view of how I think society should work.

so....we shouldn't question why more men don't SAH and more women don't become CEOs in case it makes women feel bad

There is a respectable way to question. A time and a place. Criticising people quietly going about their day to day business is not it IMHO. Question in terms of educational inequalities, employment law, childcare facilities and few would probably be very greatly offended - they would probably support the cause. However, single people out and criticise people personally and make them feel alienated and it gives a negative association to feminism.

Do you mean in RL? If so then I agree. It would just be rude.

In RL, yes mainly. However also on threads, on here, where people are talking about their own personal choices being the right ones for them. (Especially when this is the most in depth conversation many people who are sometimes somewhat socially isolated may get in a day.)

It's the feminism board, so debate is fair enough IMO, without personal attacks or other breaches of talk guidelines.

Doesn't help the cause, by alienating a whole sector of the female (and male) population, though.

Debate is best when depersonalised, as much as possible IMO. Someone's choices being criticised for being anti feminist, just because they fit into gender stereotypes, regardless of why they made the choice & how they feel about it, may not be a personal attack but it can feel pretty minimising, regarding their experience.

I've had it the other way - where a mum who openly admits gold digging told me I should "just give it all up - that's what I did and look at me!" with a big grin. I felt like telling her I don't envy her having to rely on a man to live and i'd rather chew off my left foot than have nothing to do all day but fold his pants and 'keep myself looking good for him' as she says . I think sometimes women don't help their own image when they describe the male/female roles in their families. But then I suppose that is how men who want that kind of wife get them and women who don't want that life don't go near those types of men!

"Even that wouldn't reveal to what extent our choices are free. It's just assumed, for all kinds of reasons, that it will be the mother who changes or stops work."
I think I am actually quite unusual in the amount of thought and discussion that went into how we set up our family. But we were both old and senior when I first got pregnant so we had more choices than most first time parents. I think for many couples it is a matter of following social norms, to be honest. It's very difficult to go against the flow.

Also the hornonal pull that women feel to stay with their babies shouldn't be underestimated. I think that is why more women sah than men. It's not that men don't love their children as much or aren't as capable of physically looking after them, but when my babies were born all I wanted was to be with them. When all the hormones are swirling around is often when women make the decision not to return to work.

Ah yes, that old hormonal pull.

Justifying mysogyny for generations!

Making assumptions concerning how other women 'should' feel perpetuates misogyny.

"Making assumptions concerning how other women 'should' feel perpetuates misogyny."

Don't understand- sorry.

I'd bloody love to be a stay at home mum. And I can think of a 100 things I could instead of folding his pants and keeping beautiful!

Spinnaker- are you saying that every SAHM has made a fully informed eyes wide open choice based on the facts and completely separate from conditioning and societal expectations?

Oh, and ignore the little weasel that's just popped up.

I think negating any hormonal pull some women might experience, to stay with her DC, because it 'justifies misogyny' is mysogenistic in itself, as it minimises women's, genuinely expressed, experiences. All women should have a voice, regarding feminism, not just the 'cool' ones which are perceived as high achievers.

I wasn't. The hormonal pull is a real thing. BUT it has also been used as a justification for misogyny.

And there are also societal expectations for everyone to work.

Really? In my experience there is much more societal pressure on women with small children to stay at home than to go out to work.

Not saying that the patriarchy doesn't use the physical differences between men and women to its advantage because it certainly does, but it doesn't help women to not recognise that differences exist. We are equal but not always the same. And we are making far reaching choices at times when these differences are most apparent - when we have just given birth.

I know that for me, I wanted to sah with my babies. I had to return to work after my first and it was fine but mostly because he was with my mum. I did feel I missed things and that my mum was doing all the lovely stuff and I was doing all the sleepless nights. Mind, that was when I thought playgroups sounded like fun I soon learnt otherwise
With my second I was put on bed rest and became a sahp by accident. But life was easier and nicer.
Important also to note that women with careers they love might feel more inclined to go back to work than women in jobs they don't love.

I still think the main problem is that post divorce, the men keep custody of the money and are not forced to be active participants in their children's daily lives. This reinforces the notion that dc are women's work and the money/careers belong to the men.

I think my dh would have quite enjoyed sah but I was public sector and never going to make as much money as he could so there wasn't that option by the time we would have wanted it.

Bertrand I received a certain amount of tangible pressure to go back to work before my child reached the age of 1yr. My SiL has been told by her parents , in no uncertain terms, she 'won't' be wasting her degree and not to have anymore children.

"I still think the main problem is that post divorce, the men keep custody of the money and are not forced to be active participants in their children's daily lives. This reinforces the notion that dc are women's work and the money/careers belong to the men."

The post divorce pattern of care reflects, generally and as far as possible, the pre divorce pattern of care, as stability is considered best for the kids.

If DH and I divorce, I'd expect 50:50 and an equal financial split as that's what we've done throughout.

Everyone's perception of "societal pressure" is going to be influenced by the pressures they felt as individuals, aren't they?

If pushed, I would say there's a general suspicion of anyone of working age who is economically inactive, and a rhetoric of individualism that states that everyone should be making money for themselves. (And feminism - or at least a popular interpretation of it - feeds in to this with the idea that no woman should be dependent on a man). That's how I perceived "societal pressure" when we lived in the UK.

Now we live in very conservative state in the USA and unsurprisingly, there seems to be more approval for the SAHM model. Although "choice" still frames the debate, it seems even less of a factor than in the UK given the lack of maternity leave provision and relative lack of employees rights to request flexible or part-time working hours.