Not feminist enough if you're heterosexual.

[TheRealPosieParker]

This is something I've found repeatedly lately. Frankly I'm fucked off with it. In last few weeks I've been called a breeder, that I have shitty kids, that I spewed my kids from my arse, that I'm a handmaiden.

FFS. I may as well just abandon feminism as actually men so treat me better, on a personal level, than many feminists.

What sort of feminism decides that heterosexual women are deserving of this vitriol? That mothers are all a bunch of handmaidens? That wearing make up is more anti feminist than telling a mother her kids are shitty?

Every time it happens I am genuinely shocked.

As a sahm who expects nothing from anyone and who has no pension (that's my introduction out the way), I feel equal in my partnership. I won't go up the shit if he dies...that's a bit of luck. Of course he could leave me or I him but I will still be ok. Perhaps picking apart individual posters' lives isn't the way forward.

Your husband could formally employ you as housekeeper/cook/nanny

Call me weird, but that doesn't sound like a good solution, in fact it sounds way worse.

Oddly enough DW didn't look thrilled when I suggested she become my employee and we have less money because she would pay tax and NI and I would pay employers NI but it's OK because she would feel more valued.

Interesting.

When dp and I were doing the massive amount of discussing and planning that happened before we finally decided that I would be a SAHM, he pointed out how much he would have to pay someome if he was a single father. He felt very strongly that we were doing work of equal value within our family.

I think you are right deydo/Hermione. I suspect any power imbalance would be magnified in that scenario. What would happen if the SAHM wanted to leave an abusive man...with the children?

Having said that women's unpaid labour (and the advantages men have from that) is what this thread is all about.

Personally I think its all about changing attitudes and tbh that has to happen way before any of these men get into relationships with women. It could be argued we need more radical feminists to bring up boys!

I decided, well wages and biology did, that I would stay home. I have four Dcs and a husband who earns enough for both of us. When he's home he does s much of everything as me, there's no expectation or resentment. I am entitled to half of everything should he fuck off, we pay into two pensions and what's his is mine and vice versa.

I also have a small independent business that I could tap into

It sounds as though many more feminists than I thought are still doing the bulk of the wife work while their men are progressing in their careers and are in control of the earnings. While marriage provides some protection to women who SAH, it seems a precarious position for a woman, and particularly a feminist who knows the dangers, to put herself in.

Is being a SAHM compatible with radical feminism?

I doubt the alternative to staying at home which for most women is to go to work and leave their kids with a minimum wage barely qualified woman is very feminist though!
Is farming out your kids feminist? Really? To someone that relies on the government for top up benefits?

Having said that women's unpaid labour (and the advantages men have from that) is what this thread is all about

This is the part I don't get. How is it unpaid if in exchange for staying at home you are getting a roof over your head, money for food and clothes, sharing in the wage earners wage?

How does only the woman get any benefit of what she does?

he pointed out how much he would have to pay someome if he was a single father

So what are SAHMs looking for ? Actual pay? Joint account? Share in the earners wages?

My labour is not any less worthy than my husbands, we couldn't raise our children without each other. I had a lucky well paid career before kids, he had a much better one.... it was a no brainer. We were fortunate to afford for me to stay home.

We were fortunate to afford for me to stay at home.

I can understand that sentiment if the woman is independently wealthy. Otherwise, it looks as though the woman is sacrificing her earning potential by devoting herself to wife work and it is the man who is fortunate to be able to afford a SAHW while he progresses in a career that he will benefit from. FWIW I agree that SAHM's work is as worthy as WOHM, however patriarchal society does not pay for or recognise years of wife work. If the male earner decides to leave his DP once the children are older, it is the woman who has lost out.

What is the radfem view of SAHMs?

"its all about changing attitudes and tbh that has to happen way before any of these men get into relationships with women. It could be argued we need more radical feminists to bring up boys!"
Doing my bit for this with two of them!

I don't know how to explain how it works here. I am ill and dh my carer, so is he a sahd, am I a sahm? Are we both or nether? He does a lot of the 'wife' jobs, because I couldn't even if I didn't want it to be an 'equal' relationship.

Otherwise, it looks as though the woman is sacrificing her earning potential by devoting herself to wife work and it is the man who is fortunate to be able to afford a SAHW while he progresses in a career that he will benefit from

Why does only he benefit?

Why is "wife work" only for his benefit? It's their home, their children.

FWIW I agree that SAHM's work is as worthy as WOHM, however patriarchal society does not pay for or recognise years of wife work. If the male earner decides to leave his DP once the children are older, it is the woman who has lost out

So what is your suggestion?

A state wagefor housework?

Divorce settlements which recognise this? (they do anyway)

What is my suggestion? Good question. I think taking turns would be a good idea. That way both people get to do their share of wife work leading to a better appreciation of it's value and both get a chance to maintain and progress their careers and earning potential. And the children experience both parents caring for them, taking care of the home and having a career.

What about the women who don't want to take turns, never mind the men?
Even on this thread, moreso elsewhere on MN, there are women saying they want to be the SAHP. They don't want their DHs to share, they want to be the one doing it. Can they be forced?

I was only happy to be a SAHM because I had children very late, and had already achieved as much as I was likely to in my career. I would have felt very differently if I had been a younger woman.

I am certainly not advocating forcing women to do anything. I am pointing out the dangers for women who choose to SAH and be reliant on their partner's income, modelling the traditional patriarchal set up for their children and asking how this is compatible with radical feminism.

There are several facebook groups that can explain it better than I can Dione, AllMothersWork is one and Mothers at home matter is another.

I'm not on FB. My understanding of radical feminism is that it opposes the patriarchal

Sorry, hit post instead of delete.

My understanding of radical feminism is that it aims to destroy the patriarchal nature of society by opposing the societal norms that prop up a system which benefits men and disadvantages women. How can choosing to leave the paid labour market in order to do unpaid work that benefits their DP, damages their own earning potential and raises children in a traditional "mum cooks, cleans and cares, dad goes out to earn a living" environment compatible with that?

Bert, if your DP left you tomorrow would you be able to return to your career easily and without penalty having been out of it for some years?

Havent' rtft - but it is worth remembering that antifeminists/misogynists are actively and strategically targeting radical feminists online - eg- pretending to be trans activists, womanists/black feminists, 'sex-positive' feminists.... and importantly pretending to be radical feminists themselves to 'divide and conquer' the feminist movement.. Is is possible that antifeminists have a new agenda to set mothers against radical feminists too? If some of the things that are said to you are said online, it is worth being wary about whether it is a genuine radical lesbian feminist speaking.

Having said that,Julie Bindel has pissed me off too in saying ignorant and callous things about mothers before - but loads of radical lesbian feminists are mothers - often they have fled male violence after having children - Julie Bindel just came to lesbianism when she was very young. Perhaps she is starting to regret not having kids now she is middle aged or something - but can't admit that to herself because it contradicts her deeply held political views.

There are also small-minded, tribalist people attracted to every political movement - who just draw all their energy from othering and loathing. The bigger picture and the finer details of the political arguments are lost on them. They are all too common. It is depressing. But very human.