I am a feminist and a sahm

[CountryLifeMummy]

I had a discussion with a male friend who believes I can not be a feminist and a sahm.
Bit of background -
I live in the country with some animals. I have one child. I decided to come out of the workplace to be at home with my child before they started school. They are now at school but as a family we feel we like the lifestyle of a house in the country and animals. Because of our rural location school is a bit of a drive away. I am very busy from morning to evening with the animals / school run / housework / laundry etc. I do realise this is a luxury but we budget well and can afford to have one parent at home.
I love my role in my family and feel very satisfied as a feminist that I am doing what fulfills me on a day to day basis. My husband is happy for me too and there is no resentment. He has to leave early for work and I am happily responsible for ironing his clothes and making us all dinner. He makes dinner at the weekend and will help with house jobs then too.
So, I was discussing feminism with my friend who discribes himself as a feminist - supporter of the This Girl Can campaign and Wimens March etc. He is in a relationship with a career driven person and he is very career driven himself. We get along mostly and I applaud his feminist views, usually.
He said to me that actually, how can I call myself a feminist if I stay at home living out a dated social stereotype serving a man and having no career and therefore no self worth.
I am confused but this and I didn't answer him as I didn't want to argue. By believe is that feminism is the radical notion that Men and Women are equal (actually I believe in full equal rights including children as well). Surly if I am happy in my life and my "work" then that's all that matters? Or do I need to have paid employment to really be a feminist?

That's a fair point.

Yes, it is like people will accept that a woman might keep her maiden name, but the notion that the kids will have her last name and only hers if she is married is considered extreme and agenda ridden.

When in fact my kids have my last name because I have the nicer last name! But that kind of reasoning is only okay if the woman has the less appealing last name.

Quite (I think even the term "maiden name" shouldn't exist). Such outdated patriarchy for children to get given their father's last name almost as default.

If I ever have children they'll have my surname. There's no way I'd go through carrying them in me and giving birth for them to be given someone else's surname.

I think the lack of financial independence makes it difficult to equate being a SAHM with feminism.

I think that refusing to participate in a system which expects women to take responsibility for everything whilst men carry on regardless can be a feminist choice.

OTOH I see childcare and other unpaid 'women's work' as actual work.

My DC have DH's surname and I kept mine. Mostly because I wanted it to be clear to others that they are his DC. His responsibility too. The DC having my name would have reinforced me being the default parent in the eyes of others IMO. DH didn't care either way.

I think that refusing to participate in a system which expects women to take responsibility for everything whilst men carry on regardless can be a feminist choice.

Obviously this isn't how it should be - in the ideal world, both partners can work the same amount (PT so one is always at home, or FT) and do the same number of pick ups/drop offs and chores. Work split evenly, so no-one is responsible for "everything". Of course that's unfair.

I don't have an issue with seeing childcare as actual work - it is, and it costs a bomb to get someone else to do it! Why should women do all of it though - why do we not see as many men go part-time or stay at home? Even when the woman was originally getting paid more? Why is it a default for women to give up their career or put it on hold?

An another note, the sorts of people that women at my work get annoyed with, are those whose kids have grown up or who don't have any - who have a cleaner and sit at home going to brunches and Pilates. I think someone said earlier in this thread they've heard men say "my wife won't have to work a day in her life!". Fair enough if you want to do that and your partner's OK with it, but I wouldn't be. I notice that there aren't a lot of well-earning women who are happy for their husband to stay at home and go to the gym and watch football all day.

why do we not see as many men go part-time or stay at home? Even when the woman was originally getting paid more? Why is it a default for women to give up their career or put it on hold?

Quite. So often this happens and a lot of the time the woman didn't even want to put her career on hold. It's this cultural expectation that women are by default the ones who need to sacrifice careers and stay at home if they have children which needs to change - for the good of everyone. Women's careers are seen as lesser and men's matter more, this seems ingrained in many. The notion of men sacrificing their careers, putting theirs on hold and being the main caregiver to their children whilst supporting their female partners shouldn't be remarkable.

Obviously this isn't how it should be But the thing is, this is how it is. And there are some tasks - pregnancy, birth, recovery, breastfeeding if BF - that cannot be delegated and create a natural career break for at least a short time.

The other thing that I don't see talked about much is that many women just want to look after their own DC themselves. After carrying, birthing and feeding them there is often a strong bond there. Or maybe a bond that still needs time to grow. Obviously not everyone wants to stay home, nor should they feel obliged to or bad if they don't. But wanting to look after your own DC is a good reason for prioritising family responsibilities if that's the case. It's a patriarchal thing that women's feelings and relationships can't be a valid priority. I know so many women who would love to have had more time with their DC in the early years (along with many who were glad they didn't!)

I don't really have an opinion about 'kept women' but suspect that there may be a range of reasons why women do this.

Many women don't want to stay at home but feel forced into it. On other sections of this board alone I've read of women who didn't want to but did - one because she thought her husband would go on to earn more as he's a man even though she was the higher earner, one because she was made to feel she'd be "less of a woman" if she didn't, a few due to pressure from husbands. Only this week there was a thread from a woman who wanted to go back to work but her husband said "only if it fits around the children, the children have to be your main priority".

I'm pretty sure those women a hundred or so years ago campaigning for votes for women were wearing petticoats and bonnets and long dresses and lots of other highly unfeminist things. But no one would argue that they were not feminists would they? Some of them died in those long dresses being feminists.

Not totally relevant but I've seen a Conservative councillor has suggested the Labour candidate for his constituency won't make an effective MP because she's pregnant and will be "too busy changing nappies". No men expecting to become fathers would be told that.

I also think the patriarchal thing here is that raising children is worthless, valueless. When in reality it is priceless. Few other mammals put so little value on the nurturing of their young. In other words, the contorted part is not you, but the value society gives you. Next time you see him, ask him to explore a little more with himself on why staying at home caring for children and nurturing animals is worthless and who has decided that it is. I think he will find it is the patriarchy.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/shell-busy-changing-nappies-tory-10447953

Not totally relevant but I've seen a Conservative councillor has suggested the Labour candidate for his constituency won't make an effective MP because she's pregnant and will be "too busy changing nappies". No men expecting to become fathers would be told that.

Oh man, stuff like that makes me really angry.

Funnily enough, me and my DP have discussed the future and thought that he'd make a great SAHD, and he says he'd love to do that (in many years time!). We currently work at the same company and almost same salary (he has worked here 2.5 years, me 1.5, so he is on a grand more atm), so it would be totally feasible. Our industry has a really good male-female split, and at the conference I went to recently, it was pretty much 50/50 in the top leading roles and presentations. It is a shame that him being a SAHD would be such an "unusual" choice and we'd probably get loads of family questions if/when we did do it!

The other assumption is that SAHMs are somehow 'out' of society and people going to a paid job are somehow 'in', as if you aren't engaged with the outside world if you don't get paid.

The other assumption is that SAHMs are somehow 'out' of society and people going to a paid job are somehow 'in', as if you aren't engaged with the outside world if you don't get paid.

I think that stems from paid employment being taxable hence "contributing to society", whereas unpaid work doesn't generate any taxes.

Hence if you go out to work and pay a childminder the same amount (for example), you break even, but the government gets 2 sets of taxes. Probably why they prefer it...

That sounds an excellent company YoloSwaggins. Given your partner would love to be a stay at home dad in the future, he should be. Increasing numbers of fathers are doing it, or taking on the bulk of the parenting. Anecdotally I see quite a few men out with pushchairs in the park, picking up children from school when I walk past primary schools etc, near me. I see far more women of course, but I've noticed more men doing it and parents have commented on it too. It's becoming less "unusual" (though not usual enough) and if it works for you as it sounds like it will do then hopefully you can disregard the family questions and help them see it's because it's what's best for your family!

Much of it is also about how people view earning on a personal level.

I refer to work as keeping the wolves from the door. It's not who I am, and even though my kids are grown up, I'd rather be with them, or my parents or siblings than at work. Work is just the thing I do to stop any of us ending up lying on cardboard in the city centre.

I guess - there's a lot of boring mindless jobs out there, and I couldn't think of anything worse than having to do some of them for life. I worked in retail/admin/telesales while at uni and hated all of them. I loved studying so want pursue that further, and to have a job that's interesting and brain-stretching. Those are hard to find - seeing as companies want to profit, and the most productivity from 1 person is when they know how to do 1 task extremely well and do that over and over again. Or, the job is interesting, but in an "immoral" industry. I believe my dream job is out there though! My current one is just enabling me to save up and go travelling.

I've seen it as quite aspirational to build a career - to become an expert in your field, give presentations on it, to know everything about it, to build up a skill e.t.c.

But I can understand that everyone is different - some of my cousins just wanted to be mums and did that at 21 and SAH, as that's what makes them happy. I might be an oddball because up until I met DP, I was convinced I never wanted kids.

I've seen it as quite aspirational to build a career - to become an expert in your field, give presentations on it, to know everything about it, to build up a skill e.t.c.

I do as well. So did/does my mum - she's got a great career, has spoken at conferences and is also a fantastic mother.

I might be an oddball because up until I met DP, I was convinced I never wanted kids.

There's nothing odd about this. I don't feel I'll want children though know that could change in future. It's perfectly normal to want or not want children.

There's nothing odd about this. I don't feel I'll want children though know that could change in future. It's perfectly normal to want or not want children.

I know you're absolutely right - there's just an insane amount of pressure. To be quite honest, I'm still not sure it's really my decision - my family are always saying "we want grandchildren", I hear comments that child-free people are "unfulfilled" and "don't understand" and are "missing out", as well as the classic "you're young, you'll change your mind!". Even my grandma says "well, that's the point of life". To continuously carry on the cycle of humanity? To me, the point of life is to enjoy it and find meaning in what you choose....It's really frustrating, and I used to get all this when I tried to argue being child-free from any side, my arguments ranging from "the world is overpopulated" to "I just don't want them, because I want to do other things in life".

I'm not sure if coming round to the idea is entirely me, or a fear that it would be a dealbreaker between me and DP, fear of regret when I'm retired, and just good old peer-pressure and judgement of a woman who doesn't want to pursue motherhood. But then as you said, we're judged for whatever we do eh!

Also, I just realised Mumsnet may not be the best place to be saying this....I like this forum though, I'm too old to go on the StudentRoom!

Of course one can be a feminist and a sahm!

As others have said, we live within the constraints of the society around us. For a long time the childcare would have been twice what I could have earned. I am a single parent too so I just couldn't make it work. I admire people who do make it work but I would have destroyed our quality of life at the time to 'prove' to argumentative strangers that I was a feminist. I know I'm a feminist. I am a feminist precisely because I was cornered in to that position.

Amazed that there are people who don't understand that it's not just what you do that makes you a feminist but what you'd prefer to do. Surely the motivation for any 'movement' is desire for a better future. If we were all in a position to easily 'prove' that we were feminists by living equal lives that reflected our 'isms' then there'd be no need for change. The fact that so many of us find ourselves recognising that we are cornered, dependent, weighing up childcare/earnings without the choice proves that we are

Quoting two different posters here but this is so true

"The other assumption is that SAHMs are somehow 'out' of society and people going to a paid job are somehow 'in', as if you aren't engaged with the outside world if you don't get paid.

I think that stems from paid employment being taxable hence "contributing to society", whereas unpaid work doesn't generate any taxes.

Hence if you go out to work and pay a childminder the same amount (for example), you break even, but the government gets 2 sets of taxes. Probably why they prefer it..."

So so true. Worth repeating.

yolo awesome username! We have plenty of chats on here about the assumptions made if you are childless by choice. Stick around

Yolo, I do have an academic based job. It's still just a job to me at the end of the day.

Do not feel pressured into having kids! Lots of women do not want kids and have all manner of other things they would rather spend their time on.

And many people think they will want kids and then change their minds, or think they won't want them and change their minds. It's all normal and there is no one right way.