Is choosing to be a SAHM a feminist decision?

[user1471506568]

Ok so I'm a SAHM and would also strongly identify as a radical feminist although admittedly I still am learning about all of this. I understand that liberal feminism is more about the individual as opposed to the class movement so under that philosophy being a SAHM is an acceptable feminist decision but I'm confused about the rad fem stance.

I can see how from a financial perspective being a SAHM is a bit of a backward step for feminism, but this is such a narrow view and I don't think money is the only measure of worth . In fact it strikes me as an extremely patriarchal measure where the balance will always be tipped to men earning more due to women having children.

I would be really interested in people's views on this. Can I be a radical feminist and a SAHM or am I letting down the class movement?

NB: Please don't take this as negative judgement of any working mothers as I respect everyone's decision to do what's best for them.

I just wouldn't expect them to take this weird approach on their CVs.

Why is mentioning relevant experience weird?

Constantly
Perhaps they should put "managed staff "
Dont all pile on me -Im joking !

I just think implying that being a SAHM automatically means you have effectively paused the development of any skills or capabilities that are relevant to the workplace is very damaging and misleading.

I wholeheartedly agree.

I just think implying that being a SAHM automatically means you have effectively paused the development of any skills or capabilities that are relevant to the workplace is very damaging and misleading.

I don't mean to imply that, but equally I think it's reaching to say someone will have definitely advanced their skills.

The starting point for me was that lilting had said several pages before that if we can raise the perceived value of SAHP then that will be good for women looking to return to work afterwards, because employers will value that experience.

I was just saying that actually many women who had a career or even just a nominal level of word experience prior to being a SAHP would be unlikely to benefit from any increase in perceived value. Obviously some would, so definitely a good thing, but most I think wouldn't.

Doing your own finances(for example) isnt relevent to the workplace
If you have looked after an elderly relative and become interested in Care of the Elderly -looked at current practice etc it is
Likewise gardening -doing a course etc
Basic daily life skills are assumed-sometimes wrongly

Rat - Yes I agree that being a SAHM didn't guarantee you have advanced your skills/development. I just think that society is so keen to write people off once they've been a SAHM. I agree that it's ridiculous to over egg basic domestic skills in your CV to fill a perceived gap but equally there seems to be this pressure for SAHMs to treat the years at home as an explainable gap as opposed to a role where they have developed and utilised skills and capabilities that could help the workplace. Of course, not everyone has done this and the identification of RELEVANT skills and competencies is crucial, otherwise it's too easy to mock the SAHMs who think food shopping is procurement or paying your cleaner once a week is managing staff.

In the uk as things stand at the moment, being a sahm cannot be considered a real choice for majority of the women/couples involved. If we had affordable childcare options and women generally had more equal career and earning potential, then I would say yes it can be a real choice but not at the moment.

With choice, I mean feminist decision.

Why is mentioning relevant experience weird

Because unless you have renovated a house etc most of the skills are simply normal life skills.

Obviously some would, so definitely a good thing, but most I think wouldn't.

Why? And surely anything which advances the feminist cause and promotes women's value within society is a good thing?

Because unless you have renovated a house etc most of the skills are simply normal life skills.

That was just one example. There are many others. Women who SAHP have varied expertise and contextual experience. In order to support them is not to make any assumptions based on the fact they have spent some time being a SAHP.

Again if you're a nanny, cleaner, carer, delivery driver etc aren't you mostly using domestic skills in a workplace setting?

Why? And surely anything which advances the feminist cause and promotes women's value within society is a good thing?

I don't think it would help most women because I think what would be best for women would be to be able to genuinely choose either being a SAHM or being a WOHP.

Being a SAHM, for most, would give them a great big hurdle that wouldn't otherwise be there when returning to work, but when someone's got to do it it's invariably the woman who is expected to.

Making being a SAHP appear more valuable in society wouldn't encourage more men to do it I don't think, because they can see the hurdle it gives women and are pleased it's not something they're expected to do.

It might, however, encourage more women to do it, which would mean more women struggling to get back into work, more women falling behind in their careers, fewer women in top positions etc....

So obviously I think being a SAHM is a perfectly acceptable choice for the individual and can be extremely valuable to families, to society, to children and to the individual women involved. I think women who choose this difficult path are commendable - I couldn't do it! - and I bet most men couldn't do it either. I'd like it to be seen as valuable and worthwhile etc. .... I'm just not sure it's massively valuable to feminism.

I'm just speaking off the cuff here, I really don't mean to cause offence (although I know I will eek!)

"and women don't grow up expecting to have to be the main breadwinner"

I knew people would get annoyed at this , but I was generalising to make a point. No one argues when you say that men DO grow up with the expectation they will have this role. Of course there are loads of ambitious women and girls myself included who would always have planned to get a job/career capable of providing for their own family.

Perhaps that factor is smaller these days but I still think our society places different expectations on women from a young age

Never mind assuming that all SAHMs have been off developing skills left right and centre - if we could just stop assuming that time at home equates to a person turning into an unemployable vegetable who has mostly spent their time watching daytime tv would be a step in the right direction..! As you say user, perhaps if that happened, women would feel less pressure to try and invent all sorts of skills that aren't actually that relevant to the workplace to fill the gap.

I genuinely have learned and am learning new skills as an indirect result of being a SAHM, because I've had a chance to pause, take stock, and dedicate some time to developing them. I honestly will have new, relevant, useful things to add to my cv - and, if my plans come to fruition, a portfolio that showcases them. Are those skills going to be worthless, because I'm acquiring and using them around snacktime and nappy changes? Are all the other skills I already have from before this career break suddenly irrelevant? I bloody hope not. But reading some posts on here (referring to the wider forum, not necessarily this thread!), you'd think that they may well be dismissed because they come alongside time at home with a child. I certainly worry that they will be. In fact, my goal is freelance work because I don't have high hopes of finding employment. Would I be an asset to an employer? Yes, without meaning to sound bigheaded, I would. But I don't have much confidence about that being recognised. That is surely a feminist issue?

"Maybe women who are career driven will want to go back to work and put their foot down with their partners, but would you really want to share mat leave if you had a min wage job with poor conditions?"

And we come back to the question of why women are often the secondary earners - even before kids? If you earn the same or more than your husband you might well consider sharing leave as much more practical / desirable.

Yes Spudlet, point taken.

I would say it’s equally as bad (maybe worse?) for a woman’s worth to be based on her ability to attract a rich husband

Why do some people have the idea that a sahm must have a rich husband? She doesn't need a husband at all, and if they are meant to be rich where is mine hiding all the loot?

That was just one example. There are many others. Women who SAHP have varied expertise and contextual experience. In order to support them is not to make any assumptions based on the fact they have spent some time being a SAHP

What are these?

• caring professions (yes, but you will still need qualifications)
• renovating a house (well sort of)
• gardening (maybe, but you still need qualifications)
• decorating a house (maybe but you will still have to do a City and Guilds course)

I’m not saying that you can’t learn skills as a sahp but on their own they are (often) not enough. You gain the skills at home but you need to do extra training. Simply learning at home normally won’t cut it.

Let’s say a woman becomes a sahp at the age of 21. She then wants to rejoin the work force at the age of 28. What job can she start based purely on the skills she has gained running a home and rainsing kids?
All I can think of is getting a job as a childminder in a nursery, starting at the most basic grade.

I think at the very least it would be feminist to not write off any woman with a career gap around childbearing years as a blithering idiot who now equates cooking beans on toast for the kids to being a Michelin starred chef. It is more feminist to actively help women to have access to equal opportunities. It is more feminist to acknowledge that humans do and will reproduce and the biggest burden of that reproduction falls on women and it would be equitable to offer more to the ones with the biggest burden than to stand back, watch them struggle and then laugh at them.

Equal paternity leave makes no difference to the mum who needs the time to recover from birth injuries, maternity related mental health etc etc, it just puts pressure on those women to go back to work earlier in order to be a good worker, an equal parent, a good feminist.

I listen to sahm, part time workers and full term workers. Everyone’s working hard and doing what they think is best for their families.

I know of myself and three other professional qualified women who were good at their jobs who were made redundant on maternity leave/ on return to work. Please stop equating to being good at picking a career prior to dc as having any bearing on what happens afterwards. I was the higher earner before having dc and it made fuck all difference to where I am now.

I'm with rat here, your last post has summed it up very well.

@DrumDrum I'd fall into the latter camp. I think "choice feminism" has done a lot of damage to the chances of achieving genuine equality. But obviously that is not something all feminists agree on.

I'm not going to wade into the "skills" debate as I think people have said everything already. But I agree that a year out of work is not a positive from an employer perspective and that talking about "transferable skills" from SAH parenting on a CV for a position in most professional industries is just cringe. Much better to support returnships and proper support / training.

I think the way to value time spent at home would be for society to recognise that as a whole we need children to be born and raised and that requires a break from working and that this is not the individual's problem. However I would be very wary of anything that continues to encourage the skew between man at work / woman at home.

Totally agree with both your posts handbag

I would say though that equal paternity leave doesn't preclude women having enough time off to physically recover, it doesn't take a year.