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.

This thread has been super interesting and I'm glad it's not descended into a bun fight but I'm gonna step away now as I think we are just going round in circles at this point.

My last comment is just this - from a rad fem perspective feminism is about society not individual circumstances so anything we can do to make society as a whole fairer for women should be a good thing. I'm not going to get drawn into arguments about how someone's specific SAH reasons / circumstances are super feminist

Peace ✌🏼

liltingleaf but you are saying that SAHM is going against the current patriarchal capitalist system and i disagree - SAHM are facilitating a long hours (Male) worker, and perpetuating gender stereotypes. You as a family will pay more in taxes.

Yes, I am, for the reasons I mentioned upthread. Equally I have mentioned, upthread, how not all women who work in paid employment are serving radical feminism.

Personally, my DH takes advantage of family friendly working practices, through necessity, due to having to support me through a recent cancer diagnosis. And we might pay more tax, proportionately, than a family where both parents work but not actually, as my DH does not earn enough! Also I think I probably recouped a truly frightening amount from the cancer care I have received from the NHS. My career prospects don't look great though..l

So which is it ?

Can be either or both. Point being it is not necessarily the choices you make that make you a feminist but the ideology that informs them.

My last comment is just this - from a rad fem perspective feminism is about society not individual circumstances so anything we can do to make society as a whole fairer for women should be a good thing.

But society is just a collective of individuals. Ignoring their lived experiences and perceptions on them will do nothing to further the feminist cause.

I am certainly no expert on RF. Indeed I'm sure the very notion is giving FWR regulars a right laugh. OP, I'm surprised you find what I have written to be patronising, it is simply RF analysis of SAH Mothering.

@liltingleaf my comments on SAHP re entering the workforce were absolutely not intended to be patronising and I’m sorry that you read them that way.
In my industry(Tech/Finance) speaking in interview about SAHP skills - no matter how good they might be -just wouldn’t cut it so I am speaking from my own experience. I’ve spent a lot of time and effort in my career advocating for women, in particular working mothers and maternity leavers/returners, so I do have some skin in this game. Experience gained as a SAHP is only going to be really relevant if the job applied for is related in some way (care industry). Just like years of experience as a teacher would carry a lot of weight when applying for a role in education but less so in say, marketing. You’d expect the teacher to do some training.
Yes there are core competencies such as negotiation skills or time management which are common across SAHP and other roles but I genuinely think you won’t be taken seriously in interview if you rely on this material. As I referenced earlier, lots of companies are launching returnships which are perfectly tailored for SAHPs returning to work. There are numerous online training courses (lots in Tech) many of which are free. Taking the time on these will carry a lot more weight than expecting a non-care industry to assign value to experience gained in care (SAHP). Feel free to disregard this but this is the reality as I see it and I interview a fair few people.

Quite You do realise SAHMs aren't some homogeneous group of women that all do and think the same things? I am not proud of facilitating my DH working long hours because I don't and won't. My DH also doesn't want to work longer hours as he likes seeing his kids and being an active member of the family.

I think the point about women WOH propping up the patriarchy is more that if you think women who want to stay at home should go out to work in order to be feminists then you have to ask yourself who ultimately benefits from this ethos? Is it women? As I mentioned previously, I think a lot of this comes down to where you believe a woman's desire to be a SAHM comes from. If you think it's all socialisation and that women have been hoodwinked into the role by the patriarchy then yes , freeing yourself from the SAH role could be a good thing. However if you believe that some women have a natural desire to be with the children, especially in the early years, and this is not driven by society at all but is more innate then that obviously changes things completely.

liltingleaf, you sound more like a liberal feminist, or even just a feminist. Not all feminists are RFs and that's ok.

As a SAHM I actually would not facilitate study, overtime or travel other than what was absolutely necessary

I have no doubt that any parent would disagree with this. The question is what deems "What is absolutely necessary?" And in most cases it is the employer.

Dione, I know. I don't particularly assign a label to myself. However, I think my points regarding dismantling/supporting the patriarchy are relevant in terms of radical feminism.

I don't think as a rad fem you can recognise on one hand that society doesn't value stay at home mums, but on the other fully accept you're supporting and facilitating a mans career by not working.

Sure. do what you value, what your family values, but women who proactively give up work and support their husband to progress his career past being a parent, are not just Enabling the patriarchy to continue they actively progressing it.

Because these men keep working after children, doing all the hours they chose, travelling as they wish, just as they did before they became fathers, with you at home enabling it, you thus give that father an unfair advantage over nearly every single working mother he meets, becayse in nearly every instance she doesn't have that support and you know it.

Please don't insult us by telling us that's radical feminism. It's not. is it liberal, sure you may have your own equality by whatever yard stick you find acceptable. But let's not pretend you're some rad fem supporting the sister hood in society end the patriarchy . You're not. You're actively fucking working mothers over. Because you're that woman at home making sure your man has an active advantage over nearly every working mother he comes into contact with. He sets the work pace. He can do it because of you and she needs to step up and match it. That's the reality. These men can do it because a woman is making sure he can. She's back there making damned sure he's got that advantage.

Rad fem? No. Not even slightly, and let's not pretend otherwise.

Dione, there are plenty of women on this thread and others like it who state categorically their husbands progression is down to them taking care of the kids and home and they enabled it. Hence why they are entitled to half the money.

DIone yes and no. Of course employers dictate what is necessary but I think a lot of this extra stuff is about getting ahead and working towards that next promotion. That's the problem with women facilitating men in general with this kind of stuff. It just allows the gap to widen further as the man is promoted whilst the woman is burdened with all the domestic duties. I chose to be a SAHM to benefit me and my kids, not to facilitate my husband's career. On the plus side, when I go back to work at least our setup will be sustainable and my husband's employers will see very little difference.

Bluntness

So how does devaluing the SAHP role and stigmatising the women who take this role on encouraging men to take on the SAHP role instead?

How does alienating SAHM from radical feminism progress radical feminism?

How do families which pay into exploitative care and service industries, within in a patriarchal capitalist society, progress radical feminism?

Bluntness have you read any of my more recent posts? I'm OP btw, just name changed.

Also, of course I'm entitled to half the money if not more because my future earning potential has been diminished. I deserve this not because I have facilitated anyone's career but because as a married couple we decided that we wanted someone to stay at home during the working week for a while for the benefit of the kids. I took this role, he took the WOH role. Both important, both valuable to the family. If we were to split he would benefit from the hours I put in as a SAHM parenting the kids how we both wanted to and I will get my share of the financial assets.

It really isnt relevent to the care industry.
Its like saying you are suitable to work as a chef because you can cook a meal.
Also just because you WOH doesnt mean you are any less of a caring person which is the implication.

Bluntness if you read my earlier posts you will see that my motivation for being a SAHP was not to further my DH's career. Also that my DH has had to take advantage of family friendly working practices. Many women are in similar situations to myself.

Sorry haven’t read the thread but bluntness does make a good point about sahm facilitating their partners careers to the detriment of working women. Something I’ve noticed over my career is that the senior male managers generally all have children, yet the far too female senior managers generally don’t.
Things are changing but at a snails pace, yet everyone wants a quick solution to the horrendous gender pay gaps.

It really isnt relevent to the care industry.

When is providing care not at all relevant to the care industry? When it is done by a SAHP.

Its like saying you are suitable to work as a chef because you can cook a meal.

When is experience and in and a love of regularly cooking from scratch not at all relevant to working in catering? When it is done by a SAHP.

Also just because you WOH doesnt mean you are any less of a caring person which is the implication.

Where has this been implied on this thread?

Shenanagins do all these men have SAHM partners? Even if they do, I would suggest it's not a function of the SAH role but more an attitude things. Lots of women working FT and PT are guilty of the same.

Perhaps being sahm isn’t rad fem in our current capitalist patriarchy, but if all things were equal it would be just as valid a choice as being ceo of big bollocks tech inc. The problem isn’t the sahm, it’s the inequality.

Can you blame individuals for doing what they can with what they have (law abidingly)? I’ve more earning power currently by facilitating my dh to get a better job than I do going out and getting my own job. That galls something rotten. I tried my best but the system took against me when I started having babies. I don’t blame women for their choices.

"But society is just a collective of individuals. Ignoring their lived experiences and perceptions on them will do nothing to further the feminist cause."

🤦🏻‍♀️

One more try. Yes a COLLECTIVE of whom the MAJORITY of women are not in the privileged position of the OP or gilly (who have eg negotiated equitable divisions of labour and who have good chances of re entering the work force) but do not have real choices when it comes to SAH or career . If you refuse to cannot see that the majority of SAHP being women and the majority of CEOs being men is a problem for feminism then I'm amazed.

bumpty yes they did or partners doing part-time roles. But things are changing but we’re a long way off.

Of course it gives men an advantage. They don't need to do school runs or be at home on a day off with a sick kid, or be home to make dinner or get thr shopping in, or even go to sports days or assemblies.

I constantly see on this forum women proclaiming they supported their husbands career, that he would not have progressed if it wasn't for them picking up the load at home.

No doubt that is valued in the family unit, but it gives that man an unfair advantage over nearly all working mothers. There is really no discussion to be had on that. It simply does. And that's why mothers struggle often in the workplace and fathers don't. Because mothers usually don't have a partner at home managing all the child care and enabling them to work all the hours required like their Male counterparts do all too often.

So yes, if you're the one home, doing the school runs, making sure the kids are fed, that he doesn't need to take a day off when they are sick, or during school holidays or inset days, you are 100 percent giving that man a workplace advantage over thr working mother in terms of career progression , whether it's your intention or not.

lilting
It was stated upthread that the skills gained in SAHP (caring for ones own DC) may be an advantage in care work.
By implication WOHP dont then have those skills (not that they are of any relevence anyway)

Chefs are highly trained-of course it helps to be interested in food .
"Cooking from scratch"😂
Ill call MN bingo and bow out