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 do think that society is changing slowly but it's so much easier to go down the slippery slope if you are the lower earning partner, once you've had kids. Ideally both parents would go part time but you rarely see that, almost as rare as SAHDs

But so many things to consider.
Actually rather hard to just 'get a part time job' or 'resume a career' after a period as a SAHM, even after a short time.

Eve if you are not the the lower earning it is sometimes hard to stay and work - I'm pretty tough but in my case I just wasn't tough enough to stick it out. I went back to work still BF-Ing twins. I was shattered physically. Childcare options were diabolical -it was not working out. I had a boss who looked at his watch every time I arrived and left (I was doing my hours, just not 14 hour days like him).
H had a better work situation.

Raising children is important! Surely the single most important thing in the world. Certainly far, far more important than whatever generic office job many women will end up taking as they feel obliged to work outside the home. The devaluing of child rearing pains me so much.

However, I do think modeling the woman-at-home/man-at-work set-up to children is not ideal. We know this set-up massively screws over a lot of women in the end, even if it works for a while.

I think the ideal situation would be that both parents work less and share the child rearing and housework burden equally. In the uk this isn't a viable option for most, but in some Scandinavian countries with much better state-funded childcare and parental leave I think this situation is fairly common (willing to be corrected on this as I don't know the stats, but this is the impression I get based on anecdotal evidence from Swedish and Norwegian friends!).

This is what we should be aiming towards as a society, but in the meantime, don't beat yourself up about the concessions you have to make to the system. So long as you enjoy your life and it's clear to your kids that your contribution is as important as your DH's, I'm sure you're doing a better job of raising feminist kids than most!

Not by "choosing" to be SAHMs. I appreciate this is simplistic and I've heard the argument that why should women make their own lives harder in order to to be trail blazers or more "feminist".

I disagree. Disapproving of the choice to become a SAHP devalues the role. Which is a large part of the problem. If the role were valued it would be easier to return to work and the workplace would be more equal as child rearing would be respected rendering people who have done / do the role more employable. Added to this more men would choose the role leaving more paid positions free for women to fill.

That's exactly my point. It is tough for women no matter what you earn. I'm the higher earner to the point where I have much less of an option to quit, as we would be pretty significantly worse off. That just means that the hurdle to me (or you) quitting is/was much higher. When there is a low hurdle - I can imagine plenty of women think fuck this shit , immediately on return from maternity leave. Or don't bother going back as they know it'll be too hard and it isn't worth it for their household and family. That's not their fault, it's the way society and workplaces are set up, but equally it doesn't mean that the decision to be a SAHM is a "feminist" one, in my opinion.

Bluntness - I don't think that I worded my response quite right as I didn't intend to talk about how I was valued by my DH or about the motivation behind me being a SAHM but more that there are contributions to be made to supporting a family that go beyond the financial and that as a partnership we have a level of dependency on each other. I also wanted to cover the old 'but what if you seperate' issue.

Viviennemary- I find your comment bemusing. I don't do all the cleaning and in fact only do half. Yes, I do the lion's share of the childcare at the moment as I chose to be at home with my kids (obviously that was the point) but why is this inferior to earning money?

All those posters talking about the relationship between money and power do strike a chord with me. Within my relationship as it stands I have equal control over money and equal say in all decisions. I would not be in this relationship otherwise as simple as that. I see many threads elsewhere on boards where the woman works FT or PT and her relationship has absolutely terrible power dynamics. Although you could argue being a SAHM makes you more vulnerable to your partner abusing their financial power, I don't think it's the main issue behind most unbalanced relationships which seem to come down to a lack of boundaries and self esteem.

Well, @liltingleaf how do you suggest we make the role more valued then? I think you need to force (structurally) more men into equal child rearing roles. Otherwise it won't happen.

in an ideal world, a sahp would have equal status and choices

Back in the real world: we live in a capitalist society (like it or not), and money and power (choices, freedom, status) are intricately entangled. It’s a lot easier to be independent if you are working.

Maybe my view is tainted by having been in a bad marriage, and knowing that my working (albeit part time) is what gave me the freedom to eventually escape however

"Disapproving of the choice" - I didn't say I disapproved, I said I don't think it's a particularly feminist thing to do as you are going along with stereotypical gender roles and falling back to the default patriarchal set up.

Sloth - thank you for your post. It makes a lot of sense to me.

Thanks everyone for taking the time to respond. I'm reading them all and appreciating the different perspectives.

@SlothSlothSloth totally agree with everything you said

@TheGrumpySquirrel I agree with you that we need to change the way childcare is valued and encourage more men into doing this but as with any societal issue I don't think individuals can be the ones to change this. Individual women forcing themselves into a job they may find meaningless when they find childcare much more fulfilling is not the answer. The answer must come from government. Let's look at countries who are doing better on gender equality and campaign for similar policies. I'm thinking of things like universal free or heavily subsidised childcare, much longer and better paid parental leave that isn't just for the mother, and a set amount of paternity leave of several months that new fathers MUST take otherwise they lose it.

so many of today's instamummy type posts are attempts to weave a bit more value into the sahm position. Hand sewn vintage clothes/ beeswax crayons/ forest school. It's all brilliant. No doubt little geniuses will be released into the world. But will not change your precarious financial position as a sahm one bit.

Well, @liltingleaf how do you suggest we make the role more valued then?

By not accusing women who take the role as being anti feminist for 'supporting and perpetuating the patriarchal structure', for a start. This demonises these women.

By celebrating the role. By women supporting those who take on this role. By women in power showing that they value this role by recognising and respecting women who have taken on this role and employing them in positions of power. If men see this role respected and valued they will have to follow suit.

Women need to support each other, accept and respect women who have made different life choices. Not criticise them in order to vindicate the different choices they have made.

Sorry @TheGrumpySquirrel, cross-post! I do fundamentally agree with you too and hope that came across in my second post!

Thegrumpysquirrel - I agree to a certain extent about falling back into outdated gender stereotypes but is being a SAHM automatically doing that? If you have equal control over major decisions, shows that the man pulls his weight domestically and that the relationship is generally one of equals then I don't think that it's necessarily a backward step.

I think the 1950s housewife/SAHM was husband centric whereas the modern SAHM is often much more child centric.

@liltingleaf even if that were achievable, that will change zero, why would men give up the economic power?? I'm not criticising other women's decisions. I think people employ all sorts of coping mechanisms for the structurally unfair set up we as females find ourselves in.

Why are we putting pressure on women to work outside the home, if that is not what is best for them, or their family. How is it ‘blazing a trail’ to do something that doesn’t work for you? Saying women need to put themselves last and sacrifice for others, sounds pretty much like the patriarchy.

@SlothSlothSloth I agree that this must come from structural change at policy level and individual women should not be demonised for their life choices - which are made within the confines of a patriarchal society. Still doesn't mean I think the "life choice" to be a SAHM is an actively feminist decision.

liltingleaf even if that were achievable, that will change zero, why would men give up the economic power??

It would viewed similarly to volunteering and valued. It would help employability.

@Loungingbutnotforlong I agree with you. That's why I said that I understand why women often don't want to do it. In our current unfair set up is often is NOT the optimal decision for an individual family. I'd like to see the whole set up become fairer - so that there is real choice. Currently don't you see there is a lot of pressure on women to go part time or SAHM ? That pressure is real and hard to go against.

@TheGrumpySquirrel yep, agreed

@grumpysquirrel I do see the pressure to go part time or become a SAHM. Although I wonder if it is actually ‘positive’ pressure, in the sens or encouraging PT or SAHM, or whether it is that unrelenting pressure of being a WOHM is pushing women to choose to be SAHM. I am struggling with this myself at the moment- i’ve Worked so hard and for so long in my career, but it’s fibidhing me off. If I choose (for a period of time) to cut back on work and protect my own health and the wellbeing of my family, does that mean I need to hang up my feminist hat? Do I have to give up all opinions on women and the world of work (as suggested by dammit).
Possibly this is too raw for me- we’re probably saying the same thing. Society currently values wage earners more- so it is women rather than men who are likely to choose PT or SAHM when a family is struggling with two FT. I don’t know how we fix it.

My thoughts on this are a bit all over the place, but here goes.

If sah was recognised as valuable and something which does make life much easier (and often advantageous in a career sense) to the wohp and this was recognised in divorce settlements, it would go a long way towards redistribution of power. As it is, women take the career hit and get shafted by divorce and lack of meaningful child support.

I think it's quite hard to find 2 rewarding pt jobs that pay enough to raise a family and that work cohesively, to enable both parents to work and split childcare. Which a pp thought would be the optimum scenario. When both partners work ft, it seems to be that one job is more full on than the other, so one person still ends up doing more. For me, having it all equated to doing it all (or at least more than my share). Bugger that. I don't want to. So maybe sah is my way of doing what I consider to be my share and not half of his share too.

I do actually agree that my choice impacts other women, which is something I do feel bad about. But honestly, I don't think that capitalism lends itself to balanced family life.
In the end, I recognise that all my choices are a mixed bag, good in some ways and a bit shit in others, so I did what I wanted and what made my family life easier.