Are you offended when someone says they “didnt want someone else to raise my kids”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are you all arguing about schedules and hours? You don't need to prove something how your schedule is superior to someone else. People have different lives, so what

Well this whole thread is about how many hours you spend with your kids so....

And of course SAHM’s spend more, so the whole argument is stupid.

The difference is nominal.

It really depends on both the type of work the working parent is doing and how demanding it is (ie: cushy WFH office gig vs. Big Law or busy medical practice or long commute) and also how much the SAHM is farming out her kids either through nearly full day preschool (ie: 9-2pm 5 days a week) or a "part-time nanny" or whatever. We all know different families on all ends of these spectrums.

+1 and for SAHMs of school age children there is a wide variety of involvement. Some use their time to volunteer at the school and spend the whole summer with kids. Some are picking kids up right ght after school and spending the entire afternoon engaging with them. Others aren't doing any of those things. I know plenty of SAHMs who are spending A LOT of time with their school age kids, or directly engaged with their schools or activities, and not only do working parents not do all that but they often benefit from it.

And before you yell at me yes I also know working parents who run PTAs and volunteer a lot. But you need a specific kind of personality and job for that. Most working parents cannot do all that.

Most SAHM's do not volunteer at school or run the PTA.

I don't think what happens after school is SAHM/WOHM related. Enganged moms are engaged and it has nothing to do with the working status.

My kids are in private and pretty much every parent with a position in our parents association until like 2nd is a SAHM. The heads of the auction are SAH. I volunteer about 20 hours total throughout the year (I WOH) but I can’t commit to the level of involvement required and I don’t want to drop the ball have a bunch of parents hate me.

My kids are in private and pretty much every parent with a position in our parents association works, both the men and the women. The most involved two I can think of are a radiologist and a child psychologist. I'm a lawyer, along with a handful of other lawyers. We have some realtors, multiple doctors and nurses, and some finance people. I can only think of one SAHP actually.

The stay at homes are there you just don’t know them. Stay at home moms get to know each other because they have something in common. I’m not gonna lie, some of our kids were a little too catered to because they were our main job. We had money so there was really no limit on activities and getting together for whatever reason.

You obviously know the working people and their jobs but the stay at home parents have kids at your school, you just don’t know them.

Um, that’s dumb. Sorry. At my daughter’s private in DC, there are 45 girls in her whole class and I do, indeed, know what most of the parents do. This is likely true for most privates. It’s not like there’s radar or a caste system, wtf? You meet all the parents. Most of us talk to the parents of our kid’s friends. We don’t screen for work status.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:i keep thinking about this thread and i think there is one major takeaway that i cant stress enough.

If a sahm ever says this phrase to a working mom online or in person, she is saying it to make the working mom feel like sh*t. End of story. So no, it's not ok. Not true, and not ok.

It’s ok to say in response to someone who says they would never stay home because it’s boring, or they don’t use their brain, or don’t want their husband to give them an allowance. Equally shitty things to say so if you walk around saying that, you have no reason to get upset.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are you all arguing about schedules and hours? You don't need to prove something how your schedule is superior to someone else. People have different lives, so what

Well this whole thread is about how many hours you spend with your kids so....

And of course SAHM’s spend more, so the whole argument is stupid.

The difference is nominal.

It really depends on both the type of work the working parent is doing and how demanding it is (ie: cushy WFH office gig vs. Big Law or busy medical practice or long commute) and also how much the SAHM is farming out her kids either through nearly full day preschool (ie: 9-2pm 5 days a week) or a "part-time nanny" or whatever. We all know different families on all ends of these spectrums.

+1 and for SAHMs of school age children there is a wide variety of involvement. Some use their time to volunteer at the school and spend the whole summer with kids. Some are picking kids up right ght after school and spending the entire afternoon engaging with them. Others aren't doing any of those things. I know plenty of SAHMs who are spending A LOT of time with their school age kids, or directly engaged with their schools or activities, and not only do working parents not do all that but they often benefit from it.

And before you yell at me yes I also know working parents who run PTAs and volunteer a lot. But you need a specific kind of personality and job for that. Most working parents cannot do all that.

Most SAHM's do not volunteer at school or run the PTA.

I don't think what happens after school is SAHM/WOHM related. Enganged moms are engaged and it has nothing to do with the working status.

My kids are in private and pretty much every parent with a position in our parents association until like 2nd is a SAHM. The heads of the auction are SAH. I volunteer about 20 hours total throughout the year (I WOH) but I can’t commit to the level of involvement required and I don’t want to drop the ball have a bunch of parents hate me.

My kids are in private and pretty much every parent with a position in our parents association works, both the men and the women. The most involved two I can think of are a radiologist and a child psychologist. I'm a lawyer, along with a handful of other lawyers. We have some realtors, multiple doctors and nurses, and some finance people. I can only think of one SAHP actually.

The stay at homes are there you just don’t know them. Stay at home moms get to know each other because they have something in common. I’m not gonna lie, some of our kids were a little too catered to because they were our main job. We had money so there was really no limit on activities and getting together for whatever reason.

You obviously know the working people and their jobs but the stay at home parents have kids at your school, you just don’t know them.

Um, that’s dumb. Sorry. At my daughter’s private in DC, there are 45 girls in her whole class and I do, indeed, know what most of the parents do. This is likely true for most privates. It’s not like there’s radar or a caste system, wtf? You meet all the parents. Most of us talk to the parents of our kid’s friends. We don’t screen for work status.

Looks like you screen for work status. You named all the job titles and identified one stay at home. If a woman loves her job she shouldn’t have to give it up. Both at home mothers and work mothers can equally do a bad job or an excellent job. But to claim there are no at home mothers who use private schools is ridiculous. (So is starting a sentence with “Um”)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The “math” poster is crazy or has seen too many shows about trophy wives.

When I sahm’d I didn’t spend more than an hour away from my 0-2.5 year olds while they were awake, and that was to shower and while Dad did bedtime. And I did have cleaners, too much takeout and a few hours on one weekend day. I don’t think that’s unusual. It was intense but how I wanted it. It took me *years* to get and stay pregnant. I made the most of every minute with my kids and it still flew by so fast.

I just don’t understand how she can spend so much quality time with her kids when she spends so much time spying on/stalking her SAHM neighbor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody cares about this issue after 5. Unless you are a true moron with no other life experiences.

after 5 is a different story. saying you need to sah after kid is 5 and at school is just weird.

Who says anything about “need”? The flip side of this inane argument is something like “saying you need to work when your spouse make $x is just weird”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If your infant takes a 2-hr am nap and a 2-hr pm nap, and sleeps like 11-12 hours a night, then your infant is only awake 9 hours a day. All these folks saying, well my nanny only spent 3-4 waking hours with my kid...I mean, I get that "3" and "4" sound like small numbers, but it is a full 30-40% of your child's waking hours. That's of course a meaningful difference in what you could be spending if you stayed home (and again, that's assuming you have a very good napper).

I'm a FT working mom, btw.

Me again - also what is this talk about 3 year olds going to preschool 5 days a week from 9-1? The majority of the SAHMs in my area send their 3 yr olds to preschool for 3 mornings a week (pick up at lunch). Haven't you heard of the "3 days 3's"? It's very silly to make up all these numbers and schedules. Certainly pre-ES, of course SAHMs spend an appreciably larger percentage of their kids' waking hours with them than do most WOHM (at least those with fairly typical schedules). How silly to pretend otherwise!

Yes it is true most SAHM's that are wealthy and poor send their kids to 5 days of preschool because of the value it adds. For the poor it's free and for the wealthy it's not a big deal.

But if you give up an income and have to skrimp I understand you can't send your kids 5 days a week and that's fine, they will be fine.

I live in a UMC suburb. The wealthy SAHMs here do "3 day 3's" -- preschool 3 mornings a week. They don't see a value beyond that amount of preschool time for a 3 yr old.

Our SAHM do preschool 5 days and aftercare 2-3 days a week (easier than playdates which have to be planned). Aftercare just ended up being easier than trying to figure out playdate in the middle of dinner.

I find this very hard to believe! Here (again, wealthy area with lots of SAHMs) the typical schedule is:

3yr olds - preschool 3 mornings a week (typically 9 to noon)
4 yr olds (i.e. "pre-k" year) - 5 days a week (typically 9-1)...some families do "enrichment" add-ons until 3ish one or two days a week
Then no aftercare once in ES, but some after-school ECs, playground meet-ups, etc.

+1
Our preschool was around 3 hrs / 3 days for pre-3, and 4 hours / 4 days for pre-K. Anything beyond those hours typically falls under the daycare umbrella.

+1

This is why we had a full time nanny.

OP to get back to topic. No, I don’t get offended that someone is so myopic as to believe their singular view is correct. I pity their ignorance and judge them accordingly. Lots of great SAHMs, WOHMs, nannies, SAHDs, WOHDs, grandparents, etc. As long as all the kids’ needs get met physically and emotionally - it’s all good.

Can you provide a link to preschools with 3x a week for 3 hours.

We also have a full time nanny for the infant but our 3 year old does 5 days a week preschool, because I can't find one that does 3 days a week. NW ish area or Bethesda would work.

Any church or temple based preschool is like this if they are not also trying to be a daycare. Methodist, Presbyterian or Episcopal are the most likely to offer preschool and typically very affordable because you aren't having to pay a lot extra for overhead - the church already has the space. Standard schedule is often 9am-12pm, some offer a "lunch bunch" from 12-1 or 1:30 or something like that and some just include it for everyone. They often still use the classroom 5 days a week but its shared between two classes. Ie: 3 day 3's use the classroom on MWF and 2 day 2's use the same room on TTH.

Here are some links! These programs really aren't tough to find.

https://www.ccpcwns.com/copy-of-nursery-school

https://ccbcchildrenscenter.org/programs/

That took a long time to find.

The 1st one is a church so yea ... no thanks.

The 2nd requires 5 days a week for 3.5 or older and the program is 9-12:30 (which is only 30 minutes shorter than the one I talked about). So if you want to split hairs for 6 months your child can do 3 days a week and 1/2 hour shorter.

You definitely are spending a TON of time more with your 3 year old.

/s lol.

They are both located in churches, but neither program is religious.

I live in an UMC Chicago suburb. I can think of 6 preschools off the top of my head (4 run through churches or temples and 2 that are totally secular) that offer 3 day 3's programs.

Here's one highly regarded secular option, just for example:

https://www.tamarakdaycamp.com/pdf/school_forms/TCS%20Class%20Descriptions%202024.2025.pdf

And those 3 day 3's options (with the earlier pick up) are what most of the SAHMs do around here. The fact that you would not do a church or temple preschool or would pick 5 days a week is all fine and dandy, but besides the point. Your narrative that all (or even many) of the 3 yr old kids of SAHMs are in preschool five days a week well into the afternoon is totally false! Seriously stop embarrassing yourself!

So you had to go all the way to the midwest to find a pre-school with a 3 day option?

Lady, stop! I live in the Chicago area now. My SAHM sister in Northern Virginia sent her 3 year old to a 3 day 3's program. It happens to be through a temple preschool (which we know isn't your cup of tea, but it's filled with the kids of SAHMs who are home with mom Tuesday and Thursday all day and by noon on Monday, Wednesday, Friday). I know, I know, just pretend these don't exist, got it! The types of preschools you are apparently looking at are filled with the kids of WOHMs with nannies in the afternoon.

I was not looking for a mommy and me type of situation since I had a nanny, I was looking for a preschool that prepared kids for K. It's not all that complex. All the programs in our area were 5 days a week 9-1.

The 3 day 3's programs I'm talking about are NOT mommy and me; they are 100% drop-off. Most people are looking for their kid's 4 yr-old preschool year (i.e, the pre-k year) to be the year that prepares them for kindergarten. I do see a lot of SAHM choose a 5-day option for the pre-k year, not suggesting otherwise. But I thought we were talking about 3-year old options (in other words, kid still has two years of preschool before kinder). You most certainly did not look hard enough if you could not find a 3 morning a week drop-off option for your 3 yr old. (And then follow that the next year by a 5-day option that is focused on preparing them for kinder.)

That must be it, I only looked at one place and never looked at others. LOL, okay that's it. Dude, there are waiting lists for places and you think i'm gonna find a plethora of 3 day 2 hour programs (what is even the point).

Dude, you’re gonna have a hard time in the future if preschool was a challenge.

+1000
But it doesn't really matter where their kids go to preschool, or for how many days per week. Those kids will not be alright.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All these posts "I work while my child sleeps and I spend all the waking moments with them along with my DH who also works unicorn hours. When they are preschool age we choose the best school ever....."
It's not real life, 99% of jobs are not like that and both parents equally parenting is difficult to manage too. Aren't parents often complaining about getting their spouse to take on more. I don't think the unicorn perfect parents of the world realize that most people cannot just "choose" this setup

Similarly

"I SAHM with my children, I even sleep with them to maximize my time "raising" them" ... I don't shower or cook or clean or workout or run errands or take walks or go on dates or see friends or do girls weekend or vacatino with my H or visit family without them or get sick or let my H take them or let them do independent play ever so I'm never away from them. I would never spend 1 hour away let alone 3 that is reducing my "raising" time by 20%. I spaced my kids perfectly so my toddler would never take time away from my infant."

It's not real life, 99% of SAHM's are doing stuff without their children for hours a day, they are not with them 24x7. They spend at most 6 hours a day one on one with them. I don't think it would even be healthy to be this invested and involved in every breath your child takes.

This is just not true.

+1. I can’t believe how many insecure moms are responding. Working and stay at home moms are not monolithic groups. Just because you know someone who does x does not mean that applies to all individuals in that group. The idea that working moms spend 30 minutes a day with their kids is as ludicrous as the idea that sahm spend 6 hours a day with their kids.

All of the insecure posts on here mostly directed as stay at home moms (I WFH) are insane though. Someone was offended that a poster said working moms gave up time with their kids and stay at home moms gave up status and financial security. And some crazed working mom wrote that she was insulted that someone would say working moms gave up time with their kids by working. I mean, how is it an insult to (checks notes) *state facts* unless you are so insecure that you can’t handle the truth.

So many women feel insulted by the “strangers raising my kid” comment because they feel that it is a personal attack on them and they are in complete denial about the fact that by working they spend less time with their children. Initially there were the people claiming they and their spouse worked full time and their child only had a nanny between 11-12 and 3-5 (because we all know it’s super common for children to take a three hour nap in the middle of the day from birth to five while you work and run errands🙄 and that so many nannies will accept a shambolic schedule) and since those ridiculous examples didn’t withstand scrutiny then it was the ad hominem “you dumb” after every valid argument and finally it’s this ridiculous argument that stay at home moms spend 6 hours with their kids a day (because if you’re a working parent in an office and your child naps it’s like you are right there taking care of them for all [insert unbelievably high made up number] hours they nap during the day, but if you’re a stay at home mom and your child naps you are not parenting them). It’s been illogical from the start but at this point it’s farcical too.

[Anonymous]

Didn’t read all the thread but YES!!!!! Very offended!! I would have given my left arm to be a SAHM but I couldn’t. Check your privilege.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All these posts "I work while my child sleeps and I spend all the waking moments with them along with my DH who also works unicorn hours. When they are preschool age we choose the best school ever....."
It's not real life, 99% of jobs are not like that and both parents equally parenting is difficult to manage too. Aren't parents often complaining about getting their spouse to take on more. I don't think the unicorn perfect parents of the world realize that most people cannot just "choose" this setup

Similarly

"I SAHM with my children, I even sleep with them to maximize my time "raising" them" ... I don't shower or cook or clean or workout or run errands or take walks or go on dates or see friends or do girls weekend or vacatino with my H or visit family without them or get sick or let my H take them or let them do independent play ever so I'm never away from them. I would never spend 1 hour away let alone 3 that is reducing my "raising" time by 20%. I spaced my kids perfectly so my toddler would never take time away from my infant."

It's not real life, 99% of SAHM's are doing stuff without their children for hours a day, they are not with them 24x7. They spend at most 6 hours a day one on one with them. I don't think it would even be healthy to be this invested and involved in every breath your child takes.

This is just not true.

+1. I can’t believe how many insecure moms are responding. Working and stay at home moms are not monolithic groups. Just because you know someone who does x does not mean that applies to all individuals in that group. The idea that working moms spend 30 minutes a day with their kids is as ludicrous as the idea that sahm spend 6 hours a day with their kids.

All of the insecure posts on here mostly directed as stay at home moms (I WFH) are insane though. Someone was offended that a poster said working moms gave up time with their kids and stay at home moms gave up status and financial security. And some crazed working mom wrote that she was insulted that someone would say working moms gave up time with their kids by working. I mean, how is it an insult to (checks notes) *state facts* unless you are so insecure that you can’t handle the truth.

So many women feel insulted by the “strangers raising my kid” comment because they feel that it is a personal attack on them and they are in complete denial about the fact that by working they spend less time with their children. Initially there were the people claiming they and their spouse worked full time and their child only had a nanny between 11-12 and 3-5 (because we all know it’s super common for children to take a three hour nap in the middle of the day from birth to five while you work and run errands🙄 and that so many nannies will accept a shambolic schedule) and since those ridiculous examples didn’t withstand scrutiny then it was the ad hominem “you dumb” after every valid argument and finally it’s this ridiculous argument that stay at home moms spend 6 hours with their kids a day (because if you’re a working parent in an office and your child naps it’s like you are right there taking care of them for all [insert unbelievably high made up number] hours they nap during the day, but if you’re a stay at home mom and your child naps you are not parenting them). It’s been illogical from the start but at this point it’s farcical too.

If you are talking about my post then you have reading comprehension issues because 1) I stated that my DH and I staggered schedules so that one left late and the other one came back early, 2) it was a 2-hour nap not 3 hours, and 3) We hired a nanny for 6 hours a day but she helped with housework when she wasn’t actively taking care of our kid.

And yes, it is perfectly reasonable to expect a child to take a 2-hour nap until age ~4 or so. Some don’t but most do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Didn’t read all the thread but YES!!!!! Very offended!! I would have given my left arm to be a SAHM but I couldn’t. Check your privilege.

If someone said this to you, you probably said something to deserve it. But nobody actually leads with this statement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All these posts "I work while my child sleeps and I spend all the waking moments with them along with my DH who also works unicorn hours. When they are preschool age we choose the best school ever....."
It's not real life, 99% of jobs are not like that and both parents equally parenting is difficult to manage too. Aren't parents often complaining about getting their spouse to take on more. I don't think the unicorn perfect parents of the world realize that most people cannot just "choose" this setup

Similarly

"I SAHM with my children, I even sleep with them to maximize my time "raising" them" ... I don't shower or cook or clean or workout or run errands or take walks or go on dates or see friends or do girls weekend or vacatino with my H or visit family without them or get sick or let my H take them or let them do independent play ever so I'm never away from them. I would never spend 1 hour away let alone 3 that is reducing my "raising" time by 20%. I spaced my kids perfectly so my toddler would never take time away from my infant."

It's not real life, 99% of SAHM's are doing stuff without their children for hours a day, they are not with them 24x7. They spend at most 6 hours a day one on one with them. I don't think it would even be healthy to be this invested and involved in every breath your child takes.

This is just not true.

+1. I can’t believe how many insecure moms are responding. Working and stay at home moms are not monolithic groups. Just because you know someone who does x does not mean that applies to all individuals in that group. The idea that working moms spend 30 minutes a day with their kids is as ludicrous as the idea that sahm spend 6 hours a day with their kids.

All of the insecure posts on here mostly directed as stay at home moms (I WFH) are insane though. Someone was offended that a poster said working moms gave up time with their kids and stay at home moms gave up status and financial security. And some crazed working mom wrote that she was insulted that someone would say working moms gave up time with their kids by working. I mean, how is it an insult to (checks notes) *state facts* unless you are so insecure that you can’t handle the truth.

So many women feel insulted by the “strangers raising my kid” comment because they feel that it is a personal attack on them and they are in complete denial about the fact that by working they spend less time with their children. Initially there were the people claiming they and their spouse worked full time and their child only had a nanny between 11-12 and 3-5 (because we all know it’s super common for children to take a three hour nap in the middle of the day from birth to five while you work and run errands🙄 and that so many nannies will accept a shambolic schedule) and since those ridiculous examples didn’t withstand scrutiny then it was the ad hominem “you dumb” after every valid argument and finally it’s this ridiculous argument that stay at home moms spend 6 hours with their kids a day (because if you’re a working parent in an office and your child naps it’s like you are right there taking care of them for all [insert unbelievably high made up number] hours they nap during the day, but if you’re a stay at home mom and your child naps you are not parenting them). It’s been illogical from the start but at this point it’s farcical too.

If you are talking about my post then you have reading comprehension issues because 1) I stated that my DH and I staggered schedules so that one left late and the other one came back early, 2) it was a 2-hour nap not 3 hours, and 3) We hired a nanny for 6 hours a day but she helped with housework when she wasn’t actively taking care of our kid.

And yes, it is perfectly reasonable to expect a child to take a 2-hour nap until age ~4 or so. Some don’t but most do.

So just call yourself a SAHM. What’s the difference?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All these posts "I work while my child sleeps and I spend all the waking moments with them along with my DH who also works unicorn hours. When they are preschool age we choose the best school ever....."
It's not real life, 99% of jobs are not like that and both parents equally parenting is difficult to manage too. Aren't parents often complaining about getting their spouse to take on more. I don't think the unicorn perfect parents of the world realize that most people cannot just "choose" this setup

Similarly

"I SAHM with my children, I even sleep with them to maximize my time "raising" them" ... I don't shower or cook or clean or workout or run errands or take walks or go on dates or see friends or do girls weekend or vacatino with my H or visit family without them or get sick or let my H take them or let them do independent play ever so I'm never away from them. I would never spend 1 hour away let alone 3 that is reducing my "raising" time by 20%. I spaced my kids perfectly so my toddler would never take time away from my infant."

It's not real life, 99% of SAHM's are doing stuff without their children for hours a day, they are not with them 24x7. They spend at most 6 hours a day one on one with them. I don't think it would even be healthy to be this invested and involved in every breath your child takes.

This is just not true.

+1. I can’t believe how many insecure moms are responding. Working and stay at home moms are not monolithic groups. Just because you know someone who does x does not mean that applies to all individuals in that group. The idea that working moms spend 30 minutes a day with their kids is as ludicrous as the idea that sahm spend 6 hours a day with their kids.

All of the insecure posts on here mostly directed as stay at home moms (I WFH) are insane though. Someone was offended that a poster said working moms gave up time with their kids and stay at home moms gave up status and financial security. And some crazed working mom wrote that she was insulted that someone would say working moms gave up time with their kids by working. I mean, how is it an insult to (checks notes) *state facts* unless you are so insecure that you can’t handle the truth.

So many women feel insulted by the “strangers raising my kid” comment because they feel that it is a personal attack on them and they are in complete denial about the fact that by working they spend less time with their children. Initially there were the people claiming they and their spouse worked full time and their child only had a nanny between 11-12 and 3-5 (because we all know it’s super common for children to take a three hour nap in the middle of the day from birth to five while you work and run errands🙄 and that so many nannies will accept a shambolic schedule) and since those ridiculous examples didn’t withstand scrutiny then it was the ad hominem “you dumb” after every valid argument and finally it’s this ridiculous argument that stay at home moms spend 6 hours with their kids a day (because if you’re a working parent in an office and your child naps it’s like you are right there taking care of them for all [insert unbelievably high made up number] hours they nap during the day, but if you’re a stay at home mom and your child naps you are not parenting them). It’s been illogical from the start but at this point it’s farcical too.

If you are talking about my post then you have reading comprehension issues because 1) I stated that my DH and I staggered schedules so that one left late and the other one came back early, 2) it was a 2-hour nap not 3 hours, and 3) We hired a nanny for 6 hours a day but she helped with housework when she wasn’t actively taking care of our kid.

And yes, it is perfectly reasonable to expect a child to take a 2-hour nap until age ~4 or so. Some don’t but most do.

So just call yourself a SAHM. What’s the difference?

Because I was not… I was a WOHM who made $200k+.

Why are you so antagonistic about this? It’s a good thing when working parents are able to flex their schedules to spend a ton of time with their kids. Maybe not as much as SAHPs (I didn’t claim to do so in my original post) but still a solid chunk so that they feel really connected with their kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All these posts "I work while my child sleeps and I spend all the waking moments with them along with my DH who also works unicorn hours. When they are preschool age we choose the best school ever....."
It's not real life, 99% of jobs are not like that and both parents equally parenting is difficult to manage too. Aren't parents often complaining about getting their spouse to take on more. I don't think the unicorn perfect parents of the world realize that most people cannot just "choose" this setup

Similarly

"I SAHM with my children, I even sleep with them to maximize my time "raising" them" ... I don't shower or cook or clean or workout or run errands or take walks or go on dates or see friends or do girls weekend or vacatino with my H or visit family without them or get sick or let my H take them or let them do independent play ever so I'm never away from them. I would never spend 1 hour away let alone 3 that is reducing my "raising" time by 20%. I spaced my kids perfectly so my toddler would never take time away from my infant."

It's not real life, 99% of SAHM's are doing stuff without their children for hours a day, they are not with them 24x7. They spend at most 6 hours a day one on one with them. I don't think it would even be healthy to be this invested and involved in every breath your child takes.

This is just not true.

+1. I can’t believe how many insecure moms are responding. Working and stay at home moms are not monolithic groups. Just because you know someone who does x does not mean that applies to all individuals in that group. The idea that working moms spend 30 minutes a day with their kids is as ludicrous as the idea that sahm spend 6 hours a day with their kids.

All of the insecure posts on here mostly directed as stay at home moms (I WFH) are insane though. Someone was offended that a poster said working moms gave up time with their kids and stay at home moms gave up status and financial security. And some crazed working mom wrote that she was insulted that someone would say working moms gave up time with their kids by working. I mean, how is it an insult to (checks notes) *state facts* unless you are so insecure that you can’t handle the truth.

So many women feel insulted by the “strangers raising my kid” comment because they feel that it is a personal attack on them and they are in complete denial about the fact that by working they spend less time with their children. Initially there were the people claiming they and their spouse worked full time and their child only had a nanny between 11-12 and 3-5 (because we all know it’s super common for children to take a three hour nap in the middle of the day from birth to five while you work and run errands🙄 and that so many nannies will accept a shambolic schedule) and since those ridiculous examples didn’t withstand scrutiny then it was the ad hominem “you dumb” after every valid argument and finally it’s this ridiculous argument that stay at home moms spend 6 hours with their kids a day (because if you’re a working parent in an office and your child naps it’s like you are right there taking care of them for all [insert unbelievably high made up number] hours they nap during the day, but if you’re a stay at home mom and your child naps you are not parenting them). It’s been illogical from the start but at this point it’s farcical too.

If you are talking about my post then you have reading comprehension issues because 1) I stated that my DH and I staggered schedules so that one left late and the other one came back early, 2) it was a 2-hour nap not 3 hours, and 3) We hired a nanny for 6 hours a day but she helped with housework when she wasn’t actively taking care of our kid.

And yes, it is perfectly reasonable to expect a child to take a 2-hour nap until age ~4 or so. Some don’t but most do.

So just call yourself a SAHM. What’s the difference?

Because I was not… I was a WOHM who made $200k+.

Why are you so antagonistic about this? It’s a good thing when working parents are able to flex their schedules to spend a ton of time with their kids. Maybe not as much as SAHPs (I didn’t claim to do so in my original post) but still a solid chunk so that they feel really connected with their kids.

Work out of home but spends the same amount of time at home. Ok.

[Anonymous]

^ And I love that my kids were able to spend a ton of time one-on-one with me in the morning and DH in the evening. It played to both of our strengths bc I’m good at planning fun outings, while he excels in making the dinner/bath routine enjoyable. We both did bedtime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^ And I love that my kids were able to spend a ton of time one-on-one with me in the morning and DH in the evening. It played to both of our strengths bc I’m good at planning fun outings, while he excels in making the dinner/bath routine enjoyable. We both did bedtime.

So why do care about the comment the OP is talking about that has nothing to do with you? Your insecurity and defensiveness really don’t square with what you’re saying.