SAHMs and marriage dynamics?

[Anonymous]

People and their circumstances are different and both keep changing with time, what works for one family at one time, not necessarily a formula for all families all the time.

Do what works best for you now and change if its not working anymore. By keeping one foot in your professional field with part time work, continuing education courses, networking etc can open doors when you need to go back.

That and always keep an emergency fund of six months expenses.

[Anonymous]

If neither parent wants to be there for the children, may be you are career oriented people not children oriented people. There is nothing wrong with that. You don't have to have children. Just foster from time to time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If neither parent wants to be there for the children, may be you are career oriented people not children oriented people. There is nothing wrong with that. You don't have to have children. Just foster from time to time.

Definitely. On my unemployed people should have kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If neither parent wants to be there for the children, may be you are career oriented people not children oriented people. There is nothing wrong with that. You don't have to have children. Just foster from time to time.

Definitely. On my unemployed people should have kids.

Nothing about our political economy post-industrial revolution is conducive to raising children or future citizens. Not a whole lot we can do about it since govts will always put short-term GDP over the health of it's citizens but the mommy wars are a welcome distraction for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If neither parent wants to be there for the children, may be you are career oriented people not children oriented people. There is nothing wrong with that. You don't have to have children. Just foster from time to time.

Definitely. On my unemployed people should have kids.

Nothing about our political economy post-industrial revolution is conducive to raising children or future citizens. Not a whole lot we can do about it since govts will always put short-term GDP over the health of it's citizens but the mommy wars are a welcome distraction for them.

Yes who cares about GDP! We should just be like North Korea with a low GDP and everything could be a lot better. Who cares about the amount of available food, medical technologies, transportation, vacations, the iPhone you’re typing on, ability to forecast weather etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If neither parent wants to be there for the children, may be you are career oriented people not children oriented people. There is nothing wrong with that. You don't have to have children. Just foster from time to time.

Definitely. On my unemployed people should have kids.

Nothing about our political economy post-industrial revolution is conducive to raising children or future citizens. Not a whole lot we can do about it since govts will always put short-term GDP over the health of its citizens but the mommy wars are a welcome distraction for them.

What a strange take. Modern technologies and conveniences allow women to spend more time with their children than ever before. Besides the fact now children have a much better chance of surviving childhood, mothers surviving childbirth, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a big law partner and a lot of my male colleagues have wives who are SAHMs. I'm not super involved in their marriages, obviously, but just from hearing how they talk amongst themselves, it seems like a lot of them lose respect for their wives. All conversations become about the kids or the household, and they start seeing their wives more as a mother to their kids than a true partner and equal. They do love their wives, and I think their marriages are mostly happy, but it does sometimes feel like they see their colleagues (male and female) as their peers and their wives as a step beneath - and that's with the good ones. As you probably know, cheating is rampant in big law. This may be unique to law, and big law in particular, where people tend to make their career their personality and most of their self worth.

I work in law and I have seen this too.

I’ve also seen men who work crazy hours be derisive about the fact that their sahm wife who’s doing ninety percent of the childcare has child care help. “Can’t believe we have a nanny so my wife can go to the gym.” I work and don’t even have kids but I always tuck such comments away as evidence that the guy is kind of an ass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a big law partner and a lot of my male colleagues have wives who are SAHMs. I'm not super involved in their marriages, obviously, but just from hearing how they talk amongst themselves, it seems like a lot of them lose respect for their wives. All conversations become about the kids or the household, and they start seeing their wives more as a mother to their kids than a true partner and equal. They do love their wives, and I think their marriages are mostly happy, but it does sometimes feel like they see their colleagues (male and female) as their peers and their wives as a step beneath - and that's with the good ones. As you probably know, cheating is rampant in big law. This may be unique to law, and big law in particular, where people tend to make their career their personality and most of their self worth.

I work in law and I have seen this too.

I’ve also seen men who work crazy hours be derisive about the fact that their sahm wife who’s doing ninety percent of the childcare has child care help. “Can’t believe we have a nanny so my wife can go to the gym.” I work and don’t even have kids but I always tuck such comments away as evidence that the guy is kind of an ass.

Well, I think the issue is that in 2023, law firm partnership is increasingly comprised of women, or men with wives who work. So the partners with Sahws are no longer the norm. And these guys are seeing themselves surrounded by dual working couples who have happy marriages and kids. Then their wife complains to them every day about how tired she is, and how she needs more help, and the guy starts to realize his wife may be a little disappointing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think many of you are equating income to power, and I just don’t see that in my family, at least. Power in what way? To make decisions? No. That’s not how it works. Usually the SAH parent makes most of the decisions.

OP. Actually one of the reasons I posted was because a friend who’s a SAHM recently told me she wanted a second kid but her husband didn’t so they didn’t have one. Seems like she’s pretty sad about it. I don’t know exactly how it went down but I can imagine her husband thinking he has the final say because he makes money? Not sure.

I don’t think it’s unusual for people to not completely agree on the number of children, and for the person who wanted more to be sad about it. I don’t think it has anything to do with the finances of it. I do think that a lot of women who want to be SAHMs really do enjoy babies and little kids and being part of that mother-child dyad. If her child is getting older than four or five, your friend might just be sad that this part of her life is over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If neither parent wants to be there for the children, may be you are career oriented people not children oriented people. There is nothing wrong with that. You don't have to have children. Just foster from time to time.

It’s not black and white. You can be career oriented and also want to be there for your kids. I’m guessing you’re either a SAHM who doesn’t have much earning potential or you don’t have kids. Could be wrong, but your post is strange.

[Anonymous]

This is very individual. I’ve been a SAHM for 12 years, pretty much our whole marriage. We both spend whatever money we want and don’t need permission from the other.

I do most of the household work and childcare, because I’m home to do it. But when DH comes home from work, he is either helping with the kids or chores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a big law partner and a lot of my male colleagues have wives who are SAHMs. I'm not super involved in their marriages, obviously, but just from hearing how they talk amongst themselves, it seems like a lot of them lose respect for their wives. All conversations become about the kids or the household, and they start seeing their wives more as a mother to their kids than a true partner and equal. They do love their wives, and I think their marriages are mostly happy, but it does sometimes feel like they see their colleagues (male and female) as their peers and their wives as a step beneath - and that's with the good ones. As you probably know, cheating is rampant in big law. This may be unique to law, and big law in particular, where people tend to make their career their personality and most of their self worth.

I work in law and I have seen this too.

I’ve also seen men who work crazy hours be derisive about the fact that their sahm wife who’s doing ninety percent of the childcare has child care help. “Can’t believe we have a nanny so my wife can go to the gym.” I work and don’t even have kids but I always tuck such comments away as evidence that the guy is kind of an ass.

Well, I think the issue is that in 2023, law firm partnership is increasingly comprised of women, or men with wives who work. So the partners with Sahws are no longer the norm. And these guys are seeing themselves surrounded by dual working couples who have happy marriages and kids. Then their wife complains to them every day about how tired she is, and how she needs more help, and the guy starts to realize his wife may be a little disappointing.

I am a partner at a law firm and my wife only works part time for a nonprofit legal org and is otherwise a SAHM. I don't feel this way at all. I look at the two working parent families and there is far more tension than in my marriage, and the kids in those families act, by and large, as if they're both coddled and neglected. I can't believe how much time these kids spend with nannies who are poorly educated and seem to make little effort to discipline the kids. So, yes, my wife is a lawyer and could make a lot more money, but I'd rather have her available for the kids (and family more generally) and am happy she wants to do that. And she can spend whatever she wants, although she's pretty practical and frugal by nature.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If neither parent wants to be there for the children, may be you are career oriented people not children oriented people. There is nothing wrong with that. You don't have to have children. Just foster from time to time.

Definitely. On my unemployed people should have kids.

Nothing about our political economy post-industrial revolution is conducive to raising children or future citizens. Not a whole lot we can do about it since govts will always put short-term GDP over the health of its citizens but the mommy wars are a welcome distraction for them.

What a strange take. Modern technologies and conveniences allow women to spend more time with their children than ever before. Besides the fact now children have a much better chance of surviving childhood, mothers surviving childbirth, etc.

I just meant that the industrial revolution decoupled home life from work life dramatically and in ways that we're still reeling from.

[Anonymous]

Ultimately, every marriage would be destroyed in this kind of situation. Men just don’t find it attractive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ultimately, every marriage would be destroyed in this kind of situation. Men just don’t find it attractive.

That doesn’t make any sense. The primary role of a wife was to raise kids and maintain the household since the beginning of time. Yes some women worked outside of the home or somehow earned a living, but the identity of a wife was raising kids and taking care of the home.

That’s why I don’t really buy the posts saying men are turned off by a SAHM and want a professional woman who looks good in meetings. This goes against biological desire. A woman having a high earning job in an office is something relatively new. To say that now a man wants that sexually is too much of a change in a short period of time.