A question for you "gender traditionalist" women

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I stay home so my husband can focus 100% on work.

Good for you. That alone doesn't really add value to this discussion. Is he an involved father? Does he want to be? If so, does he feel like he can take time off work or ask for flexibility to do so?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I stay home so my husband can focus 100% on work.

Good for you. That alone doesn't really add value to this discussion. Is he an involved father? Does he want to be? If so, does he feel like he can take time off work or ask for flexibility to do so?

No, he would never take off work just to pal around with the kids. That's what weekends are for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a SAHM but I've seen plenty of posts from SAHMs on here saying they would love their DHs to pitch in with household help and be more of an "involved parent."

I think you are being very reductionist.

How so? I think you have your head in the sand. I think these women chose a traditional gender breakdown and now they want to have their cake and eat it too. All the while snarking away at WOHM's and making judgment calls about their commitment to their children. What they don't get is that we are sharing the load with husbands who respect the fact that we have careers, too. And that as wives and mothers it pisses us off when our husbands are treated like pansies for wanting flexibility in their work, too.

?

Well, I hate to burst the bubble but I'm a SAHM with a very involved DH, who actually RESPECTS me...can you believe it!? Even though I "only" stay home. We treat each other with love and respect and we both value each other. We just decided that instead of paying someone else to watch our kids while they were small I'd do it. He would be a great SAHD, but he makes significantly more money. He is in a higher paying field than I am trained in, but I will return to work once our children are in elementary school.

Why are you holding onto the antiquated idea that all SAHM's believe in some 50's ideal of gender values? Oh I get it...in your worldview you can't possibly put aside a career for a few years, male or female, to take care of children and still be worthy of respect. On DCUM you either put ambition above all else, or you are an anti-feminist.

That's great for you, PP. I don't think that every SAHM is an antiquated Betty Draper. But your husband has never had to drop everything to pick up a sick kid from school, no, since that is your role? Many men I know from dual-income households like mine (including my poor DH) dread having to do that b/c they are made to feel guilty, as if they are letting their employer down. They are not celebrated for being a great dad. You have missed my point completely - my DH and I most decidedly DO NOT PUT AMBITION ABOVE ALL ELSE. We value our careers AND our family. We don't work 80 hours a week, don't bring work home, and arrange our schedules to be home in time for dinner every night. It would be nice if employers didn't make you feel like a lesser part of the team for NOT putting ambition above all else. And the reality is that men who focus 100% on their career because their wife is at home managing the household and taking care of the kids frequently do not get men like my husband and in fact make their life hell at work. Whether they or their wives realize it or not, they are perpetuating traditional gender stereotypes for all of us. I don't have to appreciate their efforts. That's my point.

All right, I understand what you are saying, and I agree with you. Someone...name escapes me...wrote a book a few years ago that started a firestorm. But the general idea was...when women on a career track to upper management marry men with higher earning power they leave the work place, often after the second kid. So the women don't make it as frequently into upper management and then men who are there aren't dealing with the demands of a dual income working family. They don't have to do the things you mention; take sick leave when kids are sick, prioritize their family, etc.... So they don't work hard to create family friendly work environments because they themselves don't need one and wouldn't even know what would be required.

I get that. I'm not sure people who make it into upper management would honestly be that different if they had a dual income family though. I think those kind of people are so driven that they just aren't the kind of people who take off work when the kids are sick. If the wife (or husband) weren't doing it the nanny would be. You see what I'm saying? I'm not sure that even if your DH's boss had a wife who worked that he'd be any more sympathetic to your DH and the plight of working men and women who want balance. If their wife wasn't home to take care of things they'd hire someone else to do it.

I guess maybe it just takes more and more dual income families who do want balance demanding it over time to make changes. Honestly as time goes on there are fewer and fewer "career" SAHM's anyway. By that I mean women who SAH and never return to work. There is so much fluidity now in people's work and life that the 50's model is outdated for most people, even women who may be SAH for a season. Like me. And I am a feminist and do believe women belong in the work place...good lord that should go without saying.

By the way my DH does take time off for our kids for many reasons (recitals, co-oping at the preschool, having lunch with school aged DD, when I'm sick) so even dads with SAH wives OFTEN want family friendly work places; granted his needs right now are different than two income families (which we once were and will be again).

Thank you for a well thought out response. I'll admit I was being purposely provocative in my original post, but you are absolutely right that dads should have the flexibility to be engaged dads whether their wives work outside the home or not. And sadly, your points about upper management not getting it anyway are well taken; gender and class issues are of course fully intertwined.

Frankly, a reasonable woman like you was not the type I was trying to provoke. There have been plenty of posters in these debates who judge WOHM's from their soap box of superior femininity and motherhood, who are proud that they allow their husbands to focus entirely on their careers. I actually don't give a damn if or why you choose to stay home; I think you have the right and I'm not going to judge you for it if it works for your family and makes you happy. But the assumption that all women and, by extension all men, want that kind of traditional gender breakdown is misguided. My point was that there are many, many men who want an equal partner. They don't want the pressure of being the sole breadwinner, AND they want to be involved with their kids. My view is that these conservative traditionalists - and especially men with those views - perpetuate a working culture that is either hostile to or incompatible with what many modern men want for their careers, their families and their lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I stay home so my husband can focus 100% on work.

Good for you. That alone doesn't really add value to this discussion. Is he an involved father? Does he want to be? If so, does he feel like he can take time off work or ask for flexibility to do so?

No, he would never take off work just to pal around with the kids. That's what weekends are for.

"Pal around?" Is that what you do at home all day? He would never take time off work to go on a field trip, or attend a meeting at school?

So is he one of the men I was alluding to, who makes men in his office who DO want to do those things feel like they are not "real men" and are not worthy of professional respect? I'm guessing the answer is likely yes based on your flip response.

[Anonymous]

The problem with your thinking is that you are assuming that everyone involved in your husband's work situation has kids. I was a childless working adult for almost twenty years and I did get tired of parents (both men and women) taking the attitude (and it was usually only a small subset that did this) that their family needs trump everyone else's. Sure sometimes we all need personal time and flexibility, but why should I have to work until 7 every night so that you can get home to have dinner with your kids or make a daycare pick up. I don't care if you want to leave early and then work those extra three hours in the evening, nut I don't want to do 60 hours of work to your 40 if we are going to be paid the same salary. Everybody makes their own choices, but you can't make other people responsible for your choices. If your husband is routinely leaving early because of sick kids, he should also be routinely staying late to pull his weight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The problem with your thinking is that you are assuming that everyone involved in your husband's work situation has kids. I was a childless working adult for almost twenty years and I did get tired of parents (both men and women) taking the attitude (and it was usually only a small subset that did this) that their family needs trump everyone else's. Sure sometimes we all need personal time and flexibility, but why should I have to work until 7 every night so that you can get home to have dinner with your kids or make a daycare pick up. I don't care if you want to leave early and then work those extra three hours in the evening, nut I don't want to do 60 hours of work to your 40 if we are going to be paid the same salary. Everybody makes their own choices, but you can't make other people responsible for your choices. If your husband is routinely leaving early because of sick kids, he should also be routinely staying late to pull his weight.

Yeah, childless adults don't need a life outside the workplace.

The problem lies either with eager beavers who want to work 60 hours and then think everyone else has to work 60 hours, or with a work system that assumes everyone has to work 60 hours -- the eternal crunch mode. The studies have long been known -- productivity tails off after 7-8 hours regardless of the field.

But blame parents and those who think it's abnormal to be working more than 45 hours a week on a routine basis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with your thinking is that you are assuming that everyone involved in your husband's work situation has kids. I was a childless working adult for almost twenty years and I did get tired of parents (both men and women) taking the attitude (and it was usually only a small subset that did this) that their family needs trump everyone else's. Sure sometimes we all need personal time and flexibility, but why should I have to work until 7 every night so that you can get home to have dinner with your kids or make a daycare pick up. I don't care if you want to leave early and then work those extra three hours in the evening, nut I don't want to do 60 hours of work to your 40 if we are going to be paid the same salary. Everybody makes their own choices, but you can't make other people responsible for your choices. If your husband is routinely leaving early because of sick kids, he should also be routinely staying late to pull his weight.

Yeah, childless adults don't need a life outside the workplace.

The problem lies either with eager beavers who want to work 60 hours and then think everyone else has to work 60 hours, or with a work system that assumes everyone has to work 60 hours -- the eternal crunch mode. The studies have long been known -- productivity tails off after 7-8 hours regardless of the field.

But blame parents and those who think it's abnormal to be working more than 45 hours a week on a routine basis.

BING BING BING! The childless need not weigh in. . .I'm not trying to have this particular debate with you and your premises are not valid anyway as PP correctly implies. I worked for someone like you. . .she was miserable and hated her life. Not exactly something to strive for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The problem with your thinking is that you are assuming that everyone involved in your husband's work situation has kids. I was a childless working adult for almost twenty years and I did get tired of parents (both men and women) taking the attitude (and it was usually only a small subset that did this) that their family needs trump everyone else's. Sure sometimes we all need personal time and flexibility, but why should I have to work until 7 every night so that you can get home to have dinner with your kids or make a daycare pick up. I don't care if you want to leave early and then work those extra three hours in the evening, nut I don't want to do 60 hours of work to your 40 if we are going to be paid the same salary. Everybody makes their own choices, but you can't make other people responsible for your choices. If your husband is routinely leaving early because of sick kids, he should also be routinely staying late to pull his weight.

Furthermore, I just have to say that one of the many problems with YOUR thinking is that work can only be done in the office. It's the 21st century, dude, and we have this amazing advancement called technology that allows me to do my job anywhere.

[Anonymous]

All right, I understand what you are saying, and I agree with you. Someone...name escapes me...wrote a book a few years ago that started a firestorm. But the general idea was...when women on a career track to upper management marry men with higher earning power they leave the work place, often after the second kid. So the women don't make it as frequently into upper management and then men who are there aren't dealing with the demands of a dual income working family. They don't have to do the things you mention; take sick leave when kids are sick, prioritize their family, etc.... So they don't work hard to create family friendly work environments because they themselves don't need one and wouldn't even know what would be required.

I think you're thinking of this book:
http://www.amazon.com/Get-Work-Life-Before-Late/dp/014303894X

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with your thinking is that you are assuming that everyone involved in your husband's work situation has kids. I was a childless working adult for almost twenty years and I did get tired of parents (both men and women) taking the attitude (and it was usually only a small subset that did this) that their family needs trump everyone else's. Sure sometimes we all need personal time and flexibility, but why should I have to work until 7 every night so that you can get home to have dinner with your kids or make a daycare pick up. I don't care if you want to leave early and then work those extra three hours in the evening, nut I don't want to do 60 hours of work to your 40 if we are going to be paid the same salary. Everybody makes their own choices, but you can't make other people responsible for your choices. If your husband is routinely leaving early because of sick kids, he should also be routinely staying late to pull his weight.

Furthermore, I just have to say that one of the many problems with YOUR thinking is that work can only be done in the office. It's the 21st century, dude, and we have this amazing advancement called technology that allows me to do my job anywhere.

I'm not thinking that work can only be done in the office and I said that one solution is that her husband can work at home to make up the time. To the PP who said that it is about eager beavers. It sometimes isn't. If there is 100 hours of work a week to be done by two people, then why isn't it reasonable for each person to be expected to do 50 hours regardless of their other obligations? I don't know what fields you all work in, but I have had professional jobs in several related fields and none of them have had a strict 40 hour a week limit. There is always bleed over work when you are a professional who earns a salary and doesn't get paid by the hour. My problem with the OP is that she seems to think that the problem in the workforce is men with SAHWs who have children. The problem is much bigger than that, especially since many people in the work don't have spouses or children. I do think that we work too much in this country. However, if you take a job that has X about of responsibility, you have to be prepared to do X amount of work. Your other choices are your choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with your thinking is that you are assuming that everyone involved in your husband's work situation has kids. I was a childless working adult for almost twenty years and I did get tired of parents (both men and women) taking the attitude (and it was usually only a small subset that did this) that their family needs trump everyone else's. Sure sometimes we all need personal time and flexibility, but why should I have to work until 7 every night so that you can get home to have dinner with your kids or make a daycare pick up. I don't care if you want to leave early and then work those extra three hours in the evening, nut I don't want to do 60 hours of work to your 40 if we are going to be paid the same salary. Everybody makes their own choices, but you can't make other people responsible for your choices. If your husband is routinely leaving early because of sick kids, he should also be routinely staying late to pull his weight.

Furthermore, I just have to say that one of the many problems with YOUR thinking is that work can only be done in the office. It's the 21st century, dude, and we have this amazing advancement called technology that allows me to do my job anywhere.

I'm not thinking that work can only be done in the office and I said that one solution is that her husband can work at home to make up the time. To the PP who said that it is about eager beavers. It sometimes isn't. If there is 100 hours of work a week to be done by two people, then why isn't it reasonable for each person to be expected to do 50 hours regardless of their other obligations? I don't know what fields you all work in, but I have had professional jobs in several related fields and none of them have had a strict 40 hour a week limit. There is always bleed over work when you are a professional who earns a salary and doesn't get paid by the hour. My problem with the OP is that she seems to think that the problem in the workforce is men with SAHWs who have children. The problem is much bigger than that, especially since many people in the work don't have spouses or children. I do think that we work too much in this country. However, if you take a job that has X about of responsibility, you have to be prepared to do X amount of work. Your other choices are your choices.

Then you are obviously assuming that parents who request time off to take care of a sick child or the like aren't actually doing this. And you'd be wrong. So are you just pissed that they are not chained to the office and you are? Or what? Because if you are okay with people making up work at home, and they are in fact doing this, then your beef is. . . . .what, exactly?

Thanks, BTW, for being part of the problem I was pointing out. Should the parents in your office make you feel like an ass when you request time off to take care of a dying parent, or get treatment for cancer, or whatever life throws at you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not thinking that work can only be done in the office and I said that one solution is that her husband can work at home to make up the time. To the PP who said that it is about eager beavers. It sometimes isn't. If there is 100 hours of work a week to be done by two people, then why isn't it reasonable for each person to be expected to do 50 hours regardless of their other obligations? I don't know what fields you all work in, but I have had professional jobs in several related fields and none of them have had a strict 40 hour a week limit. There is always bleed over work when you are a professional who earns a salary and doesn't get paid by the hour. My problem with the OP is that she seems to think that the problem in the workforce is men with SAHWs who have children. The problem is much bigger than that, especially since many people in the work don't have spouses or children. I do think that we work too much in this country. However, if you take a job that has X about of responsibility, you have to be prepared to do X amount of work. Your other choices are your choices.

I work in IT. I worked for 10 years at a place where it was 37.5 hours a week minimum, and I'd rarely work more than 50 hours. At this job, it's 40 hours minimum and again, rarely more than 50 hours.

The downside? I make just under six figures, and have to live in the hinterlands, keeping you DCUMers safe from the Visiginian and Fredneck heathens. But I do make enough to have a giant inflatable Santa in my front yard. Yee-haw!

OTOH, I work in the hinterlands too and probably won't need to go further in than Tysons/Rockville for the rest of my career.

Again, study after study has shown productivity slumps off after 7-8 hours of working a day. Hopefully you're making really good money, because if you're making $70-$120k a year, your work is taking advantage of you.

[Anonymous]

I am one of these non-gender traditional fathers. And I am not sure I really agree with the premise that it is people in traditional gender roles that make life difficult for people like me.

I have found women bosses, and male bosses with working wives, to be just as good/bad as male bosses whose wives stay at home. Some people have live-in nannies that they rely on.

At the end of the day the trick is to find a work situation where they care about quality of output and allow you the flexibility you need on when and how you do it. Fortunately, in DC at least, I think that is relatively easy to do. I also happen to think that people work too much overall here, but that is a different story.

[Anonymous]

I do agree that a gender traditionalist wife and mom sort of puts her DH in a box if he wants to be more flexible, share the income-earning, and share the time with the kids:

Wife: "No, no, really, honey, I got it, you just go to work. I'll do everythign else."

DH: "Umm, but I want to see the kids more than just late at night and on weekends? Can I chaperone some field trips? Maybe we can go 1/2 and 1/2?"

Wife: "NO! I don't want to work outside the home! You just go to work and stay there until I tell you it's time to come home for your hot dinner!"

DH: (Sad) "Oh. . okay. . ."

I just spit my coffee out laughing. Come on, no dad or mom is every going to have that conversation. I don't care whether you work our of the home or one parent stays at home. No one is every angling for more kid care or field trip duty time. This doesn't mean that parents don't want to spend time with kids or do things but the reality is that most parents feel overwhelmed with the amount of kid, work, and housework that they already are doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am one of these non-gender traditional fathers. And I am not sure I really agree with the premise that it is people in traditional gender roles that make life difficult for people like me.

I have found women bosses, and male bosses with working wives, to be just as good/bad as male bosses whose wives stay at home. Some people have live-in nannies that they rely on.

At the end of the day the trick is to find a work situation where they care about quality of output and allow you the flexibility you need on when and how you do it. Fortunately, in DC at least, I think that is relatively easy to do. I also happen to think that people work too much overall here, but that is a different story.

OP here. I hear you, and I concede your point. It's the posters like "Mrs. I stay home so my husband doesn't have to pal around with the kids" whose skin I was trying to get under. Because I do think they contribute to the culture and their judgmental POV pisses me off, frankly.

And you are right about finding the right work environment, but I don't necessarily agree that it is easy to do. I've had several jobs in the time I've been in DC and my current is the first where work/life balance is truly extended to everyone, regardless of your personal life situation.