If women could go back in time

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would they still fight for workforce accessibility/equality or accept that stay at home mom is better than working a full time job and not seeing their kids grow up? Did it provide the happiness it promised?

Saw this question being asked and I know what I would choose

Clueless premise. One-income families (e.g., father works, mother stays home) started disappearing in the late 70s, were in free-fall in the 80s, and gone by the 90s. The another 30 years went by. The corporations won.

https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/

Hate to break it to you but SAHMs are alive and well in higher education, higher income areas. My neighborhood and my sister's neighborhood are full of them, and we live several states apart.

SAHM w 2-4 kids is common in the south where you sorority sister marry a frat guy who will work for his dad.

Not common on the east or west coast.

Hahahaha. Says the poor. It's 100% alive and real among very well educated women who marry well.

I didn’t see this as a majority nor large minority when we lived and worked in Boston, NYC nor Wash DC.

Only in Dallas.

And I work in tech so never see this in The Bay Area either.

Maybe we’re defining well educated differently or running in different u grad and grad circles, as well as different DC area neighborhoods, schools and kid ECs entirely.

Agree. SAHM w/multiple degrees from elite schools. We are out there but not common.

I don’t know how this turned into an “elite degree” contest. I am one of the early posters and college-educated SAHM’s in the $250k+ household income level are still very very common. Definitely until the youngest starts kindergarten and then some do go back, but usually part-time or flexible. Maybe this is less common among rocket scientists, I don’t know. I live in the suburbs, so maybe it’s a function of that too, but many many families who have the means to make this choice, are.

It's not a contest. We are just sharing our various experiences within our own peer groups.

It's not that common in my circles. <10%

[Anonymous]

I know I would not do well as a SAHM and that life is not for me.

When I was younger I thought that if I ever did want to stay home, it would be fine.

As I have gotten older I see it as such a huge risk that I would never take. It surprises me that I feel this way, but I have seen so many marriages go to hell seemingly out of nowhere, so you CANNOT lose your ability to support yourself. As other posters have noted, it fundamentally changes the power dynamic of the marriage to have only one breadwinner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a SAHM, I would love it if most women were still SAHMs. There would be more people around and we could do more things during the day like PTO, book clubs, lunches, etc. Also there wouldn't be this pressure to "go back to work" when the kids are older the way there is now. I've managed to work just very part time at a school, but I feel like there is this expectation that because my kids are older I should be back at work. Also, if most families only had one income, there would be less of a competitive "arms race" so to speak on buying kids stuff and experiences. Housing and other prices wouldn't have been driven so high either.

But mostly I would just love it if I were EXPECTED to stay at home, rather than bucking some trend.

I get what you are saying. I think the problem now is that you are kind of considered a loser if you “only” aspire to take care of your family, home, etc. And now if you do that without marrying a male 1%er, you are putting your family at a distinct disadvantage financially relative to all the dual-earning families. At the same time, do I want to revert to not being able to own property, etc? NO. I also don’t want to be treated as though I’m a smaller less hairy man. I’m not a man! I have different fundamental desires/drives, and one of them is to be the primary caretaker of my kids.

That's more of an American perspective . Lots of international women are proud to be a stay at home mom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a SAHM, I would love it if most women were still SAHMs. There would be more people around and we could do more things during the day like PTO, book clubs, lunches, etc. Also there wouldn't be this pressure to "go back to work" when the kids are older the way there is now. I've managed to work just very part time at a school, but I feel like there is this expectation that because my kids are older I should be back at work. Also, if most families only had one income, there would be less of a competitive "arms race" so to speak on buying kids stuff and experiences. Housing and other prices wouldn't have been driven so high either.

But mostly I would just love it if I were EXPECTED to stay at home, rather than bucking some trend.

I get what you are saying. I think the problem now is that you are kind of considered a loser if you “only” aspire to take care of your family, home, etc. And now if you do that without marrying a male 1%er, you are putting your family at a distinct disadvantage financially relative to all the dual-earning families. At the same time, do I want to revert to not being able to own property, etc? NO. I also don’t want to be treated as though I’m a smaller less hairy man. I’m not a man! I have different fundamental desires/drives, and one of them is to be the primary caretaker of my kids.

That's more of an American perspective . Lots of international women are proud to be a stay at home mom.

Those are countries with a more non-negotiable patriarchy or with some kind of social safety need that makes up for the some of the income loss of a nonworking mother.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a SAHM, I would love it if most women were still SAHMs. There would be more people around and we could do more things during the day like PTO, book clubs, lunches, etc. Also there wouldn't be this pressure to "go back to work" when the kids are older the way there is now. I've managed to work just very part time at a school, but I feel like there is this expectation that because my kids are older I should be back at work. Also, if most families only had one income, there would be less of a competitive "arms race" so to speak on buying kids stuff and experiences. Housing and other prices wouldn't have been driven so high either.

But mostly I would just love it if I were EXPECTED to stay at home, rather than bucking some trend.

I get what you are saying. I think the problem now is that you are kind of considered a loser if you “only” aspire to take care of your family, home, etc. And now if you do that without marrying a male 1%er, you are putting your family at a distinct disadvantage financially relative to all the dual-earning families. At the same time, do I want to revert to not being able to own property, etc? NO. I also don’t want to be treated as though I’m a smaller less hairy man. I’m not a man! I have different fundamental desires/drives, and one of them is to be the primary caretaker of my kids.

That's more of an American perspective . Lots of international women are proud to be a stay at home mom.

Such as? And why do we aspire to be like them?

[Anonymous]

Love being married to a high earning man🙌🥂

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would they still fight for workforce accessibility/equality or accept that stay at home mom is better than working a full time job and not seeing their kids grow up? Did it provide the happiness it promised?

Saw this question being asked and I know what I would choose

Clueless premise. One-income families (e.g., father works, mother stays home) started disappearing in the late 70s, were in free-fall in the 80s, and gone by the 90s. The another 30 years went by. The corporations won.

https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/

Hate to break it to you but SAHMs are alive and well in higher education, higher income areas. My neighborhood and my sister's neighborhood are full of them, and we live several states apart.

SAHM w 2-4 kids is common in the south where you sorority sister marry a frat guy who will work for his dad.

Not common on the east or west coast.

Hahahaha. Says the poor. It's 100% alive and real among very well educated women who marry well.

I didn’t see this as a majority nor large minority when we lived and worked in Boston, NYC nor Wash DC.

Only in Dallas.

And I work in tech so never see this in The Bay Area either.

Maybe we’re defining well educated differently or running in different u grad and grad circles, as well as different DC area neighborhoods, schools and kid ECs entirely.

Agree. SAHM w/multiple degrees from elite schools. We are out there but not common.

I don’t know how this turned into an “elite degree” contest. I am one of the early posters and college-educated SAHM’s in the $250k+ household income level are still very very common. Definitely until the youngest starts kindergarten and then some do go back, but usually part-time or flexible. Maybe this is less common among rocket scientists, I don’t know. I live in the suburbs, so maybe it’s a function of that too, but many many families who have the means to make this choice, are.

It's not a contest. We are just sharing our various experiences within our own peer groups.

It's not that common in my circles. <10%

Interesting, I assume you are in the city? Where I am I’d say it’s close to 50% during the 0-5 years and still at least 25% once all children are school aged. I’m on the Fairfax/Loudoun border.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Would they still fight for workforce accessibility/equality or accept that stay at home mom is better than working a full time job and not seeing their kids grow up? Did it provide the happiness it promised?

Saw this question being asked and I know what I would choose

I have not read the thread. This is based on OP.

Women should have thought more on working. Now most costs are based on two family income. Women are expected as housewives and WOH incomes. Thumbs up to Phyllis Schafly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Love being married to a high earning man🙌🥂

Ewww you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Love being married to a high earning man🙌🥂

Ewww you.

DP here. It is pretty nice, whether the wife works or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would they still fight for workforce accessibility/equality or accept that stay at home mom is better than working a full time job and not seeing their kids grow up? Did it provide the happiness it promised?

Saw this question being asked and I know what I would choose

I have not read the thread. This is based on OP.

Women should have thought more on working. Now most costs are based on two family income. Women are expected as housewives and WOH incomes. Thumbs up to Phyllis Schafly.

Hypocrite and ghoul Phyllis Schlafly? Ew.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am someone who married and had kids late. I worked for many years and had an interesting and challenging career. It was high pressure and exhausting. I loved it but I hated the lifestyle. When I had my first child at 40, I decided to stay home. It hit me one day at work that I could be hit by a bus and they’d just assign my projects to someone else. I, like everyone else, was dispensable. That’s when I decided I to give my energy and attention to something that would actually matter more - my child and family. I am glad that I had the opportunity to have a fulfilling career, but I am also grateful that I got to decide when I was ready for a different chapter.

Whew, I relate to this. I did something very similar. I also have a friend who had kids at 22 and 24, and then went back to school when they were in middle and high school and got her PHD right around 40 and now has a pretty amazing research career.

There are many paths, and the liberation of women from a strict expectation of marriage-kids-homemaking (plus denial of basic economic participation like owning property, having checking accounts, etc.) has made many of those paths possible, including mine.

You can still become a SAHM and a house wife if you choose, and there are men who are looking for women to do that.

[Anonymous]

It doesn't make sense to me for one parent to not work once the kids are in elementary school if the family isn't well off financially. However, I do not understand the mindset that infants and toddlers can be cared for properly and with love by paid childcare workers. I think people who want to have children ought to plan their lives out financially and career wise so that they are able to sacrifice and mitigate those important factors in favor of the more important personal loving care of the child in the early years.

I feel very badly for parents who don't plan this and then find themselves wanting to care for their own child for the first few years but can't due to not anticipating this possibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate such stupid questions.

Not all women are mothers. Not all mothers want to stay home. Those mothers that do want to stay home, still can.

+1

Now you have the choice - which was the power we gained. No, I don’t think we should give that up.

Agree!!! I stay home and 1000% love caring for my home and my family and not being beholden to anyone else. As much flak as I get from angry posters on here who say people like me are lazy or that we have less value as humans bc we don’t bring in an income (what a way to live!—also, educate yourself on pink labor), I still completely love that we now have autonomy and the choice as women in this country, even though we still have a long way to go with childcare and pay parity. I also have so much respect and gratitude towards the amazing women generations before us who did such a good job fighting for and implementing rights for us that many women today completely take these freedoms for granted. Most of my friends WOH; we all make different choices for our families, and we all still love and respect each other even though our lives don’t look exactly the same. Wish there could be more of that and less ignorant scornfulness on these boards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would they still fight for workforce accessibility/equality or accept that stay at home mom is better than working a full time job and not seeing their kids grow up? Did it provide the happiness it promised?

Saw this question being asked and I know what I would choose

Clueless premise. One-income families (e.g., father works, mother stays home) started disappearing in the late 70s, were in free-fall in the 80s, and gone by the 90s. The another 30 years went by. The corporations won.

https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/

Hate to break it to you but SAHMs are alive and well in higher education, higher income areas. My neighborhood and my sister's neighborhood are full of them, and we live several states apart.

SAHM w 2-4 kids is common in the south where you sorority sister marry a frat guy who will work for his dad.

Not common on the east or west coast.

Hahahaha. Says the poor. It's 100% alive and real among very well educated women who marry well.

I didn’t see this as a majority nor large minority when we lived and worked in Boston, NYC nor Wash DC.

Only in Dallas.

And I work in tech so never see this in The Bay Area either.

Maybe we’re defining well educated differently or running in different u grad and grad circles, as well as different DC area neighborhoods, schools and kid ECs entirely.

Agree. SAHM w/multiple degrees from elite schools. We are out there but not common.

I don’t know how this turned into an “elite degree” contest. I am one of the early posters and college-educated SAHM’s in the $250k+ household income level are still very very common. Definitely until the youngest starts kindergarten and then some do go back, but usually part-time or flexible. Maybe this is less common among rocket scientists, I don’t know. I live in the suburbs, so maybe it’s a function of that too, but many many families who have the means to make this choice, are.

What you’re missing is that a HHI of $250K is not considered “marrying well” on this board. We are talking about women who can earn $200K+ in their own right (and often much more), most of whom do not choose to SAHM, except some lawyers who really hate big law.

She’s also comparing a 30-35yo making $250k to a 45yo mom making $500k.

And no, we don’t all stay in consulting, banking, accounting, or law.
5 years in you look around and see where the balance and income are and plan a track there. You leave for a client, you go in-house, you become an expert, you write books+speak, tou rotate through a think tank at a sr level, you join a startup w tons of esop, you get c level headhunter calls. 40-50 yo is peak income everyone; if you’re good at what you do.