Mom’s Who Left Career to SAHP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Idk, I’m a working mom and my job at a F500 stopped being intellectually stimulating around the time I returned from my first maternity leave six years ago. I am burnt out from trying to be both a mother and employee to my standards. Frankly, I’m not sure why people feel it’s their place to pressure women to be “intellectually stimulated” through full time work while also carrying most of the weight of childcare.

I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but it’s okay to want to be a present, full time parent and make room for that in your life. It’s okay if being “intellectually stimulated” takes a back seat to raising your kids in that season of life.

And yes, there are ways to be intellectually stimulated without working in some corporate job. Most jobs are not exactly intellectual or stimulating. I work in a stuffy corporate financial services environment and my job bores me to death.

I’d rather be reading, at a book club, writing, reading a NYT article, teaching my kids their alphabet, or spending time with the amazing people they are and are becoming. All of those things are both more stimulating and meaningful to me than redundant meetings and town halls done by one of thousands of cogs in the wheel. I am replaceable at work, but I’m not replaceable to my kids.

If I could afford to, I’d quit and go back to work when I was ready

I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like. I can possibly understand if you own your own company that is somewhat interesting work. But a corporation or the federal government? No way. I have a desirable career and know at the end of the day I’m a cog in the wheel. I have to attend pointless meetings, enter leave in a system, spend most of my day responding to emails and Teams chats, and subject to ridiculous RTO rules where I commute to sit alone in a conference room in Teams. I am working because they pay me money. Reading a book of my choice is more intellectually stimulating than this.

Well, your job sounds like it sucks. I work at home, help people, and find my job mostly fulfilling. I can think of one pointless meeting I've had this year, the rest have had purpose. Of course I email people, but the communications serve a purpose. I like interacting with my co-workers and laugh with them at least once a day. And I do find my job intellectually stimulating. I think everyone is different, and many jobs are different. If I didn't get paid to do this I would do some version of it for free, so why not get paid a ton to work at home in my yoga pants?

Are you able to understand that most people are not interested in doing their job or a similar one for free?

It sounds like you have low expectations if you’re really that content spending your day in your yoga pants in front of a screen. You say you’ve had one pointless meeting this year which is comical.

I never said I think everyone else thinks like me. I acknowledged that PP's job sounds like it sucks. Maybe yours does, too.

I'm not sure what you mean by low expectations. Why does wearing a suit mean I'm working harder? I work on a computer, yes, but I also spend time on calls, both video and on my phone. I interact with people all day long.

It's so funny to me that you people have to tear down anyone who might enjoy their job to justify how you feel. Some people like what they do, they're good at it, and they don't waste their time on meaningless work.

You have low expectations if you truly enjoy sitting in yoga pants behind a screen all day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Idk, I’m a working mom and my job at a F500 stopped being intellectually stimulating around the time I returned from my first maternity leave six years ago. I am burnt out from trying to be both a mother and employee to my standards. Frankly, I’m not sure why people feel it’s their place to pressure women to be “intellectually stimulated” through full time work while also carrying most of the weight of childcare.

I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but it’s okay to want to be a present, full time parent and make room for that in your life. It’s okay if being “intellectually stimulated” takes a back seat to raising your kids in that season of life.

And yes, there are ways to be intellectually stimulated without working in some corporate job. Most jobs are not exactly intellectual or stimulating. I work in a stuffy corporate financial services environment and my job bores me to death.

I’d rather be reading, at a book club, writing, reading a NYT article, teaching my kids their alphabet, or spending time with the amazing people they are and are becoming. All of those things are both more stimulating and meaningful to me than redundant meetings and town halls done by one of thousands of cogs in the wheel. I am replaceable at work, but I’m not replaceable to my kids.

If I could afford to, I’d quit and go back to work when I was ready

I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like. I can possibly understand if you own your own company that is somewhat interesting work. But a corporation or the federal government? No way. I have a desirable career and know at the end of the day I’m a cog in the wheel. I have to attend pointless meetings, enter leave in a system, spend most of my day responding to emails and Teams chats, and subject to ridiculous RTO rules where I commute to sit alone in a conference room in Teams. I am working because they pay me money. Reading a book of my choice is more intellectually stimulating than this.

Well, your job sounds like it sucks. I work at home, help people, and find my job mostly fulfilling. I can think of one pointless meeting I've had this year, the rest have had purpose. Of course I email people, but the communications serve a purpose. I like interacting with my co-workers and laugh with them at least once a day. And I do find my job intellectually stimulating. I think everyone is different, and many jobs are different. If I didn't get paid to do this I would do some version of it for free, so why not get paid a ton to work at home in my yoga pants?

Are you able to understand that most people are not interested in doing their job or a similar one for free?

It sounds like you have low expectations if you’re really that content spending your day in your yoga pants in front of a screen. You say you’ve had one pointless meeting this year which is comical.

I don’t think people realize how uninterested others are in their jobs. They can be very boring without realizing it. I’m a SAHM with friends who are physicians, lawyers, various consultants and business owners. Many women I hang out with have very successful husbands. The worst people are the ones rambling about work. They seem to lack awareness in certain social situations. If we are hanging out, we don’t want to hear about your job and a lot of job talk is often job complaining. It makes me wonder if the job is really so wonderful because everyone I know complains about their work.

I think most people would hate to have my job (just as I would hate to do certain jobs). But it's very niche and is a perfect fit for me and my skillset and I'm lucky that I'm highly compensated for doing it and find it fulfilling. Of course it's not perfect all the time, nothing is, but the ridiculous trope that no one who has a job enjoys is so tired.

Pp here. Most of my friends work so I obviously enjoy their company. I don’t think working status matters in relationships. I’m well educated and had a career. My husband is successful. My kids are all thriving. Our entire family is super social. DH is well respected and likable. I have a packed social life between family friends and the million events between DH’s work and personal and my three very social children at three different schools. I enjoy hosting so we often have people over whether it is a play date or party with a 100 people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Idk, I’m a working mom and my job at a F500 stopped being intellectually stimulating around the time I returned from my first maternity leave six years ago. I am burnt out from trying to be both a mother and employee to my standards. Frankly, I’m not sure why people feel it’s their place to pressure women to be “intellectually stimulated” through full time work while also carrying most of the weight of childcare.

I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but it’s okay to want to be a present, full time parent and make room for that in your life. It’s okay if being “intellectually stimulated” takes a back seat to raising your kids in that season of life.

And yes, there are ways to be intellectually stimulated without working in some corporate job. Most jobs are not exactly intellectual or stimulating. I work in a stuffy corporate financial services environment and my job bores me to death.

I’d rather be reading, at a book club, writing, reading a NYT article, teaching my kids their alphabet, or spending time with the amazing people they are and are becoming. All of those things are both more stimulating and meaningful to me than redundant meetings and town halls done by one of thousands of cogs in the wheel. I am replaceable at work, but I’m not replaceable to my kids.

If I could afford to, I’d quit and go back to work when I was ready

I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like. I can possibly understand if you own your own company that is somewhat interesting work. But a corporation or the federal government? No way. I have a desirable career and know at the end of the day I’m a cog in the wheel. I have to attend pointless meetings, enter leave in a system, spend most of my day responding to emails and Teams chats, and subject to ridiculous RTO rules where I commute to sit alone in a conference room in Teams. I am working because they pay me money. Reading a book of my choice is more intellectually stimulating than this.

Well, your job sounds like it sucks. I work at home, help people, and find my job mostly fulfilling. I can think of one pointless meeting I've had this year, the rest have had purpose. Of course I email people, but the communications serve a purpose. I like interacting with my co-workers and laugh with them at least once a day. And I do find my job intellectually stimulating. I think everyone is different, and many jobs are different. If I didn't get paid to do this I would do some version of it for free, so why not get paid a ton to work at home in my yoga pants?

Are you able to understand that most people are not interested in doing their job or a similar one for free?

It sounds like you have low expectations if you’re really that content spending your day in your yoga pants in front of a screen. You say you’ve had one pointless meeting this year which is comical.

I don’t think people realize how uninterested others are in their jobs. They can be very boring without realizing it. I’m a SAHM with friends who are physicians, lawyers, various consultants and business owners. Many women I hang out with have very successful husbands. The worst people are the ones rambling about work. They seem to lack awareness in certain social situations. If we are hanging out, we don’t want to hear about your job and a lot of job talk is often job complaining. It makes me wonder if the job is really so wonderful because everyone I know complains about their work.

I am not a SAHM but I lost my job a few months ago and have been slow to look for a new one since I was burnt out. I have noticed the same thing more- people HATE their jobs but always want to talk about them. Also people always want to talk to me about looking for a new job and ask what I am doing...it makes me feel so reduced to the small thing that a company might value me for.

Dunno maybe there are tons of people who like their jobs but when people start complaining about their jobs those people don't speak up? Or maybe I am just not friends with any of them.

People talk about their jobs because it’s where they spend most of their time. Someone in a white collar job with kids doesn’t have much time for hobbies or fun. It’s all work and that’s why they talk about it.

When I worked, it was literally all there was in my life, but the work was confidential, so I couldn't even talk about it. I was the most boring person on the planet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Idk, I’m a working mom and my job at a F500 stopped being intellectually stimulating around the time I returned from my first maternity leave six years ago. I am burnt out from trying to be both a mother and employee to my standards. Frankly, I’m not sure why people feel it’s their place to pressure women to be “intellectually stimulated” through full time work while also carrying most of the weight of childcare.

I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but it’s okay to want to be a present, full time parent and make room for that in your life. It’s okay if being “intellectually stimulated” takes a back seat to raising your kids in that season of life.

And yes, there are ways to be intellectually stimulated without working in some corporate job. Most jobs are not exactly intellectual or stimulating. I work in a stuffy corporate financial services environment and my job bores me to death.

I’d rather be reading, at a book club, writing, reading a NYT article, teaching my kids their alphabet, or spending time with the amazing people they are and are becoming. All of those things are both more stimulating and meaningful to me than redundant meetings and town halls done by one of thousands of cogs in the wheel. I am replaceable at work, but I’m not replaceable to my kids.

If I could afford to, I’d quit and go back to work when I was ready

I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like. I can possibly understand if you own your own company that is somewhat interesting work. But a corporation or the federal government? No way. I have a desirable career and know at the end of the day I’m a cog in the wheel. I have to attend pointless meetings, enter leave in a system, spend most of my day responding to emails and Teams chats, and subject to ridiculous RTO rules where I commute to sit alone in a conference room in Teams. I am working because they pay me money. Reading a book of my choice is more intellectually stimulating than this.

Well, your job sounds like it sucks. I work at home, help people, and find my job mostly fulfilling. I can think of one pointless meeting I've had this year, the rest have had purpose. Of course I email people, but the communications serve a purpose. I like interacting with my co-workers and laugh with them at least once a day. And I do find my job intellectually stimulating. I think everyone is different, and many jobs are different. If I didn't get paid to do this I would do some version of it for free, so why not get paid a ton to work at home in my yoga pants?

Are you able to understand that most people are not interested in doing their job or a similar one for free?

It sounds like you have low expectations if you’re really that content spending your day in your yoga pants in front of a screen. You say you’ve had one pointless meeting this year which is comical.

I never said I think everyone else thinks like me. I acknowledged that PP's job sounds like it sucks. Maybe yours does, too.

I'm not sure what you mean by low expectations. Why does wearing a suit mean I'm working harder? I work on a computer, yes, but I also spend time on calls, both video and on my phone. I interact with people all day long.

It's so funny to me that you people have to tear down anyone who might enjoy their job to justify how you feel. Some people like what they do, they're good at it, and they don't waste their time on meaningless work.

NP. It’s mind-boggling that you seem to be under the impression that fulfilling jobs one would do for free are the norm, rather than the (obvious) conclusion that you have landed yourself a pretty sweet deal and should maybe not have jumped into this conversation as you did.

You were either being deliberately provocative, or else you are painfully stupid.

Touchy much? Should me where I said my situation is the norm.

I responded to PP's statement that "I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like."

I get paid for what I do. I like what I do. It comes with a big paycheck and an enormous amount of freedom. So yeah, I'd rather do that than not get paid to work. So I guess I baffle both the PP and you.

Are you always so literal? By adding your anecdata to the conversation the implication was that you are under the impression that your set up is normal. It’s not. You also clearly missed the implied “if money was no object” would you rather work for the man or do your own thing on your own schedule.

You have contributed nothing to this conversation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Idk, I’m a working mom and my job at a F500 stopped being intellectually stimulating around the time I returned from my first maternity leave six years ago. I am burnt out from trying to be both a mother and employee to my standards. Frankly, I’m not sure why people feel it’s their place to pressure women to be “intellectually stimulated” through full time work while also carrying most of the weight of childcare.

I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but it’s okay to want to be a present, full time parent and make room for that in your life. It’s okay if being “intellectually stimulated” takes a back seat to raising your kids in that season of life.

And yes, there are ways to be intellectually stimulated without working in some corporate job. Most jobs are not exactly intellectual or stimulating. I work in a stuffy corporate financial services environment and my job bores me to death.

I’d rather be reading, at a book club, writing, reading a NYT article, teaching my kids their alphabet, or spending time with the amazing people they are and are becoming. All of those things are both more stimulating and meaningful to me than redundant meetings and town halls done by one of thousands of cogs in the wheel. I am replaceable at work, but I’m not replaceable to my kids.

If I could afford to, I’d quit and go back to work when I was ready

I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like. I can possibly understand if you own your own company that is somewhat interesting work. But a corporation or the federal government? No way. I have a desirable career and know at the end of the day I’m a cog in the wheel. I have to attend pointless meetings, enter leave in a system, spend most of my day responding to emails and Teams chats, and subject to ridiculous RTO rules where I commute to sit alone in a conference room in Teams. I am working because they pay me money. Reading a book of my choice is more intellectually stimulating than this.

Yes thank you. 100% if we could afford it, neither my husband nor I would work for money. This cannot be uncommon.

I just went on a girls trip with friends. I am the only SAHM. Everyone else works. Some are divorced. DH earns more than possibly everyone combined on the trip, including their spouses. My friends all said they wished they had my life and I am living the dream. The most competent one in the group is high earning but like high six figure earning so very high for a woman, but not so high for a man. She is going through a divorce and likely will have to buy her husband out on the house and pay him alimony and child support. She will also be on hook for kids’ college.

Meh, to each their own. I think being financially dependent on a man who is in no way an equal parent sounds awful to me so I wouldn't want your life. Luckily I like mine. Sounds like your friends are going through tough times so no wonder your life sounds better to them.

But it’s okay to be financially dependent on a corporation that doesn’t parent, and probably doesn’t even provide sufficient parental leave?

I think a lot of posters have a false sense of security with their jobs. Consider how many women were dedicated to their federal government job that no longer exists. We are all financially dependent on others - the US government, banks/brokerage accounts, childcare providers etc. The unfortunate reality is that even if you have a great job, most women are hurt financially from divorce.

Do you not even appreciate the irony of your post? You're ok being financially dependent on a man who is financially dependent on a corporation but you'll attack a woman who works for one? GTFO.

DP

I hope that you aren’t expected to have conversations with other adults if you consider anyone disagreeing with you or raising a point that might undermine your argument as attacking you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Idk, I’m a working mom and my job at a F500 stopped being intellectually stimulating around the time I returned from my first maternity leave six years ago. I am burnt out from trying to be both a mother and employee to my standards. Frankly, I’m not sure why people feel it’s their place to pressure women to be “intellectually stimulated” through full time work while also carrying most of the weight of childcare.

I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but it’s okay to want to be a present, full time parent and make room for that in your life. It’s okay if being “intellectually stimulated” takes a back seat to raising your kids in that season of life.

And yes, there are ways to be intellectually stimulated without working in some corporate job. Most jobs are not exactly intellectual or stimulating. I work in a stuffy corporate financial services environment and my job bores me to death.

I’d rather be reading, at a book club, writing, reading a NYT article, teaching my kids their alphabet, or spending time with the amazing people they are and are becoming. All of those things are both more stimulating and meaningful to me than redundant meetings and town halls done by one of thousands of cogs in the wheel. I am replaceable at work, but I’m not replaceable to my kids.

If I could afford to, I’d quit and go back to work when I was ready

I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like. I can possibly understand if you own your own company that is somewhat interesting work. But a corporation or the federal government? No way. I have a desirable career and know at the end of the day I’m a cog in the wheel. I have to attend pointless meetings, enter leave in a system, spend most of my day responding to emails and Teams chats, and subject to ridiculous RTO rules where I commute to sit alone in a conference room in Teams. I am working because they pay me money. Reading a book of my choice is more intellectually stimulating than this.

Well, your job sounds like it sucks. I work at home, help people, and find my job mostly fulfilling. I can think of one pointless meeting I've had this year, the rest have had purpose. Of course I email people, but the communications serve a purpose. I like interacting with my co-workers and laugh with them at least once a day. And I do find my job intellectually stimulating. I think everyone is different, and many jobs are different. If I didn't get paid to do this I would do some version of it for free, so why not get paid a ton to work at home in my yoga pants?

Are you able to understand that most people are not interested in doing their job or a similar one for free?

It sounds like you have low expectations if you’re really that content spending your day in your yoga pants in front of a screen. You say you’ve had one pointless meeting this year which is comical.

I never said I think everyone else thinks like me. I acknowledged that PP's job sounds like it sucks. Maybe yours does, too.

I'm not sure what you mean by low expectations. Why does wearing a suit mean I'm working harder? I work on a computer, yes, but I also spend time on calls, both video and on my phone. I interact with people all day long.

It's so funny to me that you people have to tear down anyone who might enjoy their job to justify how you feel. Some people like what they do, they're good at it, and they don't waste their time on meaningless work.

You have low expectations if you truly enjoy sitting in yoga pants behind a screen all day.

I wear yoga pants behind a screen all day and love it.

If you don’t like working, cool. No problem if you want to marry someone with money and quit work. Just don’t expect me to help pay for you if your H walks out for a newer model.

Also it’s pretty gross to have kids solely because you don’t want to work. Terrible reason to have children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Idk, I’m a working mom and my job at a F500 stopped being intellectually stimulating around the time I returned from my first maternity leave six years ago. I am burnt out from trying to be both a mother and employee to my standards. Frankly, I’m not sure why people feel it’s their place to pressure women to be “intellectually stimulated” through full time work while also carrying most of the weight of childcare.

I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but it’s okay to want to be a present, full time parent and make room for that in your life. It’s okay if being “intellectually stimulated” takes a back seat to raising your kids in that season of life.

And yes, there are ways to be intellectually stimulated without working in some corporate job. Most jobs are not exactly intellectual or stimulating. I work in a stuffy corporate financial services environment and my job bores me to death.

I’d rather be reading, at a book club, writing, reading a NYT article, teaching my kids their alphabet, or spending time with the amazing people they are and are becoming. All of those things are both more stimulating and meaningful to me than redundant meetings and town halls done by one of thousands of cogs in the wheel. I am replaceable at work, but I’m not replaceable to my kids.

If I could afford to, I’d quit and go back to work when I was ready

I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like. I can possibly understand if you own your own company that is somewhat interesting work. But a corporation or the federal government? No way. I have a desirable career and know at the end of the day I’m a cog in the wheel. I have to attend pointless meetings, enter leave in a system, spend most of my day responding to emails and Teams chats, and subject to ridiculous RTO rules where I commute to sit alone in a conference room in Teams. I am working because they pay me money. Reading a book of my choice is more intellectually stimulating than this.

Well, your job sounds like it sucks. I work at home, help people, and find my job mostly fulfilling. I can think of one pointless meeting I've had this year, the rest have had purpose. Of course I email people, but the communications serve a purpose. I like interacting with my co-workers and laugh with them at least once a day. And I do find my job intellectually stimulating. I think everyone is different, and many jobs are different. If I didn't get paid to do this I would do some version of it for free, so why not get paid a ton to work at home in my yoga pants?

Are you able to understand that most people are not interested in doing their job or a similar one for free?

It sounds like you have low expectations if you’re really that content spending your day in your yoga pants in front of a screen. You say you’ve had one pointless meeting this year which is comical.

I never said I think everyone else thinks like me. I acknowledged that PP's job sounds like it sucks. Maybe yours does, too.

I'm not sure what you mean by low expectations. Why does wearing a suit mean I'm working harder? I work on a computer, yes, but I also spend time on calls, both video and on my phone. I interact with people all day long.

It's so funny to me that you people have to tear down anyone who might enjoy their job to justify how you feel. Some people like what they do, they're good at it, and they don't waste their time on meaningless work.

You have low expectations if you truly enjoy sitting in yoga pants behind a screen all day.

I wear yoga pants behind a screen all day and love it.

If you don’t like working, cool. No problem if you want to marry someone with money and quit work. Just don’t expect me to help pay for you if your H walks out for a newer model.

Also it’s pretty gross to have kids solely because you don’t want to work. Terrible reason to have children.

DO. Wow. You have derailed this train in crazy town.

I call BS on you loving your job. People who love their jobs don’t spend their time trolling message boards, hoping their SAHM acquaintances get cheated on, or fretting about what “muh tax dollars!” may or may not be paying for.

You sound lonely and angry. Maybe put those yoga pants to good use, get off your butt, and go out for a walk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Idk, I’m a working mom and my job at a F500 stopped being intellectually stimulating around the time I returned from my first maternity leave six years ago. I am burnt out from trying to be both a mother and employee to my standards. Frankly, I’m not sure why people feel it’s their place to pressure women to be “intellectually stimulated” through full time work while also carrying most of the weight of childcare.

I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but it’s okay to want to be a present, full time parent and make room for that in your life. It’s okay if being “intellectually stimulated” takes a back seat to raising your kids in that season of life.

And yes, there are ways to be intellectually stimulated without working in some corporate job. Most jobs are not exactly intellectual or stimulating. I work in a stuffy corporate financial services environment and my job bores me to death.

I’d rather be reading, at a book club, writing, reading a NYT article, teaching my kids their alphabet, or spending time with the amazing people they are and are becoming. All of those things are both more stimulating and meaningful to me than redundant meetings and town halls done by one of thousands of cogs in the wheel. I am replaceable at work, but I’m not replaceable to my kids.

If I could afford to, I’d quit and go back to work when I was ready

I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like. I can possibly understand if you own your own company that is somewhat interesting work. But a corporation or the federal government? No way. I have a desirable career and know at the end of the day I’m a cog in the wheel. I have to attend pointless meetings, enter leave in a system, spend most of my day responding to emails and Teams chats, and subject to ridiculous RTO rules where I commute to sit alone in a conference room in Teams. I am working because they pay me money. Reading a book of my choice is more intellectually stimulating than this.

Well, your job sounds like it sucks. I work at home, help people, and find my job mostly fulfilling. I can think of one pointless meeting I've had this year, the rest have had purpose. Of course I email people, but the communications serve a purpose. I like interacting with my co-workers and laugh with them at least once a day. And I do find my job intellectually stimulating. I think everyone is different, and many jobs are different. If I didn't get paid to do this I would do some version of it for free, so why not get paid a ton to work at home in my yoga pants?

Are you able to understand that most people are not interested in doing their job or a similar one for free?

It sounds like you have low expectations if you’re really that content spending your day in your yoga pants in front of a screen. You say you’ve had one pointless meeting this year which is comical.

I never said I think everyone else thinks like me. I acknowledged that PP's job sounds like it sucks. Maybe yours does, too.

I'm not sure what you mean by low expectations. Why does wearing a suit mean I'm working harder? I work on a computer, yes, but I also spend time on calls, both video and on my phone. I interact with people all day long.

It's so funny to me that you people have to tear down anyone who might enjoy their job to justify how you feel. Some people like what they do, they're good at it, and they don't waste their time on meaningless work.

You have low expectations if you truly enjoy sitting in yoga pants behind a screen all day.

I wear yoga pants behind a screen all day and love it.

If you don’t like working, cool. No problem if you want to marry someone with money and quit work. Just don’t expect me to help pay for you if your H walks out for a newer model.

Also it’s pretty gross to have kids solely because you don’t want to work. Terrible reason to have children.

DO. Wow. You have derailed this train in crazy town.

I call BS on you loving your job. People who love their jobs don’t spend their time trolling message boards, hoping their SAHM acquaintances get cheated on, or fretting about what “muh tax dollars!” may or may not be paying for.

You sound lonely and angry. Maybe put those yoga pants to good use, get off your butt, and go out for a walk.

And SAHMs who love staying at home spend their time on message boards? Confused here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Idk, I’m a working mom and my job at a F500 stopped being intellectually stimulating around the time I returned from my first maternity leave six years ago. I am burnt out from trying to be both a mother and employee to my standards. Frankly, I’m not sure why people feel it’s their place to pressure women to be “intellectually stimulated” through full time work while also carrying most of the weight of childcare.

I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but it’s okay to want to be a present, full time parent and make room for that in your life. It’s okay if being “intellectually stimulated” takes a back seat to raising your kids in that season of life.

And yes, there are ways to be intellectually stimulated without working in some corporate job. Most jobs are not exactly intellectual or stimulating. I work in a stuffy corporate financial services environment and my job bores me to death.

I’d rather be reading, at a book club, writing, reading a NYT article, teaching my kids their alphabet, or spending time with the amazing people they are and are becoming. All of those things are both more stimulating and meaningful to me than redundant meetings and town halls done by one of thousands of cogs in the wheel. I am replaceable at work, but I’m not replaceable to my kids.

If I could afford to, I’d quit and go back to work when I was ready

I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like. I can possibly understand if you own your own company that is somewhat interesting work. But a corporation or the federal government? No way. I have a desirable career and know at the end of the day I’m a cog in the wheel. I have to attend pointless meetings, enter leave in a system, spend most of my day responding to emails and Teams chats, and subject to ridiculous RTO rules where I commute to sit alone in a conference room in Teams. I am working because they pay me money. Reading a book of my choice is more intellectually stimulating than this.

Well, your job sounds like it sucks. I work at home, help people, and find my job mostly fulfilling. I can think of one pointless meeting I've had this year, the rest have had purpose. Of course I email people, but the communications serve a purpose. I like interacting with my co-workers and laugh with them at least once a day. And I do find my job intellectually stimulating. I think everyone is different, and many jobs are different. If I didn't get paid to do this I would do some version of it for free, so why not get paid a ton to work at home in my yoga pants?

Are you able to understand that most people are not interested in doing their job or a similar one for free?

It sounds like you have low expectations if you’re really that content spending your day in your yoga pants in front of a screen. You say you’ve had one pointless meeting this year which is comical.

I never said I think everyone else thinks like me. I acknowledged that PP's job sounds like it sucks. Maybe yours does, too.

I'm not sure what you mean by low expectations. Why does wearing a suit mean I'm working harder? I work on a computer, yes, but I also spend time on calls, both video and on my phone. I interact with people all day long.

It's so funny to me that you people have to tear down anyone who might enjoy their job to justify how you feel. Some people like what they do, they're good at it, and they don't waste their time on meaningless work.

You have low expectations if you truly enjoy sitting in yoga pants behind a screen all day.

I wear yoga pants behind a screen all day and love it.

If you don’t like working, cool. No problem if you want to marry someone with money and quit work. Just don’t expect me to help pay for you if your H walks out for a newer model.

Also it’s pretty gross to have kids solely because you don’t want to work. Terrible reason to have children.

DO. Wow. You have derailed this train in crazy town.

I call BS on you loving your job. People who love their jobs don’t spend their time trolling message boards, hoping their SAHM acquaintances get cheated on, or fretting about what “muh tax dollars!” may or may not be paying for.

You sound lonely and angry. Maybe put those yoga pants to good use, get off your butt, and go out for a walk.

And SAHMs who love staying at home spend their time on message boards? Confused here.

Both of you are embarrassing yourselves. Please stop. There are pros and cons to working or staying home. Let the yoga pant wearing working mom love her job. She is allowed to.

[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:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Idk, I’m a working mom and my job at a F500 stopped being intellectually stimulating around the time I returned from my first maternity leave six years ago. I am burnt out from trying to be both a mother and employee to my standards. Frankly, I’m not sure why people feel it’s their place to pressure women to be “intellectually stimulated” through full time work while also carrying most of the weight of childcare.

I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but it’s okay to want to be a present, full time parent and make room for that in your life. It’s okay if being “intellectually stimulated” takes a back seat to raising your kids in that season of life.

And yes, there are ways to be intellectually stimulated without working in some corporate job. Most jobs are not exactly intellectual or stimulating. I work in a stuffy corporate financial services environment and my job bores me to death.

I’d rather be reading, at a book club, writing, reading a NYT article, teaching my kids their alphabet, or spending time with the amazing people they are and are becoming. All of those things are both more stimulating and meaningful to me than redundant meetings and town halls done by one of thousands of cogs in the wheel. I am replaceable at work, but I’m not replaceable to my kids.

If I could afford to, I’d quit and go back to work when I was ready

I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like. I can possibly understand if you own your own company that is somewhat interesting work. But a corporation or the federal government? No way. I have a desirable career and know at the end of the day I’m a cog in the wheel. I have to attend pointless meetings, enter leave in a system, spend most of my day responding to emails and Teams chats, and subject to ridiculous RTO rules where I commute to sit alone in a conference room in Teams. I am working because they pay me money. Reading a book of my choice is more intellectually stimulating than this.

Well, your job sounds like it sucks. I work at home, help people, and find my job mostly fulfilling. I can think of one pointless meeting I've had this year, the rest have had purpose. Of course I email people, but the communications serve a purpose. I like interacting with my co-workers and laugh with them at least once a day. And I do find my job intellectually stimulating. I think everyone is different, and many jobs are different. If I didn't get paid to do this I would do some version of it for free, so why not get paid a ton to work at home in my yoga pants?

Are you able to understand that most people are not interested in doing their job or a similar one for free?

It sounds like you have low expectations if you’re really that content spending your day in your yoga pants in front of a screen. You say you’ve had one pointless meeting this year which is comical.

I never said I think everyone else thinks like me. I acknowledged that PP's job sounds like it sucks. Maybe yours does, too.

I'm not sure what you mean by low expectations. Why does wearing a suit mean I'm working harder? I work on a computer, yes, but I also spend time on calls, both video and on my phone. I interact with people all day long.

It's so funny to me that you people have to tear down anyone who might enjoy their job to justify how you feel. Some people like what they do, they're good at it, and they don't waste their time on meaningless work.

You have low expectations if you truly enjoy sitting in yoga pants behind a screen all day.

I wear yoga pants behind a screen all day and love it.

If you don’t like working, cool. No problem if you want to marry someone with money and quit work. Just don’t expect me to help pay for you if your H walks out for a newer model.

Also it’s pretty gross to have kids solely because you don’t want to work. Terrible reason to have children.

DO. Wow. You have derailed this train in crazy town.

I call BS on you loving your job. People who love their jobs don’t spend their time trolling message boards, hoping their SAHM acquaintances get cheated on, or fretting about what “muh tax dollars!” may or may not be paying for.

You sound lonely and angry. Maybe put those yoga pants to good use, get off your butt, and go out for a walk.

And SAHMs who love staying at home spend their time on message boards? Confused here.

Both of you are embarrassing yourselves. Please stop. There are pros and cons to working or staying home. Let the yoga pant wearing working mom love her job. She is allowed to.

Working yoga pant mom can get bent. So can you, Karen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Idk, I’m a working mom and my job at a F500 stopped being intellectually stimulating around the time I returned from my first maternity leave six years ago. I am burnt out from trying to be both a mother and employee to my standards. Frankly, I’m not sure why people feel it’s their place to pressure women to be “intellectually stimulated” through full time work while also carrying most of the weight of childcare.

I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but it’s okay to want to be a present, full time parent and make room for that in your life. It’s okay if being “intellectually stimulated” takes a back seat to raising your kids in that season of life.

And yes, there are ways to be intellectually stimulated without working in some corporate job. Most jobs are not exactly intellectual or stimulating. I work in a stuffy corporate financial services environment and my job bores me to death.

I’d rather be reading, at a book club, writing, reading a NYT article, teaching my kids their alphabet, or spending time with the amazing people they are and are becoming. All of those things are both more stimulating and meaningful to me than redundant meetings and town halls done by one of thousands of cogs in the wheel. I am replaceable at work, but I’m not replaceable to my kids.

If I could afford to, I’d quit and go back to work when I was ready

I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like. I can possibly understand if you own your own company that is somewhat interesting work. But a corporation or the federal government? No way. I have a desirable career and know at the end of the day I’m a cog in the wheel. I have to attend pointless meetings, enter leave in a system, spend most of my day responding to emails and Teams chats, and subject to ridiculous RTO rules where I commute to sit alone in a conference room in Teams. I am working because they pay me money. Reading a book of my choice is more intellectually stimulating than this.

Yes thank you. 100% if we could afford it, neither my husband nor I would work for money. This cannot be uncommon.

I just went on a girls trip with friends. I am the only SAHM. Everyone else works. Some are divorced. DH earns more than possibly everyone combined on the trip, including their spouses. My friends all said they wished they had my life and I am living the dream. The most competent one in the group is high earning but like high six figure earning so very high for a woman, but not so high for a man. She is going through a divorce and likely will have to buy her husband out on the house and pay him alimony and child support. She will also be on hook for kids’ college.

Meh, to each their own. I think being financially dependent on a man who is in no way an equal parent sounds awful to me so I wouldn't want your life. Luckily I like mine. Sounds like your friends are going through tough times so no wonder your life sounds better to them.

But it’s okay to be financially dependent on a corporation that doesn’t parent, and probably doesn’t even provide sufficient parental leave?

I think a lot of posters have a false sense of security with their jobs. Consider how many women were dedicated to their federal government job that no longer exists. We are all financially dependent on others - the US government, banks/brokerage accounts, childcare providers etc. The unfortunate reality is that even if you have a great job, most women are hurt financially from divorce.

Do you not even appreciate the irony of your post? You're ok being financially dependent on a man who is financially dependent on a corporation but you'll attack a woman who works for one? GTFO.

DP

I hope that you aren’t expected to have conversations with other adults if you consider anyone disagreeing with you or raising a point that might undermine your argument as attacking you.

I mean…pp was right though. np

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Idk, I’m a working mom and my job at a F500 stopped being intellectually stimulating around the time I returned from my first maternity leave six years ago. I am burnt out from trying to be both a mother and employee to my standards. Frankly, I’m not sure why people feel it’s their place to pressure women to be “intellectually stimulated” through full time work while also carrying most of the weight of childcare.

I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but it’s okay to want to be a present, full time parent and make room for that in your life. It’s okay if being “intellectually stimulated” takes a back seat to raising your kids in that season of life.

And yes, there are ways to be intellectually stimulated without working in some corporate job. Most jobs are not exactly intellectual or stimulating. I work in a stuffy corporate financial services environment and my job bores me to death.

I’d rather be reading, at a book club, writing, reading a NYT article, teaching my kids their alphabet, or spending time with the amazing people they are and are becoming. All of those things are both more stimulating and meaningful to me than redundant meetings and town halls done by one of thousands of cogs in the wheel. I am replaceable at work, but I’m not replaceable to my kids.

If I could afford to, I’d quit and go back to work when I was ready

I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like. I can possibly understand if you own your own company that is somewhat interesting work. But a corporation or the federal government? No way. I have a desirable career and know at the end of the day I’m a cog in the wheel. I have to attend pointless meetings, enter leave in a system, spend most of my day responding to emails and Teams chats, and subject to ridiculous RTO rules where I commute to sit alone in a conference room in Teams. I am working because they pay me money. Reading a book of my choice is more intellectually stimulating than this.

Yes thank you. 100% if we could afford it, neither my husband nor I would work for money. This cannot be uncommon.

I just went on a girls trip with friends. I am the only SAHM. Everyone else works. Some are divorced. DH earns more than possibly everyone combined on the trip, including their spouses. My friends all said they wished they had my life and I am living the dream. The most competent one in the group is high earning but like high six figure earning so very high for a woman, but not so high for a man. She is going through a divorce and likely will have to buy her husband out on the house and pay him alimony and child support. She will also be on hook for kids’ college.

Meh, to each their own. I think being financially dependent on a man who is in no way an equal parent sounds awful to me so I wouldn't want your life. Luckily I like mine. Sounds like your friends are going through tough times so no wonder your life sounds better to them.

But it’s okay to be financially dependent on a corporation that doesn’t parent, and probably doesn’t even provide sufficient parental leave?

I think a lot of posters have a false sense of security with their jobs. Consider how many women were dedicated to their federal government job that no longer exists. We are all financially dependent on others - the US government, banks/brokerage accounts, childcare providers etc. The unfortunate reality is that even if you have a great job, most women are hurt financially from divorce.

Do you not even appreciate the irony of your post? You're ok being financially dependent on a man who is financially dependent on a corporation but you'll attack a woman who works for one? GTFO.

DP

I hope that you aren’t expected to have conversations with other adults if you consider anyone disagreeing with you or raising a point that might undermine your argument as attacking you.

I mean…pp was right though. np

No one has been attacked on this thread. Words have meaning.

[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:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Idk, I’m a working mom and my job at a F500 stopped being intellectually stimulating around the time I returned from my first maternity leave six years ago. I am burnt out from trying to be both a mother and employee to my standards. Frankly, I’m not sure why people feel it’s their place to pressure women to be “intellectually stimulated” through full time work while also carrying most of the weight of childcare.

I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but it’s okay to want to be a present, full time parent and make room for that in your life. It’s okay if being “intellectually stimulated” takes a back seat to raising your kids in that season of life.

And yes, there are ways to be intellectually stimulated without working in some corporate job. Most jobs are not exactly intellectual or stimulating. I work in a stuffy corporate financial services environment and my job bores me to death.

I’d rather be reading, at a book club, writing, reading a NYT article, teaching my kids their alphabet, or spending time with the amazing people they are and are becoming. All of those things are both more stimulating and meaningful to me than redundant meetings and town halls done by one of thousands of cogs in the wheel. I am replaceable at work, but I’m not replaceable to my kids.

If I could afford to, I’d quit and go back to work when I was ready

I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like. I can possibly understand if you own your own company that is somewhat interesting work. But a corporation or the federal government? No way. I have a desirable career and know at the end of the day I’m a cog in the wheel. I have to attend pointless meetings, enter leave in a system, spend most of my day responding to emails and Teams chats, and subject to ridiculous RTO rules where I commute to sit alone in a conference room in Teams. I am working because they pay me money. Reading a book of my choice is more intellectually stimulating than this.

Yes thank you. 100% if we could afford it, neither my husband nor I would work for money. This cannot be uncommon.

I just went on a girls trip with friends. I am the only SAHM. Everyone else works. Some are divorced. DH earns more than possibly everyone combined on the trip, including their spouses. My friends all said they wished they had my life and I am living the dream. The most competent one in the group is high earning but like high six figure earning so very high for a woman, but not so high for a man. She is going through a divorce and likely will have to buy her husband out on the house and pay him alimony and child support. She will also be on hook for kids’ college.

Meh, to each their own. I think being financially dependent on a man who is in no way an equal parent sounds awful to me so I wouldn't want your life. Luckily I like mine. Sounds like your friends are going through tough times so no wonder your life sounds better to them.

But it’s okay to be financially dependent on a corporation that doesn’t parent, and probably doesn’t even provide sufficient parental leave?

I think a lot of posters have a false sense of security with their jobs. Consider how many women were dedicated to their federal government job that no longer exists. We are all financially dependent on others - the US government, banks/brokerage accounts, childcare providers etc. The unfortunate reality is that even if you have a great job, most women are hurt financially from divorce.

Do you not even appreciate the irony of your post? You're ok being financially dependent on a man who is financially dependent on a corporation but you'll attack a woman who works for one? GTFO.

DP

I hope that you aren’t expected to have conversations with other adults if you consider anyone disagreeing with you or raising a point that might undermine your argument as attacking you.

I mean…pp was right though. np

No one has been attacked on this thread. Words have meaning.

Everyone’s a cog in the system.

If you work, you’re a gear turning to make money for someone else.

If you stay home to raise kids, you’re just raising the next set of gears to keep the machine going.

The only way to truly opt out is become a witch woman living in the middle of the woods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Idk, I’m a working mom and my job at a F500 stopped being intellectually stimulating around the time I returned from my first maternity leave six years ago. I am burnt out from trying to be both a mother and employee to my standards. Frankly, I’m not sure why people feel it’s their place to pressure women to be “intellectually stimulated” through full time work while also carrying most of the weight of childcare.

I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but it’s okay to want to be a present, full time parent and make room for that in your life. It’s okay if being “intellectually stimulated” takes a back seat to raising your kids in that season of life.

And yes, there are ways to be intellectually stimulated without working in some corporate job. Most jobs are not exactly intellectual or stimulating. I work in a stuffy corporate financial services environment and my job bores me to death.

I’d rather be reading, at a book club, writing, reading a NYT article, teaching my kids their alphabet, or spending time with the amazing people they are and are becoming. All of those things are both more stimulating and meaningful to me than redundant meetings and town halls done by one of thousands of cogs in the wheel. I am replaceable at work, but I’m not replaceable to my kids.

If I could afford to, I’d quit and go back to work when I was ready

I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like. I can possibly understand if you own your own company that is somewhat interesting work. But a corporation or the federal government? No way. I have a desirable career and know at the end of the day I’m a cog in the wheel. I have to attend pointless meetings, enter leave in a system, spend most of my day responding to emails and Teams chats, and subject to ridiculous RTO rules where I commute to sit alone in a conference room in Teams. I am working because they pay me money. Reading a book of my choice is more intellectually stimulating than this.

Well, your job sounds like it sucks. I work at home, help people, and find my job mostly fulfilling. I can think of one pointless meeting I've had this year, the rest have had purpose. Of course I email people, but the communications serve a purpose. I like interacting with my co-workers and laugh with them at least once a day. And I do find my job intellectually stimulating. I think everyone is different, and many jobs are different. If I didn't get paid to do this I would do some version of it for free, so why not get paid a ton to work at home in my yoga pants?

Are you able to understand that most people are not interested in doing their job or a similar one for free?

It sounds like you have low expectations if you’re really that content spending your day in your yoga pants in front of a screen. You say you’ve had one pointless meeting this year which is comical.

I never said I think everyone else thinks like me. I acknowledged that PP's job sounds like it sucks. Maybe yours does, too.

I'm not sure what you mean by low expectations. Why does wearing a suit mean I'm working harder? I work on a computer, yes, but I also spend time on calls, both video and on my phone. I interact with people all day long.

It's so funny to me that you people have to tear down anyone who might enjoy their job to justify how you feel. Some people like what they do, they're good at it, and they don't waste their time on meaningless work.

You have low expectations if you truly enjoy sitting in yoga pants behind a screen all day.

I wear yoga pants behind a screen all day and love it.

If you don’t like working, cool. No problem if you want to marry someone with money and quit work. Just don’t expect me to help pay for you if your H walks out for a newer model.

Also it’s pretty gross to have kids solely because you don’t want to work. Terrible reason to have children.

DO. Wow. You have derailed this train in crazy town.

I call BS on you loving your job. People who love their jobs don’t spend their time trolling message boards, hoping their SAHM acquaintances get cheated on, or fretting about what “muh tax dollars!” may or may not be paying for.

You sound lonely and angry. Maybe put those yoga pants to good use, get off your butt, and go out for a walk.

And SAHMs who love staying at home spend their time on message boards? Confused here.

The keyword in the PPs post is “trolling”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really amazing to me that so many smart and well educated women seem to believe that the only way to be intellectually engaged is by working some job.

What other ways do you suggest?

Idk, I’m a working mom and my job at a F500 stopped being intellectually stimulating around the time I returned from my first maternity leave six years ago. I am burnt out from trying to be both a mother and employee to my standards. Frankly, I’m not sure why people feel it’s their place to pressure women to be “intellectually stimulated” through full time work while also carrying most of the weight of childcare.

I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but it’s okay to want to be a present, full time parent and make room for that in your life. It’s okay if being “intellectually stimulated” takes a back seat to raising your kids in that season of life.

And yes, there are ways to be intellectually stimulated without working in some corporate job. Most jobs are not exactly intellectual or stimulating. I work in a stuffy corporate financial services environment and my job bores me to death.

I’d rather be reading, at a book club, writing, reading a NYT article, teaching my kids their alphabet, or spending time with the amazing people they are and are becoming. All of those things are both more stimulating and meaningful to me than redundant meetings and town halls done by one of thousands of cogs in the wheel. I am replaceable at work, but I’m not replaceable to my kids.

If I could afford to, I’d quit and go back to work when I was ready

I’m baffled by really anyone who would rather work for a corporation/organization than be free to do whatever they’d like. I can possibly understand if you own your own company that is somewhat interesting work. But a corporation or the federal government? No way. I have a desirable career and know at the end of the day I’m a cog in the wheel. I have to attend pointless meetings, enter leave in a system, spend most of my day responding to emails and Teams chats, and subject to ridiculous RTO rules where I commute to sit alone in a conference room in Teams. I am working because they pay me money. Reading a book of my choice is more intellectually stimulating than this.

Well, your job sounds like it sucks. I work at home, help people, and find my job mostly fulfilling. I can think of one pointless meeting I've had this year, the rest have had purpose. Of course I email people, but the communications serve a purpose. I like interacting with my co-workers and laugh with them at least once a day. And I do find my job intellectually stimulating. I think everyone is different, and many jobs are different. If I didn't get paid to do this I would do some version of it for free, so why not get paid a ton to work at home in my yoga pants?

Are you able to understand that most people are not interested in doing their job or a similar one for free?

It sounds like you have low expectations if you’re really that content spending your day in your yoga pants in front of a screen. You say you’ve had one pointless meeting this year which is comical.

I never said I think everyone else thinks like me. I acknowledged that PP's job sounds like it sucks. Maybe yours does, too.

I'm not sure what you mean by low expectations. Why does wearing a suit mean I'm working harder? I work on a computer, yes, but I also spend time on calls, both video and on my phone. I interact with people all day long.

It's so funny to me that you people have to tear down anyone who might enjoy their job to justify how you feel. Some people like what they do, they're good at it, and they don't waste their time on meaningless work.

You have low expectations if you truly enjoy sitting in yoga pants behind a screen all day.

I wear yoga pants behind a screen all day and love it.

If you don’t like working, cool. No problem if you want to marry someone with money and quit work. Just don’t expect me to help pay for you if your H walks out for a newer model.

Also it’s pretty gross to have kids solely because you don’t want to work. Terrible reason to have children.

Wow, I was defending you until your last comments. I was a working mom before I became a SAHM. I’m ivy educated and had a successful career before I decided collectively with my husband that it would be best for our family if I stayed home with our three children.

I didn’t have children so I wouldn’t have to work. I stopped working because I had children.