SAHMs that never return to workforce?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should do you. The value that you add to your family and kids is difficult to measure - but it's significant. Society should value it more.

Who cares what "society" thinks. The value is entirely maintained within the family system - it's not like "society" reaps some benefit from this decision. But there is no need for external validation, is there?

Society absolutely benefits from this decision.

With women staying home indefinitely? I don't think so. It papers over holes in our social infrastructure but my life isn't any better because someone decides not to work ever again.

I still think it's a totally fine choice to make, and that if you have the luxury of being able to make that choice then cheers to you and to your family!

Just because you can't see what these people are doing to benefit your life doesn't mean they aren't. I don't see you doing anything to benefit them either, but I'm sure your paid labor has some social value beyond the economic. Similarly their unpaid labor has both social and economic value. If you suddenly removed every SAHP from society, what do you image would happen? You note that they "paper[] over holes in our social infrastructure" as if that were a minor thing easily fixed by ... what? Capitalism? Socialism? If every one of them were required to enter the paid workforce tomorrow, you really think nothing bad would come of that? Read some feminist critiques of Marx as a starting point. An economic model that fails to include the unpaid labor in society is obviously deficient, as is failing to recognize the inequality of pay across diverse workers. Similarly a failure to include non-bankable benefits of a variety of social roles is tunnel vision over-emphasizing currency as a measure of life and society.

I hear you in the case of low income families. But in this case OP simply has the financial means not to have to work even if her family doesn't need her home. That's what she told us - and it's why she says she's struggling a little with the decision. There's no positive externality to that.

But I also think it's a perfectly valid decision to make! That's why I say: who cares what society thinks of the decision. I think it's silly to demand that society somehow recognize that OP is making a decision that's beneficial beyond her family - it's clearly not - but who cares? Have enough self-esteem and self-awareness to make the decision that works for you and your family, and not care if society's giving you a pat on the back while you're doing it.

It's basically the dream to not have to work - and not because your labor is so desperately needed at home that of course you can't be shared with a workplace. But because this is what you want to do, and you have the means to do it. THAT is freedom - and it's what OP is describing.

I agree with this person in that I know that my parents where the first generation of people in my forebears to ever have to work, the generations before WW2 were independently wealthy both men and women, they managed their assets which took perhaps a few hours a day, Ive seen my graandmother sit with her secretary to do this but she divided her wealth equally among her children. My father was fairly successful and left money for my siblings and I, my sister and are also married to fairly successful spouses and have the choice to work out of the home or not but we do have to do more housework if we stay home than our mom or grandmother did. My grandmother just directed staff, my mom had a live in when we were kids and then a cook, outdoor maintenance and cleaners who came in took care of stuff and then live in when she was aging. I have aunts and uncles who had all working spouses on my moms side though b/c while their inheritance was a nice cushion and provided for retirement, it was not enough to live on. The point is- if you have the means, people stay home, both men and women, Kids or no kids. My great uncle and aunt didn't have any kids, they both never worked a day in their lives other than meeting with their property managers a few times a year. Americans in general value work as a way of contributing to society and as independently wealthy people lost their wealth over the 2oth century they also bought into the work is good b/c you are contributing to society myth b/c it was too difficult to admit that they worked out of NEED. most women need to work, just like men, that is why they work. Faffing around and claiming it is a social need, social good bah blah is just so much window dressing. if we could all live like Wooster, we would.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should do you. The value that you add to your family and kids is difficult to measure - but it's significant. Society should value it more.

Who cares what "society" thinks. The value is entirely maintained within the family system - it's not like "society" reaps some benefit from this decision. But there is no need for external validation, is there?

Society absolutely benefits from this decision.

With women staying home indefinitely? I don't think so. It papers over holes in our social infrastructure but my life isn't any better because someone decides not to work ever again.

I still think it's a totally fine choice to make, and that if you have the luxury of being able to make that choice then cheers to you and to your family!

Just because you can't see what these people are doing to benefit your life doesn't mean they aren't. I don't see you doing anything to benefit them either, but I'm sure your paid labor has some social value beyond the economic. Similarly their unpaid labor has both social and economic value. If you suddenly removed every SAHP from society, what do you image would happen? You note that they "paper[] over holes in our social infrastructure" as if that were a minor thing easily fixed by ... what? Capitalism? Socialism? If every one of them were required to enter the paid workforce tomorrow, you really think nothing bad would come of that? Read some feminist critiques of Marx as a starting point. An economic model that fails to include the unpaid labor in society is obviously deficient, as is failing to recognize the inequality of pay across diverse workers. Similarly a failure to include non-bankable benefits of a variety of social roles is tunnel vision over-emphasizing currency as a measure of life and society.

I hear you in the case of low income families. But in this case OP simply has the financial means not to have to work even if her family doesn't need her home. That's what she told us - and it's why she says she's struggling a little with the decision. There's no positive externality to that.

But I also think it's a perfectly valid decision to make! That's why I say: who cares what society thinks of the decision. I think it's silly to demand that society somehow recognize that OP is making a decision that's beneficial beyond her family - it's clearly not - but who cares? Have enough self-esteem and self-awareness to make the decision that works for you and your family, and not care if society's giving you a pat on the back while you're doing it.

It's basically the dream to not have to work - and not because your labor is so desperately needed at home that of course you can't be shared with a workplace. But because this is what you want to do, and you have the means to do it. THAT is freedom - and it's what OP is describing.

I agree with this person in that I know that my parents where the first generation of people in my forebears to ever have to work, the generations before WW2 were independently wealthy both men and women, they managed their assets which took perhaps a few hours a day, Ive seen my graandmother sit with her secretary to do this but she divided her wealth equally among her children. My father was fairly successful and left money for my siblings and I, my sister and are also married to fairly successful spouses and have the choice to work out of the home or not but we do have to do more housework if we stay home than our mom or grandmother did. My grandmother just directed staff, my mom had a live in when we were kids and then a cook, outdoor maintenance and cleaners who came in took care of stuff and then live in when she was aging. I have aunts and uncles who had all working spouses on my moms side though b/c while their inheritance was a nice cushion and provided for retirement, it was not enough to live on. The point is- if you have the means, people stay home, both men and women, Kids or no kids. My great uncle and aunt didn't have any kids, they both never worked a day in their lives other than meeting with their property managers a few times a year. Americans in general value work as a way of contributing to society and as independently wealthy people lost their wealth over the 2oth century they also bought into the work is good b/c you are contributing to society myth b/c it was too difficult to admit that they worked out of NEED. most women need to work, just like men, that is why they work. Faffing around and claiming it is a social need, social good bah blah is just so much window dressing. if we could all live like Wooster, we would.

Too bad all that wealth did not buy you enough education to teach you when to use 'I' and when to use 'me'.

[Anonymous]

Why humans have this need to seek validity for their choices? Why can’t your choice can be right for you and next person’s choice be right for him? Why we all have to sing one tune?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why humans have this need to seek validity for their choices? Why can’t your choice can be right for you and next person’s choice be right for him? Why we all have to sing one tune?

Because it is falsely presented as a choice. For most people, it isn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why humans have this need to seek validity for their choices? Why can’t your choice can be right for you and next person’s choice be right for him? Why we all have to sing one tune?

Because it is falsely presented as a choice. For most people, it isn't.

Fair enough but why the urge to take it away from one’s who have it? Human misery needs to spread until all are miserable?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why humans have this need to seek validity for their choices? Why can’t your choice can be right for you and next person’s choice be right for him? Why we all have to sing one tune?

Because it is falsely presented as a choice. For most people, it isn't.

Fair enough but why the urge to take it away from one’s who have it? Human misery needs to spread until all are miserable?

Because people are pushing the narrative that was pushed on them. That goes for both the SAH crowd and the WOH crowd. There is less choice than people want to believe, so they carry on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why humans have this need to seek validity for their choices? Why can’t your choice can be right for you and next person’s choice be right for him? Why we all have to sing one tune?

Because it is falsely presented as a choice. For most people, it isn't.

Fair enough but why the urge to take it away from one’s who have it? Human misery needs to spread until all are miserable?

Because people are pushing the narrative that was pushed on them. That goes for both the SAH crowd and the WOH crowd. There is less choice than people want to believe, so they carry on.

This is very true. I was pushed by my family to work and they are horrified years later that I'm not working. Their entire identities are based off their jobs (or former jobs for those retired). My mom was pushed to work by her mom as they were able to give my mom opportunities that my grandmother never had. The difference is my mom had my grandmothers help every time we got sick, every school holiday and summers when there wasn't camp. My mom has never once offered to babysit or help, nor would on the rare occasion when asked, so its a very different situation.

I think its great that people have choices and that women have choices. I raise my son's to give their wives the choice and to support them no matter what their wife's choice is and that we will support both of them, especially if they both work. The nice thing about me not working is being available to help my kids and their spouses so they also get that choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Adoption is beautiful and a blessing but are there any unbiased scientific studies about any psychological effects on babies?

Of course there are.

[Anonymous]

I have not returned to the workplace because I like hanging out with my kids and DH.

Basically, currently I live a calm and chilled lifestyle. I think going back to work will be like punishment for me. Even the thought of it makes me want to cry, because I don't even like getting up in the morning. Thank You, Jesus!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t see why importance of biological bond between a mother and a baby has to be undermined to validate adoption or daycare. Just because it’s not optimal, doesn’t mean it’s subpar.

There is also an equal bond between a father and child. And, that of parents through adoption. Biology has nothing to do with bonding, nor does giving birth. Day care is a separate issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why humans have this need to seek validity for their choices? Why can’t your choice can be right for you and next person’s choice be right for him? Why we all have to sing one tune?

Because it is falsely presented as a choice. For most people, it isn't.

Fair enough but why the urge to take it away from one’s who have it? Human misery needs to spread until all are miserable?

Because people are pushing the narrative that was pushed on them. That goes for both the SAH crowd and the WOH crowd. There is less choice than people want to believe, so they carry on.

This is very true. I was pushed by my family to work and they are horrified years later that I'm not working. Their entire identities are based off their jobs (or former jobs for those retired). My mom was pushed to work by her mom as they were able to give my mom opportunities that my grandmother never had. The difference is my mom had my grandmothers help every time we got sick, every school holiday and summers when there wasn't camp. My mom has never once offered to babysit or help, nor would on the rare occasion when asked, so its a very different situation.

I think its great that people have choices and that women have choices. I raise my son's to give their wives the choice and to support them no matter what their wife's choice is and that we will support both of them, especially if they both work. The nice thing about me not working is being available to help my kids and their spouses so they also get that choice.

Well, in contrast to your experience, I had people tell me that I should have aborted my son rather than let him spend 9 hours in a relatively good daycare where he had the same teacher for all 5 years of his attendance. My mother told me that I might as well drop him off at a 'Romanian orphanage'. Yes, my mother actually said that. No, she isn't Romanian. I had 5 weeks paid leave and 1 week unpaid, that's all. So, it goes both ways. I don't really care what people do, but when you put it out there and claim 'freedom and choice' it gets damn tiresome. Especially the noone can care for a baby but the one that birthed it poster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have not returned to the workplace because I like hanging out with my kids and DH.

Basically, currently I live a calm and chilled lifestyle. I think going back to work will be like punishment for me. Even the thought of it makes me want to cry, because I don't even like getting up in the morning. Thank You, Jesus!

Ok maybe thank your husband. Thank society too for pushing him to work so that you don't have to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t see why importance of biological bond between a mother and a baby has to be undermined to validate adoption or daycare. Just because it’s not optimal, doesn’t mean it’s subpar.

There is also an equal bond between a father and child. And, that of parents through adoption. Biology has nothing to do with bonding, nor does giving birth. Day care is a separate issue.

Really? DH and I were so enamored by our biological kids - their cuteness, their personalities, their intelligence, their very existance - that both of us working outside the home and leaving them with someone else was not an option. If they were less cute, less intelligent, less pleasant, and less related to us by genetic, maybe I would have been ok leaving them in daycare or formula feeding them. For me, the very thought of leaving them to get back to work would make me want to weep. DH was also super protective of them and wanted the best for them. He did not trust anyone with them except me and my mom. DH and I, paid for all sorts of outsourcing, so that my kids were either with me, DH or my mom - at all times. Of course, all of this was possible because we also were ok financially and could afford to be single income family.

If they were not our biological kids, I wonder if we would feel that kind of bonding with our kids? Yes, nurture makes a difference, but we also could see nature and genetics reflected in the way our kids were. Our parents (ILs and my parents), pitched in and helped to raise the grandkids also because of the genetics. They could see their own kids and their own traits in their grandkids. I wonder if that urge to look after the baby with such tenderness, love, responsiblity and care would have happened to the degree that it did if they were adopted grandkids? Of course, they would have been involved and been loving grandparents, but I am sure that the very same feelings would not have been there knowing that these grandkids were the same bloodline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have not returned to the workplace because I like hanging out with my kids and DH.

Basically, currently I live a calm and chilled lifestyle. I think going back to work will be like punishment for me. Even the thought of it makes me want to cry, because I don't even like getting up in the morning. Thank You, Jesus!

Ok maybe thank your husband. Thank society too for pushing him to work so that you don't have to.

I think he likes to work though and also get up early in the morning.

Thank you patriarchal society for telling men that they must be providers!

Thank you DH, for appreciating me for having your kids, breastfeeding them, raising them etc...things other women also do for their families but are not given credit for.

[Anonymous]

I wish all the moms were supported and respected. I wish all wives had great marriages and supportive husbands. I wish all dads were good dads. I wish everyone had enough money.

BUT, this does not happen. And people adjust to their reality. My reality is that I have had to work hard in some years, but right now, my life is pretty easy and it is a life of leisure.