Be honest- what do you think about women who are content to be just wives and mothers?

[Anonymous]

Not this same tired debate that pops up every week again!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm always confused by the black and white thinking of this questions - unless we're talking about women who marry and stay home immediately, even SAHMs usually have careers.

I had a great 15 year career prior to SAH

I now largely stay at home (do a little consulting to stay connected so I have options down the road)

Even If I stay home until by youngest is off to college, I will hopefully have another 15+ healthy years. My parents (who are 71) both have hobbies that make an income / contribute to their community at this part of their life. i'd expect the same

So even if I stay home with kids the entire time they're growing up, thats still 30+ years out in the world doing things to contribute, paid or otherwise. And yet this question wants to define my entire life by just what I do with 2 decades of it

Agreed! I’m not permanently unemployable because I am staying home right now. I had a great career, along with a network of colleagues/friends, and I can go back to it if and when I choose. I can also continue to stay home and prioritize my house and family if I choose. Or maybe I can try something completely different!

I think the poster who said a lot of this judgement is a direct result of anxiety is on to something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good for them! Hope it works out.

This. But if it were my daughter I would be privately disappointed after spending so much money on sending her to college and then to not work professionally. I could have saved that money in my retirement instead and retired earlier. I do believe that the world needs more women in the workforce, especially in leadership roles and science, to change the status quo for all women.

Life happens. She could have gotten all that education and had an accident or other disability that forced her out of the workplace. The education is formative and beneficial regardless of what you do with it in the years to come.

As for other women in the workforce - only if that’s what they choose to do. It’s all about choices and freedom. You don’t owe other women a career.

But we do. and that kind of thinking is why/how women keep holding other women back. it's the war of which SAHM has it better, WOHM stepping on other women to get ahead instead of helping others achieve.

You dont need a college education to stay home. Save your parents the money and do your part to marry well.

You sound like the people on the college forum who won't pay for their kids' school unless they declare a STEM major. People are 17 and 18 years old when they choose a college. You really think they all know what they are doing with their entire lives?

By the way, since you raised it, who do you think all the well-to-do men are marrying? College educated women.

These doctors, lawyers, tech executives are not marrying uneducated women who didn’t go to college. They are reproducing with these women. DH is glad to have his ivy educated wife staying home to raise his children.

I mean, of course he is. It only benefits him. You are the one taking on all risk.

DP but how on earth would it “only” benefit him? Maybe she actually LIKES being with her kids more…

You misread this.

A college educated women only benefits him.

Not

A college educated women benefits only him.

[Anonymous]

I've been reading this board for more than ten years, and have always worked, adn needed to work. I was a child prodigy and today am tremendously successful in a field of biomedicine where I both do good and make quite a bit of money.
I have a DH who also makes plenty of money and works hard, but not like big law.
AS my kids finish elementary school I am so, so, tired. I am not doing the best job at either my work, where I increasingly realize my colleagues are childless or empty nesters and fitness nuts. I have a SN child and my other is high needs. I have a fantastic nanny, family in town and a great, helpful DH who does it all, but there is still too much.

I do not know what the answer is and I could not SAH - my nanny is better at most things than me, and we are sending my kids to private to deal with the rest, but..it is too much. So if SAH is working for someone, who am I to judge? (I know this last comment is virtually sacrilege on DCUM, but I told you I was tired!)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm always confused by the black and white thinking of this questions - unless we're talking about women who marry and stay home immediately, even SAHMs usually have careers.

I had a great 15 year career prior to SAH

I now largely stay at home (do a little consulting to stay connected so I have options down the road)

Even If I stay home until by youngest is off to college, I will hopefully have another 15+ healthy years. My parents (who are 71) both have hobbies that make an income / contribute to their community at this part of their life. i'd expect the same

So even if I stay home with kids the entire time they're growing up, thats still 30+ years out in the world doing things to contribute, paid or otherwise. And yet this question wants to define my entire life by just what I do with 2 decades of it

Agreed! I’m not permanently unemployable because I am staying home right now. I had a great career, along with a network of colleagues/friends, and I can go back to it if and when I choose. I can also continue to stay home and prioritize my house and family if I choose. Or maybe I can try something completely different!

I think the poster who said a lot of this judgement is a direct result of anxiety is on to something.

Same, and this is such a great point. Someone above commented that divorce/alimony don't work the way they used to, but neither do typical career paths. Also in this day and age a "typical" educated woman who can afford to be a SAHM does have a career under her belt by the time she leaves the workforce, which wasn't always true when people were marrying and having kids straight out of college. It's easier to return to an old line of work than it is to come up with something totally new after X number of years out of the game. And yes, of course I realize that there are challenges and the time away doesn't come without a cost -- especially depending on the field -- but resume gaps are less frowned upon than they used to be and it just isn't that unusual for women (or men) to return to the workforce after a stint as a SAHP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good for them! Hope it works out.

This. But if it were my daughter I would be privately disappointed after spending so much money on sending her to college and then to not work professionally. I could have saved that money in my retirement instead and retired earlier. I do believe that the world needs more women in the workforce, especially in leadership roles and science, to change the status quo for all women.

Life happens. She could have gotten all that education and had an accident or other disability that forced her out of the workplace. The education is formative and beneficial regardless of what you do with it in the years to come.

As for other women in the workforce - only if that’s what they choose to do. It’s all about choices and freedom. You don’t owe other women a career.

But we do. and that kind of thinking is why/how women keep holding other women back. it's the war of which SAHM has it better, WOHM stepping on other women to get ahead instead of helping others achieve.

You dont need a college education to stay home. Save your parents the money and do your part to marry well.

You sound like the people on the college forum who won't pay for their kids' school unless they declare a STEM major. People are 17 and 18 years old when they choose a college. You really think they all know what they are doing with their entire lives?

By the way, since you raised it, who do you think all the well-to-do men are marrying? College educated women.

These doctors, lawyers, tech executives are not marrying uneducated women who didn’t go to college. They are reproducing with these women. DH is glad to have his ivy educated wife staying home to raise his children.

I mean, of course he is. It only benefits him. You are the one taking on all risk.

DP but how on earth would it “only” benefit him? Maybe she actually LIKES being with her kids more…

You misread this.

A college educated women only benefits him.

Not

A college educated women benefits only him.

I’m the person who wrote that and you are correct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll be honest since you requested it OP.

I have a low opinion of parents who do not even want to be the primary caregiver for their children when they are infants and toddlers. I think prioritizing material things and one's own career and self-fulfillment is selfish and indicates a lack of understanding of how important it is for young children to spend most of their time with someone who loves them completely and unconditionally.

A little off of your topic but completely relevant.

Your opinion clearly presumes that the parent has a choice not to work. What about the mother who works not because she prioritizes material things but because she needs to earn money to put food on the table and a roof over the kid's head? Is she selfish?

Must be difficult for you to understand the world outside of your bubble.

I'm not talking about parents who have no choice financially. I'm talking about parents who don't want to be the primary caregiver for their children when they are infants and toddlers.

We did that as a family with very little extra money, prioritizing my children over everything else.

It really just robbed your kids of many experiences.

And you robbed your children of one of the most important experiences of their lives, and one which can't be experienced later in life: of being taken care of by someone who loves you completely and totally. They will never experience that in life. Ever. And that is very sad IMO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll be honest since you requested it OP.

I have a low opinion of parents who do not even want to be the primary caregiver for their children when they are infants and toddlers. I think prioritizing material things and one's own career and self-fulfillment is selfish and indicates a lack of understanding of how important it is for young children to spend most of their time with someone who loves them completely and unconditionally.

A little off of your topic but completely relevant.

Your opinion clearly presumes that the parent has a choice not to work. What about the mother who works not because she prioritizes material things but because she needs to earn money to put food on the table and a roof over the kid's head? Is she selfish?

Must be difficult for you to understand the world outside of your bubble.

I'm not talking about parents who have no choice financially. I'm talking about parents who don't want to be the primary caregiver for their children when they are infants and toddlers.

We did that as a family with very little extra money, prioritizing my children over everything else.

It really just robbed your kids of many experiences.

And you robbed your children of one of the most important experiences of their lives, and one which can't be experienced later in life: of being taken care of by someone who loves you completely and totally. They will never experience that in life. Ever. And that is very sad IMO.

Genuine question from someone who stayed home: are you utterly crazy? This is literally insane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've been reading this board for more than ten years, and have always worked, adn needed to work. I was a child prodigy and today am tremendously successful in a field of biomedicine where I both do good and make quite a bit of money.
I have a DH who also makes plenty of money and works hard, but not like big law.
AS my kids finish elementary school I am so, so, tired. I am not doing the best job at either my work, where I increasingly realize my colleagues are childless or empty nesters and fitness nuts. I have a SN child and my other is high needs. I have a fantastic nanny, family in town and a great, helpful DH who does it all, but there is still too much.

I do not know what the answer is and I could not SAH - my nanny is better at most things than me, and we are sending my kids to private to deal with the rest, but..it is too much. So if SAH is working for someone, who am I to judge? (I know this last comment is virtually sacrilege on DCUM, but I told you I was tired!)

The answer is not to have children if you want an important career. You can't do well at both. Chose the career -- and spare the humans you are forcing to sacrifice on your behalf.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been reading this board for more than ten years, and have always worked, adn needed to work. I was a child prodigy and today am tremendously successful in a field of biomedicine where I both do good and make quite a bit of money.
I have a DH who also makes plenty of money and works hard, but not like big law.
AS my kids finish elementary school I am so, so, tired. I am not doing the best job at either my work, where I increasingly realize my colleagues are childless or empty nesters and fitness nuts. I have a SN child and my other is high needs. I have a fantastic nanny, family in town and a great, helpful DH who does it all, but there is still too much.

I do not know what the answer is and I could not SAH - my nanny is better at most things than me, and we are sending my kids to private to deal with the rest, but..it is too much. So if SAH is working for someone, who am I to judge? (I know this last comment is virtually sacrilege on DCUM, but I told you I was tired!)

The answer is not to have children if you want an important career. You can't do well at both. Chose the career -- and spare the humans you are forcing to sacrifice on your behalf.

Is this advice for men or only directed as women?

Why would you want a country where only men continue to have careers after having children?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll be honest since you requested it OP.

I have a low opinion of parents who do not even want to be the primary caregiver for their children when they are infants and toddlers. I think prioritizing material things and one's own career and self-fulfillment is selfish and indicates a lack of understanding of how important it is for young children to spend most of their time with someone who loves them completely and unconditionally.

A little off of your topic but completely relevant.

Your opinion clearly presumes that the parent has a choice not to work. What about the mother who works not because she prioritizes material things but because she needs to earn money to put food on the table and a roof over the kid's head? Is she selfish?

Must be difficult for you to understand the world outside of your bubble.

I'm not talking about parents who have no choice financially. I'm talking about parents who don't want to be the primary caregiver for their children when they are infants and toddlers.

We did that as a family with very little extra money, prioritizing my children over everything else.

It really just robbed your kids of many experiences.

And you robbed your children of one of the most important experiences of their lives, and one which can't be experienced later in life: of being taken care of by someone who loves you completely and totally. They will never experience that in life. Ever. And that is very sad IMO.

Maybe? My own mother was like you and now that I’m a mother I find her behavior odd. I could write a novel on her bad parenting, but let’s just say that because if it I want to work and not stay home. She was also against “strangers” raising her children and thought she was so much better than others for prioritizing child rearing over money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been reading this board for more than ten years, and have always worked, adn needed to work. I was a child prodigy and today am tremendously successful in a field of biomedicine where I both do good and make quite a bit of money.
I have a DH who also makes plenty of money and works hard, but not like big law.
AS my kids finish elementary school I am so, so, tired. I am not doing the best job at either my work, where I increasingly realize my colleagues are childless or empty nesters and fitness nuts. I have a SN child and my other is high needs. I have a fantastic nanny, family in town and a great, helpful DH who does it all, but there is still too much.

I do not know what the answer is and I could not SAH - my nanny is better at most things than me, and we are sending my kids to private to deal with the rest, but..it is too much. So if SAH is working for someone, who am I to judge? (I know this last comment is virtually sacrilege on DCUM, but I told you I was tired!)

The answer is not to have children if you want an important career. You can't do well at both. Chose the career -- and spare the humans you are forcing to sacrifice on your behalf.

Is this advice for men or only directed as women?

Why would you want a country where only men continue to have careers after having children?

Did you not read the post you are responding to? it says SKIP having kids and just focus on your career.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll be honest since you requested it OP.

I have a low opinion of parents who do not even want to be the primary caregiver for their children when they are infants and toddlers. I think prioritizing material things and one's own career and self-fulfillment is selfish and indicates a lack of understanding of how important it is for young children to spend most of their time with someone who loves them completely and unconditionally.

A little off of your topic but completely relevant.

Your opinion clearly presumes that the parent has a choice not to work. What about the mother who works not because she prioritizes material things but because she needs to earn money to put food on the table and a roof over the kid's head? Is she selfish?

Must be difficult for you to understand the world outside of your bubble.

I'm not talking about parents who have no choice financially. I'm talking about parents who don't want to be the primary caregiver for their children when they are infants and toddlers.

We did that as a family with very little extra money, prioritizing my children over everything else.

It really just robbed your kids of many experiences.

And you robbed your children of one of the most important experiences of their lives, and one which can't be experienced later in life: of being taken care of by someone who loves you completely and totally. They will never experience that in life. Ever. And that is very sad IMO.

Maybe? My own mother was like you and now that I’m a mother I find her behavior odd. I could write a novel on her bad parenting, but let’s just say that because if it I want to work and not stay home. She was also against “strangers” raising her children and thought she was so much better than others for prioritizing child rearing over money.

I mean, so what. I don't understand how a post about your own mother proves anything. Maybe you're a better person because you weren't raised by strangers who didn't love you and only saw you as a paycheck, despite how little your respect your mother.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not this same tired debate that pops up every week again!

Everyone is subconsciously unhappy with their circumstances and options and trying to defend their choices to themselves and to others.

[Anonymous]

Its not easy to be a full time parent. Not everyone can do it. Its easier to parent part time with someone else substituting for 8+ waking hours. If one can't do full time because they want or need to be away for a valid reason like finances or mental health, there is no shame in it.