S/O Why do you care if moms stay home?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SAHM here.

I hate these threads. They're usually started by a WOHM asking some version of "why don't you want to work a flexible job and not be dependent on a man?"

So you explain how your former industry was not flexible, why you and your husband prize a peaceful, calm existence where one person works and the other takes care of home and kid stuff, and what you have done to mitigate the risk of being financially dependent (large cash savings, continue to invest for your own retirement, large life insurance and disability policies, post nuptial agreements, etc. etc.) and they come back with "well it's not about YOU or your reasons, it's about women in general."

Don't you get that ALL women are making choices based on their unique circumstances and are making good choices mitigating risk in their lives?

Like sorry your dad left your mom high and dry but that's not going to happen to me for various reasons and no amount of bitter wishing on your part is going to make it so. It's just not. If my husband left me tomorrow, which is extremely unlikely for various reasons, I'd walk away with about 3 million dollars. A nice cushion to start over with.

+100

I’m at home right now. It’s not forever but I’m REALLY happy at home and a 100% better parent when I’m not giving so much of my mental energy and time to corporate America. My dd is doing better than she was when I was at work and we’re all less stressed. I’m not concerned about getting back into the workforce even though I know I’ll encounter bitter women who don’t want to let me back in because I took time off. But I’ll get back in anyways. (And I only judge those who are arguing that their way of staying at work is the right way for everyone and society at large.) I have several girlfriends who are much happier parents because they have fulfilling jobs to go to and I’m glad they have that option and that MOST people don’t judge them for working and putting their kids in daycare. It’s nice to have choices and it saddens me that so many families in this country don’t actually have many choices or career flexibility. I use my vote to help change that but I won’t give up my ability to choose in the name of solidarity. That’s so ass backwards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care if you're SAHM or WOH mom. I do care when I get SAHM tell me 'I would NEVER let anyone care for my child'. That is nice for you since you have a supportive spouse who makes significant amount of money to allow you to have the luxury to stay home. Comments like these upsets me. Don't you think all moms would like to have the luxury to have options but not all are fortunate. Idon't identify myself through my career. I could care less. I only work for my paycheck to support my family and provide a certain quality of life for them. My goal is to earn and save significantly so I can retire early.

I sah and we are far from rich. I knew My dh and I both wanted me to care for our children and not have them in someone else's care. We waited, planned, saved and lived off of one income for years before having kids. We'll never be rich, but we have the family life we want.

Enjoy dependence!

You missed the part where we planned and saved for years. Also, we depend on each other.

But why? Why wouldn’t you want to have a flexible job where you can spend time with your kids AND remain an independent person? My mom stayed home and sacrificed so much. Now that she sees me work a flexible job I think it has hit her how foolish she was.

The main person sacrificing in this arrangement is you. You won’t be contributing to your own retirement account. You will face challenges retentering the workforce. You have lost your identity outside of your kids and husband. Of course your husband will go along with this arrangement.

NP. If you’re talking about a flexible part-time job, how many hours do you have to work to be not dependent on your husband? If you’re talking about a flexible full time job where you work 40+ hrs/wk and also spend several hours per day with your children, then wow good for you but that sounds exhausting.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I never jump into these stupid debates and did not read the prior posts, but for this one I have to, because the OP betrays the total ignorance about history, women's rights, and the role of women in society.

It is not just about what you, Cindy Lou, decide to do with your career once you have kids. It's about the bigger picture, and the fact that when women are not able to, for various reasons, combine career with family, or when we collectively as a society start to spin a narrative that children are hurt when women work, then women feel pressured to drop out, or guilted into dropping out, or forced into it, and then women (and children) suffer the consequences, for example:

-when you have only male OB/GYNs who force you into c-sections and many other procedures because of a lack of understanding or care for what women face
-when there is less money given in the budget process of government to education, or protection for families, because men typically value these things less
-- when you get no paid maternity leave because CEOs are all men and so are the legislators
-- when scientists run studies only on male subjects because they assume women are the same
-- when rape kids go untouched because it's simply not a priority for police departments (mostly male)
-when you have no access to birth control because male legislators don't value it

I could go on and on. All of the above is part of our history and was part of our reality for hundreds/thousands of years. This is why women have fought to be in the workplace. So when SAHMs start talking about "who cares when women aren't part of the workforce," well that is just completely stupid.

I appreciate everything you said, but none of it would make it possible for me to put my 4-month-old in daycare. There is something primal/emotional in me that will not let someone else be my infant/toddler’s primary caregiver. It’s not guilt or worry - it’s just a deep desire to be with her. Do I think these are all good arguments to return to work when she’s like 5? yes. Also, remember that I vote for all the policies you suggested, even if I’m not currently working. And really, what is to stop someone from taking a couple years off from their medical practice, for ex, and then returning when her kids are in preschool? I mean, even Nancy Pelosi was a sahm for awhile....

What you don’t understand is that many working moms are still primary caregivers.

If your infant or toddler is in daycare of with a nanny, then that person is your child's primary care giver, not you. I'm not saying that's bad, but it's just a fact.

nope

+1 Amazing how somehow these women would not consider a kindergarten teacher a primary care giver but they make these inane statements. Are you homeschooling? Because if not, then by your definition you aren't the primary care giver once your kid enters K.

Agreed. Someone who's going on and on about primary caregiving, what switch flips when a kid turns 5 and goes to school? What about if they go to preschool?

Can't help you if you don't see the developmental difference between a toddler and an elementary schooler.

Enlighten me. In your own words, please. I wouldn't consider a 5 year old about to start K a toddler, but you do you.

Where did I say a 5-year-old is a toddler...?

Oh my good Lord. The idea being that before they’re old enough to go to school children should be coddled by their mother 24/7. Then the minute they go to kindergarten, somehow the teacher does NOT become a primary caregiver? Even though a nanny watching them the week before would have been?

I did not say "SHOULD" ("should be coddled by their mother"). We can all agree infants need almost constant care by a 1-1 provider, right? Or at most 2-1? All I am saying is I want to be that person. And yes, if your infant is with a nanny or at daycare for most of their waking hours, then that person is their primary caregiver. I don't see how you can disagree with that. Again, I am not saying there is anything wrong with that! If you are happy with that arrangement and your child is too, then great! By 5 years old, a child does NOT need that kind of attention. What problem do you have with the idea that children's needs and independence change from the course of 0 to 5?

DP. No, you are incorrect. My DH and I both work and we also are our childrens' primary caretakers. Period. They know who their mother is and who their father is and there is no confusion on their part. The people at daycare were also caretakers, but not the primary ones. Their grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins have been part-time caretakers. Their teachers and staff at their school are now also caretakers, but they are not their primary caretakers.

A lot of life happens outside of "9 to 5" as you call it, *especially* for infants. The caretakers at daycare never nursed my babies in the middle of the night. When my children were or are now sick, they did not care for them. I did. Everyday, we have breakfast together. Every night, my family eats dinner together, and we discuss our days. Every night, we spend time as a family, whether doing homework, playing games, reading. I tuck them in. Tons of meaningful conversations have happened in all sorts of contexts, including in the car and especially in those moments before sleep. Those other caretakers did not buy food to feed my children or clothes to clothe them. None of the other caretakers know the whole, wonderful stories of our children like my husband and me. My children do not know or love anyone else as much as they love us, their parents. We are their primary caregivers, whether you choose to admit or not.

If that all works for you, then fine! I'm not talking about love, who buys food, clothes, etc etc etc. I'm saying the person that spends the most time with the child during their waking hours. I want that person to be me, particularly during infancy and early toddlerhood, because that's how I FEEL. Not because it's better in any way or superior to anyone else's arrangement. I'm sorry, but spending time with my infant during the day is way more different (and more fun...) than spending time with her at nighttime, and I PERSONALLY don't want to miss that time. If you don't mind missing that time and your child has great care during that time, then fine! Good for you! Am I not allowed to feel differently from you....? The whole way this started was me saying i want to be the one with my child during infancy/toddlerhood instead of a nanny or daycare. I did not say it was better than working outside the home or that a parent who doesn't feel this way is bad or that a child who goes to daycare or has a nanny is worse off. And then a bunch of working moms told me I was silly for feeling this way and replied with illogical arguments about a 3-month-old in daycare being the same as a 5-year-old in kindergarten.

You said if a woman who works is not her child's primary caretaker. That is incorrect. Stop with the moving goalposts.

Yea, but I guess I didn't mean it the way people are taking it. I never said anything about love etc. I'm not sure what other term you think I should use for someone who is spending the majority of a child's waking hours with them....?

I don't know if you'll be back, PP, but if you do come back, I wanted to ask if you are a new mom. Most new moms feel the way you do, so in love with their baby, whether they intend to go back to work or not. The truth is, I cried every day when I dropped off my baby at her daycare provider for a while when I went back to work. But that pain was mine, not my baby's. She was happy and fine. Happy with me in the morning, happy with her provider during the day, happy with me in the evenings and all weekend. I know that feeling of not wanting to be away from your baby, but that feeling doesn't mean it is bad for the baby when mom and dad work. It means it can be hard for some moms to go back to work, that's all.

You have to understand that your posts come in context with a few other SAHMs on the currently running mom-war threads who are being really judgmental and nasty. Their posts are contain two things: proclamations of pity for the poor working moms who have "no choice" but to work and outright or thinly-veiled contempt for the rest of working moms. Working moms deserve none of their contempt and are not the least bit interested in their pity. Some of what you were saying skirted close to the kinds of things they were saying, so similar intentions may have been inferred.

I'm the PP. I swear I'm not the "crazy" PP who's posting from her toilet at 3 am... I happen to be up right now because I'm in my third trimester and hungry. Anyway, I totally agree with EVERYTHING you said. And yes, I am a relatively "new" mom, I guess? My daughter is a 2-year-old, and if you'll notice, all my posts clearly differentiate between infants/toddlers/elementary schoolers, etc. Yes, I am talking about the same pull you describe, but I NEVER said anything about babies being happier or better off with their moms instead of a nanny/daycare worker. Other posters may have said that, but not me. In fact, I went out of my way multiple times to say I don't think staying home is better for children or that children are sad at daycare, etc. The issue I personally am having is: poster says anyone who stays at home instead of going back to work is shirking her responsibilities toward women's empowerment; my response: okay, but I feel a deep pull to be with my daughter full-time for longer than a traditional maternity leave, and there's really nothing I can do about that. And then a bunch of working moms jump on me as if I'm threatening their status as parents, saying they don't love their child, etc. AND while jumping on me, they make totally ridiculous arguments about the differences/non-differences between an infant vs a kindergartner, daytime hours vs. nighttime hours, etc., and taking issue with the term "primary caregiver," which I guess is much more loaded than I initially understood.

Yes, "primary caregiver" is pretty loaded. "Primary" means first in importance; therefore, you will not find any loving parent out there who will tell you they are not the primary caregivers for their children. And why should they? They ARE the primary caregivers of their children. Most children have a number of part-time caregivers who help care for them. Frankly, it would not be healthy for a child to spend all of their time with only one person anyway. There are so many stories out there and so many different scenarios, all of which can be fine for kids and fine for parents. Any PP who comes on here and gives us their single, unique life story and uses that to pass judgment on other moms is out of line. It's all over this thread and it's ANNOYING and naive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care if you're SAHM or WOH mom. I do care when I get SAHM tell me 'I would NEVER let anyone care for my child'. That is nice for you since you have a supportive spouse who makes significant amount of money to allow you to have the luxury to stay home. Comments like these upsets me. Don't you think all moms would like to have the luxury to have options but not all are fortunate. Idon't identify myself through my career. I could care less. I only work for my paycheck to support my family and provide a certain quality of life for them. My goal is to earn and save significantly so I can retire early.

I sah and we are far from rich. I knew My dh and I both wanted me to care for our children and not have them in someone else's care. We waited, planned, saved and lived off of one income for years before having kids. We'll never be rich, but we have the family life we want.

Enjoy dependence!

You missed the part where we planned and saved for years. Also, we depend on each other.

But why? Why wouldn’t you want to have a flexible job where you can spend time with your kids AND remain an independent person? My mom stayed home and sacrificed so much. Now that she sees me work a flexible job I think it has hit her how foolish she was.

The main person sacrificing in this arrangement is you. You won’t be contributing to your own retirement account. You will face challenges retentering the workforce. You have lost your identity outside of your kids and husband. Of course your husband will go along with this arrangement.

I've seen too many of my wohm friends scramble last minute due to kid's illness, weather closings, etc. I know they still bear the brunt of responsibilty for their kids and for things in the home, even though they work. My dh and I both wanted the same type of family and home life: peaceful, low stress, supportive, smooth, etc. We have been together many, many years and continue to have a happy, healthy marriage. We are planners and I will be just fine if the unthinkable (insert your concern here) happens.

DP: good for you! You and your family are unusual, and you know that, but for some reason can't look beyond your own situation. The vast majority of women who SAH are in difficult positions financially, as PP (and others) have noted. This debate isn't about you, personally, it's about what happens to society at large and women in general when most women don't have the opportunities for flexible, decently paid employment. In real life, people have to solve challenging problems *and that's fine*. Let's not stick our heads in the sand and pretend that all is hunky-dory just because we got lucky in our own personal lives.

I didn't get lucky. We sacrificed and planned. Luck has played no part in my marriage or family life. Dh and I knew exactly what we wanted and we made it happen. It wasn't luck which brought us together or which has kept us together, it was good decision making paired with shared values and continuing commitment to each other and our family.

Only a super-lucky, privileged person would write such a tone-deaf, ridiculous post. Yes, I said ridiculous. If you honestly think that whatever good fortune you enjoy now was solely due to your own efforts and merits, I have a bridge to sell you. You are truly insufferable, and you will raise insufferable children who also falsely believe they are better than everyone else.

I believe in self determination over luck. Luck is superstition. I fully understand that sh*t happens, but I have made choices in life which help make the sh*t bearable when it happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care if you're SAHM or WOH mom. I do care when I get SAHM tell me 'I would NEVER let anyone care for my child'. That is nice for you since you have a supportive spouse who makes significant amount of money to allow you to have the luxury to stay home. Comments like these upsets me. Don't you think all moms would like to have the luxury to have options but not all are fortunate. Idon't identify myself through my career. I could care less. I only work for my paycheck to support my family and provide a certain quality of life for them. My goal is to earn and save significantly so I can retire early.

I sah and we are far from rich. I knew My dh and I both wanted me to care for our children and not have them in someone else's care. We waited, planned, saved and lived off of one income for years before having kids. We'll never be rich, but we have the family life we want.

Enjoy dependence!

You missed the part where we planned and saved for years. Also, we depend on each other.

But why? Why wouldn’t you want to have a flexible job where you can spend time with your kids AND remain an independent person? My mom stayed home and sacrificed so much. Now that she sees me work a flexible job I think it has hit her how foolish she was.

The main person sacrificing in this arrangement is you. You won’t be contributing to your own retirement account. You will face challenges retentering the workforce. You have lost your identity outside of your kids and husband. Of course your husband will go along with this arrangement.

NP. If you’re talking about a flexible part-time job, how many hours do you have to work to be not dependent on your husband? If you’re talking about a flexible full time job where you work 40+ hrs/wk and also spend several hours per day with your children, then wow good for you but that sounds exhausting.

Depends on where you started before getting pregnant. I do work for a consulting firm in the DC area for about 100/hour (I work in a niche field). If I do 130 hrs./month (equivalent of about 30 hours a week), I am benefits eligible (that's the ACA limit where hourly employees should be offered benefits).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care if you're SAHM or WOH mom. I do care when I get SAHM tell me 'I would NEVER let anyone care for my child'. That is nice for you since you have a supportive spouse who makes significant amount of money to allow you to have the luxury to stay home. Comments like these upsets me. Don't you think all moms would like to have the luxury to have options but not all are fortunate. Idon't identify myself through my career. I could care less. I only work for my paycheck to support my family and provide a certain quality of life for them. My goal is to earn and save significantly so I can retire early.

I sah and we are far from rich. I knew My dh and I both wanted me to care for our children and not have them in someone else's care. We waited, planned, saved and lived off of one income for years before having kids. We'll never be rich, but we have the family life we want.

Enjoy dependence!

You missed the part where we planned and saved for years. Also, we depend on each other.

But why? Why wouldn’t you want to have a flexible job where you can spend time with your kids AND remain an independent person? My mom stayed home and sacrificed so much. Now that she sees me work a flexible job I think it has hit her how foolish she was.

The main person sacrificing in this arrangement is you. You won’t be contributing to your own retirement account. You will face challenges retentering the workforce. You have lost your identity outside of your kids and husband. Of course your husband will go along with this arrangement.

I've seen too many of my wohm friends scramble last minute due to kid's illness, weather closings, etc. I know they still bear the brunt of responsibilty for their kids and for things in the home, even though they work. My dh and I both wanted the same type of family and home life: peaceful, low stress, supportive, smooth, etc. We have been together many, many years and continue to have a happy, healthy marriage. We are planners and I will be just fine if the unthinkable (insert your concern here) happens.

DP: good for you! You and your family are unusual, and you know that, but for some reason can't look beyond your own situation. The vast majority of women who SAH are in difficult positions financially, as PP (and others) have noted. This debate isn't about you, personally, it's about what happens to society at large and women in general when most women don't have the opportunities for flexible, decently paid employment. In real life, people have to solve challenging problems *and that's fine*. Let's not stick our heads in the sand and pretend that all is hunky-dory just because we got lucky in our own personal lives.

I didn't get lucky. We sacrificed and planned. Luck has played no part in my marriage or family life. Dh and I knew exactly what we wanted and we made it happen. It wasn't luck which brought us together or which has kept us together, it was good decision making paired with shared values and continuing commitment to each other and our family.

Only a super-lucky, privileged person would write such a tone-deaf, ridiculous post. Yes, I said ridiculous. If you honestly think that whatever good fortune you enjoy now was solely due to your own efforts and merits, I have a bridge to sell you. You are truly insufferable, and you will raise insufferable children who also falsely believe they are better than everyone else.

I believe in self determination over luck. Luck is superstition. I fully understand that sh*t happens, but I have made choices in life which help make the sh*t bearable when it happens.

Let's take the word luck out of it and substitute with what we are really talking about here: lack of control. You cannot control everything that happens to you, your spouse, and your kids. It is one of the hardest things for anyone to grapple with in life. Start a thread and ask and you will get a million stories of things that can happen to the best of planners. It would just be sad that you have to delude yourself to deal with this, except that your delusion comes with that layer of self-satisfaction and belief in your own superiority to boot, so...insufferable is the word for you.

"Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall. Better it is to be of an humble spirit with the lowly, than to divide the spoil with the proud."

[Anonymous]

These arguments are so nasty and non existent in my home country. Most women stay at home. No one is judging anyone’s choice. This post is evidence that American women are miserable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SAHM here.

I hate these threads. They're usually started by a WOHM asking some version of "why don't you want to work a flexible job and not be dependent on a man?"

So you explain how your former industry was not flexible, why you and your husband prize a peaceful, calm existence where one person works and the other takes care of home and kid stuff, and what you have done to mitigate the risk of being financially dependent (large cash savings, continue to invest for your own retirement, large life insurance and disability policies, post nuptial agreements, etc. etc.) and they come back with "well it's not about YOU or your reasons, it's about women in general."

Don't you get that ALL women are making choices based on their unique circumstances and are making good choices mitigating risk in their lives?

Like sorry your dad left your mom high and dry but that's not going to happen to me for various reasons and no amount of bitter wishing on your part is going to make it so. It's just not. If my husband left me tomorrow, which is extremely unlikely for various reasons, I'd walk away with about 3 million dollars. A nice cushion to start over with.

This is more trash and toxicity added to an already toxic subject. You want to stir the pot and you're enjoying the drama. So much for prizing a peaceful, calm existence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SAHM here.

I hate these threads. They're usually started by a WOHM asking some version of "why don't you want to work a flexible job and not be dependent on a man?"

So you explain how your former industry was not flexible, why you and your husband prize a peaceful, calm existence where one person works and the other takes care of home and kid stuff, and what you have done to mitigate the risk of being financially dependent (large cash savings, continue to invest for your own retirement, large life insurance and disability policies, post nuptial agreements, etc. etc.) and they come back with "well it's not about YOU or your reasons, it's about women in general."

Don't you get that ALL women are making choices based on their unique circumstances and are making good choices mitigating risk in their lives?

Like sorry your dad left your mom high and dry but that's not going to happen to me for various reasons and no amount of bitter wishing on your part is going to make it so. It's just not. If my husband left me tomorrow, which is extremely unlikely for various reasons, I'd walk away with about 3 million dollars. A nice cushion to start over with.

This is more trash and toxicity added to an already toxic subject. You want to stir the pot and you're enjoying the drama. So much for prizing a peaceful, calm existence.

+1. If you were truly happy with your life, you wouldn’t add to nastiness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care if you're SAHM or WOH mom. I do care when I get SAHM tell me 'I would NEVER let anyone care for my child'. That is nice for you since you have a supportive spouse who makes significant amount of money to allow you to have the luxury to stay home. Comments like these upsets me. Don't you think all moms would like to have the luxury to have options but not all are fortunate. Idon't identify myself through my career. I could care less. I only work for my paycheck to support my family and provide a certain quality of life for them. My goal is to earn and save significantly so I can retire early.

I sah and we are far from rich. I knew My dh and I both wanted me to care for our children and not have them in someone else's care. We waited, planned, saved and lived off of one income for years before having kids. We'll never be rich, but we have the family life we want.

Enjoy dependence!

You missed the part where we planned and saved for years. Also, we depend on each other.

But why? Why wouldn’t you want to have a flexible job where you can spend time with your kids AND remain an independent person? My mom stayed home and sacrificed so much. Now that she sees me work a flexible job I think it has hit her how foolish she was.

The main person sacrificing in this arrangement is you. You won’t be contributing to your own retirement account. You will face challenges retentering the workforce. You have lost your identity outside of your kids and husband. Of course your husband will go along with this arrangement.

NP. If you’re talking about a flexible part-time job, how many hours do you have to work to be not dependent on your husband? If you’re talking about a flexible full time job where you work 40+ hrs/wk and also spend several hours per day with your children, then wow good for you but that sounds exhausting.

Working isn’t just about money. It’s about being part of an equitable marriage where you aren’t just a nanny, cook and maid. It’s having your own retirement account, getting out of the house. It’s not experiencing a sudden change in your life (no longer going to work!) just because you had a child. It’s having the same opportunities as a man. It’s the ability to have a life and relationships outside of the home or children. I could go on.

I work 40 hours with a less than 15 min commute.

I don’t find working and having a child exhausting. Both are work but I wouldn’t want to give up my job or my child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care if you're SAHM or WOH mom. I do care when I get SAHM tell me 'I would NEVER let anyone care for my child'. That is nice for you since you have a supportive spouse who makes significant amount of money to allow you to have the luxury to stay home. Comments like these upsets me. Don't you think all moms would like to have the luxury to have options but not all are fortunate. Idon't identify myself through my career. I could care less. I only work for my paycheck to support my family and provide a certain quality of life for them. My goal is to earn and save significantly so I can retire early.

I sah and we are far from rich. I knew My dh and I both wanted me to care for our children and not have them in someone else's care. We waited, planned, saved and lived off of one income for years before having kids. We'll never be rich, but we have the family life we want.

Enjoy dependence!

You missed the part where we planned and saved for years. Also, we depend on each other.

But why? Why wouldn’t you want to have a flexible job where you can spend time with your kids AND remain an independent person? My mom stayed home and sacrificed so much. Now that she sees me work a flexible job I think it has hit her how foolish she was.

The main person sacrificing in this arrangement is you. You won’t be contributing to your own retirement account. You will face challenges retentering the workforce. You have lost your identity outside of your kids and husband. Of course your husband will go along with this arrangement.

I've seen too many of my wohm friends scramble last minute due to kid's illness, weather closings, etc. I know they still bear the brunt of responsibilty for their kids and for things in the home, even though they work. My dh and I both wanted the same type of family and home life: peaceful, low stress, supportive, smooth, etc. We have been together many, many years and continue to have a happy, healthy marriage. We are planners and I will be just fine if the unthinkable (insert your concern here) happens.

DP: good for you! You and your family are unusual, and you know that, but for some reason can't look beyond your own situation. The vast majority of women who SAH are in difficult positions financially, as PP (and others) have noted. This debate isn't about you, personally, it's about what happens to society at large and women in general when most women don't have the opportunities for flexible, decently paid employment. In real life, people have to solve challenging problems *and that's fine*. Let's not stick our heads in the sand and pretend that all is hunky-dory just because we got lucky in our own personal lives.

I didn't get lucky. We sacrificed and planned. Luck has played no part in my marriage or family life. Dh and I knew exactly what we wanted and we made it happen. It wasn't luck which brought us together or which has kept us together, it was good decision making paired with shared values and continuing commitment to each other and our family.

Only a super-lucky, privileged person would write such a tone-deaf, ridiculous post. Yes, I said ridiculous. If you honestly think that whatever good fortune you enjoy now was solely due to your own efforts and merits, I have a bridge to sell you. You are truly insufferable, and you will raise insufferable children who also falsely believe they are better than everyone else.

I believe in self determination over luck. Luck is superstition. I fully understand that sh*t happens, but I have made choices in life which help make the sh*t bearable when it happens.

Let's take the word luck out of it and substitute with what we are really talking about here: lack of control. You cannot control everything that happens to you, your spouse, and your kids. It is one of the hardest things for anyone to grapple with in life. Start a thread and ask and you will get a million stories of things that can happen to the best of planners. It would just be sad that you have to delude yourself to deal with this, except that your delusion comes with that layer of self-satisfaction and belief in your own superiority to boot, so...insufferable is the word for you.

"Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall. Better it is to be of an humble spirit with the lowly, than to divide the spoil with the proud."

Of course no one can control everything. The point is you can control how you treat others so that, when bad things happen, there are people around reaching out and helping you. Everything in life comes down to the choices you make.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SAHM here.

I hate these threads. They're usually started by a WOHM asking some version of "why don't you want to work a flexible job and not be dependent on a man?"

So you explain how your former industry was not flexible, why you and your husband prize a peaceful, calm existence where one person works and the other takes care of home and kid stuff, and what you have done to mitigate the risk of being financially dependent (large cash savings, continue to invest for your own retirement, large life insurance and disability policies, post nuptial agreements, etc. etc.) and they come back with "well it's not about YOU or your reasons, it's about women in general."

Don't you get that ALL women are making choices based on their unique circumstances and are making good choices mitigating risk in their lives?

Like sorry your dad left your mom high and dry but that's not going to happen to me for various reasons and no amount of bitter wishing on your part is going to make it so. It's just not. If my husband left me tomorrow, which is extremely unlikely for various reasons, I'd walk away with about 3 million dollars. A nice cushion to start over with.

This is more trash and toxicity added to an already toxic subject. You want to stir the pot and you're enjoying the drama. So much for prizing a peaceful, calm existence.

Exactly. Also: step outside your privilege bubble. ALL women don't have the same choices as you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These arguments are so nasty and non existent in my home country. Most women stay at home. No one is judging anyone’s choice. This post is evidence that American women are miserable.

I am also from another country, there is nothing to judge when a woman is "expected" to do certain things and they quietly fall in line and do those things. American women have the choice, that is the key, not the expectation that of course a woman will stay at home post kids. No, they are not miserable, this just happens to be a topic which has passionate debaters on both sides.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These arguments are so nasty and non existent in my home country. Most women stay at home. No one is judging anyone’s choice. This post is evidence that American women are miserable.

I am also from another country, there is nothing to judge when a woman is "expected" to do certain things and they quietly fall in line and do those things. American women have the choice, that is the key, not the expectation that of course a woman will stay at home post kids. No, they are not miserable, this just happens to be a topic which has passionate debaters on both sides.

Seriously!

[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:I don't care if you're SAHM or WOH mom. I do care when I get SAHM tell me 'I would NEVER let anyone care for my child'. That is nice for you since you have a supportive spouse who makes significant amount of money to allow you to have the luxury to stay home. Comments like these upsets me. Don't you think all moms would like to have the luxury to have options but not all are fortunate. Idon't identify myself through my career. I could care less. I only work for my paycheck to support my family and provide a certain quality of life for them. My goal is to earn and save significantly so I can retire early.

I sah and we are far from rich. I knew My dh and I both wanted me to care for our children and not have them in someone else's care. We waited, planned, saved and lived off of one income for years before having kids. We'll never be rich, but we have the family life we want.

Enjoy dependence!

You missed the part where we planned and saved for years. Also, we depend on each other.

But why? Why wouldn’t you want to have a flexible job where you can spend time with your kids AND remain an independent person? My mom stayed home and sacrificed so much. Now that she sees me work a flexible job I think it has hit her how foolish she was.

The main person sacrificing in this arrangement is you. You won’t be contributing to your own retirement account. You will face challenges retentering the workforce. You have lost your identity outside of your kids and husband. Of course your husband will go along with this arrangement.

I've seen too many of my wohm friends scramble last minute due to kid's illness, weather closings, etc. I know they still bear the brunt of responsibilty for their kids and for things in the home, even though they work. My dh and I both wanted the same type of family and home life: peaceful, low stress, supportive, smooth, etc. We have been together many, many years and continue to have a happy, healthy marriage. We are planners and I will be just fine if the unthinkable (insert your concern here) happens.

DP: good for you! You and your family are unusual, and you know that, but for some reason can't look beyond your own situation. The vast majority of women who SAH are in difficult positions financially, as PP (and others) have noted. This debate isn't about you, personally, it's about what happens to society at large and women in general when most women don't have the opportunities for flexible, decently paid employment. In real life, people have to solve challenging problems *and that's fine*. Let's not stick our heads in the sand and pretend that all is hunky-dory just because we got lucky in our own personal lives.

I didn't get lucky. We sacrificed and planned. Luck has played no part in my marriage or family life. Dh and I knew exactly what we wanted and we made it happen. It wasn't luck which brought us together or which has kept us together, it was good decision making paired with shared values and continuing commitment to each other and our family.

Only a super-lucky, privileged person would write such a tone-deaf, ridiculous post. Yes, I said ridiculous. If you honestly think that whatever good fortune you enjoy now was solely due to your own efforts and merits, I have a bridge to sell you. You are truly insufferable, and you will raise insufferable children who also falsely believe they are better than everyone else.

I believe in self determination over luck. Luck is superstition. I fully understand that sh*t happens, but I have made choices in life which help make the sh*t bearable when it happens.

Let's take the word luck out of it and substitute with what we are really talking about here: lack of control. You cannot control everything that happens to you, your spouse, and your kids. It is one of the hardest things for anyone to grapple with in life. Start a thread and ask and you will get a million stories of things that can happen to the best of planners. It would just be sad that you have to delude yourself to deal with this, except that your delusion comes with that layer of self-satisfaction and belief in your own superiority to boot, so...insufferable is the word for you.

"Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall. Better it is to be of an humble spirit with the lowly, than to divide the spoil with the proud."

Of course no one can control everything. The point is you can control how you treat others so that, when bad things happen, there are people around reaching out and helping you. Everything in life comes down to the choices you make.

DP. My goodness you are obnoxious. And blind, blind, blind.