If you are a working mom, why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My big why - if women aren't in the workforce, men will be running everything, making the decisions, shaping the world we live in - and that's not good for my daughters.

That being said, SAH and WOH both suck for me. As a SAHM I missed having a deeper purpose in life, and as a WOHM I desperately missed my kids. As a SAHM I had to beg my H for money, and as a WOHM I had to beg my H to help with the kids. I'll be damned if I ever have to do those again.

What has worked well for me is I started my own business WAH and hired a nanny. So I get the rewards of work and financial security, and I get to see and play with my babies throughout the day, plus I have all the flexibility I need for family life.

I think it would be very hard to find anybody who thinks women should not be in the workforce. The issue is what is the best start for children when they are infants and toddlers, before they start school full time at about age 5. Many parents, not just women, believe their children will get a better start in life and have a better daily experience with a loving parent home caring for them during those early years. Some parents don't believe that, they think paid childcare is just as good as parent care. Each family has to decide for themselves what they believe, what they can afford, and what the whole family will benefit most from.

Your solution sounds well thought out and clearly works well for you.

The problem is that while “many parents” may think it, women are almost always the ones who stay home. So it’s less about what is doing what’s best for the kids, and more about what is doing what’s best for men.

The answer is more family-friendly public policy and for men to step back from the workforce in equal numbers as women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My big why - if women aren't in the workforce, men will be running everything, making the decisions, shaping the world we live in - and that's not good for my daughters.

That being said, SAH and WOH both suck for me. As a SAHM I missed having a deeper purpose in life, and as a WOHM I desperately missed my kids. As a SAHM I had to beg my H for money, and as a WOHM I had to beg my H to help with the kids. I'll be damned if I ever have to do those again.

What has worked well for me is I started my own business WAH and hired a nanny. So I get the rewards of work and financial security, and I get to see and play with my babies throughout the day, plus I have all the flexibility I need for family life.

I think it would be very hard to find anybody who thinks women should not be in the workforce. The issue is what is the best start for children when they are infants and toddlers, before they start school full time at about age 5. Many parents, not just women, believe their children will get a better start in life and have a better daily experience with a loving parent home caring for them during those early years. Some parents don't believe that, they think paid childcare is just as good as parent care. Each family has to decide for themselves what they believe, what they can afford, and what the whole family will benefit most from.

Your solution sounds well thought out and clearly works well for you.

It’s cute to say women “belong in the workforce” and then advocate for 5+ year gaps in their professional careers. I certainly wouldn’t let a surgeon touch me who hadn’t held a scalpel in five years. So by “women belong in the workforce” what you mean is “women belong in subservient, lesser roles, even in the workplace”

No thanks.

+1. If taking 5-10 years off DIDN’T massively hurt your career, we would see men do it. But they don’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My big why - if women aren't in the workforce, men will be running everything, making the decisions, shaping the world we live in - and that's not good for my daughters.

That being said, SAH and WOH both suck for me. As a SAHM I missed having a deeper purpose in life, and as a WOHM I desperately missed my kids. As a SAHM I had to beg my H for money, and as a WOHM I had to beg my H to help with the kids. I'll be damned if I ever have to do those again.

What has worked well for me is I started my own business WAH and hired a nanny. So I get the rewards of work and financial security, and I get to see and play with my babies throughout the day, plus I have all the flexibility I need for family life.

I think it would be very hard to find anybody who thinks women should not be in the workforce. The issue is what is the best start for children when they are infants and toddlers, before they start school full time at about age 5. Many parents, not just women, believe their children will get a better start in life and have a better daily experience with a loving parent home caring for them during those early years. Some parents don't believe that, they think paid childcare is just as good as parent care. Each family has to decide for themselves what they believe, what they can afford, and what the whole family will benefit most from.

Your solution sounds well thought out and clearly works well for you.

It’s cute to say women “belong in the workforce” and then advocate for 5+ year gaps in their professional careers. I certainly wouldn’t let a surgeon touch me who hadn’t held a scalpel in five years. So by “women belong in the workforce” what you mean is “women belong in subservient, lesser roles, even in the workplace”

No thanks.

So you disagree that each family should figure out what is most important to them and then design their life around that the best they can? What I'm getting from your response is you believe there is only one solution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My big why - if women aren't in the workforce, men will be running everything, making the decisions, shaping the world we live in - and that's not good for my daughters.

That being said, SAH and WOH both suck for me. As a SAHM I missed having a deeper purpose in life, and as a WOHM I desperately missed my kids. As a SAHM I had to beg my H for money, and as a WOHM I had to beg my H to help with the kids. I'll be damned if I ever have to do those again.

What has worked well for me is I started my own business WAH and hired a nanny. So I get the rewards of work and financial security, and I get to see and play with my babies throughout the day, plus I have all the flexibility I need for family life.

I think it would be very hard to find anybody who thinks women should not be in the workforce. The issue is what is the best start for children when they are infants and toddlers, before they start school full time at about age 5. Many parents, not just women, believe their children will get a better start in life and have a better daily experience with a loving parent home caring for them during those early years. Some parents don't believe that, they think paid childcare is just as good as parent care. Each family has to decide for themselves what they believe, what they can afford, and what the whole family will benefit most from.

Your solution sounds well thought out and clearly works well for you.

It’s cute to say women “belong in the workforce” and then advocate for 5+ year gaps in their professional careers. I certainly wouldn’t let a surgeon touch me who hadn’t held a scalpel in five years. So by “women belong in the workforce” what you mean is “women belong in subservient, lesser roles, even in the workplace”

No thanks.

So you disagree that each family should figure out what is most important to them and then design their life around that the best they can? What I'm getting from your response is you believe there is only one solution.

Oh you’re for people designing their lives in a way that works for them now? I thought you were busy thinking that being home with a parent for five years w
was what was “best” for children. Please return to leaving people alone to shape their lives in the way they see fit, smart enough to know that a 5-10 year working gap will mean very limited professional opportunities for success.

[Anonymous]

Because I’m good at it and they pay me a lot of money. Like 2.5x my spouse’s comp.

[Anonymous]

is this a real question, OP? lol
because I am a single mom and have no choice. Even if I had, I would prefer to work at least part-time. My mother always worked full-time, that is what is normal to me I guess. I do NOT have a lot of respect to women who could work but just stay at home, sorry....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:is this a real question, OP? lol
because I am a single mom and have no choice. Even if I had, I would prefer to work at least part-time. My mother always worked full-time, that is what is normal to me I guess. I do NOT have a lot of respect to women who could work but just stay at home, sorry....

You’re just jealous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My big why - if women aren't in the workforce, men will be running everything, making the decisions, shaping the world we live in - and that's not good for my daughters.

That being said, SAH and WOH both suck for me. As a SAHM I missed having a deeper purpose in life, and as a WOHM I desperately missed my kids. As a SAHM I had to beg my H for money, and as a WOHM I had to beg my H to help with the kids. I'll be damned if I ever have to do those again.

What has worked well for me is I started my own business WAH and hired a nanny. So I get the rewards of work and financial security, and I get to see and play with my babies throughout the day, plus I have all the flexibility I need for family life.

I think it would be very hard to find anybody who thinks women should not be in the workforce. The issue is what is the best start for children when they are infants and toddlers, before they start school full time at about age 5. Many parents, not just women, believe their children will get a better start in life and have a better daily experience with a loving parent home caring for them during those early years. Some parents don't believe that, they think paid childcare is just as good as parent care. Each family has to decide for themselves what they believe, what they can afford, and what the whole family will benefit most from.

Your solution sounds well thought out and clearly works well for you.

It’s cute to say women “belong in the workforce” and then advocate for 5+ year gaps in their professional careers. I certainly wouldn’t let a surgeon touch me who hadn’t held a scalpel in five years. So by “women belong in the workforce” what you mean is “women belong in subservient, lesser roles, even in the workplace”

No thanks.

So you disagree that each family should figure out what is most important to them and then design their life around that the best they can? What I'm getting from your response is you believe there is only one solution.

DP. I think the problem is that the priorities are:

1. What is best for the kids
2. What is best for dad
.
.
.
99. What is best for mom

Look at the attitudes on this board: that SAHMs aren’t entitled to any of “their husband’s” money, that working fathers get to relax and have leisure time while moms needs to be on duty 24/7 because that’s the trade off for not working, the belief that childcare is bad for kids.

I think for SAH to benefit *the entire family* - not just kids and dads - things need to be equitable. Mom and dad get equal leisure time. Mom gets access to all the money and can spend how she sees fit - including spending on herself. When mom returns to the workforce, dad takes a career hit for 5+ years so she can build her career back up, meaning he needs to be responsible for at least 75% of pickups and dropoffs, sick days, etc. The things no one enjoys doing, like deep cleaning, gets outsourced rather than forcing mom to do work she hates.

And honestly most SAHMs I know stayed home out of a sense of guilt. Very few truly enjoy being at home, most would rather work. But everyone guilt trips them, and their Hs don’t contribute equally at home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is this a real question, OP? lol
because I am a single mom and have no choice. Even if I had, I would prefer to work at least part-time. My mother always worked full-time, that is what is normal to me I guess. I do NOT have a lot of respect to women who could work but just stay at home, sorry....

You’re just jealous.

On DCUM “you’re just jealous” means “I’ve lost the argument and I’m wrong but can’t admit it.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is this a real question, OP? lol
because I am a single mom and have no choice. Even if I had, I would prefer to work at least part-time. My mother always worked full-time, that is what is normal to me I guess. I do NOT have a lot of respect to women who could work but just stay at home, sorry....

You’re just jealous.

NP, but I get it. And no, it's not jealousy. There is so much about being a SAHM that doesn't make anyone jealous. I guess you can keep saying it if you want, but it isn't always true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My big why - if women aren't in the workforce, men will be running everything, making the decisions, shaping the world we live in - and that's not good for my daughters.

That being said, SAH and WOH both suck for me. As a SAHM I missed having a deeper purpose in life, and as a WOHM I desperately missed my kids. As a SAHM I had to beg my H for money, and as a WOHM I had to beg my H to help with the kids. I'll be damned if I ever have to do those again.

What has worked well for me is I started my own business WAH and hired a nanny. So I get the rewards of work and financial security, and I get to see and play with my babies throughout the day, plus I have all the flexibility I need for family life.

I think it would be very hard to find anybody who thinks women should not be in the workforce. The issue is what is the best start for children when they are infants and toddlers, before they start school full time at about age 5. Many parents, not just women, believe their children will get a better start in life and have a better daily experience with a loving parent home caring for them during those early years. Some parents don't believe that, they think paid childcare is just as good as parent care. Each family has to decide for themselves what they believe, what they can afford, and what the whole family will benefit most from.

Your solution sounds well thought out and clearly works well for you.

It’s cute to say women “belong in the workforce” and then advocate for 5+ year gaps in their professional careers. I certainly wouldn’t let a surgeon touch me who hadn’t held a scalpel in five years. So by “women belong in the workforce” what you mean is “women belong in subservient, lesser roles, even in the workplace”

No thanks.

So you disagree that each family should figure out what is most important to them and then design their life around that the best they can? What I'm getting from your response is you believe there is only one solution.

DP. I think the problem is that the priorities are:

1. What is best for the kids
2. What is best for dad
.
.
.
99. What is best for mom

Look at the attitudes on this board: that SAHMs aren’t entitled to any of “their husband’s” money, that working fathers get to relax and have leisure time while moms needs to be on duty 24/7 because that’s the trade off for not working, the belief that childcare is bad for kids.

I think for SAH to benefit *the entire family* - not just kids and dads - things need to be equitable. Mom and dad get equal leisure time. Mom gets access to all the money and can spend how she sees fit - including spending on herself. When mom returns to the workforce, dad takes a career hit for 5+ years so she can build her career back up, meaning he needs to be responsible for at least 75% of pickups and dropoffs, sick days, etc. The things no one enjoys doing, like deep cleaning, gets outsourced rather than forcing mom to do work she hates.

And honestly most SAHMs I know stayed home out of a sense of guilt. Very few truly enjoy being at home, most would rather work. But everyone guilt trips them, and their Hs don’t contribute equally at home.

I work because I love the money, I spend it ALL on me, my H doesn't need to know that I get 1K morpheus8 treatments on my legs and arms, $400 guerlain perfume, or $500 highlights and I'm not touching the children's inheritance. My needs are important. I'm happy and relaxed when I take care of myself and enjoying life's little luxuries and I don't have to discuss it with anyone. I only have one life to live. I know a lot of SAHM and they are the only ones sacrificing their needs for the family.

[Anonymous]

I work because I was heavily influenced by seeing the lives of divorced women in my neighborhood. It was rare but there were two across the street. They got financially screwed and ended up back in the workforce in their late 30s at the bottom of the ladder. It looked really difficult for them while their husbands swanned off with younger women and the bulk of their assets. And NONE of the children seemed to benefit from having had a SAHM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My big why - if women aren't in the workforce, men will be running everything, making the decisions, shaping the world we live in - and that's not good for my daughters.

That being said, SAH and WOH both suck for me. As a SAHM I missed having a deeper purpose in life, and as a WOHM I desperately missed my kids. As a SAHM I had to beg my H for money, and as a WOHM I had to beg my H to help with the kids. I'll be damned if I ever have to do those again.

What has worked well for me is I started my own business WAH and hired a nanny. So I get the rewards of work and financial security, and I get to see and play with my babies throughout the day, plus I have all the flexibility I need for family life.

I think it would be very hard to find anybody who thinks women should not be in the workforce. The issue is what is the best start for children when they are infants and toddlers, before they start school full time at about age 5. Many parents, not just women, believe their children will get a better start in life and have a better daily experience with a loving parent home caring for them during those early years. Some parents don't believe that, they think paid childcare is just as good as parent care. Each family has to decide for themselves what they believe, what they can afford, and what the whole family will benefit most from.

Your solution sounds well thought out and clearly works well for you.

Right? My career is not one where I could take any significant time off and get back into it... not just would have to take a lower role, I just don't think there would be a place for me to return at all taking more than a year off.

It’s cute to say women “belong in the workforce” and then advocate for 5+ year gaps in their professional careers. I certainly wouldn’t let a surgeon touch me who hadn’t held a scalpel in five years. So by “women belong in the workforce” what you mean is “women belong in subservient, lesser roles, even in the workplace”

No thanks.

+1. If taking 5-10 years off DIDN’T massively hurt your career, we would see men do it. But they don’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is this a real question, OP? lol
because I am a single mom and have no choice. Even if I had, I would prefer to work at least part-time. My mother always worked full-time, that is what is normal to me I guess. I do NOT have a lot of respect to women who could work but just stay at home, sorry....

You’re just jealous.

-1

I was a SAHM, then a single mom, and now I’m remarried to a very high earner. I could stay home if I wanted to but, barring having to raise a severely special needs child, see SAHM as a cop out in most cases. I think it strengthens the belief in “traditional” (sexist) gender roles and is destructive toward women’s rights, because there is NO comprehensive maternal leave or care for women in the workplace. Until it becomes a high public policy priority and one that corporations actively pursue, women are shooting themselves in the foot by opting out.

It’s a vicious, capitalist society in which your value is determined pretty exclusively by your earning capacity. When you’re earning zero, you’re doing yourself a grave disservice. I don’t think any of the above is right, by the way, but this is the way the system operates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My big why - if women aren't in the workforce, men will be running everything, making the decisions, shaping the world we live in - and that's not good for my daughters.

That being said, SAH and WOH both suck for me. As a SAHM I missed having a deeper purpose in life, and as a WOHM I desperately missed my kids. As a SAHM I had to beg my H for money, and as a WOHM I had to beg my H to help with the kids. I'll be damned if I ever have to do those again.

What has worked well for me is I started my own business WAH and hired a nanny. So I get the rewards of work and financial security, and I get to see and play with my babies throughout the day, plus I have all the flexibility I need for family life.

I think it would be very hard to find anybody who thinks women should not be in the workforce. The issue is what is the best start for children when they are infants and toddlers, before they start school full time at about age 5. Many parents, not just women, believe their children will get a better start in life and have a better daily experience with a loving parent home caring for them during those early years. Some parents don't believe that, they think paid childcare is just as good as parent care. Each family has to decide for themselves what they believe, what they can afford, and what the whole family will benefit most from.

Your solution sounds well thought out and clearly works well for you.

It’s cute to say women “belong in the workforce” and then advocate for 5+ year gaps in their professional careers. I certainly wouldn’t let a surgeon touch me who hadn’t held a scalpel in five years. So by “women belong in the workforce” what you mean is “women belong in subservient, lesser roles, even in the workplace”

No thanks.

So you disagree that each family should figure out what is most important to them and then design their life around that the best they can? What I'm getting from your response is you believe there is only one solution.

DP. I think the problem is that the priorities are:

1. What is best for the kids
2. What is best for dad
.
.
.
99. What is best for mom

Look at the attitudes on this board: that SAHMs aren’t entitled to any of “their husband’s” money, that working fathers get to relax and have leisure time while moms needs to be on duty 24/7 because that’s the trade off for not working, the belief that childcare is bad for kids.

I think for SAH to benefit *the entire family* - not just kids and dads - things need to be equitable. Mom and dad get equal leisure time. Mom gets access to all the money and can spend how she sees fit - including spending on herself. When mom returns to the workforce, dad takes a career hit for 5+ years so she can build her career back up, meaning he needs to be responsible for at least 75% of pickups and dropoffs, sick days, etc. The things no one enjoys doing, like deep cleaning, gets outsourced rather than forcing mom to do work she hates.

And honestly most SAHMs I know stayed home out of a sense of guilt. Very few truly enjoy being at home, most would rather work. But everyone guilt trips them, and their Hs don’t contribute equally at home.

This.