Why are so many women here so angry with / resentful toward women who stay home?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel a lot of ambivalence towards SAH moms, because it's always SAH moms and not SAH parents. It's totally fine if one parent wants to step back from their career and focus on the family (and is often very good for the family!), but there is still a lot of social pressure for women to step into that role that men to not receive. When I got married in my mid 20s, I heard questions about whether I was going to step back when we had kids, whether I was going to take a lower prestige/lower pressure job so my husband could focus on his career and I could the raise kids, etc. Why didn't anyone ask my husband whether he was going to step back his career ambitions to start a family years before kids were even in the picture?

Until it's seen as an equally acceptable/normal path for men (and men decide to SAH in equal numbers), it will always be a choice that is colored by gender politics. Even if it's the best choice for your family, it still is a choice that was influenced by societal norms that women have been trying to crack for decades.

And you think anything else isn't? Come on. You sound really naive here. We are all historical actors. No one is operating completely free of our time period's mores and values.

And yet plenty of people choose to. Even more elect to not regress back into the mores and values that our predecessors fought so hard to break us free of.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People who look down on other people's life choices, particularly ones as benign as whether to be a WOHP or SAHP, need to figure out "why" they need to look down on someone else. That's the real issue.

Preach lots of insecurity. Most people grow up instead of permanently having a highschool mentality

[Anonymous]

It is ugly women who are resentful. They know they can't snag a man who will just take care of them and their kids. They are trying to level the playing field of life that they share with attractive women - women who don't have to work very hard to get perks in life.

It's just human nature. Nothing to be done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel a lot of ambivalence towards SAH moms, because it's always SAH moms and not SAH parents. It's totally fine if one parent wants to step back from their career and focus on the family (and is often very good for the family!), but there is still a lot of social pressure for women to step into that role that men to not receive. When I got married in my mid 20s, I heard questions about whether I was going to step back when we had kids, whether I was going to take a lower prestige/lower pressure job so my husband could focus on his career and I could the raise kids, etc. Why didn't anyone ask my husband whether he was going to step back his career ambitions to start a family years before kids were even in the picture?

Until it's seen as an equally acceptable/normal path for men (and men decide to SAH in equal numbers), it will always be a choice that is colored by gender politics. Even if it's the best choice for your family, it still is a choice that was influenced by societal norms that women have been trying to crack for decades.

And you think anything else isn't? Come on. You sound really naive here. We are all historical actors. No one is operating completely free of our time period's mores and values.

And yet plenty of people choose to. Even more elect to not regress back into the mores and values that our predecessors fought so hard to break us free of.

This is so ridiculous. I should make MY life miserable because a bunch of women were miserable back in 1960? No f***ing way. You're out of your mind if you think I should let that influence how I live my ONE life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel a lot of ambivalence towards SAH moms, because it's always SAH moms and not SAH parents. It's totally fine if one parent wants to step back from their career and focus on the family (and is often very good for the family!), but there is still a lot of social pressure for women to step into that role that men to not receive. When I got married in my mid 20s, I heard questions about whether I was going to step back when we had kids, whether I was going to take a lower prestige/lower pressure job so my husband could focus on his career and I could the raise kids, etc. Why didn't anyone ask my husband whether he was going to step back his career ambitions to start a family years before kids were even in the picture?

Until it's seen as an equally acceptable/normal path for men (and men decide to SAH in equal numbers), it will always be a choice that is colored by gender politics. Even if it's the best choice for your family, it still is a choice that was influenced by societal norms that women have been trying to crack for decades.

And you think anything else isn't? Come on. You sound really naive here. We are all historical actors. No one is operating completely free of our time period's mores and values.

And yet plenty of people choose to. Even more elect to not regress back into the mores and values that our predecessors fought so hard to break us free of.

This is so ridiculous. I should make MY life miserable because a bunch of women were miserable back in 1960? No f***ing way. You're out of your mind if you think I should let that influence how I live my ONE life.

+ 1

The fact is, we're all free to choose now. So you choose for yourself and I'll choose for myself. Live and let live. I'm happy with my choices and I'm not putting you down. So why do you feel the right to do that to me?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel a lot of ambivalence towards SAH moms, because it's always SAH moms and not SAH parents. It's totally fine if one parent wants to step back from their career and focus on the family (and is often very good for the family!), but there is still a lot of social pressure for women to step into that role that men to not receive. When I got married in my mid 20s, I heard questions about whether I was going to step back when we had kids, whether I was going to take a lower prestige/lower pressure job so my husband could focus on his career and I could the raise kids, etc. Why didn't anyone ask my husband whether he was going to step back his career ambitions to start a family years before kids were even in the picture?

Until it's seen as an equally acceptable/normal path for men (and men decide to SAH in equal numbers), it will always be a choice that is colored by gender politics. Even if it's the best choice for your family, it still is a choice that was influenced by societal norms that women have been trying to crack for decades.

And you think anything else isn't? Come on. You sound really naive here. We are all historical actors. No one is operating completely free of our time period's mores and values.

Sure, but by having another family structure (having a SAH dad, or having both parents work and raise kids as equal partners) you are making a conscious choice that it doesn't have to be this way. I'm not saying it's wrong to be a SAH mom--I'm only saying it's a choice I feel ambivalence about. It models a set of norms for your kids--how does your daughter internalize that her career will be equally important in the future if you made the choice to step down from yours? There are all kinds of situations that make not having a parent SAH unfeasible (for example children with special needs or medical problems), or make having a SAH parent unfeasible (when both parents are absolutely required to work to make ends meet). But for most of the privileged situations on this board, it's a choice to not model an equal marriage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel a lot of ambivalence towards SAH moms, because it's always SAH moms and not SAH parents. It's totally fine if one parent wants to step back from their career and focus on the family (and is often very good for the family!), but there is still a lot of social pressure for women to step into that role that men to not receive. When I got married in my mid 20s, I heard questions about whether I was going to step back when we had kids, whether I was going to take a lower prestige/lower pressure job so my husband could focus on his career and I could the raise kids, etc. Why didn't anyone ask my husband whether he was going to step back his career ambitions to start a family years before kids were even in the picture?

Until it's seen as an equally acceptable/normal path for men (and men decide to SAH in equal numbers), it will always be a choice that is colored by gender politics. Even if it's the best choice for your family, it still is a choice that was influenced by societal norms that women have been trying to crack for decades.

And you think anything else isn't? Come on. You sound really naive here. We are all historical actors. No one is operating completely free of our time period's mores and values.

And yet plenty of people choose to. Even more elect to not regress back into the mores and values that our predecessors fought so hard to break us free of.

I'm not sure which predecessors you're referring to, but the ones I respect weren't stating the only valuable choices for women were outside the home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel a lot of ambivalence towards SAH moms, because it's always SAH moms and not SAH parents. It's totally fine if one parent wants to step back from their career and focus on the family (and is often very good for the family!), but there is still a lot of social pressure for women to step into that role that men to not receive. When I got married in my mid 20s, I heard questions about whether I was going to step back when we had kids, whether I was going to take a lower prestige/lower pressure job so my husband could focus on his career and I could the raise kids, etc. Why didn't anyone ask my husband whether he was going to step back his career ambitions to start a family years before kids were even in the picture?

Until it's seen as an equally acceptable/normal path for men (and men decide to SAH in equal numbers), it will always be a choice that is colored by gender politics. Even if it's the best choice for your family, it still is a choice that was influenced by societal norms that women have been trying to crack for decades.

And you think anything else isn't? Come on. You sound really naive here. We are all historical actors. No one is operating completely free of our time period's mores and values.

Sure, but by having another family structure (having a SAH dad, or having both parents work and raise kids as equal partners) you are making a conscious choice that it doesn't have to be this way. I'm not saying it's wrong to be a SAH mom--I'm only saying it's a choice I feel ambivalence about. It models a set of norms for your kids--how does your daughter internalize that her career will be equally important in the future if you made the choice to step down from yours? There are all kinds of situations that make not having a parent SAH unfeasible (for example children with special needs or medical problems), or make having a SAH parent unfeasible (when both parents are absolutely required to work to make ends meet). But for most of the privileged situations on this board, it's a choice to not model an equal marriage.

LOL. Only if your definition of an equal marriage requires both partners to work outside the home. Fortunately, your narrow and short-sighted definition isn't the only one out there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there is some jealous there. In the DC area, one partner has to be making a lot of money to enable the other to stay home and still maintain a nice lifestyle (nice house in a close in nabe, vacations, nice cars, pricey extracurricular activities for the kiddos, maybe private school, etc.)

To have an UMC lifestyle with a SAHP, the breadwinner has to be making 300-400k +.

On my end its less jealous and more...disbelief. I was raised to be independent and to own my own financials. When I went into my marriage I was comfortably set in a career and had two properties free-and-clear. That only helped when we made future decisions together to buy our 'dream' home. It boggles my mind that some women will rely solely on another person's generosity to live their life.

It disturbs me even further when these same women, some of them friends, were die-hard Hillary fans and very much into telling their daughters that 'this will be the first woman president, someone to look up to, someone to emulate' and yet the closest rolemodel to those daughters completely opted out of a career. How can you tell your children to aspire to be the head of NASA or a president or a multi-millionaire CEO, but you didn't bother to do anything yourself?

Interesting comments. Most of the SAHMs I know here in the DC area became parents later in life and already had successful careers - and made big financial contributions to the family - before taking time off of work to spend more time with their children. And many plan to go back to work in some capacity.

This is in fact what happens in most cases. Even as a former sah, however, I do think permanent sahs are a bit lame.

Really? I think they're lucky. It's like retiring at 27. I'd love to not work. There are aspects of my job that I like but if they stopped paying me, you better believe I'd stop coming in.

You would understand if you were ever a sah with kids in school. It's mind numbingly dull after a few months, all the smart moms are back to work. A good gig if you like event planning as that is what permanent SAH moms seem to obsess over (fundraising, teacher appreciation day, mom's night out, etc. .) Frankly, I'd rather just attend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel a lot of ambivalence towards SAH moms, because it's always SAH moms and not SAH parents. It's totally fine if one parent wants to step back from their career and focus on the family (and is often very good for the family!), but there is still a lot of social pressure for women to step into that role that men to not receive. When I got married in my mid 20s, I heard questions about whether I was going to step back when we had kids, whether I was going to take a lower prestige/lower pressure job so my husband could focus on his career and I could the raise kids, etc. Why didn't anyone ask my husband whether he was going to step back his career ambitions to start a family years before kids were even in the picture?

Until it's seen as an equally acceptable/normal path for men (and men decide to SAH in equal numbers), it will always be a choice that is colored by gender politics. Even if it's the best choice for your family, it still is a choice that was influenced by societal norms that women have been trying to crack for decades.

And you think anything else isn't? Come on. You sound really naive here. We are all historical actors. No one is operating completely free of our time period's mores and values.

Sure, but by having another family structure (having a SAH dad, or having both parents work and raise kids as equal partners) you are making a conscious choice that it doesn't have to be this way. I'm not saying it's wrong to be a SAH mom--I'm only saying it's a choice I feel ambivalence about. It models a set of norms for your kids--how does your daughter internalize that her career will be equally important in the future if you made the choice to step down from yours? There are all kinds of situations that make not having a parent SAH unfeasible (for example children with special needs or medical problems), or make having a SAH parent unfeasible (when both parents are absolutely required to work to make ends meet). But for most of the privileged situations on this board, it's a choice to not model an equal marriage.

Look. These other models have problems because of one simple fact. Women are attracted to powerful men. SAH dads rarely work out because it is very difficult for a SAH dad to remain sophisticated, worldly and powerful in his wife's eyes when she is interacting with innovators and business leaders while he is making school lunch. Not impossible, but very difficult and rare.

The equal partner situation can work out more easily than a SAH dad situation, but if both partners are really totally hands on at home, it means that neither one is going to go stratospheric with their careers. Maybe that's ok, maybe one or both spouses feel very disappointed about it.

The fact that women have romantic preference for respected, leadership quality men is a constraint that may annoy you and seem like it shouldn't influence so much of life, but there really isn't much that can be done about it. Women are never going to be attracted to men of a lower social status than themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel a lot of ambivalence towards SAH moms, because it's always SAH moms and not SAH parents. It's totally fine if one parent wants to step back from their career and focus on the family (and is often very good for the family!), but there is still a lot of social pressure for women to step into that role that men to not receive. When I got married in my mid 20s, I heard questions about whether I was going to step back when we had kids, whether I was going to take a lower prestige/lower pressure job so my husband could focus on his career and I could the raise kids, etc. Why didn't anyone ask my husband whether he was going to step back his career ambitions to start a family years before kids were even in the picture?

Until it's seen as an equally acceptable/normal path for men (and men decide to SAH in equal numbers), it will always be a choice that is colored by gender politics. Even if it's the best choice for your family, it still is a choice that was influenced by societal norms that women have been trying to crack for decades.

And you think anything else isn't? Come on. You sound really naive here. We are all historical actors. No one is operating completely free of our time period's mores and values.

And yet plenty of people choose to. Even more elect to not regress back into the mores and values that our predecessors fought so hard to break us free of.

This is so ridiculous. I should make MY life miserable because a bunch of women were miserable back in 1960? No f***ing way. You're out of your mind if you think I should let that influence how I live my ONE life.

+ 1

The fact is, we're all free to choose now. So you choose for yourself and I'll choose for myself. Live and let live. I'm happy with my choices and I'm not putting you down. So why do you feel the right to do that to me?

I'm not putting you down. I'm just saying you are buying into societal forces rather than fighting them. It's ok if you don't want to be that political in your personal life, or if it's not a priority to you, or if other circumstances make other more equitable arrangements not the best choice for your individual family. But it signals your values to your children, just as other choices you make do. And you have to be ok with that. It doesn't mean you are a bad person. It just means that you don't walk the walk on this part of your life if you care about women and men having equal roles in society. And I'm sure some of you don't care.

We all make choices on what values we compromise on. It's ok if this is your compromise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel a lot of ambivalence towards SAH moms, because it's always SAH moms and not SAH parents. It's totally fine if one parent wants to step back from their career and focus on the family (and is often very good for the family!), but there is still a lot of social pressure for women to step into that role that men to not receive. When I got married in my mid 20s, I heard questions about whether I was going to step back when we had kids, whether I was going to take a lower prestige/lower pressure job so my husband could focus on his career and I could the raise kids, etc. Why didn't anyone ask my husband whether he was going to step back his career ambitions to start a family years before kids were even in the picture?

Until it's seen as an equally acceptable/normal path for men (and men decide to SAH in equal numbers), it will always be a choice that is colored by gender politics. Even if it's the best choice for your family, it still is a choice that was influenced by societal norms that women have been trying to crack for decades.

And you think anything else isn't? Come on. You sound really naive here. We are all historical actors. No one is operating completely free of our time period's mores and values.

And yet plenty of people choose to. Even more elect to not regress back into the mores and values that our predecessors fought so hard to break us free of.

This is so ridiculous. I should make MY life miserable because a bunch of women were miserable back in 1960? No f***ing way. You're out of your mind if you think I should let that influence how I live my ONE life.

+ 1

The fact is, we're all free to choose now. So you choose for yourself and I'll choose for myself. Live and let live. I'm happy with my choices and I'm not putting you down. So why do you feel the right to do that to me?

I'm not putting you down. [b] I'm just saying you are buying into societal forces rather than fighting them.[b] It's ok if you don't want to be that political in your personal life, or if it's not a priority to you, or if other circumstances make other more equitable arrangements not the best choice for your individual family. But it signals your values to your children, just as other choices you make do. And you have to be ok with that. It doesn't mean you are a bad person. It just means that you don't walk the walk on this part of your life if you care about women and men having equal roles in society. And I'm sure some of you don't care.

We all make choices on what values we compromise on. It's ok if this is your compromise.

You're so condescending, yet still so wrong. By working outside the home and unnecessarily reducing the amount of time you spend with your children, you're buying into "societal forces" as much as anyone else; the only difference is that you think you're in the right because you're following the more socially-accepted path.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel a lot of ambivalence towards SAH moms, because it's always SAH moms and not SAH parents. It's totally fine if one parent wants to step back from their career and focus on the family (and is often very good for the family!), but there is still a lot of social pressure for women to step into that role that men to not receive. When I got married in my mid 20s, I heard questions about whether I was going to step back when we had kids, whether I was going to take a lower prestige/lower pressure job so my husband could focus on his career and I could the raise kids, etc. Why didn't anyone ask my husband whether he was going to step back his career ambitions to start a family years before kids were even in the picture?

Until it's seen as an equally acceptable/normal path for men (and men decide to SAH in equal numbers), it will always be a choice that is colored by gender politics. Even if it's the best choice for your family, it still is a choice that was influenced by societal norms that women have been trying to crack for decades.

And you think anything else isn't? Come on. You sound really naive here. We are all historical actors. No one is operating completely free of our time period's mores and values.

And yet plenty of people choose to. Even more elect to not regress back into the mores and values that our predecessors fought so hard to break us free of.

This is so ridiculous. I should make MY life miserable because a bunch of women were miserable back in 1960? No f***ing way. You're out of your mind if you think I should let that influence how I live my ONE life.

+ 1

The fact is, we're all free to choose now. So you choose for yourself and I'll choose for myself. Live and let live. I'm happy with my choices and I'm not putting you down. So why do you feel the right to do that to me?

I'm not putting you down. I'm just saying you are buying into societal forces rather than fighting them. It's ok if you don't want to be that political in your personal life, or if it's not a priority to you, or if other circumstances make other more equitable arrangements not the best choice for your individual family. But it signals your values to your children, just as other choices you make do. And you have to be ok with that. It doesn't mean you are a bad person. It just means that you don't walk the walk on this part of your life if you care about women and men having equal roles in society. And I'm sure some of you don't care.

We all make choices on what values we compromise on. It's ok if this is your compromise.

I think having the role of a cherished mother and matriarch is one of society's superior roles. Hardly "less than equal."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel a lot of ambivalence towards SAH moms, because it's always SAH moms and not SAH parents. It's totally fine if one parent wants to step back from their career and focus on the family (and is often very good for the family!), but there is still a lot of social pressure for women to step into that role that men to not receive. When I got married in my mid 20s, I heard questions about whether I was going to step back when we had kids, whether I was going to take a lower prestige/lower pressure job so my husband could focus on his career and I could the raise kids, etc. Why didn't anyone ask my husband whether he was going to step back his career ambitions to start a family years before kids were even in the picture?

Until it's seen as an equally acceptable/normal path for men (and men decide to SAH in equal numbers), it will always be a choice that is colored by gender politics. Even if it's the best choice for your family, it still is a choice that was influenced by societal norms that women have been trying to crack for decades.

And you think anything else isn't? Come on. You sound really naive here. We are all historical actors. No one is operating completely free of our time period's mores and values.

And yet plenty of people choose to. Even more elect to not regress back into the mores and values that our predecessors fought so hard to break us free of.

This is so ridiculous. I should make MY life miserable because a bunch of women were miserable back in 1960? No f***ing way. You're out of your mind if you think I should let that influence how I live my ONE life.

+ 1

The fact is, we're all free to choose now. So you choose for yourself and I'll choose for myself. Live and let live. I'm happy with my choices and I'm not putting you down. So why do you feel the right to do that to me?

I'm not putting you down. I'm just saying you are buying into societal forces rather than fighting them. It's ok if you don't want to be that political in your personal life, or if it's not a priority to you, or if other circumstances make other more equitable arrangements not the best choice for your individual family. But it signals your values to your children, just as other choices you make do. And you have to be ok with that. It doesn't mean you are a bad person. It just means that you don't walk the walk on this part of your life if you care about women and men having equal roles in society. And I'm sure some of you don't care.

We all make choices on what values we compromise on. It's ok if this is your compromise.

You're so condescending, yet still so wrong. By working outside the home and unnecessarily reducing the amount of time you spend with your children, you're buying into "societal forces" as much as anyone else; the only difference is that you think you're in the right because you're following the more socially-accepted path.

[Anonymous]

You're so condescending, yet still so wrong. By working outside the home and unnecessarily reducing the amount of time you spend with your children, you're buying into "societal forces" as much as anyone else; the only difference is that you think you're in the right because you're following the more socially-accepted path.

Why is it ok for men to unnecessarily reduce the amount of time they spend with their children for the "greater good" of the family? And why must it always be the mom?

I can't be so wrong if people are reacting so viscerally to this. It reminds me of when my MIL vehemently proclaims that she's not racist after saying something about interracial marriage being icky.