I’m happy being a SAHM, except when others talk about it like I’m some kind of sucker

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And in this case that person was Barak Obama.

I just heard an interview with him on an NPR podcast, and he said something about how Michelle’s mom had stretches where she was “just” a SAHM, and too often it’s women who make that sacrifice when they really should be working.

I really like Obama, and I’m a feminist, but seriously?

Especially after Covid I’m just not convinced that I’m the one making a “sacrifice”. Maybe my DH is the one sacrificing family time in order to work? And he likes his job but it’s hardly a “calling”, and it sure as heck isn’t a hobby. As far as I can tell I chose to SAH, I wasn’t suckered into it. There are good things and bad things about SAH, and there are good things and bad things about working. I wish our policies encouraged women AND men to SAH for stretches (a year or two) with young kids, and facilitated that choice with family leave policies or tax breaks (while also facilitating affordable day care for parents who want to work).

Anyway. I’m happy with my choice 90% of the time but it’s sucks to hear someone I admire denigrate my choices.

Sorry you're in your feelings but you're all over the place here. He said it's often women who are the ones to sacrifice their careers/incomes to raise kids, and you disagree that it's a sacrifice because you don't want to work and chose to SAH, but also you wish policies encouraged both men and women to SAH? Why do men need to be encouraged if it's not a sacrifice?

Some people want to stay home. Some have to because of childcare expenses and inflexible work schedules. When it's not a first choice, it's a sacrifice. Most of the time, women are the ones who make that sacrifice. If SAH is what you always wanted to do and you're happy and don't feel like you're sacrificing, you're not the topic of conversation. "If it don't apply, let it fly." It's like hearing someone talk about how they gave up meat for Lent and getting pissed off that they say it's been hard because you were raised vegetarian and have no desire to eat meat. Everything is not about you.

For most women, it's not a sacrifice, it's a choice. They want to be home. For most men, it would be a sacrifice, because they would rather be at work. So yes, men need to be encouraged because it is a sacrifice for them, and women conversely need societal encouragement to go to work because many would rather be at home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with you. It bothers me because the talk around universal preK is really a push to not tackle the real issue: most families cannot afford to live without two working parents. I wish they'd tackle housing costs, college costs, wages, etc. that would allow people to make the best decision for their family, whether that's working or staying home.

unless you want to live in a command economy, most of those things aren't fixable. Providing supports like universal prek is achievable

I disagree. College costs rising are directly tied with government-backed educational loans. That is a problem of our own making. We could limit foreign investment on housing. We could raise taxes on non-primary homes and air bnb situations that lower supply. There are options to fix these problems.

do you really think air bnb and Chinese investment properties matter more than at the edges? If I want to to buy an 850k home in Springfield, how much of the price that I will pay is a result of non-primary homes? Do you want to pull government backed education loans and leave middle class families without any ability to send their kids to school? Those loans are the only thing enabling large swaths of kids to attend college in the first place. I notice you didn't mention wages, because we're coming up on 50 years of wage stagnation relative to inflation, but no one even pretends to have an answer to that one at this point even though it's at the root of all of these issues

DP here. And the truth is that this one is very easy to solve, but politically untenable. Individual wealth like the kind controlled by Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates shouldn't exist. Perhaps more importantly, the overall wealth disparity between the type of people on DCUM (UMC/rich people like me) and the average American shouldn't exist, though I think this disparity is more of a secondary effect. The primary issue is that large corporations and their shareholders are allowed to hoard the profits generated off of the labor of American workers, who aren't benefitting from their increased productivity. These corporations have so many tax loopholes available to them that on paper they pay no taxes. This is the real issue, and it could be resolved by simplifying the tax code, enacting a much higher minimum-wage, and better regulating compensation packages to the executives of publicly-funded companies. The one thing that is somewhat politically viable is to increase taxes on UMC/rich professionals. I'm pretty ambivalent on the value of doing that, but I don't think it solves the real problem...which is that our approach to capitalism is very sick right now.

well said.

[Anonymous]

For those who weren't listening the first time - the problem is wage stagnation that has made most families NEED to have two full time working parents in order to afford a home with at least two bedrooms, a working car, etc.

Just think what our society could be like if part time work paid well (thus removing the need for full time day care) or if it wasn't a huge financial risk for a family to live on only one paycheck.

We are sheep. . .

[Anonymous]

I think SAHMs who do not want to stay at home are suckers. If my income had been necessary for us to buy a home I would not have had any children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And in this case that person was Barak Obama.

I just heard an interview with him on an NPR podcast, and he said something about how Michelle’s mom had stretches where she was “just” a SAHM, and too often it’s women who make that sacrifice when they really should be working.

I really like Obama, and I’m a feminist, but seriously?

Especially after Covid I’m just not convinced that I’m the one making a “sacrifice”. Maybe my DH is the one sacrificing family time in order to work? And he likes his job but it’s hardly a “calling”, and it sure as heck isn’t a hobby. As far as I can tell I chose to SAH, I wasn’t suckered into it. There are good things and bad things about SAH, and there are good things and bad things about working. I wish our policies encouraged women AND men to SAH for stretches (a year or two) with young kids, and facilitated that choice with family leave policies or tax breaks (while also facilitating affordable day care for parents who want to work).

Anyway. I’m happy with my choice 90% of the time but it’s sucks to hear someone I admire denigrate my choices.

Sorry you're in your feelings but you're all over the place here. He said it's often women who are the ones to sacrifice their careers/incomes to raise kids, and you disagree that it's a sacrifice because you don't want to work and chose to SAH, but also you wish policies encouraged both men and women to SAH? Why do men need to be encouraged if it's not a sacrifice?

Some people want to stay home. Some have to because of childcare expenses and inflexible work schedules. When it's not a first choice, it's a sacrifice. Most of the time, women are the ones who make that sacrifice. If SAH is what you always wanted to do and you're happy and don't feel like you're sacrificing, you're not the topic of conversation. "If it don't apply, let it fly." It's like hearing someone talk about how they gave up meat for Lent and getting pissed off that they say it's been hard because you were raised vegetarian and have no desire to eat meat. Everything is not about you.

For most women, it's not a sacrifice, it's a choice. They want to be home. For most men, it would be a sacrifice, because they would rather be at work. So yes, men need to be encouraged because it is a sacrifice for them, and women conversely need societal encouragement to go to work because many would rather be at home.

Citation needed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think SAHMs who do not want to stay at home are suckers. If my income had been necessary for us to buy a home I would not have had any children.

Well those are odd values.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with you. It bothers me because the talk around universal preK is really a push to not tackle the real issue: most families cannot afford to live without two working parents. I wish they'd tackle housing costs, college costs, wages, etc. that would allow people to make the best decision for their family, whether that's working or staying home.

unless you want to live in a command economy, most of those things aren't fixable. Providing supports like universal prek is achievable

I disagree. College costs rising are directly tied with government-backed educational loans. That is a problem of our own making. We could limit foreign investment on housing. We could raise taxes on non-primary homes and air bnb situations that lower supply. There are options to fix these problems.

do you really think air bnb and Chinese investment properties matter more than at the edges? If I want to to buy an 850k home in Springfield, how much of the price that I will pay is a result of non-primary homes? Do you want to pull government backed education loans and leave middle class families without any ability to send their kids to school? Those loans are the only thing enabling large swaths of kids to attend college in the first place. I notice you didn't mention wages, because we're coming up on 50 years of wage stagnation relative to inflation, but no one even pretends to have an answer to that one at this point even though it's at the root of all of these issues

It's not just Chinese investment. I'm just debating your point that they're not fixable.

For college, I did not even imply middle-class families should bypass college. I am questioning why college prices have increased so much. Huge loans for students mean limited opportunities in the future. It means delayed home ownership and retirement. It means less money passed along to their kids and widening of the wealth gap over generations. We should be questioning college costs and if the value they provide is actually in line with the cost.

[Anonymous]

I feel lucky to be married to a high earner and to SAH. My kids are my top priority (as they are for most people) and I feel fortunate that I was able to arrange my daily activities to reflect that fact.

I have a really nice life that I actively chose. I’m not a sucker. People should not feel sorry for me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You sound deeply insecure if you're internalizing someone else's story like this.

+1 the whole sahm wohm issues always dissolve to the insecure people. They see any comment as an afront to their personhood and capabilities as a parent. They get set off over people describing their own situation. Sahm: I want to spend these precious years being a full time mom. Wohm: Are you saying I am not a loving mom? I'll have you know....
Wohm: I need a work life outside the home to feel mentally active and I'm proud to be a financial support to my family and use my brain. SAHM: How dare you imply I am not using my brain? I'll have you know...

People, be comfortable in your skin! Someone's choice is not an indictment on you! Be glad if what you chose is not a "sacrifice".

Yes, this!

Whenever someone on DCUM or even in real life (although much more rare) has an opinion about my choice to work outside the house or not, I just laugh. I couldn't care less what they think because I know how it works for me and my family. All the people who get all up in arms about it are insecure, so maybe you need to evaluate why that is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And in this case that person was Barak Obama.

I just heard an interview with him on an NPR podcast, and he said something about how Michelle’s mom had stretches where she was “just” a SAHM, and too often it’s women who make that sacrifice when they really should be working.

I really like Obama, and I’m a feminist, but seriously?

Especially after Covid I’m just not convinced that I’m the one making a “sacrifice”. Maybe my DH is the one sacrificing family time in order to work? And he likes his job but it’s hardly a “calling”, and it sure as heck isn’t a hobby. As far as I can tell I chose to SAH, I wasn’t suckered into it. There are good things and bad things about SAH, and there are good things and bad things about working. I wish our policies encouraged women AND men to SAH for stretches (a year or two) with young kids, and facilitated that choice with family leave policies or tax breaks (while also facilitating affordable day care for parents who want to work).

Anyway. I’m happy with my choice 90% of the time but it’s sucks to hear someone I admire denigrate my choices.

Yeah and I wish single people were paid by the government to take a year off and discover what they want to do with their life.

Pay for your own years of SAHP.

This is the most nonsensical comment. What a ridiculous argument. Go back to bed.

NP. No, it's not. Why should people get paid to stay home for a year or two with kids? What about people who don't have kids? What do they get?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just hope you never get divorced.

Or widowed early without really good life insurance.

Women who mommy track or sahm often get really screwed by divorce.

Watch out a bunch of women are about to tell you:

1. I'm SUPER RICH and NEVER needed to work!

or

2. DH is SUPER RICH and I'll be fine with 50%!

or

3. We have a PRENUP that says I get EVERYTHING.

or

4. DH PROMISED that I'll be SUPER RICH if we divorce or if he dies!


Any woman who has been left holding the bag is a dumb dumb. The majority of women are less well off after divorce or death, but I'M DIFFERENT.

Ok but you know that life insurance and equitable asset division are things now right? It’s more than possible to do the math and realize how much money you’d have if your husband dies or you do an equitable split of assets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And in this case that person was Barak Obama.

I just heard an interview with him on an NPR podcast, and he said something about how Michelle’s mom had stretches where she was “just” a SAHM, and too often it’s women who make that sacrifice when they really should be working.

I really like Obama, and I’m a feminist, but seriously?

Especially after Covid I’m just not convinced that I’m the one making a “sacrifice”. Maybe my DH is the one sacrificing family time in order to work? And he likes his job but it’s hardly a “calling”, and it sure as heck isn’t a hobby. As far as I can tell I chose to SAH, I wasn’t suckered into it. There are good things and bad things about SAH, and there are good things and bad things about working. I wish our policies encouraged women AND men to SAH for stretches (a year or two) with young kids, and facilitated that choice with family leave policies or tax breaks (while also facilitating affordable day care for parents who want to work).

Anyway. I’m happy with my choice 90% of the time but it’s sucks to hear someone I admire denigrate my choices.

Yeah and I wish single people were paid by the government to take a year off and discover what they want to do with their life.

Pay for your own years of SAHP.

This is the most nonsensical comment. What a ridiculous argument. Go back to bed.

NP. No, it's not. Why should people get paid to stay home for a year or two with kids? What about people who don't have kids? What do they get?

Nothing. Know why? They’re not helping to raise the next generation who will support the millennials in their old age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree 100% with you, OP. I don't think other posters are right that you're reading into it. There is the assumption in the democratic party that women are only SAHM's when they are forced into it/duped into it, and all women would be better off if they were working.

I am also very happy that I became a SAHM, but yes, it does get depressing when people in power are always suggesting that I'm dumb/victim of the patriarchy/stuck in a role, etc. It's just depressing to be looked down on.

It was so refreshing when Andrew Yang spoke positively about his SAH wife in the debates.

I honestly went to a therapist about a year after having my first child to ask her if she could tell me whether or not I was fooling myself that I liked being a SAHM. She said that it used to be that women had to stay home, and now the pendulum has swung the other way and all women feel forced to be a working mom. Her focus was actually child psychology (it just happened that she was the closest therapist to me) and she was really supportive of me staying home and told me she sees a lot of kids in her practice who have problems because their parents are too focused on theri big careers.

I also think another thing being totally ignored is that there are so many women out there who would love to stay home with their babies but can't because they have to go back to work. To me, it borders on inhumane that we live in a society where some women are forced to be separated from their babies just to be able to afford basic necessities. I think that's the real tragedy, not someone who has to spend the day with their baby (the horror!) when they would prefer to be working. I don't know why we don't talk about this more.

There it is! You SAHMs just can't resist getting a dig in, can you? Do you feel better about yourself now? Gross.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And in this case that person was Barak Obama.

I just heard an interview with him on an NPR podcast, and he said something about how Michelle’s mom had stretches where she was “just” a SAHM, and too often it’s women who make that sacrifice when they really should be working.

I really like Obama, and I’m a feminist, but seriously?

Especially after Covid I’m just not convinced that I’m the one making a “sacrifice”. Maybe my DH is the one sacrificing family time in order to work? And he likes his job but it’s hardly a “calling”, and it sure as heck isn’t a hobby. As far as I can tell I chose to SAH, I wasn’t suckered into it. There are good things and bad things about SAH, and there are good things and bad things about working. I wish our policies encouraged women AND men to SAH for stretches (a year or two) with young kids, and facilitated that choice with family leave policies or tax breaks (while also facilitating affordable day care for parents who want to work).

Anyway. I’m happy with my choice 90% of the time but it’s sucks to hear someone I admire denigrate my choices.

Sorry you're in your feelings but you're all over the place here. He said it's often women who are the ones to sacrifice their careers/incomes to raise kids, and you disagree that it's a sacrifice because you don't want to work and chose to SAH, but also you wish policies encouraged both men and women to SAH? Why do men need to be encouraged if it's not a sacrifice?

Some people want to stay home. Some have to because of childcare expenses and inflexible work schedules. When it's not a first choice, it's a sacrifice. Most of the time, women are the ones who make that sacrifice. If SAH is what you always wanted to do and you're happy and don't feel like you're sacrificing, you're not the topic of conversation. "If it don't apply, let it fly." It's like hearing someone talk about how they gave up meat for Lent and getting pissed off that they say it's been hard because you were raised vegetarian and have no desire to eat meat. Everything is not about you.

For most women, it's not a sacrifice, it's a choice. They want to be home. For most men, it would be a sacrifice, because they would rather be at work. So yes, men need to be encouraged because it is a sacrifice for them, and women conversely need societal encouragement to go to work because many would rather be at home.

Citation needed.

+1

You won't find this to be true among pretty much all the women I know. Nice try, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And in this case that person was Barak Obama.

I just heard an interview with him on an NPR podcast, and he said something about how Michelle’s mom had stretches where she was “just” a SAHM, and too often it’s women who make that sacrifice when they really should be working.

I really like Obama, and I’m a feminist, but seriously?

Especially after Covid I’m just not convinced that I’m the one making a “sacrifice”. Maybe my DH is the one sacrificing family time in order to work? And he likes his job but it’s hardly a “calling”, and it sure as heck isn’t a hobby. As far as I can tell I chose to SAH, I wasn’t suckered into it. There are good things and bad things about SAH, and there are good things and bad things about working. I wish our policies encouraged women AND men to SAH for stretches (a year or two) with young kids, and facilitated that choice with family leave policies or tax breaks (while also facilitating affordable day care for parents who want to work).

Anyway. I’m happy with my choice 90% of the time but it’s sucks to hear someone I admire denigrate my choices.

Yeah and I wish single people were paid by the government to take a year off and discover what they want to do with their life.

Pay for your own years of SAHP.

This is the most nonsensical comment. What a ridiculous argument. Go back to bed.

NP. No, it's not. Why should people get paid to stay home for a year or two with kids? What about people who don't have kids? What do they get?

Nothing. Know why? They’re not helping to raise the next generation who will support the millennials in their old age.

Ugh, I can't stand people who act like people who have children are superior to those who don't. You're one of the worst kinds.

- someone with children