Husbands with SAHMs that prefer they work

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So who all does the primary care of your children 0-3?
Daycare?
Nannies?
Relatives?
Friends?

Well, on DCUM, all dual working parent households are happy and well balanced places. Childcare is always top notch and what is best for the child, whether it be a nanny or daycare. Men and women spilt housework evenly because they all have flexible jobs which allow them plenty of quality time with their children, who aren't suffering at all.

Hence, the high rate of high school drinking parties and then driving in Montgomery and Fairfax Counties, not to mention rampant depression and drug use. And the resulting suicides... It's awful.

The parents of those kids must not be DCUM posters. Nothing slips through the cracks in a dual working parent DCUM household.

Ha! In their dreams. They're either living it up at the office or at home on DCUM. The kids are raising themselves. All these kids need to do is demand what they want, and they get it. Skateboard, anyone? "Give him the damn skateboard!"

"Now let's put our feet up, and enjoy our kids."

Put down the wine, nutjob.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So who all does the primary care of your children 0-3?
Daycare?
Nannies?
Relatives?
Friends?

Well, on DCUM, all dual working parent households are happy and well balanced places. Childcare is always top notch and what is best for the child, whether it be a nanny or daycare. Men and women spilt housework evenly because they all have flexible jobs which allow them plenty of quality time with their children, who aren't suffering at all.

Hence, the high rate of high school drinking parties and then driving in Montgomery and Fairfax Counties, not to mention rampant depression and drug use. And the resulting suicides... It's awful.

The parents of those kids must not be DCUM posters. Nothing slips through the cracks in a dual working parent DCUM household.

Ha! In their dreams. They're either living it up at the office or at home on DCUM. The kids are raising themselves. All these kids need to do is demand what they want, and they get it. Skateboard, anyone? "Give him the damn skateboard!"

"Now let's put our feet up, and enjoy our kids."

Put down the wine, nutjob.

Hit a nerve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So who all does the primary care of your children 0-3?
Daycare?
Nannies?
Relatives?
Friends?

Well, on DCUM, all dual working parent households are happy and well balanced places. Childcare is always top notch and what is best for the child, whether it be a nanny or daycare. Men and women spilt housework evenly because they all have flexible jobs which allow them plenty of quality time with their children, who aren't suffering at all.

Yes, just like all the SAHMs on DCUM are magically married to high-earning DHs who never work a minute over 40 hours with flexible schedules, home by 5 every night and they cook dinner! And they are completely fulfilled and NEVER want to work again (nor will they ever have to, because nothing bad ever happens).

DCUM: it's a magical place indeed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am not bashing SAHM but I wonder sometimes why any woman would want to be so vulnerable to be in the position of being a SAHM. If you have skills and 10yrs go by you will have to fight tooth and nail to get them back and get back out there. Marriages end and they end often so why throw all your eggs in one basket and hope for the best. Women with children need to be able to fend for themselves with or with out a husband/boyfriend and being a SAHM is a very vulnerable position to be in even if wealthy.

I took the risk because I believe, based on what I have read, that growth from 0-3 sets the course for a person's life. During this time, i wanted to make sure that my daughter got lots of love, attention, guidance how to behave. And to have real hands on introduction to the world from spending time in the woods, at unfamiliar playgrounds, in the city streets, playing with kids with special needs, with poor kids from the city, with rich kids in Kalorama, etc so that she has confidence in many different situations.

Now that my daughter is 2, I am actively networking and volunteering to find a decent job by the time she is 3. I see it as giving her time to grow strong roots, then she can go off alone.

I don't have time to summarize the research, but look it up. White Led the Harvard Preschool Project for decades, among other things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not bashing SAHM but I wonder sometimes why any woman would want to be so vulnerable to be in the position of being a SAHM. If you have skills and 10yrs go by you will have to fight tooth and nail to get them back and get back out there. Marriages end and they end often so why throw all your eggs in one basket and hope for the best. Women with children need to be able to fend for themselves with or with out a husband/boyfriend and being a SAHM is a very vulnerable position to be in even if wealthy.

I took the risk because I believe, based on what I have read, that growth from 0-3 sets the course for a person's life. During this time, i wanted to make sure that my daughter got lots of love, attention, guidance how to behave. And to have real hands on introduction to the world from spending time in the woods, at unfamiliar playgrounds, in the city streets, playing with kids with special needs, with poor kids from the city, with rich kids in Kalorama, etc so that she has confidence in many different situations.

Now that my daughter is 2, I am actively networking and volunteering to find a decent job by the time she is 3. I see it as giving her time to grow strong roots, then she can go off alone.

I don't have time to summarize the research, but look it up. White Led the Harvard Preschool Project for decades, among other things.

There is a ton of research showing there is no difference between having a SAHP vs working. Other factors are much more important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not bashing SAHM but I wonder sometimes why any woman would want to be so vulnerable to be in the position of being a SAHM. If you have skills and 10yrs go by you will have to fight tooth and nail to get them back and get back out there. Marriages end and they end often so why throw all your eggs in one basket and hope for the best. Women with children need to be able to fend for themselves with or with out a husband/boyfriend and being a SAHM is a very vulnerable position to be in even if wealthy.

I took the risk because I believe, based on what I have read, that growth from 0-3 sets the course for a person's life. During this time, i wanted to make sure that my daughter got lots of love, attention, guidance how to behave. And to have real hands on introduction to the world from spending time in the woods, at unfamiliar playgrounds, in the city streets, playing with kids with special needs, with poor kids from the city, with rich kids in Kalorama, etc so that she has confidence in many different situations.

Now that my daughter is 2, I am actively networking and volunteering to find a decent job by the time she is 3. I see it as giving her time to grow strong roots, then she can go off alone.

I don't have time to summarize the research, but look it up. White Led the Harvard Preschool Project for decades, among other things.

There is a ton of research showing there is no difference between having a SAHP vs working. Other factors are much more important.

This is a fat load. Resources being equal, I suppose maybe this could pan out. But a 1 to 1 ratio of child to caretaker easily trumps a busy daycare. And if you have a nanny who cares about your kid like their own, hopefully you're paying them what that level of care is worth.

Comments like this reflect the ridiculously insular bubble of the DC metro area. Clueless, the lot of you!

[Anonymous]

People have a negative reaction to stay at homes for the same reason they have a negative reaction to welfare queens: indolence and stupidity.

+2000

Honestly: has anyone met an highly intelligent stay at home? The women drawn to sah have little or no intellectual curiosity, which is why they love the child rearing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not bashing SAHM but I wonder sometimes why any woman would want to be so vulnerable to be in the position of being a SAHM. If you have skills and 10yrs go by you will have to fight tooth and nail to get them back and get back out there. Marriages end and they end often so why throw all your eggs in one basket and hope for the best. Women with children need to be able to fend for themselves with or with out a husband/boyfriend and being a SAHM is a very vulnerable position to be in even if wealthy.

I took the risk because I believe, based on what I have read, that growth from 0-3 sets the course for a person's life. During this time, i wanted to make sure that my daughter got lots of love, attention, guidance how to behave. And to have real hands on introduction to the world from spending time in the woods, at unfamiliar playgrounds, in the city streets, playing with kids with special needs, with poor kids from the city, with rich kids in Kalorama, etc so that she has confidence in many different situations.

Now that my daughter is 2, I am actively networking and volunteering to find a decent job by the time she is 3. I see it as giving her time to grow strong roots, then she can go off alone.

I don't have time to summarize the research, but look it up. White Led the Harvard Preschool Project for decades, among other things.

There is a ton of research showing there is no difference between having a SAHP vs working. Other factors are much more important.

This is a fat load. Resources being equal, I suppose maybe this could pan out. But a 1 to 1 ratio of child to caretaker easily trumps a busy daycare. And if you have a nanny who cares about your kid like their own, hopefully you're paying them what that level of care is worth.

Comments like this reflect the ridiculously insular bubble of the DC metro area. Clueless, the lot of you!

LOL-whatever helps you sleep at night grandma!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People have a negative reaction to stay at homes for the same reason they have a negative reaction to welfare queens: indolence and stupidity.

+2000

Honestly: has anyone met an highly intelligent stay at home? The women drawn to sah have little or no intellectual curiosity, which is why they love the child rearing.

Honestly: has anyone met a highly intelligent person who believes insulting stereotypes about millions of people? The people drawn to dumb stereotypes have little or no intellectual curiosity or they live in a very small, ignorant bubble, which is why they believe such falsehoods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People have a negative reaction to stay at homes for the same reason they have a negative reaction to welfare queens: indolence and stupidity.

+2000

Honestly: has anyone met an highly intelligent stay at home? The women drawn to sah have little or no intellectual curiosity, which is why they love the child rearing.

You're trying to troll 38 pages in? A little late to the party, no?

And FYI, I'm an accomplished SAHM with an IQ of 142 so suck it.

[Anonymous]

Can anyone name an intelligent public figure woman who stayed home to raise kids? Neither Clinton did it. Trumps' daughter didn't. It's alluring to the women who do not have the intellectual firepower to compete successfully in the free market. And of my dozens of male friends, I don't have 1 that wants his wife to stay home. Not one. Instead, many of their spouses just decreed that they are staying home. I would never marry a stay at home or a woman who even said she wanted to stay at home. Just like I'm sure every one of the women on here wouldn't marry a man that said he wanted to stay home.. There is nothing attractive about people who cannot look after themselves- man or woman.

[Anonymous]

For PP above, I am not 100% but I thought I read Madeleine Albright was a SAH until children were in school.

I work now but I did SAH and my DH fully supported this. His own mom SAH as he was youngest of 5 and she even " held him back " a year ( in the late 70s no less) and he always says what a gift to him and sacrifice to her career she made for him.

I have an amazing career and luckily kept my hand in here and there but we absolutely wanted me there for the DC - mainly because I wanted to be. My DH loves me and always wants me to be happy. And guess what, I'm good at what I do so when he wanted to take a career risk and make less money to go in a different direction, I stepped up and began contributing significantly so he could be happy. We are a team.

I think that is whT is missing for you and your friends --no understanding of relationships. Life is long, needs change, people change. You need to be flexible, loving, kind to your partner. It is not all or nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: Can anyone name an intelligent public figure woman who stayed home to raise kids? Neither Clinton did it. Trumps' daughter didn't. It's alluring to the women who do not have the intellectual firepower to compete successfully in the free market. And of my dozens of male friends, I don't have 1 that wants his wife to stay home. Not one. Instead, many of their spouses just decreed that they are staying home. I would never marry a stay at home or a woman who even said she wanted to stay at home. Just like I'm sure every one of the women on here wouldn't marry a man that said he wanted to stay home.. There is nothing attractive about people who cannot look after themselves- man or woman.

Just to name a few:
-former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi
-Martha Stewart
-former chairman of the board of the Washington Post Katherine Meyer Graham
-Twilight author Stephenie Meyer
-Harry Potter author JK Rowling
-fashion designer Lilly Pulitzer

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For PP above, I am not 100% but I thought I read Madeleine Albright was a SAH until children were in school.

I work now but I did SAH and my DH fully supported this. His own mom SAH as he was youngest of 5 and she even " held him back " a year ( in the late 70s no less) and he always says what a gift to him and sacrifice to her career she made for him.

I have an amazing career and luckily kept my hand in here and there but we absolutely wanted me there for the DC - mainly because I wanted to be. My DH loves me and always wants me to be happy. And guess what, I'm good at what I do so when he wanted to take a career risk and make less money to go in a different direction, I stepped up and began contributing significantly so he could be happy. We are a team.

I think that is whT is missing for you and your friends --no understanding of relationships. Life is long, needs change, people change. You need to be flexible, loving, kind to your partner. It is not all or nothing.

Finally a normal person on here!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People have a negative reaction to stay at homes for the same reason they have a negative reaction to welfare queens: indolence and stupidity.

+2000

Honestly: has anyone met an highly intelligent stay at home? The women drawn to sah have little or no intellectual curiosity, which is why they love the child rearing.

Your question is ridiculous. The vast majority of people work for a paycheck and aren't exactly changing the world. There are plenty of stupid women who work and plenty of smart women who stay at home.