61% of single women in America are not looking to get into a new relationship compared to 38% of men

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look ladies, it’s all fun and games to be the “cool aunt” when you are 28 and traveling the world. Everyone looks up to you and they want to be you. Then you turn 43 and you’re still single with no kids and your career has sort of peaked, as well as your looks.

You can’t be a “cool aunt” at 43

Right, that’s the age when the cool aunts become the cool SMBC whose nieces and nephews free babysit and who is in a place in her career to have a full time
Nanny.

It's not really a step up to be a SMBC. Nobody is envious of that person, doing it all alone, with a fatherless child. A nanny is not a replacement for a second parent.

Oh honey.

A ton of women with three kids (two babies and one husband) envy the independence and the freedom a wealthy single mother has. Go read more in this forum about how many people are staying because they can’t bear the thought of giving their kids up half the time.

The person no one envies is the woman married to a low-tier man.

Uh, no. Speak for yourself. I'd rather just be single and fabulous than be the sole, constant on duty, single plane.

And that’s fine— but the poster was bemoaning how women have “no families” as though women are constrained to having a child with a partner— they’re not and they’re frequently better off without one.

I wasn't that PP but I don't see the 40something woman deciding to just become SMBC as the answer to not being the 'cool aunt' anymore. There are lots of unenviable people out there. Those with the dud husband, this with the dud ex who rarely sees his kids, the SMBC trying to do it all alone..... none of these are ideal or enviable.

In your list only the SMBC has freedom. So she’s more enviable than the rest by a mile.

How is she free? When you have a kid you are no long free by any stretch. The ones I didn't mention have more free time: happily married with kids, happily married with no kids, and single and childless. SMBC has no freedom any more than a single divorce mom has freedom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look ladies, it’s all fun and games to be the “cool aunt” when you are 28 and traveling the world. Everyone looks up to you and they want to be you. Then you turn 43 and you’re still single with no kids and your career has sort of peaked, as well as your looks.

You can’t be a “cool aunt” at 43

Right, that’s the age when the cool aunts become the cool SMBC whose nieces and nephews free babysit and who is in a place in her career to have a full time
Nanny.

It's not really a step up to be a SMBC. Nobody is envious of that person, doing it all alone, with a fatherless child. A nanny is not a replacement for a second parent.

Nannie’s are often better.

Women can have and raise babies without men, you make it sound like it’s impossible.

Of course it's possible. Never heard of a single mom before? But it's not desirable, at all. And no, a nanny is not a parent replacement. You must have a nanny if you think that to make yourself feel better.

It’s is desirable when it’s planned that way.

Not a replacement but better at providing support and not being a burden.

Most men are less helpful than a nanny/sister/grandmother.

Sadly, men are mostly missing or worse pouting about not getting more attention.

Remove him from the picture and life is much easier.

Please. It may be planned but any parent can attest to not really knowing what they were getting into. Doing it all on your own with no other parent to share the joys with is hardly desirable. It can be lonely, selfish, and a slog.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look ladies, it’s all fun and games to be the “cool aunt” when you are 28 and traveling the world. Everyone looks up to you and they want to be you. Then you turn 43 and you’re still single with no kids and your career has sort of peaked, as well as your looks.

You can’t be a “cool aunt” at 43

Right, that’s the age when the cool aunts become the cool SMBC whose nieces and nephews free babysit and who is in a place in her career to have a full time
Nanny.

It's not really a step up to be a SMBC. Nobody is envious of that person, doing it all alone, with a fatherless child. A nanny is not a replacement for a second parent.

Nannie’s are often better.

Women can have and raise babies without men, you make it sound like it’s impossible.

Of course it's possible. Never heard of a single mom before? But it's not desirable, at all. And no, a nanny is not a parent replacement. You must have a nanny if you think that to make yourself feel better.

It’s is desirable when it’s planned that way.

Not a replacement but better at providing support and not being a burden.

Most men are less helpful than a nanny/sister/grandmother.

Sadly, men are mostly missing or worse pouting about not getting more attention.

Remove him from the picture and life is much easier.

Please. It may be planned but any parent can attest to not really knowing what they were getting into. Doing it all on your own with no other parent to share the joys with is hardly desirable. It can be lonely, selfish, and a slog.

Most married women find raising kids with a man lonely, selfish and a slog.

they have one extra ungrateful child to care for and it pulls their attention from raising actual children. Men are contantly competing with their children for attention and it's like pulling teeth to get them to be a partner.... and those are the ones that are not working 24x7 to avoid home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look ladies, it’s all fun and games to be the “cool aunt” when you are 28 and traveling the world. Everyone looks up to you and they want to be you. Then you turn 43 and you’re still single with no kids and your career has sort of peaked, as well as your looks.

You can’t be a “cool aunt” at 43

Right, that’s the age when the cool aunts become the cool SMBC whose nieces and nephews free babysit and who is in a place in her career to have a full time
Nanny.

It's not really a step up to be a SMBC. Nobody is envious of that person, doing it all alone, with a fatherless child. A nanny is not a replacement for a second parent.

Oh honey.

A ton of women with three kids (two babies and one husband) envy the independence and the freedom a wealthy single mother has. Go read more in this forum about how many people are staying because they can’t bear the thought of giving their kids up half the time.

The person no one envies is the woman married to a low-tier man.

Uh, no. Speak for yourself. I'd rather just be single and fabulous than be the sole, constant on duty, single plane.

And that’s fine— but the poster was bemoaning how women have “no families” as though women are constrained to having a child with a partner— they’re not and they’re frequently better off without one.

I wasn't that PP but I don't see the 40something woman deciding to just become SMBC as the answer to not being the 'cool aunt' anymore. There are lots of unenviable people out there. Those with the dud husband, this with the dud ex who rarely sees his kids, the SMBC trying to do it all alone..... none of these are ideal or enviable.

In your list only the SMBC has freedom. So she’s more enviable than the rest by a mile.

How is she free? When you have a kid you are no long free by any stretch. The ones I didn't mention have more free time: happily married with kids, happily married with no kids, and single and childless. SMBC has no freedom any more than a single divorce mom has freedom.

A divorced mother cannot move out of state without the consent of her ex.

A divorced mother cannot take her children abroad without the consent of her ex.

A divorced mother has to deal with her ex on every single issue no matter how awful he is.

A single mother does as she likes and as her financial status allows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look ladies, it’s all fun and games to be the “cool aunt” when you are 28 and traveling the world. Everyone looks up to you and they want to be you. Then you turn 43 and you’re still single with no kids and your career has sort of peaked, as well as your looks.

You can’t be a “cool aunt” at 43

Right, that’s the age when the cool aunts become the cool SMBC whose nieces and nephews free babysit and who is in a place in her career to have a full time
Nanny.

It's not really a step up to be a SMBC. Nobody is envious of that person, doing it all alone, with a fatherless child. A nanny is not a replacement for a second parent.

Oh honey.

A ton of women with three kids (two babies and one husband) envy the independence and the freedom a wealthy single mother has. Go read more in this forum about how many people are staying because they can’t bear the thought of giving their kids up half the time.

The person no one envies is the woman married to a low-tier man.

Uh, no. Speak for yourself. I'd rather just be single and fabulous than be the sole, constant on duty, single plane.

And that’s fine— but the poster was bemoaning how women have “no families” as though women are constrained to having a child with a partner— they’re not and they’re frequently better off without one.

I wasn't that PP but I don't see the 40something woman deciding to just become SMBC as the answer to not being the 'cool aunt' anymore. There are lots of unenviable people out there. Those with the dud husband, this with the dud ex who rarely sees his kids, the SMBC trying to do it all alone..... none of these are ideal or enviable.

In your list only the SMBC has freedom. So she’s more enviable than the rest by a mile.

How is she free? When you have a kid you are no long free by any stretch. The ones I didn't mention have more free time: happily married with kids, happily married with no kids, and single and childless. SMBC has no freedom any more than a single divorce mom has freedom.

A divorced mother cannot move out of state without the consent of her ex.

A divorced mother cannot take her children abroad without the consent of her ex.

A divorced mother has to deal with her ex on every single issue no matter how awful he is.

A single mother does as she likes and as her financial status allows.

A single mother has to plan travel around school breaks. Is on call 24/7 even when she's sick. There's nobody to help clean up vomit from the bed at 3am. There are a million reasons why "freedom" and "single mother' don't go hand in hand. Stop trying to glamorize it. What you're looking to compare is a divorced mother to a single and childless woman. She only answers to herself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look ladies, it’s all fun and games to be the “cool aunt” when you are 28 and traveling the world. Everyone looks up to you and they want to be you. Then you turn 43 and you’re still single with no kids and your career has sort of peaked, as well as your looks.

You can’t be a “cool aunt” at 43

Right, that’s the age when the cool aunts become the cool SMBC whose nieces and nephews free babysit and who is in a place in her career to have a full time
Nanny.

It's not really a step up to be a SMBC. Nobody is envious of that person, doing it all alone, with a fatherless child. A nanny is not a replacement for a second parent.

Nannie’s are often better.

Women can have and raise babies without men, you make it sound like it’s impossible.

Of course it's possible. Never heard of a single mom before? But it's not desirable, at all. And no, a nanny is not a parent replacement. You must have a nanny if you think that to make yourself feel better.

It’s is desirable when it’s planned that way.

Not a replacement but better at providing support and not being a burden.

Most men are less helpful than a nanny/sister/grandmother.

Sadly, men are mostly missing or worse pouting about not getting more attention.

Remove him from the picture and life is much easier.

Please. It may be planned but any parent can attest to not really knowing what they were getting into. Doing it all on your own with no other parent to share the joys with is hardly desirable. It can be lonely, selfish, and a slog.

Most married women find raising kids with a man lonely, selfish and a slog.

they have one extra ungrateful child to care for and it pulls their attention from raising actual children. Men are contantly competing with their children for attention and it's like pulling teeth to get them to be a partner.... and those are the ones that are not working 24x7 to avoid home.

Most? Really? Care that back that up? Sorry you had a bad picker and married a dud.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look ladies, it’s all fun and games to be the “cool aunt” when you are 28 and traveling the world. Everyone looks up to you and they want to be you. Then you turn 43 and you’re still single with no kids and your career has sort of peaked, as well as your looks.

You can’t be a “cool aunt” at 43

Right, that’s the age when the cool aunts become the cool SMBC whose nieces and nephews free babysit and who is in a place in her career to have a full time
Nanny.

It's not really a step up to be a SMBC. Nobody is envious of that person, doing it all alone, with a fatherless child. A nanny is not a replacement for a second parent.

Oh honey.

A ton of women with three kids (two babies and one husband) envy the independence and the freedom a wealthy single mother has. Go read more in this forum about how many people are staying because they can’t bear the thought of giving their kids up half the time.

The person no one envies is the woman married to a low-tier man.

Uh, no. Speak for yourself. I'd rather just be single and fabulous than be the sole, constant on duty, single plane.

And that’s fine— but the poster was bemoaning how women have “no families” as though women are constrained to having a child with a partner— they’re not and they’re frequently better off without one.

I wasn't that PP but I don't see the 40something woman deciding to just become SMBC as the answer to not being the 'cool aunt' anymore. There are lots of unenviable people out there. Those with the dud husband, this with the dud ex who rarely sees his kids, the SMBC trying to do it all alone..... none of these are ideal or enviable.

In your list only the SMBC has freedom. So she’s more enviable than the rest by a mile.

How is she free? When you have a kid you are no long free by any stretch. The ones I didn't mention have more free time: happily married with kids, happily married with no kids, and single and childless. SMBC has no freedom any more than a single divorce mom has freedom.

A divorced mother cannot move out of state without the consent of her ex.

A divorced mother cannot take her children abroad without the consent of her ex.

A divorced mother has to deal with her ex on every single issue no matter how awful he is.

A single mother does as she likes and as her financial status allows.

A single mother has to plan travel around school breaks. Is on call 24/7 even when she's sick. There's nobody to help clean up vomit from the bed at 3am. There are a million reasons why "freedom" and "single mother' don't go hand in hand. Stop trying to glamorize it. What you're looking to compare is a divorced mother to a single and childless woman. She only answers to herself.

Of course there are people to help clean up vomit— a SMBC has a housekeeper and a nanny. It’s the mother whose spouse is sleeping peacefully while she washes the vomit who you need to pity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look ladies, it’s all fun and games to be the “cool aunt” when you are 28 and traveling the world. Everyone looks up to you and they want to be you. Then you turn 43 and you’re still single with no kids and your career has sort of peaked, as well as your looks.

You can’t be a “cool aunt” at 43

Right, that’s the age when the cool aunts become the cool SMBC whose nieces and nephews free babysit and who is in a place in her career to have a full time
Nanny.

It's not really a step up to be a SMBC. Nobody is envious of that person, doing it all alone, with a fatherless child. A nanny is not a replacement for a second parent.

Oh honey.

A ton of women with three kids (two babies and one husband) envy the independence and the freedom a wealthy single mother has. Go read more in this forum about how many people are staying because they can’t bear the thought of giving their kids up half the time.

The person no one envies is the woman married to a low-tier man.

Uh, no. Speak for yourself. I'd rather just be single and fabulous than be the sole, constant on duty, single plane.

And that’s fine— but the poster was bemoaning how women have “no families” as though women are constrained to having a child with a partner— they’re not and they’re frequently better off without one.

I wasn't that PP but I don't see the 40something woman deciding to just become SMBC as the answer to not being the 'cool aunt' anymore. There are lots of unenviable people out there. Those with the dud husband, this with the dud ex who rarely sees his kids, the SMBC trying to do it all alone..... none of these are ideal or enviable.

In your list only the SMBC has freedom. So she’s more enviable than the rest by a mile.

How is she free? When you have a kid you are no long free by any stretch. The ones I didn't mention have more free time: happily married with kids, happily married with no kids, and single and childless. SMBC has no freedom any more than a single divorce mom has freedom.

A divorced mother cannot move out of state without the consent of her ex.

A divorced mother cannot take her children abroad without the consent of her ex.

A divorced mother has to deal with her ex on every single issue no matter how awful he is.

A single mother does as she likes and as her financial status allows.

A single mother has to plan travel around school breaks. Is on call 24/7 even when she's sick. There's nobody to help clean up vomit from the bed at 3am. There are a million reasons why "freedom" and "single mother' don't go hand in hand. Stop trying to glamorize it. What you're looking to compare is a divorced mother to a single and childless woman. She only answers to herself.

I think the point is that a single mom, by choice, has more freedom than a divorced mom. If you assume a certain degree of wealth and that the divorced mom's ex is difficult, then PP is correct.

[Anonymous]

I mean in any situation, if you're comparing a thing vs the absolute worse case as a baseline (horrible ex), then whatever that other thing is will be better.

[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:Look ladies, it’s all fun and games to be the “cool aunt” when you are 28 and traveling the world. Everyone looks up to you and they want to be you. Then you turn 43 and you’re still single with no kids and your career has sort of peaked, as well as your looks.

You can’t be a “cool aunt” at 43

Right, that’s the age when the cool aunts become the cool SMBC whose nieces and nephews free babysit and who is in a place in her career to have a full time
Nanny.

It's not really a step up to be a SMBC. Nobody is envious of that person, doing it all alone, with a fatherless child. A nanny is not a replacement for a second parent.

Oh honey.

A ton of women with three kids (two babies and one husband) envy the independence and the freedom a wealthy single mother has. Go read more in this forum about how many people are staying because they can’t bear the thought of giving their kids up half the time.

The person no one envies is the woman married to a low-tier man.

Uh, no. Speak for yourself. I'd rather just be single and fabulous than be the sole, constant on duty, single plane.

And that’s fine— but the poster was bemoaning how women have “no families” as though women are constrained to having a child with a partner— they’re not and they’re frequently better off without one.

I wasn't that PP but I don't see the 40something woman deciding to just become SMBC as the answer to not being the 'cool aunt' anymore. There are lots of unenviable people out there. Those with the dud husband, this with the dud ex who rarely sees his kids, the SMBC trying to do it all alone..... none of these are ideal or enviable.

In your list only the SMBC has freedom. So she’s more enviable than the rest by a mile.

How is she free? When you have a kid you are no long free by any stretch. The ones I didn't mention have more free time: happily married with kids, happily married with no kids, and single and childless. SMBC has no freedom any more than a single divorce mom has freedom.

A divorced mother cannot move out of state without the consent of her ex.

A divorced mother cannot take her children abroad without the consent of her ex.

A divorced mother has to deal with her ex on every single issue no matter how awful he is.

A single mother does as she likes and as her financial status allows.

A single mother has to plan travel around school breaks. Is on call 24/7 even when she's sick. There's nobody to help clean up vomit from the bed at 3am. There are a million reasons why "freedom" and "single mother' don't go hand in hand. Stop trying to glamorize it. What you're looking to compare is a divorced mother to a single and childless woman. She only answers to herself.

I think the point is that a single mom, by choice, has more freedom than a divorced mom. If you assume a certain degree of wealth and that the divorced mom's ex is difficult, then PP is correct.

Yeah but the PP is more threatened by a SMBC than a divorced mom. A SMBC has entirely avoided being accountable to a man. A divorced mom still is bound to one for 18 years *and* a SMBC lifestyle cannot be replicated by the overwhelming majority of men.

[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:Look ladies, it’s all fun and games to be the “cool aunt” when you are 28 and traveling the world. Everyone looks up to you and they want to be you. Then you turn 43 and you’re still single with no kids and your career has sort of peaked, as well as your looks.

You can’t be a “cool aunt” at 43

Right, that’s the age when the cool aunts become the cool SMBC whose nieces and nephews free babysit and who is in a place in her career to have a full time
Nanny.

It's not really a step up to be a SMBC. Nobody is envious of that person, doing it all alone, with a fatherless child. A nanny is not a replacement for a second parent.

Oh honey.

A ton of women with three kids (two babies and one husband) envy the independence and the freedom a wealthy single mother has. Go read more in this forum about how many people are staying because they can’t bear the thought of giving their kids up half the time.

The person no one envies is the woman married to a low-tier man.

Uh, no. Speak for yourself. I'd rather just be single and fabulous than be the sole, constant on duty, single plane.

And that’s fine— but the poster was bemoaning how women have “no families” as though women are constrained to having a child with a partner— they’re not and they’re frequently better off without one.

I wasn't that PP but I don't see the 40something woman deciding to just become SMBC as the answer to not being the 'cool aunt' anymore. There are lots of unenviable people out there. Those with the dud husband, this with the dud ex who rarely sees his kids, the SMBC trying to do it all alone..... none of these are ideal or enviable.

In your list only the SMBC has freedom. So she’s more enviable than the rest by a mile.

How is she free? When you have a kid you are no long free by any stretch. The ones I didn't mention have more free time: happily married with kids, happily married with no kids, and single and childless. SMBC has no freedom any more than a single divorce mom has freedom.

A divorced mother cannot move out of state without the consent of her ex.

A divorced mother cannot take her children abroad without the consent of her ex.

A divorced mother has to deal with her ex on every single issue no matter how awful he is.

A single mother does as she likes and as her financial status allows.

A single mother has to plan travel around school breaks. Is on call 24/7 even when she's sick. There's nobody to help clean up vomit from the bed at 3am. There are a million reasons why "freedom" and "single mother' don't go hand in hand. Stop trying to glamorize it. What you're looking to compare is a divorced mother to a single and childless woman. She only answers to herself.

Of course there are people to help clean up vomit— a SMBC has a housekeeper and a nanny. It’s the mother whose spouse is sleeping peacefully while she washes the vomit who you need to pity.

Delulu

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I mean in any situation, if you're comparing a thing vs the absolute worse case as a baseline (horrible ex), then whatever that other thing is will be better.

Even a nice ex typically doesn’t consent to the other parent moving the kids abroad. SMBC gets 100% autonomy in how she raises her kids and where, without having someone else’s view to consider. She has exponentially more freedom than a married or divorced mother.

[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:Look ladies, it’s all fun and games to be the “cool aunt” when you are 28 and traveling the world. Everyone looks up to you and they want to be you. Then you turn 43 and you’re still single with no kids and your career has sort of peaked, as well as your looks.

You can’t be a “cool aunt” at 43

Right, that’s the age when the cool aunts become the cool SMBC whose nieces and nephews free babysit and who is in a place in her career to have a full time
Nanny.

It's not really a step up to be a SMBC. Nobody is envious of that person, doing it all alone, with a fatherless child. A nanny is not a replacement for a second parent.

Oh honey.

A ton of women with three kids (two babies and one husband) envy the independence and the freedom a wealthy single mother has. Go read more in this forum about how many people are staying because they can’t bear the thought of giving their kids up half the time.

The person no one envies is the woman married to a low-tier man.

Uh, no. Speak for yourself. I'd rather just be single and fabulous than be the sole, constant on duty, single plane.

And that’s fine— but the poster was bemoaning how women have “no families” as though women are constrained to having a child with a partner— they’re not and they’re frequently better off without one.

I wasn't that PP but I don't see the 40something woman deciding to just become SMBC as the answer to not being the 'cool aunt' anymore. There are lots of unenviable people out there. Those with the dud husband, this with the dud ex who rarely sees his kids, the SMBC trying to do it all alone..... none of these are ideal or enviable.

In your list only the SMBC has freedom. So she’s more enviable than the rest by a mile.

How is she free? When you have a kid you are no long free by any stretch. The ones I didn't mention have more free time: happily married with kids, happily married with no kids, and single and childless. SMBC has no freedom any more than a single divorce mom has freedom.

A divorced mother cannot move out of state without the consent of her ex.

A divorced mother cannot take her children abroad without the consent of her ex.

A divorced mother has to deal with her ex on every single issue no matter how awful he is.

A single mother does as she likes and as her financial status allows.

A single mother has to plan travel around school breaks. Is on call 24/7 even when she's sick. There's nobody to help clean up vomit from the bed at 3am. There are a million reasons why "freedom" and "single mother' don't go hand in hand. Stop trying to glamorize it. What you're looking to compare is a divorced mother to a single and childless woman. She only answers to herself.

Of course there are people to help clean up vomit— a SMBC has a housekeeper and a nanny. It’s the mother whose spouse is sleeping peacefully while she washes the vomit who you need to pity.

I couldn't stand that last bit, it would drive me crazy and yes I would ultimately divorce. I'm a working class woman most of my life and I have many friends in that position and no, being a single working mother is not glamorous and most cannot afford nanny or housekeeper. But many still find it is more peaceful to carry all that burden of mothering and housekeeping and life managing on their own without watching a man sat on his keister doing very little to help - the indignity of that is just too maddening to some of us.

[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:Look ladies, it’s all fun and games to be the “cool aunt” when you are 28 and traveling the world. Everyone looks up to you and they want to be you. Then you turn 43 and you’re still single with no kids and your career has sort of peaked, as well as your looks.

You can’t be a “cool aunt” at 43

Right, that’s the age when the cool aunts become the cool SMBC whose nieces and nephews free babysit and who is in a place in her career to have a full time
Nanny.

It's not really a step up to be a SMBC. Nobody is envious of that person, doing it all alone, with a fatherless child. A nanny is not a replacement for a second parent.

Oh honey.

A ton of women with three kids (two babies and one husband) envy the independence and the freedom a wealthy single mother has. Go read more in this forum about how many people are staying because they can’t bear the thought of giving their kids up half the time.

The person no one envies is the woman married to a low-tier man.

Uh, no. Speak for yourself. I'd rather just be single and fabulous than be the sole, constant on duty, single plane.

And that’s fine— but the poster was bemoaning how women have “no families” as though women are constrained to having a child with a partner— they’re not and they’re frequently better off without one.

I wasn't that PP but I don't see the 40something woman deciding to just become SMBC as the answer to not being the 'cool aunt' anymore. There are lots of unenviable people out there. Those with the dud husband, this with the dud ex who rarely sees his kids, the SMBC trying to do it all alone..... none of these are ideal or enviable.

In your list only the SMBC has freedom. So she’s more enviable than the rest by a mile.

How is she free? When you have a kid you are no long free by any stretch. The ones I didn't mention have more free time: happily married with kids, happily married with no kids, and single and childless. SMBC has no freedom any more than a single divorce mom has freedom.

A divorced mother cannot move out of state without the consent of her ex.

A divorced mother cannot take her children abroad without the consent of her ex.

A divorced mother has to deal with her ex on every single issue no matter how awful he is.

A single mother does as she likes and as her financial status allows.

A single mother has to plan travel around school breaks. Is on call 24/7 even when she's sick. There's nobody to help clean up vomit from the bed at 3am. There are a million reasons why "freedom" and "single mother' don't go hand in hand. Stop trying to glamorize it. What you're looking to compare is a divorced mother to a single and childless woman. She only answers to herself.

Of course there are people to help clean up vomit— a SMBC has a housekeeper and a nanny. It’s the mother whose spouse is sleeping peacefully while she washes the vomit who you need to pity.

A SMBC has a housekeeper and a nanny? What fantasy is this?

[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:Look ladies, it’s all fun and games to be the “cool aunt” when you are 28 and traveling the world. Everyone looks up to you and they want to be you. Then you turn 43 and you’re still single with no kids and your career has sort of peaked, as well as your looks.

You can’t be a “cool aunt” at 43

Right, that’s the age when the cool aunts become the cool SMBC whose nieces and nephews free babysit and who is in a place in her career to have a full time
Nanny.

It's not really a step up to be a SMBC. Nobody is envious of that person, doing it all alone, with a fatherless child. A nanny is not a replacement for a second parent.

Oh honey.

A ton of women with three kids (two babies and one husband) envy the independence and the freedom a wealthy single mother has. Go read more in this forum about how many people are staying because they can’t bear the thought of giving their kids up half the time.

The person no one envies is the woman married to a low-tier man.

Uh, no. Speak for yourself. I'd rather just be single and fabulous than be the sole, constant on duty, single plane.

And that’s fine— but the poster was bemoaning how women have “no families” as though women are constrained to having a child with a partner— they’re not and they’re frequently better off without one.

I wasn't that PP but I don't see the 40something woman deciding to just become SMBC as the answer to not being the 'cool aunt' anymore. There are lots of unenviable people out there. Those with the dud husband, this with the dud ex who rarely sees his kids, the SMBC trying to do it all alone..... none of these are ideal or enviable.

In your list only the SMBC has freedom. So she’s more enviable than the rest by a mile.

How is she free? When you have a kid you are no long free by any stretch. The ones I didn't mention have more free time: happily married with kids, happily married with no kids, and single and childless. SMBC has no freedom any more than a single divorce mom has freedom.

A divorced mother cannot move out of state without the consent of her ex.

A divorced mother cannot take her children abroad without the consent of her ex.

A divorced mother has to deal with her ex on every single issue no matter how awful he is.

A single mother does as she likes and as her financial status allows.

A single mother has to plan travel around school breaks. Is on call 24/7 even when she's sick. There's nobody to help clean up vomit from the bed at 3am. There are a million reasons why "freedom" and "single mother' don't go hand in hand. Stop trying to glamorize it. What you're looking to compare is a divorced mother to a single and childless woman. She only answers to herself.

I think the point is that a single mom, by choice, has more freedom than a divorced mom. If you assume a certain degree of wealth and that the divorced mom's ex is difficult, then PP is correct.

But less freedom than other women. Why the weird hair splitting?