If women could go back in time

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Would they still fight for workforce accessibility/equality or accept that stay at home mom is better than working a full time job and not seeing their kids grow up? Did it provide the happiness it promised?

Saw this question being asked and I know what I would choose

This is a very loaded question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work full time, make >$500k, and see my children grow up and do tons of things together.

It’s how I manage my time and the systems we have set up.

Meh would rather have a husband who does that so I can relax at home

Relax at home? I thought being a SAHM was the hardest job in the world...

Once the kids are in upper elementary school all you do is volunteer and drive in figure eights around town from 4pm to 9pm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate such stupid questions.

Not all women are mothers. Not all mothers want to stay home. Those mothers that do want to stay home, still can.

+1

Now you have the choice - which was the power we gained. No, I don’t think we should give that up.

There's some weird misconception among some women today that the feminist movement was about "choice." It wasn't. It was about women's liberation and financial equality.

Remember also that during this time, a woman couldn't even get a credit card in her own name (until well into the 1970s) and needed her husband's permission for many other financial decisions. So it's about a lot more than just "choice" and staying at home and workplace access.

What?! Is that is the Middle East or South Asia or in the United States? I don’t believe that was the case in this country.

Signed,
An immmigrant

Is this a joke? Plus claiming to be a recent immigrant who never took US history in k-12 so post something silly now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My career field disappeared with the Great Recession and we had very young kids. I became a SAHM. It's worked well for our family. The kids are thriving, my spouse makes good money and is glad I'm at home to handle the home front. When our kids were sick at school, and needed to be picked up, I could be there in 15 minutes. I once apologized for taking 20 minutes and the school nurse said don't worry, you're doing just fine. She had sick kids who sat there all day until the bell rang, and then went to after care...

I always remember that moment. My kids had it pretty good. I have no regrets looking back. Life has been good. Nobody can have everything, all the time, all at once. We all make choices, and have to live with them.

Speaking of choices, men and women can also choose employers and industries who “get it” and allow you to work from home when needed or leave for a sick child.

I’ve had that industry and 4 employers in a row that allowed that and everyone took vacation, did the 9am camp drops, and managed their work and $250,000 incomes plus bonuses just fine.

I’m all for paying your dues in your 20s and getting the toughest and best work experiences possible; then picking your spot based on your values. It works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work full time, make >$500k, and see my children grow up and do tons of things together.

It’s how I manage my time and the systems we have set up.

Meh would rather have a husband who does that so I can relax at home

Relax at home? I thought being a SAHM was the hardest job in the world...

Once the kids are in upper elementary school all you do is volunteer and drive in figure eights around town from 4pm to 9pm.

Robots plan, clean, cook, shop, maintain, repair, do paperwork etc.

[Anonymous]

My great great grandmother was one of the first female PHDs from Columbia U and my mother was one of the first female MBAs from an Ivy. Both had very successful careers and happy marriages and so do I. I have a sister who is a SAHM and she has already developed a business plan for her own business when her youngest is in school full time. There is no going back to Leave it to Beaver.

[Anonymous]

Being a mom is thankless.

Why not be a mom who works and get some direct thanks, and money, from that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work full time, make >$500k, and see my children grow up and do tons of things together.

It’s how I manage my time and the systems we have set up.

Meh would rather have a husband who does that so I can relax at home

Relax at home? I thought being a SAHM was the hardest job in the world...

Once the kids are in upper elementary school all you do is volunteer and drive in figure eights around town from 4pm to 9pm.

Robots plan, clean, cook, shop, maintain, repair, do paperwork etc.

Send one over!

[Anonymous]

The question is inherently stupid, given that the majority of women have always had to work to help their families survive.

This conversation is for a few privileged women to kvetch over. The rest of us know that this world will never be good for women and girls until we crush the patriarchy and stand on truly equal footing with men in all areas of life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would they still fight for workforce accessibility/equality or accept that stay at home mom is better than working a full time job and not seeing their kids grow up? Did it provide the happiness it promised?

Saw this question being asked and I know what I would choose

I think about this all the time. I think if you have a good marriage and husband, assuming that one job is enough to live a nice life, the 50s way seems easier. But that's a lot of ifs.

Just remember many if not most mommies were bored to tears and drugged with valium a/k/a "Mama's little helper." Be a little careful romanticizing it.

That said, it's true that a widespread two-parent workforce did help catalyze the affordability crisis with housing, I think.

DP but what on Earth is your source for this?

https://www.historyhit.com/mothers-little-helper-the-history-of-valium/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24007886/

You could easily do some research if you are interested. It's widely researched.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:God no!

I’m thankful for the 40 hour week that was fought for as well.

I could not imagine having someone I love with all my heart working more than that, never seeing their own kids, and giving up 1/2 their hard earned money to a cheating wife

Now that we’re getting closer to bring equal at work..

I’m also super thankful men are getting Paternity leave, getting family flexible schedules and gave more opportunities to be equal parents.

Plus I did not miss one thing in my children’s lives.

Also I could not imagine being so selfish as to not fight for women who don’t want to marry /have kids not having those opportunities.

Also … yes I’m very happy! I provide the happiness… it was never “ promised “ its comes from within.

How is that possible if you were at work and they were with somebody else?

Do you homeschool? Never let them out of your sight? I assure you, you have missed some things in your children's lives. And they are probably glad of it.

She never showers and her kids don't nap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would they still fight for workforce accessibility/equality or accept that stay at home mom is better than working a full time job and not seeing their kids grow up? Did it provide the happiness it promised?

Saw this question being asked and I know what I would choose

It's a personal choice.

If you are going back in time, you also need to consider not taking up a valuable selective college seat, for someone who might need that seat and degree to advance themselves...working, earning money, providing for a family (thinking of single parents for example).

This. If you truly believe women should be SAHMs then why go to college? I guess to catch a high-earning husband who would allow that.

If value of an education is nothing more than a pay check then this discussion has zero value. Not every woman gets married early, becomes a parent, gains no work experience, not volunteer, not teach kids,not do part time, not go back to work, become a SAHM, not get divorced/widowed, has supportive or affluent husband etc etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work full time, make >$500k, and see my children grow up and do tons of things together.

It’s how I manage my time and the systems we have set up.

Meh would rather have a husband who does that so I can relax at home

If my wife made that kind of money, I would be home too! (my wife certainly wished I made a third of that amount)

[Anonymous]

Something has to break and I think our entire system is unstable.
-Men no longer make enough money to allow women to stay home
-School hours do not match working hours
-Work hours should be 7 hours instead of 8+

I think school hours would be the easiest one to fix, except teachers seem so burnt out these days. I would redesign schools to have several recesses and make them longer, longer lunch break (my kids whine about not having time to eat). Maybe those recesses could be staffed by PE like teachers and be at the end of the day. If school just went to 8-4:30pm, it would take a heavy load off my plate.

My kids go to a title 1 school and so many of their classmates walk home to unattended houses because school lets out so very early.

[Anonymous]

I'm from a culture where staying at home was expected and encouraged even enforced 2-3 decades ago, there is such a drastic difference between educated women and uneducated women, not just for kids but for themselves, husbands and society, no matter if they are SAHM, doctors, scientists, engineers or even if doing useless jobs to impress their social circle or as an escape from home life.