Anonymous wrote:Note: you are completely dependent on your husband when you are a SAHM. That's a fact. But the assumptions people make about wohms are rarely grounded in fact. You have no way of knowing how many hours I work, if I telecommute, if I leave at 6am and get home by 3:30, etc. See?

Fact. Not when you are an independently wealthy woman.

See?

Note: you are completely dependent on your husband when you are a SAHM. That's a fact. But the assumptions people make about wohms are rarely grounded in fact. You have no way of knowing how many hours I work, if I telecommute, if I leave at 6am and get home by 3:30, etc. See?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cool story, bro!

Of course, if you married a doctor, lawyer, or some other kind of busy professional who can't/won't help with the house and kids, then you just might choose to quit the rat race and stay home with the kids...and then you'd likely hire a nanny and housekeeper...just like lots of other American mommies in DCUMLandia. There's no shame in it.

Personally, I'd rather cut off my arm than be a SAHM completely dependent on my husband. But if a lady wants to be a SAHM, that's no skin off my nose.

And I'd rather have my eyes poked out than be a WOHM trying to carve out an hour a day for her kids. But if a lady wants to be a WOHM, that's no skin off my nose.

I bet I spend more time with my kids than you do. I'm home by 4pm everyday, and the kids are in school and on the bus until right around then.

My kids are proud of my career. They think it's cool when I go to meetings at the White House and love traveling with me when I speak at conferences.

Did you not read the post directly above mine? I was responding in kind to that PP. Some of you have great difficulty with irony.

I'm the poster you are quoting. Go read it again. I didn't say anything nasty about SAHMs...I just said I couldn't do it. Then YOU made the snarky comment about struggling to carve out an hour for the kids. Remember?

Like the old PSA: Reading is fundamental.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I could easily work and support myself and kids on my salary as a GS-15 WAH Fed with benefits and flexibility.

He makes a lot more than me, but I'd survive with my $175k/salary.

It is hard for somebody that stopped working at 27-32 years old to him back in the workforce at 45+. Really hard. Don't fool yourself--especially with this economy. This is why it's wise to downscale if you have the luxury--2-3 days per week or telework, but I'd be careful about just quitting with 60-years of life left.

I had a lot of SAHM friends when we had babies and nearly all were back at work within 5 years. Yes, staying out for 15+ years is a different ballgame but those people are probably not expecting to jump back on the same career track.

My mom quit work as a secretary when she got married in the late 1960s and went back to work 16 years later. Despite having to completely learn how to work a computer, she was still hireable as an admin and ended up doing that for over 20 yrs before retiring. Life is long and circumstances and desires change. Not taking the time you want with your babies for a couple years because you worry about your employability 15 years from now seems a sad way to live.

Me me me me me. Time I want. What about the pressure on your husband being the sole breadwinner? The lack of contributions to retirement, to college? But hey, as long as you get your time at Starbucks and Little Gym, who cares?

This is so ironic given the working mom posting that one of her fringe benefits of working was going out to get coffee mere paragraphs above yours.

Ha, I thought the same thing! I guess it's ok to go out for coffee while on the company's dime, but not if you're out and about with your own children. What a skewed way of thinking.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here.

I am still confused about how the ability to work outside the home and earn an income started being viewed as a chore and a burden rather than a desirable exercise of ones ability be able to use your mind and intelligence and be financially independent?

All I knew was women wanting to be more than just housewives and poop cleaners for their babies.

In the first world, its reversed. Women seem to want to go back into their kitchens.

You are being intentionally provocative.

+1

Her remarks at the end of her OP were similarly provocative. Trying to sound confused and sincere while ending with digs and looking down her nose. Typical.

I was not trying to be provocative. I am trying to put it in simple terms.

I don't understand the desire to stay home. My mother always told me to always always be financially independent and never to be dependent on a man or a burden on your parents. I'm confused as to why western women desire to be provided for. There's no dignity in that. You're dependent on someone else for your livelihood.

Interesting that it doesn't similarly bother you that your children are completely dependent on someone other than their parents for their care.

We get it. You "don't understand the desire to stay home." You don't have to understand. No one cares what your opinion is. But thanks for sharing!

When your 5 year old goes to kindergarten, who are they "completely dependent on for their care?"

+1
We're waiting.

And the rest of us are still waiting to hear why it doesn't bother you that your non-school-aged child is completely dependent on someone else for their care. After all, PP is just so concerned that SAHMs are "completely dependent on someone else for their livelihood." Seems only fair she (and you) should be equally concerned about your own kids. But clearly the irony is lost on you.

Correct, I don't have any issue outsourcing some of my childcare. My kids are thriving, in a fabulous learning situation where they are cared for deeply and learn to be part of a team, learn from amazing women (and men!) with different cultural backgrounds, and run smiling to tell me about their day when I pick them up.

Does a switch flip at 5?

I can't believe this (once again) has to be explained to you. The question was asked in response to the PP who was so "concerned" about women being "dependent" on another. So that was reframed to ask PP whether she was as concerned about her own children being dependent on others for their care. Never mind. If you don't get it, you don't get it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cool story, bro!

Of course, if you married a doctor, lawyer, or some other kind of busy professional who can't/won't help with the house and kids, then you just might choose to quit the rat race and stay home with the kids...and then you'd likely hire a nanny and housekeeper...just like lots of other American mommies in DCUMLandia. There's no shame in it.

Personally, I'd rather cut off my arm than be a SAHM completely dependent on my husband. But if a lady wants to be a SAHM, that's no skin off my nose.

And I'd rather have my eyes poked out than be a WOHM trying to carve out an hour a day for her kids. But if a lady wants to be a WOHM, that's no skin off my nose.

I bet I spend more time with my kids than you do. I'm home by 4pm everyday, and the kids are in school and on the bus until right around then.

My kids are proud of my career. They think it's cool when I go to meetings at the White House and love traveling with me when I speak at conferences.

Did you not read the post directly above mine? I was responding in kind to that PP. Some of you have great difficulty with irony.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here.

I am still confused about how the ability to work outside the home and earn an income started being viewed as a chore and a burden rather than a desirable exercise of ones ability be able to use your mind and intelligence and be financially independent?

All I knew was women wanting to be more than just housewives and poop cleaners for their babies.

In the first world, its reversed. Women seem to want to go back into their kitchens.

You are being intentionally provocative.

+1

Her remarks at the end of her OP were similarly provocative. Trying to sound confused and sincere while ending with digs and looking down her nose. Typical.

I was not trying to be provocative. I am trying to put it in simple terms.

I don't understand the desire to stay home. My mother always told me to always always be financially independent and never to be dependent on a man or a burden on your parents. I'm confused as to why western women desire to be provided for. There's no dignity in that. You're dependent on someone else for your livelihood.

Interesting that it doesn't similarly bother you that your children are completely dependent on someone other than their parents for their care.

We get it. You "don't understand the desire to stay home." You don't have to understand. No one cares what your opinion is. But thanks for sharing!

When your 5 year old goes to kindergarten, who are they "completely dependent on for their care?"

+1
We're waiting.

And the rest of us are still waiting to hear why it doesn't bother you that your non-school-aged child is completely dependent on someone else for their care. After all, PP is just so concerned that SAHMs are "completely dependent on someone else for their livelihood." Seems only fair she (and you) should be equally concerned about your own kids. But clearly the irony is lost on you.

Correct, I don't have any issue outsourcing some of my childcare. My kids are thriving, in a fabulous learning situation where they are cared for deeply and learn to be part of a team, learn from amazing women (and men!) with different cultural backgrounds, and run smiling to tell me about their day when I pick them up.

Does a switch flip at 5?

I understand what you mean OP. I am so thankful for my career and that I married a guy who was raised by 2 working parents - and so had no problem being an equal partner in parenting and household management. He cooks, takes sick days off, keeps the house going, etc. And I make a great salary - work about 40-45 hours a week and have a ton of flexibility.

Very grateful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad I grew up in India. Women grossly outnumber men as engineers, scientists, doctors, army, pilots... you name it! Girls are rarely restricted to home and hearth unless it is their personal choice. Surprised to hear this about Pakistan.

I know. It's like saying Indians kill their baby girls, burn brides for dowries, assault them on streets, gang rape them on buses, force widows to commit satee. Oh wait . .

What century are you posting from?

This one https://www.rt.com/news/india-ritual-suicide-sati/. And you?

I wa born and raised in India. You dig up some obscure report and make it sound like millions of women are committing sati? It is a country of over a billion people and some areas are still untouched by modern development.
The Roop Kanwar case created a major uproar when it happened.
And the US has had plenty of violence directed against women and minorities.
Anyway your hatred of India will only allow you to see facts as you present them, so your opinion would be laughed at by most educated people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cool story, bro!

Of course, if you married a doctor, lawyer, or some other kind of busy professional who can't/won't help with the house and kids, then you just might choose to quit the rat race and stay home with the kids...and then you'd likely hire a nanny and housekeeper...just like lots of other American mommies in DCUMLandia. There's no shame in it.

Personally, I'd rather cut off my arm than be a SAHM completely dependent on my husband. But if a lady wants to be a SAHM, that's no skin off my nose.

And I'd rather have my eyes poked out than be a WOHM trying to carve out an hour a day for her kids. But if a lady wants to be a WOHM, that's no skin off my nose.

I bet I spend more time with my kids than you do. I'm home by 4pm everyday, and the kids are in school and on the bus until right around then.

My kids are proud of my career. They think it's cool when I go to meetings at the White House and love traveling with me when I speak at conferences.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I could easily work and support myself and kids on my salary as a GS-15 WAH Fed with benefits and flexibility.

He makes a lot more than me, but I'd survive with my $175k/salary.

It is hard for somebody that stopped working at 27-32 years old to him back in the workforce at 45+. Really hard. Don't fool yourself--especially with this economy. This is why it's wise to downscale if you have the luxury--2-3 days per week or telework, but I'd be careful about just quitting with 60-years of life left.

I had a lot of SAHM friends when we had babies and nearly all were back at work within 5 years. Yes, staying out for 15+ years is a different ballgame but those people are probably not expecting to jump back on the same career track.

My mom quit work as a secretary when she got married in the late 1960s and went back to work 16 years later. Despite having to completely learn how to work a computer, she was still hireable as an admin and ended up doing that for over 20 yrs before retiring. Life is long and circumstances and desires change. Not taking the time you want with your babies for a couple years because you worry about your employability 15 years from now seems a sad way to live.

Me me me me me. Time I want. What about the pressure on your husband being the sole breadwinner? The lack of contributions to retirement, to college? But hey, as long as you get your time at Starbucks and Little Gym, who cares?

This is so ironic given the working mom posting that one of her fringe benefits of working was going out to get coffee mere paragraphs above yours.

I'm kind of surprised at the last few PPs who are pouncing on OP for presenting her experience as a Pakistani woman. I'm a first generation American to Indian parents who continues to have very close ties to India (visit frequently and am very close to cousins who live there), and I feel like that's a willfully narrow view of women's status in that region.

For context, I have a STEM PhD and my mom is a physician. All of the girl cousins on my Dad's side have advanced degrees (actually, come to think of it, on my Mom's side too) except my sister...and I'm pretty sure my Dad still has money set aside if she ever wanted to go back to school. We were encouraged to get the best educations we could by my grandmother, who was married off very young and denied most of her desires to be educated. That said, even in our progressive family there is a clear difference between how our careers are perceived compared to my brother's and male cousins. Our careers are nice-to-have status symbols...evidenced by my aunt who keeps wishing my doctor cousin would stop working. My mom is the only DIL in my Dad's family who worked after being married (though both my aunts are well-educated), and she caught a lot of flak for it. Despite the fact that I'm probably more ambitious than my DH, I'm constantly being asked about how my career decisions are impacting DH and rarely the other way around. I've had conversations with many of my cousins' friends who, before getting married, talked about how they hoped they would have a MIL who "let them work". Similarly my own friends who live in India express gratefulness that that they have MIL's who "let them work". Granted, these are all fairly UC/UMC people, but there is a clear sense that women's careers are for fun, not important parts of their identity and definitely secondary to their identities as wives and mothers.

As you move down the SES ladder, things can be even worse. The perceptions of women's role and place is fairly complex, but it's willfully ignorant to pretend that there is universal support for women working outside the home...or evenbeing educated. The Delhi bus rape, the experience of Nobel Laureate Malala Yousafzai, and honor killings in Pakistan (highly recommend this year's Oscar-winning documentary short now on HBO) all speak to ongoing patriarchal views of women's roles in society.

While OP's original framing did set this thread up to turn into a WOHM vs SAHM debate, I'm very surprised that she's being slammed for pointing out that the US is a more egalitarian society than Pakistan (or India). My aunt (Mom's sister) is a well-respected economist who focuses on the nexus of women's rights and land ownership. She only in the last decade (can't remember exactly when) was able to get passed landmark legislation that allowed women to inherit land by default.

I agree that there is definitely a minority of well-educated and wealthy female professionals in India who have the means and support to pursue high-powered careers...but it's ridiculous to pretend like this is the norm for women in that part of the world. Even just considering the fact that those women rely on a large domestic staff (paid very low wages by US standards) starts to paint the bigger picture. Have any of the PPs asked themselves what the lives of those workers are like?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad I grew up in India. Women grossly outnumber men as engineers, scientists, doctors, army, pilots... you name it! Girls are rarely restricted to home and hearth unless it is their personal choice. Surprised to hear this about Pakistan.

I know. It's like saying Indians kill their baby girls, burn brides for dowries, assault them on streets, gang rape them on buses, force widows to commit satee. Oh wait . .

What century are you posting from?

This one https://www.rt.com/news/india-ritual-suicide-sati/. And you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad I grew up in India. Women grossly outnumber men as engineers, scientists, doctors, army, pilots... you name it! Girls are rarely restricted to home and hearth unless it is their personal choice. Surprised to hear this about Pakistan.

I know. It's like saying Indians kill their baby girls, burn brides for dowries, assault them on streets, gang rape them on buses, force widows to commit satee. Oh wait . .

What century are you posting from?

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad I grew up in India. Women grossly outnumber men as engineers, scientists, doctors, army, pilots... you name it! Girls are rarely restricted to home and hearth unless it is their personal choice. Surprised to hear this about Pakistan.

I know. It's like saying Indians kill their baby girls, burn brides for dowries, assault them on streets, gang rape them on buses, force widows to commit satee. Oh wait . .