Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My wife is a sahm because it makes the most sense for us financially and it's what she genuinely prefers. But sometimes women in our family make weird comments about it by saying things like "but don't you want to do something?". These women happen to be very progressive and feminist. Anyone else deal w/ this?

Shut up maga

Your wife is a fool

Breeding your little shits instead of keeping up her education and career for wha5 a white Christian male to tell her how to think ?

She’s stupid to do this and your kids will never succeed

Bigot.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a feminist, and think that part of being one is accepting that women do what they want without being held back by men.

I grew up with a depressed SAHM. In elementary school my hair was always in a messy ponytail because that's all I could do, I made my own breakfast and lunch, I walked myself to school after locking the front door, and I came home to a note with a list of chores. I wish my mother had worked! If I'd come home to homemade cookies just ONCE I could have ridden that high for years.

And lots of us had the same deal with working moms...

I know, and WISH my mom had worked. At least it would have made sense. Plus I'd have had more freedom - I'd have been able to blast music while I did my chores, wouldn't have had to sit on the floor next to my mother splayed out on the couch or her bed and entertained her, been able to call my friends and do homework over the phone together, etc. Plus we'd have had more money, and my dad would have had less stress.

I'm a working mom, and I loved having a stay-at-home mom. We always had a healthy snack after school, and she ran us all around to sports and supported us in homework, and we had a family dinner together most nights. Plus, we had plenty of money because my dad could focus on his business while she ran the home. My dad would've been more stressed if he were home more often because he doesn't have the patience or disposition to spend a lot of time with young kids.

That said, I work because even though I had an ideal childhood with a mom who was devoted and supportive, I also felt sorry for my mom because she had no autonomy, respect or access to money. I know women who are very happy staying home, and I think the key is having a very supportive working spouse who values the effort of the stay-at-home spouse, and they have complete transparency and shared control over money.

Yes. If you do not have financial control and financial security, being a SAHM can be a risk.

I guess there are people who are in this position, but I don’t feel more vulnerable financially than someone working. I have education and could work if necessary. If my husband wanted a divorce, I would get half of everything. I have my own credit score and credit cards, etc. If my husband lost his job, either of us could work and we have savings because we built our lifestyle on one income. If he dies, we have life insurance. I just don’t spend time worrying about this. Life is full of unknowns and you deal with them.

This is good.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a feminist, and think that part of being one is accepting that women do what they want without being held back by men.

I grew up with a depressed SAHM. In elementary school my hair was always in a messy ponytail because that's all I could do, I made my own breakfast and lunch, I walked myself to school after locking the front door, and I came home to a note with a list of chores. I wish my mother had worked! If I'd come home to homemade cookies just ONCE I could have ridden that high for years.

And lots of us had the same deal with working moms...

I know, and WISH my mom had worked. At least it would have made sense. Plus I'd have had more freedom - I'd have been able to blast music while I did my chores, wouldn't have had to sit on the floor next to my mother splayed out on the couch or her bed and entertained her, been able to call my friends and do homework over the phone together, etc. Plus we'd have had more money, and my dad would have had less stress.

I'm a working mom, and I loved having a stay-at-home mom. We always had a healthy snack after school, and she ran us all around to sports and supported us in homework, and we had a family dinner together most nights. Plus, we had plenty of money because my dad could focus on his business while she ran the home. My dad would've been more stressed if he were home more often because he doesn't have the patience or disposition to spend a lot of time with young kids.

That said, I work because even though I had an ideal childhood with a mom who was devoted and supportive, I also felt sorry for my mom because she had no autonomy, respect or access to money. I know women who are very happy staying home, and I think the key is having a very supportive working spouse who values the effort of the stay-at-home spouse, and they have complete transparency and shared control over money.

Yes. If you do not have financial control and financial security, being a SAHM can be a risk.

I guess there are people who are in this position, but I don’t feel more vulnerable financially than someone working. I have education and could work if necessary. If my husband wanted a divorce, I would get half of everything. I have my own credit score and credit cards, etc. If my husband lost his job, either of us could work and we have savings because we built our lifestyle on one income. If he dies, we have life insurance. I just don’t spend time worrying about this. Life is full of unknowns and you deal with them.

Anonymous wrote:My wife is a sahm because it makes the most sense for us financially and it's what she genuinely prefers. But sometimes women in our family make weird comments about it by saying things like "but don't you want to do something?". These women happen to be very progressive and feminist. Anyone else deal w/ this?

Maybe they’re worried you’ll get a divorce and she’ll be destitute or maybe they worry she’s unhappy if she’s always been very career oriented. If they are members of her family of origin (siblings, mom) it might stem from genuine concern. If they are members of your family it might not concern or curiosity…a question isn’t an attack. And I find most people are not caricatures and are instead fairly pragmatic on a variety of topics, especially concerning kids, reproductive choices, and family.

I have three children and work in a demanding job that happens to be remote. I feel that I have the best of both worlds and have friends that work and friends that are SAHM. Everyone I know has different struggles and hang up’s as a result of their choices. And a choice about working after kids doesn’t have to be forever and shouldn’t become anyone’s identity.

Anonymous wrote:"It is really up to the couple to decide this. I have no issues with someone being just a "non working for pay" person in a couple. If it makes the couple happy and everyone is okay with it, why not? You truly don't know what someone is going thru. They might have a hidden illness that makes daily life stressful and being "at home" helps them manage it. As long as the family is not on welfare it is really none of my business."

But you yourself say this is acceptable only because the "kept" person has an illness that prevents them from being able to contribute with money they earn through working. Nobody here seems to be saying that unhealthy people should be expected to pull their own weight. But why is an otherwise healthy and capable adult who has no caregiver needs not contributing? How is this not going to create a caregiver to dependent dynamic in what should be a partnership of two equals?

There are more dimensions to life than a paycheck. Many SAHMs provide more financial value in equivalent unpaid labor costs than they would working. They also may be the factor that is responsible for DH being successful in his career. Not having an equivalent paycheck doesn’t mean they are not equally contributing to the household in different areas.

Personally I have no desire to SAH because it’s not a fit for my personality and I personally don’t want to assume the risk of being 100% financially dependent on my husband. But other people have different priorities. Not recognizing the value and importance of SAHPs harms women and families.

"It is really up to the couple to decide this. I have no issues with someone being just a "non working for pay" person in a couple. If it makes the couple happy and everyone is okay with it, why not? You truly don't know what someone is going thru. They might have a hidden illness that makes daily life stressful and being "at home" helps them manage it. As long as the family is not on welfare it is really none of my business."

But you yourself say this is acceptable only because the "kept" person has an illness that prevents them from being able to contribute with money they earn through working. Nobody here seems to be saying that unhealthy people should be expected to pull their own weight. But why is an otherwise healthy and capable adult who has no caregiver needs not contributing? How is this not going to create a caregiver to dependent dynamic in what should be a partnership of two equals?

My mom was a SAHM. She raised 4 kids while my dad worked for the military. Every day she made sure his uniforms were pressed and ready for him to wear, she woke up at 4:45 every morning to make his coffee and breakfast, then got us 4 kids ready and off to school. She changed diapers, drove us to our music lessons, and after school activities, made sure the booster clubs had cupcakes to sell for the fundraisers, and managed to clean our house and prep healthy dinners for us every single day of the year, without exception. She stretched his modest paycheck and juggled paying the bills so that we could enjoy a comfortable life. (Thank goodness for pensions because there was nothing left to save for their old age!) As a mom with a FT professional career, I have ZERO negative judgment for her. But she'd be the first one to say that her life was not fulfilling. She knew to not dream or want more than what she got. She knows that she was lucky, because unlike the other young women from her low-income neighborhood, her husband was faithful, didn't drink away his paycheck, didn't physically abuse her, and stuck with her for over 60 years. But she also knows that nobody ever asked her what she wanted. I find it ludicrous that people here are talking about the "choice" to stay home, as if the women who did this in prior generations were doing this as a choice. She instilled in us from childhood the importance of being able to financially support ourselves so that we would have power within our marriages and not have our wellbeing dependent on the whims of our husbands. The most important thing to her was that her daughters would never depend on a man to keep a roof over our heads. She would be so disappointed in us if we didn't make our own money. When I had my first child, she came to help me at the hospital and then stayed for the first few months to help me while I was on maternity leave. Part of the reason for that was to help me learn to let someone besides me take care of my child's diapers and bottles. She did everything possible to enable me to return to work with minimal stress and worry. Never in a million years would she consider that the lovely women who cared for him while I worked for pay were "raising him for me."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, does anyone really enjoy working? Why do women act like the dream is to work and raise a family? I have a career but have done stay-at-home, FT work, PT work, WFH, etc as a mom. Preference would be to never work again. I just do it for the money. Can people really not find intellectual stimulation without a job??

Same. I would only add that I do it to have my own money - I needed a level of financial control to feel secure.

I never really understand this line of thinking. Why are you having children with a man with whom you already don’t feel secure with, or with whom you share control over finances? So no one should ever stay home? Or only women with trust funds should stay home? Because it’s not safe otherwise? If that’s the case, then only a small fraction of women would successfully stay home.

Just so you know, you could have a job and a man could still gamble or otherwise squander away every penny you have and that would be the end of it.

I’m genuinely curious what “security” looks like to you? Having your own bank account with money before baby? It’s still a marital asset, you know. So is every penny of his money, and it’s unlikely he wants to throw it all away unless he’s Fotis Dulos or something. Divorcing a SAHM doesn’t come cheap.

Not if you have your own accounts.

Not in my state. They’d be disclosed in discovery and become marital property.

That’s only if you’re divorcing. Which is not what I was responding to. I’d make him pay his gambling debts himself while married.

Cool. But then when all of his funds are gone after paying his debts, how are you paying to live? From your money, that’s how.

He’s still employed, obviously. He will be earning money continuously.

He’s spending it on gambling, remember?

He won't be after I find out about it. I won't pay a cent towards this nonsense--the bookies can come and break his kneecaps. He doesn't need them to work.

Anonymous wrote:"Unless you believe a woman WITHOUT children should be able to "choose" to not work for pay, your arguments about not working being a new form of feminism are BS."


"Taking care of children is a valuable and meaningful contribution to society. Pretending that it’s the same a vacation is very misogynistic."

My point is that adults need to adult. A core part of that means contributing to the household unit. Unlaunched 22-year-olds leisurely wake up at 9am and come up with fun ways to fill their day that may or may not enhance the life of the household's income generators. Those people are basically adult "roommates" who don't pay their share of the rent/mortgage/home maintenance. They usually sponge off the health and car insurance policies of the working adults in the household. A spouse has no business doing that IMO. You either work for pay, or you do things to support the income generating activities of the breadwinner. That could be making sure that they have zero things to worry about that aren't related to making money at work, like providing for all the needs of their children or keeping everything at home in tip-top shape.

It is really up to the couple to decide this. I have no issues with someone being just a "non working for pay" person in a couple. If it makes the couple happy and everyone is okay with it, why not? You truly don't know what someone is going thru. They might have a hidden illness that makes daily life stressful and being "at home" helps them manage it. As long as the family is not on welfare it is really none of my business.

Anonymous wrote:If she worked, people would judge her for that too. As a mom, you have to develop super thick skin. There is constant judgement.

This. People will always judge-for some it makes them feel better. Need to just be ok with who are, where are and what doing. Much easier to write that than to do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If she worked, people would judge her for that too. As a mom, you have to develop super thick skin. There is constant judgement.

The thing is, it’s rare a woman judges another woman TO HER FACE about having a job, but it’s a common occurrence for the SAHM.

Oh, no, to her face is very common.

Anonymous wrote:My wife is a sahm because it makes the most sense for us financially and it's what she genuinely prefers. But sometimes women in our family make weird comments about it by saying things like "but don't you want to do something?". These women happen to be very progressive and feminist. Anyone else deal w/ this?

Can be progressive and feminist and still be or want to be SAHM- the judging women in your family just sound like jerks.

"Unless you believe a woman WITHOUT children should be able to "choose" to not work for pay, your arguments about not working being a new form of feminism are BS."


"Taking care of children is a valuable and meaningful contribution to society. Pretending that it’s the same a vacation is very misogynistic."

My point is that adults need to adult. A core part of that means contributing to the household unit. Unlaunched 22-year-olds leisurely wake up at 9am and come up with fun ways to fill their day that may or may not enhance the life of the household's income generators. Those people are basically adult "roommates" who don't pay their share of the rent/mortgage/home maintenance. They usually sponge off the health and car insurance policies of the working adults in the household. A spouse has no business doing that IMO. You either work for pay, or you do things to support the income generating activities of the breadwinner. That could be making sure that they have zero things to worry about that aren't related to making money at work, like providing for all the needs of their children or keeping everything at home in tip-top shape.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women belong in the home, that’s what you should tell them. While their kids are at daycare or wherever, yours are at home with their mother. This is the real feminism.

I’m so glad society is shifting and now so many more women are proud to be SAHMs (just look at the posters on this thread). I think we will soon see enrollment rates for girls drop at college because what’s the point of an education when staying at home become normalized as a career path, it’s the hardest job in the world after all.

Because there’s a backlash against feminism in the younger generations after having seen it play out. They’ve seen the limitations and failures of it. Having strangers raise your kids is not a desirable outcome.

Enrolling your kids in school, sports, summer camps, religious activities, or having some child care help is hardly "having strangers raise your kids". Many societies throughout history have emphasized communal child-rearing, where extended family, neighbors, and community members all play active roles in raising children. A communal approach gives children multiple role models, diverse perspectives, shared wisdom across generations, and a broader support network.

Anonymous wrote:Does your wife pay the household bills? Does she have all the passwords to all accounts ?
Do you give her an allowance?

DP: Been SAHP for 25+ years. I manage all the finances....spouse would have no clue how to access any of it other than contacting our financial advisor (and he'd have to ask me for his email/phone number probably). Not because I "hide" anything just because that's what I manage.