Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I get your general point and agree that the petty drama needs to end. But this "you do you" mentality is ultimately self-serving because it doesn't help those people who don't have choices. We can do more than simply "feel bad" for them and feel thankful for our own privilege.
Stop with the ‘privilege’ stuff. It is not about privilege it is about choices in adult life that lead you to your current life and decisions. For the most part, people chose to or chose not to get a higher education or vocational training. People, for the most part but there are always exceptions, chose to have kids. It is what goes on in your relational, financial and emotional household that directs these types of choices. I am a ‘you do you’ person because no one else walks in your shoes and understands YOUR life. What more CAN I do realistically?!?
For starters you can pull your head out of your a$$.
Omg that poster is unreal. People choose to get vocational training instead of higher education because they don’t want to make as much money as they possibly can? Are you really saying that?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I get your general point and agree that the petty drama needs to end. But this "you do you" mentality is ultimately self-serving because it doesn't help those people who don't have choices. We can do more than simply "feel bad" for them and feel thankful for our own privilege.
Stop with the ‘privilege’ stuff. It is not about privilege it is about choices in adult life that lead you to your current life and decisions. For the most part, people chose to or chose not to get a higher education or vocational training. People, for the most part but there are always exceptions, chose to have kids. It is what goes on in your relational, financial and emotional household that directs these types of choices. I am a ‘you do you’ person because no one else walks in your shoes and understands YOUR life. What more CAN I do realistically?!?
For starters you can pull your head out of your a$$.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I get your general point and agree that the petty drama needs to end. But this "you do you" mentality is ultimately self-serving because it doesn't help those people who don't have choices. We can do more than simply "feel bad" for them and feel thankful for our own privilege.
Stop with the ‘privilege’ stuff. It is not about privilege it is about choices in adult life that lead you to your current life and decisions. For the most part, people chose to or chose not to get a higher education or vocational training. People, for the most part but there are always exceptions, chose to have kids. It is what goes on in your relational, financial and emotional household that directs these types of choices. I am a ‘you do you’ person because no one else walks in your shoes and understands YOUR life. What more CAN I do realistically?!?
Anonymous wrote:I get your general point and agree that the petty drama needs to end. But this "you do you" mentality is ultimately self-serving because it doesn't help those people who don't have choices. We can do more than simply "feel bad" for them and feel thankful for our own privilege.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Ultimate hypocrisy. “The future is female” - so I’ll stay home while a man pays.
I had a lengthy conversation with a sahd yesterday. Feel better?
Was he at home with a son, a woman supporting them both, and crowing “the future is male!?”
I’d say no different were that the case.
If you don’t see the irony in that quote from the article, I can’t help you.
When one person takes care of the children and homefront, that allows the partner to work, including travel, unfettered by childcare and other home-based concerns. There is huge value in that, and it’s the partnership that allows it. They are both supporting the entire family unit. No irony.
Maybe in some SAHM situations. In my case, I see my child as my daytime occupation. If I throw in laundry or dishes, fine, but I’m not home slaving away at the house while DH sits back. He gets home and helps with dishes and laundry and takes the trash out we hire cleaners to come once every 2-3 weeks so neither of us has to scrub toilets. Once DH isn’t home for the night, child duties are split between us, most of the time more heavily in DH’s direction as he often does both bath and bed.
Meant to say once DH *is home* for the night, childcare is split... I wouldn’t say DH is unfettered by child and home concerns.
What I meant by that is that the partner earning an income can travel for work, stay late for meetings, head to the office when a kid is sick, not have to come home to meet a contractor, etc. Unfettered in that sense.
Yeah, but that kind of stuff is called being a parent. Also called being a house owner, if you want to talk about a contractor. I get that that stuff is inconvenient, but it sounds like these parents (dad in your scenario) want to have kids as long as they're not inconvenienced by them. To me, that's offputting. And I work full time, so I'm not one of those "why did you have kids if you're only going to abandon them to a nanny" hand wringers.
NP here. You are being deliberately obtuse. My husband and I are in regular contact about home repairs, sick kids, etc. It’s just I am the one physically taking care of the sick kid and meeting the cable guy. I don’t feel neglected or abandoned and neither do my kids. He attends all games, performances and PT conferences. He just doesn’t run to Rite Aid for the amoxicillin. It works.
Both of you need to stop.
Also, you can get prescriptions delivered these days.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I get asked if I have the day off all the time —
Nurses, dentists, cashiers...
So I notice I get that question a lot from other people who work non-traditional schedules--like medical professionals (a lot of dentists are open Saturday but have closed or half days during the week, too), cashiers, etc. I think part of it has nothing to do with distinguishing between SAHMs and WOHMs but rather the fact that, in their world, a lot of people have Mondays or Tuesdays or whatever off. For them, it's normal to ask someone if it's "their day off" on a Wednesday.
Also, in DC, a lot of people are on flex schedules where you do have a weekday off...there's a restaurant I take my kid to sometimes on my flex day off.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I get asked if I have the day off all the time —
Nurses, dentists, cashiers...
So I notice I get that question a lot from other people who work non-traditional schedules--like medical professionals (a lot of dentists are open Saturday but have closed or half days during the week, too), cashiers, etc. I think part of it has nothing to do with distinguishing between SAHMs and WOHMs but rather the fact that, in their world, a lot of people have Mondays or Tuesdays or whatever off. For them, it's normal to ask someone if it's "their day off" on a Wednesday.
Anonymous wrote:I get your general point and agree that the petty drama needs to end. But this "you do you" mentality is ultimately self-serving because it doesn't help those people who don't have choices. We can do more than simply "feel bad" for them and feel thankful for our own privilege.
Anonymous wrote:I get your general point and agree that the petty drama needs to end. But this "you do you" mentality is ultimately self-serving because it doesn't help those people who don't have choices. We can do more than simply "feel bad" for them and feel thankful for our own privilege.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I get asked if I have the day off all the time —
Nurses, dentists, cashiers...
So do I. But it’s just chitchat, no need to take offense or launch into some diatribe. Sometimes I just smile, sometimes I tell them I’m home with my toddler.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Ultimate hypocrisy. “The future is female” - so I’ll stay home while a man pays.
I had a lengthy conversation with a sahd yesterday. Feel better?
Was he at home with a son, a woman supporting them both, and crowing “the future is male!?”
I’d say no different were that the case.
If you don’t see the irony in that quote from the article, I can’t help you.
When one person takes care of the children and homefront, that allows the partner to work, including travel, unfettered by childcare and other home-based concerns. There is huge value in that, and it’s the partnership that allows it. They are both supporting the entire family unit. No irony.
Maybe in some SAHM situations. In my case, I see my child as my daytime occupation. If I throw in laundry or dishes, fine, but I’m not home slaving away at the house while DH sits back. He gets home and helps with dishes and laundry and takes the trash out we hire cleaners to come once every 2-3 weeks so neither of us has to scrub toilets. Once DH isn’t home for the night, child duties are split between us, most of the time more heavily in DH’s direction as he often does both bath and bed.
Meant to say once DH *is home* for the night, childcare is split... I wouldn’t say DH is unfettered by child and home concerns.
What I meant by that is that the partner earning an income can travel for work, stay late for meetings, head to the office when a kid is sick, not have to come home to meet a contractor, etc. Unfettered in that sense.
Yeah, but that kind of stuff is called being a parent. Also called being a house owner, if you want to talk about a contractor. I get that that stuff is inconvenient, but it sounds like these parents (dad in your scenario) want to have kids as long as they're not inconvenienced by them. To me, that's offputting. And I work full time, so I'm not one of those "why did you have kids if you're only going to abandon them to a nanny" hand wringers.
NP here. You are being deliberately obtuse. My husband and I are in regular contact about home repairs, sick kids, etc. It’s just I am the one physically taking care of the sick kid and meeting the cable guy. I don’t feel neglected or abandoned and neither do my kids. He attends all games, performances and PT conferences. He just doesn’t run to Rite Aid for the amoxicillin. It works.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Ultimate hypocrisy. “The future is female” - so I’ll stay home while a man pays.
I had a lengthy conversation with a sahd yesterday. Feel better?
Was he at home with a son, a woman supporting them both, and crowing “the future is male!?”
I’d say no different were that the case.
If you don’t see the irony in that quote from the article, I can’t help you.
When one person takes care of the children and homefront, that allows the partner to work, including travel, unfettered by childcare and other home-based concerns. There is huge value in that, and it’s the partnership that allows it. They are both supporting the entire family unit. No irony.
Maybe in some SAHM situations. In my case, I see my child as my daytime occupation. If I throw in laundry or dishes, fine, but I’m not home slaving away at the house while DH sits back. He gets home and helps with dishes and laundry and takes the trash out we hire cleaners to come once every 2-3 weeks so neither of us has to scrub toilets. Once DH isn’t home for the night, child duties are split between us, most of the time more heavily in DH’s direction as he often does both bath and bed.
Meant to say once DH *is home* for the night, childcare is split... I wouldn’t say DH is unfettered by child and home concerns.
What I meant by that is that the partner earning an income can travel for work, stay late for meetings, head to the office when a kid is sick, not have to come home to meet a contractor, etc. Unfettered in that sense.
Yeah, but that kind of stuff is called being a parent. Also called being a house owner, if you want to talk about a contractor. I get that that stuff is inconvenient, but it sounds like these parents (dad in your scenario) want to have kids as long as they're not inconvenienced by them. To me, that's offputting. And I work full time, so I'm not one of those "why did you have kids if you're only going to abandon them to a nanny" hand wringers.