Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question for those of you who look down upon SAHMs: Do you consider yourself a feminist?

Not really.

I do. That's why I find it so disturbing to see a generation of women choosing to give up their own lives to focus on their children. I see their energy and creativity and productivity wasted on bento boxes and halloween costumes and over-the-top birthday parties.

Honestly, it worries me that this country is losing so much vitality and gaining only a generation of coddled, helicoptered kids.

Amen and one thousand agreement plus signs.

I fully agree too. It's even scarier they won't admit they do it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol. Ok. So it's unfair to the children to have a parent in the home caring for them? So your kids are better off in day care than they are with you? Speak for yourself pp. if that's how you honestly feel, why not put them up for adoption? That's your logic, right, it's unfair to the kids to be at home with mom (or dad)?

You're so stupid it's painful.

Maybe you're right. Maybe in your case the kids are better off at day care. You're so angry over my confusion with your logic that you call names and refuse to elaborate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question for those of you who look down upon SAHMs: Do you consider yourself a feminist?

Not really.

I do. That's why I find it so disturbing to see a generation of women choosing to give up their own lives to focus on their children. I see their energy and creativity and productivity wasted on bento boxes and halloween costumes and over-the-top birthday parties.

Honestly, it worries me that this country is losing so much vitality and gaining only a generation of coddled, helicoptered kids.

Oh gosh, we wouldn't want you to be "disturbed." You consider SAHMs to be "giving up" their lives to focus on their children... are you kidding me? You're sitting in judgment of the many women who are doing exactly what they want to be doing?

This would be the perfect opening for someone to light into you about exactly what WOHMs are missing, but you probably know that and are just waiting for someone to rise to the bait so you can play the victim, whining about SAHMs attacking WOHMs. The mommy wars just give you so much pleasure, don't they? For most people I know, mommy wars are over. But not you, apparently. And you wonder why you and judgmental women like you come across as so clearly unhappy with your own lives. If you were happy, why would you possibly feel the need to slam other women's choices?

You must be the poster who likes to throw out stereotypes of SAHMs (you know, the bratty, Starbucks loving one, etc.). I've never used a bento box in my life and don't know anyone who does - but what would it matter anyhow? And frankly, the only people I know who throw over-the-top birthday parties are those who are desperately trying to overcompensate for something. Hmm, who could that be?

Anonymous wrote:Lol. Ok. So it's unfair to the children to have a parent in the home caring for them? So your kids are better off in day care than they are with you? Speak for yourself pp. if that's how you honestly feel, why not put them up for adoption? That's your logic, right, it's unfair to the kids to be at home with mom (or dad)?

You're so stupid it's painful.

Anonymous wrote:Working mom: you need anger management.

Take a mental health day off from work.

Find a hobby.

Relax.

I'm not 15:31 or 15:35 but I'm one of the posters on the long threads. I know you can't fathom it but there are a lot of us.

And I already have Fridays off, but thanks for the thoughts!

Lol. Ok. So it's unfair to the children to have a parent in the home caring for them? So your kids are better off in day care than they are with you? Speak for yourself pp. if that's how you honestly feel, why not put them up for adoption? That's your logic, right, it's unfair to the kids to be at home with mom (or dad)?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question for those of you who look down upon SAHMs: Do you consider yourself a feminist?

Not really.

Well good - at least you're honest about that. Because feminism, in my book, includes celebrating the many choices women have and their ability to go after the one that works for them.

Obviously. Did you not think we saw through you trying to bait us?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didn't read all 120+ threads, but SAHM are lazy, and it's comical when they complain about being "tired." Yes, I'm awful but it's how I truly feel.

I would say the opposite. It takes a lot of strength and courage to rely completely on a single income and to deal with babies and toddlers for months on end. This is the "lazy" choice, not the mom who palms her dc off to virtual strangers for most of their waking hours

I always wondered about that.. The SAHM haters on DCUM.. Do they also hate the people who are taking care of their kids? They are "above" staying home with their children, so they find childcare for them, but do they respect the people that are doing this job? And if they do respect them, why do they deserve your respect above mothers who stay home instead of paying somebody else to take care of them while they go to work?

Childcare providers do not do the same thing as SAHPs. Hopefully SAHPs do much more.

You're absolutely right. Which makes it even more of a mystery how SAHMs are looked down upon by the very same people who put their childcare providers up on a pedestal.

Because many people think that you can take care of your children AND earn two salaries.

You can.

Of course you can - no one is disputing this! But exactly what business is it of yours if a parent chooses to spend his or her time raising children than drawing a salary? Why does that choice burn you up so much? IT'S A CHOICE. You made yours - deal with the fact that other people choose to live their lives differently.

None. And I don't care whether you work, don't work, part time work etc. I'm not sure why people care about what anyone is doing in their family. Just pointing out to the poster who said, "many people think you can do both." Yes, you can- it's not some elusive one or the other.

Sure, you "can" do both at the same time. But for many of us, both usually suffer as a result.

This is why some WOHMs look down on SAHMs - some WOHMs actually can raise well adjusted children with whom they have a close relationship and bring in serious cash, and some SAHMs don't seem to want to acknowledge that it's possible to work and parent and do both well. If you can't, you can't, but don't imply that some women can't do both without something suffering. For instance, my husband works a straight 40 hour week job. If he worked a 60 or 70 hour a week executive job with lots of travel, I might feel I couldn't WOH FT without the children suffering.

I agree. Oh and I should add another opinion. If it's an option for both parents to work jobs with reasonable hours and bring in a similar HHI, I think asking one parent to work insane hours so another can SAH is completely unfair and sets up a terrible family dynamic.

Unfair, is it? I think this is very revealing about your animosity towards SAHMs. Otherwise you wouldn't have made such a comment. What's the problem? Dh doesn't earn enough so you can't afford to stay home and now you're bitter towards all SAHMs bc you can't sah? So instead you pretend like SAHMs judge you for working (false) so you can insult SAHMs.

Unfair to the children, you moron, not to the adults!!!!!

Thank you. OMG, these posters. Making SAHMs look bad.

Working mom: you need anger management.

Take a mental health day off from work.

Find a hobby.

Relax.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didn't read all 120+ threads, but SAHM are lazy, and it's comical when they complain about being "tired." Yes, I'm awful but it's how I truly feel.

I would say the opposite. It takes a lot of strength and courage to rely completely on a single income and to deal with babies and toddlers for months on end. This is the "lazy" choice, not the mom who palms her dc off to virtual strangers for most of their waking hours

I always wondered about that.. The SAHM haters on DCUM.. Do they also hate the people who are taking care of their kids? They are "above" staying home with their children, so they find childcare for them, but do they respect the people that are doing this job? And if they do respect them, why do they deserve your respect above mothers who stay home instead of paying somebody else to take care of them while they go to work?

Childcare providers do not do the same thing as SAHPs. Hopefully SAHPs do much more.

You're absolutely right. Which makes it even more of a mystery how SAHMs are looked down upon by the very same people who put their childcare providers up on a pedestal.

Because many people think that you can take care of your children AND earn two salaries.

You can.

Of course you can - no one is disputing this! But exactly what business is it of yours if a parent chooses to spend his or her time raising children than drawing a salary? Why does that choice burn you up so much? IT'S A CHOICE. You made yours - deal with the fact that other people choose to live their lives differently.

None. And I don't care whether you work, don't work, part time work etc. I'm not sure why people care about what anyone is doing in their family. Just pointing out to the poster who said, "many people think you can do both." Yes, you can- it's not some elusive one or the other.

Sure, you "can" do both at the same time. But for many of us, both usually suffer as a result.

This is why some WOHMs look down on SAHMs - some WOHMs actually can raise well adjusted children with whom they have a close relationship and bring in serious cash, and some SAHMs don't seem to want to acknowledge that it's possible to work and parent and do both well. If you can't, you can't, but don't imply that some women can't do both without something suffering. For instance, my husband works a straight 40 hour week job. If he worked a 60 or 70 hour a week executive job with lots of travel, I might feel I couldn't WOH FT without the children suffering.

I agree. Oh and I should add another opinion. If it's an option for both parents to work jobs with reasonable hours and bring in a similar HHI, I think asking one parent to work insane hours so another can SAH is completely unfair and sets up a terrible family dynamic.

Unfair, is it? I think this is very revealing about your animosity towards SAHMs. Otherwise you wouldn't have made such a comment. What's the problem? Dh doesn't earn enough so you can't afford to stay home and now you're bitter towards all SAHMs bc you can't sah? So instead you pretend like SAHMs judge you for working (false) so you can insult SAHMs.

Unfair to the children, you moron, not to the adults!!!!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question for those of you who look down upon SAHMs: Do you consider yourself a feminist?

Not really.

I do. That's why I find it so disturbing to see a generation of women choosing to give up their own lives to focus on their children. I see their energy and creativity and productivity wasted on bento boxes and halloween costumes and over-the-top birthday parties.

Honestly, it worries me that this country is losing so much vitality and gaining only a generation of coddled, helicoptered kids.

Amen and one thousand agreement plus signs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question for those of you who look down upon SAHMs: Do you consider yourself a feminist?

Not really.

Well good - at least you're honest about that. Because feminism, in my book, includes celebrating the many choices women have and their ability to go after the one that works for them.

So all the 1950s housewives were feminists, or you're a feminist because you could use your education for paid employment, yet choose not to do so?

Anonymous wrote:Question for those of you who look down upon SAHMs: Do you consider yourself a feminist?

Yes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didn't read all 120+ threads, but SAHM are lazy, and it's comical when they complain about being "tired." Yes, I'm awful but it's how I truly feel.

I would say the opposite. It takes a lot of strength and courage to rely completely on a single income and to deal with babies and toddlers for months on end. This is the "lazy" choice, not the mom who palms her dc off to virtual strangers for most of their waking hours

I always wondered about that.. The SAHM haters on DCUM.. Do they also hate the people who are taking care of their kids? They are "above" staying home with their children, so they find childcare for them, but do they respect the people that are doing this job? And if they do respect them, why do they deserve your respect above mothers who stay home instead of paying somebody else to take care of them while they go to work?

Childcare providers do not do the same thing as SAHPs. Hopefully SAHPs do much more.

You're absolutely right. Which makes it even more of a mystery how SAHMs are looked down upon by the very same people who put their childcare providers up on a pedestal.

Because many people think that you can take care of your children AND earn two salaries.

You can.

Of course you can - no one is disputing this! But exactly what business is it of yours if a parent chooses to spend his or her time raising children than drawing a salary? Why does that choice burn you up so much? IT'S A CHOICE. You made yours - deal with the fact that other people choose to live their lives differently.

None. And I don't care whether you work, don't work, part time work etc. I'm not sure why people care about what anyone is doing in their family. Just pointing out to the poster who said, "many people think you can do both." Yes, you can- it's not some elusive one or the other.

Sure, you "can" do both at the same time. But for many of us, both usually suffer as a result.

This is why some WOHMs look down on SAHMs - some WOHMs actually can raise well adjusted children with whom they have a close relationship and bring in serious cash, and some SAHMs don't seem to want to acknowledge that it's possible to work and parent and do both well. If you can't, you can't, but don't imply that some women can't do both without something suffering. For instance, my husband works a straight 40 hour week job. If he worked a 60 or 70 hour a week executive job with lots of travel, I might feel I couldn't WOH FT without the children suffering.

I agree. Oh and I should add another opinion. If it's an option for both parents to work jobs with reasonable hours and bring in a similar HHI, I think asking one parent to work insane hours so another can SAH is completely unfair and sets up a terrible family dynamic.

Unfair, is it? I think this is very revealing about your animosity towards SAHMs. Otherwise you wouldn't have made such a comment. What's the problem? Dh doesn't earn enough so you can't afford to stay home and now you're bitter towards all SAHMs bc you can't sah? So instead you pretend like SAHMs judge you for working (false) so you can insult SAHMs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question for those of you who look down upon SAHMs: Do you consider yourself a feminist?

Not really.

I do. That's why I find it so disturbing to see a generation of women choosing to give up their own lives to focus on their children. I see their energy and creativity and productivity wasted on bento boxes and halloween costumes and over-the-top birthday parties.

Honestly, it worries me that this country is losing so much vitality and gaining only a generation of coddled, helicoptered kids.