Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What kind of support? Like UBI? Universal healthcare? Tax breaks?

Just similar rights as others? For starters long due respect and acknowledgment of their historic contributions to this country.

This^.

Feminists and corporate careerist women are often the ones denigrating SAHM's and shaming other women for their choices.

Need a change in narrative, from talking about women and SAHM to talking about the needs of FAMILIES. Many of my male colleagues crave the same flexibility that women do but they are pushed back by the "driven" ones.

Not just that, in the main, women are not going to be attracted to and respect SAHD types. It is what it is.

Just like ambitious men, ambitious women can see the value of a content and supportive spouse who can help them focus on their goals.

https://news.ubc.ca/2016/10/28/marrying-up-despite-more-education-women-still-choose-husbands-with-higher-incomes/

Women aren't as comfortable carrying around a "free-loading" man.

First, caring for your family isn’t free loading so stop the condescending nonsense. Second, they know that men aren’t likely to hold fort to support them so what’s the point?

Slow down, Patsy. I put free-loading in quotes for a reason. That is the attitude many women have toward men performing those functions, regardless of whether they are "holding the fort" or not.

There are many ways to express your point without having to call names or use quotes to soften the blow.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its astounding how important people think they are and how condescending they can be towards other humans based on self perception of their own importance.

+1

No idea what this post is supposed to mean. Is this talking about women who look down on other women because they have an office with a nice view and a corporate expense account?

Anonymous wrote:Its astounding how important people think they are and how condescending they can be towards other humans based on self perception of their own importance.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m surprised no one ever stood up for this group and would love to see politicians advocating for it on local and National level.

Conservatives like it in theory. But only if families themselves pay for it.

Don't expect a handout, SAHMs.

Conservative here. I agree. Never wanted a handout, just wanted other women to stop telling me I was wasting my life.

This. Its 2022, women doesn’t have to put each other down to prove their worth and all humans should relearn their worth isn’t attached to an office chair.

Anonymous wrote:Is there any party, lobby or an individual politician advocating for people who work without titles and compensations? Its been a traditional role serving nation’s most important units known as families, nation’s most important asset known as minor citizens and nation’s most important buildings known as homes. They fill so many voids in the society but get no recognition, no compensation or no one protecting this endangered species. Isn’t it about time for them to stand up for their rights and for others to acknowledge and support it?

They deserve as much respect and recognition as anyone else and they should demand it but they have no voice, use your voice and vote to claim your rightful position in this society. People forget history, if it’s not written and filmed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m surprised no one ever stood up for this group and would love to see politicians advocating for it on local and National level.

Conservatives like it in theory. But only if families themselves pay for it.

Don't expect a handout, SAHMs.

Conservative here. I agree. Never wanted a handout, just wanted other women to stop telling me I was wasting my life.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there any party, lobby or an individual politician advocating for people who work without titles and compensations? Its been a traditional role serving nation’s most important units known as families, nation’s most important asset known as minor citizens and nation’s most important buildings known as homes. They fill so many voids in the society but get no recognition, no compensation or no one protecting this endangered species. Isn’t it about time for them to stand up for their rights and for others to acknowledge and support it?

You won’t get support for this. It’s assumed all SAH moms are rich and privileged.

Assumptions serves no one. There are all sort of assumptions helping majority marginalize other minorities as well.

Yet those minorities are deemed “underserved” , etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there any party, lobby or an individual politician advocating for people who work without titles and compensations? Its been a traditional role serving nation’s most important units known as families, nation’s most important asset known as minor citizens and nation’s most important buildings known as homes. They fill so many voids in the society but get no recognition, no compensation or no one protecting this endangered species. Isn’t it about time for them to stand up for their rights and for others to acknowledge and support it?

You won’t get support for this. It’s assumed all SAH moms are rich and privileged.

My wife is a SAHM, despite being a Smith grad with a law degree. Wow, I feel great about myself now.

Good for her! She’s doing a very important job, probably the most.

Anonymous wrote:Is there any party, lobby or an individual politician advocating for people who work without titles and compensations? Its been a traditional role serving nation’s most important units known as families, nation’s most important asset known as minor citizens and nation’s most important buildings known as homes. They fill so many voids in the society but get no recognition, no compensation or no one protecting this endangered species. Isn’t it about time for them to stand up for their rights and for others to acknowledge and support it?

Both of my maternal and paternal grandmas were SAHP and only because of them my grandads were able to build careers which helped lots of people. Between two of them, they raised 12 successful children. They were the hardest working people I’ve seen. I don’t see how their contribution to the society was less than my granddads. That being said, we need to provide equal choices to both women and men so families can thrive. What happens to one person effects other so just looking out for ourselves isn’t the way to have a society supportive to all.

Lots of trolls operating in this thread.

Here’s the reality: the American political system & tax code already greatly advantages SAH parent + breadwinner combo. The political system & tax code actively f#cks single people and single parents.

Look at every rich family out there - 95% of them have a non-working/SAH parent and one breadwinner. Of course the tax code is going to advantage them. The breadwinner gets to shelter a lot more income from taxation because they have a non-working spouse.

They get social security (double dipping) which is more than enough.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only person that should be looking out for SAHMs is their husband/wife. The tax payer should not be on the hook for an able bodied person who has decided they would prefer to stay home.

These are the wrong assumptions that one is doing somehow more work if they are putting on heels and dress and driving to another place. If its a nanny or a childcare assistant, it’s hard work but if a mother does it for her own children, somehow it looses its value.

Yes, and as was stated, the tax system benefits this arrangement. A nanny or childcare assistant is paying taxes, social security, healthcare with their salary. Your labor as a parent isn’t being taxed, and you’re entitled to half your spouses social security should they die before you. Are you just advocating for “be nicer to homemakers” legislation?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What kind of support? Like UBI? Universal healthcare? Tax breaks?

Just similar rights as others? For starters long due respect and acknowledgment of their historic contributions to this country.

This^.

Feminists and corporate careerist women are often the ones denigrating SAHM's and shaming other women for their choices.

Need a change in narrative, from talking about women and SAHM to talking about the needs of FAMILIES. Many of my male colleagues crave the same flexibility that women do but they are pushed back by the "driven" ones.

Not just that, in the main, women are not going to be attracted to and respect SAHD types. It is what it is.

Just like ambitious men, ambitious women can see the value of a content and supportive spouse who can help them focus on their goals.

https://news.ubc.ca/2016/10/28/marrying-up-despite-more-education-women-still-choose-husbands-with-higher-incomes/

Women aren't as comfortable carrying around a "free-loading" man.

First, caring for your family isn’t free loading so stop the condescending nonsense. Second, they know that men aren’t likely to hold fort to support them so what’s the point?

Slow down, Patsy. I put free-loading in quotes for a reason. That is the attitude many women have toward men performing those functions, regardless of whether they are "holding the fort" or not.

Its astounding how important people think they are and how condescending they can be towards other humans based on self perception of their own importance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What kind of support? Like UBI? Universal healthcare? Tax breaks?

Just similar rights as others? For starters long due respect and acknowledgment of their historic contributions to this country.

This^.

Feminists and corporate careerist women are often the ones denigrating SAHM's and shaming other women for their choices.

Need a change in narrative, from talking about women and SAHM to talking about the needs of FAMILIES. Many of my male colleagues crave the same flexibility that women do but they are pushed back by the "driven" ones.

Not just that, in the main, women are not going to be attracted to and respect SAHD types. It is what it is.

Just like ambitious men, ambitious women can see the value of a content and supportive spouse who can help them focus on their goals.

https://news.ubc.ca/2016/10/28/marrying-up-despite-more-education-women-still-choose-husbands-with-higher-incomes/

Women aren't as comfortable carrying around a "free-loading" man.

First, caring for your family isn’t free loading so stop the condescending nonsense. Second, they know that men aren’t likely to hold fort to support them so what’s the point?