Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just saw a social media fb post on a local moms page from a lamenting mom earnestly asking the question of how in the world moms are supposed to work 9-5, but still get kids to school by 8AM and picked up at 3PM and have time to make dinner and energy for homework help and so on and so on.

The clear answer is, of course, that they aren’t supposed to do this. In fact, most men were perfectly happy with the arrangement of division of labor where he performed the “outside” labor that secured earned income for the family and she performed the domestic labor that allowed the home and children to be cared for without outsourcing those duties and payments to someone else.
No one asked women to “do it all”—and women were offended by this!
And yet, somehow about 40 years ago some so-called feminists convinced women that they were being oppressed and needed the “freedom” to go spend their days working outside the home as well.
Yay for feminism!

The Ironic Part is when both couples work they often earn less as both of them can't fully commit to job. Plus there is child care, double commuting costs, work clothes, work lunches, more outsourcing of work at home like a maid. A dual couple often earns less. And the children suffer.

My wife is a rare SAHM once we decided to go that route. I was only making 60K and she was only making 60k. We decided to go all in on me, she would 100 percent support my career, I could work as late as needed, travel on a moments notice, join boards, travel for work, network after work. In other words 100 percent focused on work. Her Mom worked and she was bitter coming home to a house where she and sister was expected in HS to take care of their brother 10 years younger and no one every at a game or event or available to car pool.

Anyhow my salary went from 60k to 360K in 10 years. So after 10 years home we were making enough that it confused my dual income relatives our age. It does not matter man or women, the person with most career potential should focus on that. My own sister was not till her dumb husband got laid off third time after she just had third kid and he decided to be a stay at home Dad for next 15 years did her career rocketship up. She was done having kids and no longer had to do the SAHM and juggle work. They made a lot more money as soon as they picked one person to make a run at it. He was holding her back.

No offense, but most of us don't want this marriage. We wanted spouses who were home by 5:30. DH and I are both very ambitious and make 200k, but we wouldn't sacrifice our families so that one of us could work 15 hour days. DH had an offer last year to make 350k with very large bonuses, but it meant he'd be on call 24/7, traveling nonstop and working long days. I don't want to be a single mom and I actually really really love my DH. He's my person! Why do I have to deal with the kids and he doesn't? lol

I think what would be ideal is if DH and I only worked 7 hours a day each. Quality of life would go way up and then our hours would match school hours. I know everyone makes fun of "bank hours" but damn, it's "school hours" that we need to make fun of. 8-2:30 is wild.

I am one who worked like that. I only did it for 10 years. Then I had staff, admin, take care of stuff. I only work till 5pm and only in office three days a week. But you have to put in time. My kids 24,22 and 18 barely remember me working like a dog. It was from age six month on oldest to age 10.5 on oldest. My 18 year old I had a nine to five job her whole life. You do realize this is how careers work.

21-32 no one takes you seriously. From 32-45 is only chance you have to move up ranks quickly and that involves alot of work. Then at around 45-50 if have not made it, never will then 50-67 is hold on for dear life mode in career trying to survive till the eventual lay off.

But trouble is that 32-45 range aligns with marriage, and most of child bearing and young kids part of life. So if both work neither can put time in. There is a reason Michelle Obama became a SAHM both could not climb to top with kids.

Can't say it better than this!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just saw a social media fb post on a local moms page from a lamenting mom earnestly asking the question of how in the world moms are supposed to work 9-5, but still get kids to school by 8AM and picked up at 3PM and have time to make dinner and energy for homework help and so on and so on.

The clear answer is, of course, that they aren’t supposed to do this. In fact, most men were perfectly happy with the arrangement of division of labor where he performed the “outside” labor that secured earned income for the family and she performed the domestic labor that allowed the home and children to be cared for without outsourcing those duties and payments to someone else.
No one asked women to “do it all”—and women were offended by this!
And yet, somehow about 40 years ago some so-called feminists convinced women that they were being oppressed and needed the “freedom” to go spend their days working outside the home as well.
Yay for feminism!

The Ironic Part is when both couples work they often earn less as both of them can't fully commit to job. Plus there is child care, double commuting costs, work clothes, work lunches, more outsourcing of work at home like a maid. A dual couple often earns less. And the children suffer.

My wife is a rare SAHM once we decided to go that route. I was only making 60K and she was only making 60k. We decided to go all in on me, she would 100 percent support my career, I could work as late as needed, travel on a moments notice, join boards, travel for work, network after work. In other words 100 percent focused on work. Her Mom worked and she was bitter coming home to a house where she and sister was expected in HS to take care of their brother 10 years younger and no one every at a game or event or available to car pool.

Anyhow my salary went from 60k to 360K in 10 years. So after 10 years home we were making enough that it confused my dual income relatives our age. It does not matter man or women, the person with most career potential should focus on that. My own sister was not till her dumb husband got laid off third time after she just had third kid and he decided to be a stay at home Dad for next 15 years did her career rocketship up. She was done having kids and no longer had to do the SAHM and juggle work. They made a lot more money as soon as they picked one person to make a run at it. He was holding her back.

No offense, but most of us don't want this marriage. We wanted spouses who were home by 5:30. DH and I are both very ambitious and make 200k, but we wouldn't sacrifice our families so that one of us could work 15 hour days. DH had an offer last year to make 350k with very large bonuses, but it meant he'd be on call 24/7, traveling nonstop and working long days. I don't want to be a single mom and I actually really really love my DH. He's my person! Why do I have to deal with the kids and he doesn't? lol

I think what would be ideal is if DH and I only worked 7 hours a day each. Quality of life would go way up and then our hours would match school hours. I know everyone makes fun of "bank hours" but damn, it's "school hours" that we need to make fun of. 8-2:30 is wild.

Ideally, you work 15 hours a day in your twenties and early thirties, and by the time you have kids, you have enough goodwill in your career to set a flexible work schedule around the family schedule. I know it doesn't work this way in all fields, but it did in ours.

Yes ideally. But what normally happens is that this is true for men. Women on the other hand get judged for having kids and get projects withdrawn - they suffer for having kids, while men get promoted for having kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just saw a social media fb post on a local moms page from a lamenting mom earnestly asking the question of how in the world moms are supposed to work 9-5, but still get kids to school by 8AM and picked up at 3PM and have time to make dinner and energy for homework help and so on and so on.

The clear answer is, of course, that they aren’t supposed to do this. In fact, most men were perfectly happy with the arrangement of division of labor where he performed the “outside” labor that secured earned income for the family and she performed the domestic labor that allowed the home and children to be cared for without outsourcing those duties and payments to someone else.
No one asked women to “do it all”—and women were offended by this!
And yet, somehow about 40 years ago some so-called feminists convinced women that they were being oppressed and needed the “freedom” to go spend their days working outside the home as well.
Yay for feminism!

The Ironic Part is when both couples work they often earn less as both of them can't fully commit to job. Plus there is child care, double commuting costs, work clothes, work lunches, more outsourcing of work at home like a maid. A dual couple often earns less. And the children suffer.

My wife is a rare SAHM once we decided to go that route. I was only making 60K and she was only making 60k. We decided to go all in on me, she would 100 percent support my career, I could work as late as needed, travel on a moments notice, join boards, travel for work, network after work. In other words 100 percent focused on work. Her Mom worked and she was bitter coming home to a house where she and sister was expected in HS to take care of their brother 10 years younger and no one every at a game or event or available to car pool.

Anyhow my salary went from 60k to 360K in 10 years. So after 10 years home we were making enough that it confused my dual income relatives our age. It does not matter man or women, the person with most career potential should focus on that. My own sister was not till her dumb husband got laid off third time after she just had third kid and he decided to be a stay at home Dad for next 15 years did her career rocketship up. She was done having kids and no longer had to do the SAHM and juggle work. They made a lot more money as soon as they picked one person to make a run at it. He was holding her back.

No offense, but most of us don't want this marriage. We wanted spouses who were home by 5:30. DH and I are both very ambitious and make 200k, but we wouldn't sacrifice our families so that one of us could work 15 hour days. DH had an offer last year to make 350k with very large bonuses, but it meant he'd be on call 24/7, traveling nonstop and working long days. I don't want to be a single mom and I actually really really love my DH. He's my person! Why do I have to deal with the kids and he doesn't? lol

I think what would be ideal is if DH and I only worked 7 hours a day each. Quality of life would go way up and then our hours would match school hours. I know everyone makes fun of "bank hours" but damn, it's "school hours" that we need to make fun of. 8-2:30 is wild.

I am one who worked like that. I only did it for 10 years. Then I had staff, admin, take care of stuff. I only work till 5pm and only in office three days a week. But you have to put in time. My kids 24,22 and 18 barely remember me working like a dog. It was from age six month on oldest to age 10.5 on oldest. My 18 year old I had a nine to five job her whole life. You do realize this is how careers work.

21-32 no one takes you seriously. From 32-45 is only chance you have to move up ranks quickly and that involves alot of work. Then at around 45-50 if have not made it, never will then 50-67 is hold on for dear life mode in career trying to survive till the eventual lay off.

But trouble is that 32-45 range aligns with marriage, and most of child bearing and young kids part of life. So if both work neither can put time in. There is a reason Michelle Obama became a SAHM both could not climb to top with kids.

It doesn't have to be this way, especially outside of big law or large corporations. Start your firm or business, and you can do things on your own schedule.

I'm not sure that is true. My DH is self employed and he definitely had to work really long hours from 32-45 to make it to where he is today.

In general, I think that the pendulum is swinging back away workers and towards employers. The WSJ ran an article today which described how white collar jobs have been disappering for the past 3 1/2 years, corporations now expect workers to work longer hours than they did in the past and become more productive. I just don't see things improving for working moms any time soon.

https://www.wsj.com/business/the-biggest-companies-across-america-are-cutting-their-workforces-a0e8739a?mod=hp_lead_pos8

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just saw a social media fb post on a local moms page from a lamenting mom earnestly asking the question of how in the world moms are supposed to work 9-5, but still get kids to school by 8AM and picked up at 3PM and have time to make dinner and energy for homework help and so on and so on.

The clear answer is, of course, that they aren’t supposed to do this. In fact, most men were perfectly happy with the arrangement of division of labor where he performed the “outside” labor that secured earned income for the family and she performed the domestic labor that allowed the home and children to be cared for without outsourcing those duties and payments to someone else.
No one asked women to “do it all”—and women were offended by this!
And yet, somehow about 40 years ago some so-called feminists convinced women that they were being oppressed and needed the “freedom” to go spend their days working outside the home as well.
Yay for feminism!

The Ironic Part is when both couples work they often earn less as both of them can't fully commit to job. Plus there is child care, double commuting costs, work clothes, work lunches, more outsourcing of work at home like a maid. A dual couple often earns less. And the children suffer.

My wife is a rare SAHM once we decided to go that route. I was only making 60K and she was only making 60k. We decided to go all in on me, she would 100 percent support my career, I could work as late as needed, travel on a moments notice, join boards, travel for work, network after work. In other words 100 percent focused on work. Her Mom worked and she was bitter coming home to a house where she and sister was expected in HS to take care of their brother 10 years younger and no one every at a game or event or available to car pool.

Anyhow my salary went from 60k to 360K in 10 years. So after 10 years home we were making enough that it confused my dual income relatives our age. It does not matter man or women, the person with most career potential should focus on that. My own sister was not till her dumb husband got laid off third time after she just had third kid and he decided to be a stay at home Dad for next 15 years did her career rocketship up. She was done having kids and no longer had to do the SAHM and juggle work. They made a lot more money as soon as they picked one person to make a run at it. He was holding her back.

No offense, but most of us don't want this marriage. We wanted spouses who were home by 5:30. DH and I are both very ambitious and make 200k, but we wouldn't sacrifice our families so that one of us could work 15 hour days. DH had an offer last year to make 350k with very large bonuses, but it meant he'd be on call 24/7, traveling nonstop and working long days. I don't want to be a single mom and I actually really really love my DH. He's my person! Why do I have to deal with the kids and he doesn't? lol

I think what would be ideal is if DH and I only worked 7 hours a day each. Quality of life would go way up and then our hours would match school hours. I know everyone makes fun of "bank hours" but damn, it's "school hours" that we need to make fun of. 8-2:30 is wild.

I am one who worked like that. I only did it for 10 years. Then I had staff, admin, take care of stuff. I only work till 5pm and only in office three days a week. But you have to put in time. My kids 24,22 and 18 barely remember me working like a dog. It was from age six month on oldest to age 10.5 on oldest. My 18 year old I had a nine to five job her whole life. You do realize this is how careers work.

21-32 no one takes you seriously. From 32-45 is only chance you have to move up ranks quickly and that involves alot of work. Then at around 45-50 if have not made it, never will then 50-67 is hold on for dear life mode in career trying to survive till the eventual lay off.

But trouble is that 32-45 range aligns with marriage, and most of child bearing and young kids part of life. So if both work neither can put time in. There is a reason Michelle Obama became a SAHM both could not climb to top with kids.

It doesn't have to be this way, especially outside of big law or large corporations. Start your firm or business, and you can do things on your own schedule.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On I'm Chicago and I saw the exact same post. It was on Facebook. I am inundated in Facebook with stuff about "overwhelmed moms" and it feels synthetic to me. Also lots of stuff about lazy uninvolved husbands which mine is certainly not.
Somebody out there wants you resentful.
I work half time hours and I am happy and not overwhelmed at all. Of course I don't make DCUM money.

Agreed. All I see all around me are wonderful dads who are very, very involved. Why is there a constant narrative about men not doing enough? Go to any playground and it's full of men hanging out with their kids. Men are at all the school events at equal numbers to the moms present.

Honestly I'm glad I'm not a man because of all the constant hate that dads seem to get, despite all the chores they do, plus bringing home 50%+ of the income. My dh absolutely pulls his own weight. Despite all this, boomer women thank him and praise him for babysitting his own kids when he's at the grocery store with them (I haven't stepped into a grocery store in years, that's dh's chore). A relative couldn't get over how dh changed diapers (what?!!?). Millennial men have shown up for their wives and kids.

+1. Gen X woman with two kids now in their twenties. My own mother landed a doctor. Who was of course abusive and cheated. She left him, went back to teaching and every month panicked about whether child support would come. She drilled into me that women should always be able to support themselves and any kids they have. I have drilled into my son and daughter that parents- either gender— should always be capable at any time of supporting themselves and any children they have. Doesn’t have to be a $2 million house- safe housing, decent education, healthy food standard of living is fine. You want to be a SAH mom or dad— that’s great— it’s a hard job, but worth it because being there for your kids is amazing. But— you always keep your skills, credentials, licenses, networks up to date.

I always knew I wanted a 50% partner to parent. I was clear on that before we got married and before we had kids. And, I have had a 50% partner in parenting. And both of us did slow down at work to make it happen. I’m a government attorney. He’s a software engineer, but flexible not crazy hours. And most people I know have spouses who are 50% parents. And there were crazy periods— a toddler and a newborn and the year two kids were in different high schools and not driving come to mind. And we are solidly UMC and sent two kids to good colleges with no debt.

Yes— if I went Big law or DH went all in on his job and got lucky with options, we could come close to our combined income. But, for us, the income isn’t the point. The kids and our family is the point. I wouldn’t trade my time with my kids for a big law job. And here’s the thing— DH wouldn’t trade his time with the kids for double the salary. What’s missing from the conversation is that my kids have really strong close relationships with both their parents. As they become adults, we are there for them in different ways because we have different strengths. And they come to us for different things. But DH has the bond with the kids of night time feedings and taking care of them when they were sick, and running a zillion carpools overhearing secrets from the back seat and family dinner every night and both parents attending PT conferences and school events. I know DH treasurers that relationship, and I certainly see my kids bonded to DH in a way neither of us are with our dads. And I’m confident in the relationship I have with my kids and fine with sharing it, because it’s what’s best for the people I love most. I don’t have to be their primary support. Love isn’t finite. There’s plenty to go around. I think kids lose something when one parents travels a lot and is working 80 hour weeks. And that continues into adulthood relationships with your kids. And that is something that isn’t discussed. You are looking at building a lifelong relationship. Hopefully it’s not 18 years and go away.

I grew up with a divorce, then step parents. I always wanted a stable two parent family for my kids. And what the point of a two parents family if one parent is never fully present?

Plus, I love spending time with my husband. I want him around.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just saw a social media fb post on a local moms page from a lamenting mom earnestly asking the question of how in the world moms are supposed to work 9-5, but still get kids to school by 8AM and picked up at 3PM and have time to make dinner and energy for homework help and so on and so on.

The clear answer is, of course, that they aren’t supposed to do this. In fact, most men were perfectly happy with the arrangement of division of labor where he performed the “outside” labor that secured earned income for the family and she performed the domestic labor that allowed the home and children to be cared for without outsourcing those duties and payments to someone else.
No one asked women to “do it all”—and women were offended by this!
And yet, somehow about 40 years ago some so-called feminists convinced women that they were being oppressed and needed the “freedom” to go spend their days working outside the home as well.
Yay for feminism!

The Ironic Part is when both couples work they often earn less as both of them can't fully commit to job. Plus there is child care, double commuting costs, work clothes, work lunches, more outsourcing of work at home like a maid. A dual couple often earns less. And the children suffer.

My wife is a rare SAHM once we decided to go that route. I was only making 60K and she was only making 60k. We decided to go all in on me, she would 100 percent support my career, I could work as late as needed, travel on a moments notice, join boards, travel for work, network after work. In other words 100 percent focused on work. Her Mom worked and she was bitter coming home to a house where she and sister was expected in HS to take care of their brother 10 years younger and no one every at a game or event or available to car pool.

Anyhow my salary went from 60k to 360K in 10 years. So after 10 years home we were making enough that it confused my dual income relatives our age. It does not matter man or women, the person with most career potential should focus on that. My own sister was not till her dumb husband got laid off third time after she just had third kid and he decided to be a stay at home Dad for next 15 years did her career rocketship up. She was done having kids and no longer had to do the SAHM and juggle work. They made a lot more money as soon as they picked one person to make a run at it. He was holding her back.

No offense, but most of us don't want this marriage. We wanted spouses who were home by 5:30. DH and I are both very ambitious and make 200k, but we wouldn't sacrifice our families so that one of us could work 15 hour days. DH had an offer last year to make 350k with very large bonuses, but it meant he'd be on call 24/7, traveling nonstop and working long days. I don't want to be a single mom and I actually really really love my DH. He's my person! Why do I have to deal with the kids and he doesn't? lol

I think what would be ideal is if DH and I only worked 7 hours a day each. Quality of life would go way up and then our hours would match school hours. I know everyone makes fun of "bank hours" but damn, it's "school hours" that we need to make fun of. 8-2:30 is wild.

I am one who worked like that. I only did it for 10 years. Then I had staff, admin, take care of stuff. I only work till 5pm and only in office three days a week. But you have to put in time. My kids 24,22 and 18 barely remember me working like a dog. It was from age six month on oldest to age 10.5 on oldest. My 18 year old I had a nine to five job her whole life. You do realize this is how careers work.

21-32 no one takes you seriously. From 32-45 is only chance you have to move up ranks quickly and that involves alot of work. Then at around 45-50 if have not made it, never will then 50-67 is hold on for dear life mode in career trying to survive till the eventual lay off.

But trouble is that 32-45 range aligns with marriage, and most of child bearing and young kids part of life. So if both work neither can put time in. There is a reason Michelle Obama became a SAHM both could not climb to top with kids.

It only sucks if you have a crappy husband who expects you to do everything. If your DH is an equal partner in parenting and housework, yes, it can be hectic but also very manageable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+1 for year round schooling and a school day that matches the work day

since capitalism is king around here and all

lol, I get shot down every time I suggest that the agrarian school calendar needs to be revisited

don’t even get me started on learning loss

I am 100 percent with you there. The school calendar makes no sense for 95 percent of people in 2025. Longer breaks throughout the year but no long summer stretch.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+1 for year round schooling and a school day that matches the work day

since capitalism is king around here and all

creating tons of low paid job for women to teach kids and watch kids all day is somehow helpful? Unless staffed solely by men a bad thing.

misanthrope

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the main problem - and why working took off for women in the first place - is that a SAHM is essentially trapped. She can't support herself, can't support her kids, she's completely dependent on her husband. Being a working mom is HARD but I feel very secure knowing that I am a fully independent person who would, god forbid, be able to take care of myself and my kids if something happened to my husband. Sure, I would love to be at home instead of at work! I mean, who wouldn't, male or female? But that trade off isn't one I'm willing to make.

I work part time and this is a big reason why. Stepping totally out of the workforce is scary to me. I actually did stay home for about a year when I first became a mom and I LOVED it, but the fear that came with having no independent income was ultimately too overwhelming. And I have a good marriage and a supportive husband, so it's not like I was planning for divorce or something. I'm actually more afraid my husband will die and I will need to support my family completely on my own -- I don't want to have to start from scratch if something like that happened.

But also -- being home alone cuts you off from other people in a way that is not healthy. Maybe it was different back in another era when many women stayed home and they had community in their neighborhoods. It's not like that now. Being a SAHM now is insanely isolating. I think this is one reason so many SAHMs become influencers or start posting on SM a lot -- they are trying to connect to people and build community. I don't get a ton of community from work but it does keep me plugged into the working world a little bit and that's worth a lot. I also just feel relief in earning my own money, being able to contribute to my own retirement accounts, etc.

This just isn't true in the DMV. People are very busy no matter where they work including at home.

Anonymous wrote:+1 for year round schooling and a school day that matches the work day

since capitalism is king around here and all

creating tons of low paid job for women to teach kids and watch kids all day is somehow helpful? Unless staffed solely by men a bad thing.

Anonymous wrote:+1 for year round schooling and a school day that matches the work day

since capitalism is king around here and all

lol, I get shot down every time I suggest that the agrarian school calendar needs to be revisited

don’t even get me started on learning loss

Anonymous wrote:This is such an UMC bubble discussion.

this is a message board for working parents in the DMV area. the conversation is reflective of the group having it. whats your point again?

+1 for year round schooling and a school day that matches the work day

since capitalism is king around here and all

This is such an UMC bubble discussion.