Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This attitude is ridiculous. The kid is not a lump of clay. A child should not be a "datime occupation". This mindset is an issue. Staying home is not. Moms like this are honestly creating monsters and a real PITA themselves. Its not rocket science and hell yeah, you should be doing the laundry. How TF would you not have the time? I have WOHM, SAHM and worked partime and so has my spouse and the one home with the kid does this stuff. That is how it is done. No, it is not fair to refuse to do household chores when you are not earning any income because your child is an "occupation". GTFO yourself.

I don't see my time with my kids as an "occupation" but I also don't see that I'm automatically responsible for more of the general household chores. I'll do them if I can, but they certainly aren't my "job" either.

I don't know what I think about that. I think as a general rule that stuff should be done by the person who has the time, or cares more. I don't see how the former would not usually be the SAHM. If I am really busy at work and my husband is off for any reason, I certainly expect him to do the household chores. I don't see why that would not be the general assumption. Your "job" is not staring at your kid all day, and anyone should be able to handle having a small child and doing the laundry. Sorry if that isn't popular, but come on.

To that end, everyone I know that employs a caretaker for young kids expects that they will do the dishes and do the laundry for the kid. Why would you not expect the same from a SAHM? Seriously, that's just a crappy deal if not. I would not take it. Sorry.

"A crappy deal"? You are negotiating your family's approach to childcare?

Every single family that has ever discussed this has negotiated their approach to child care. If you are not talking about it, you are...what, exactly? Yes, when my husband took a job that paid much more and required more hours, I said I would need to cut back to drive the kids around and I would do the dishes and laundry so he could work more and we could save more. I fail entirely to see how coming up with an arrangement that seems fair and workable is bad?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This attitude is ridiculous. The kid is not a lump of clay. A child should not be a "datime occupation". This mindset is an issue. Staying home is not. Moms like this are honestly creating monsters and a real PITA themselves. Its not rocket science and hell yeah, you should be doing the laundry. How TF would you not have the time? I have WOHM, SAHM and worked partime and so has my spouse and the one home with the kid does this stuff. That is how it is done. No, it is not fair to refuse to do household chores when you are not earning any income because your child is an "occupation". GTFO yourself.

What? I merely said if I have time to put in laundry or wash dishes, I do. If we are doing some special activity and we are out all day, I don’t stress about it. DH and I both do light cleaning at night or if one of us is home. I just said I’m not slaving away at home at housework. I’m not sure how this is so offensive to you. I do choose to stay at home to primarily be with y kid, not so my house can look perfect all the time.

It is not offensive to me, but moms who insist that they are OMGEnriching their childrens' lives all day every day by staying home and SOBUSYHARDESTBESTJOBEVERAMIRITEWHONEEDSACLEANKICTHENWHENTHEREISLOVINGANDEDUCATINTODO generally suck and raise aholes. I speak from lots of experience. I prefer a mom who stays home, shuts up about it, and can handle keeping her house clean.

I think you’re reading into my post. Maybe “occupation” wasn’t the right word? I see DH’s work as his occupation during the day and the kid as mine during the day. It’s my responsibility to watch and take care of the kid, I don’t see myself as an automatic housekeeper and cook, though of course I do clean when I can and cook. But I don’t see housekeeping as my job. I do all the grocery shopping and I’m certainly not letting dishes sit for days in the sink, but I’m not going to be dusting and vacuuming daily and folding all of DH’s laundry all day just because I am home. I’ll do some of it, but no I do not see that as the reason I am staying home.

Well, as far as I am concerned, I do expect the person I pay to watch my young children to take them to play dates, the library, make food, clean up, and do their laundry and that is standard. It is what I expected and did myself when I was at home. If you "don't care about that stuff," I would posit that it is part and parcel of child rearing. Old fashioned and inconvenient, but children need clean clothes, spaces, and nutritious food as much as they need baby class time.

Do you really think I’m sitting back and taking my kid to story time and not cooking meals or washing his clothes? I understand your point about some SAHM but that’s not me. I’m merely saying that I’m not bending over backwards to do all the housework while DH is at work. I do tend to do all the kid laundry and towels, but DH also grows in our communal laundry when he is home and I often fold at night while watching TV. During the day of course I wipe up after my kid and I eat lunch, and vacuum as messes are made, but I am not cleaning as a cleaning crew or housekeeper would all day, nor do I see that as my job. I was originally responding to a PP who said a working DH would be completely “unfettered” by housework and childcare concerns, and I don’t think that’s the case in my house.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This attitude is ridiculous. The kid is not a lump of clay. A child should not be a "datime occupation". This mindset is an issue. Staying home is not. Moms like this are honestly creating monsters and a real PITA themselves. Its not rocket science and hell yeah, you should be doing the laundry. How TF would you not have the time? I have WOHM, SAHM and worked partime and so has my spouse and the one home with the kid does this stuff. That is how it is done. No, it is not fair to refuse to do household chores when you are not earning any income because your child is an "occupation". GTFO yourself.

I don't see my time with my kids as an "occupation" but I also don't see that I'm automatically responsible for more of the general household chores. I'll do them if I can, but they certainly aren't my "job" either.

I don't know what I think about that. I think as a general rule that stuff should be done by the person who has the time, or cares more. I don't see how the former would not usually be the SAHM. If I am really busy at work and my husband is off for any reason, I certainly expect him to do the household chores. I don't see why that would not be the general assumption. Your "job" is not staring at your kid all day, and anyone should be able to handle having a small child and doing the laundry. Sorry if that isn't popular, but come on.

My "job" isn't watching the kids just like my "job" isn't washing my DH's underwear.

So, you have no actual responsibilities? I could care less, honestly, I am just interested in how people view this stuff. It is such a new and unfamiliar viewpoint for me.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This attitude is ridiculous. The kid is not a lump of clay. A child should not be a "datime occupation". This mindset is an issue. Staying home is not. Moms like this are honestly creating monsters and a real PITA themselves. Its not rocket science and hell yeah, you should be doing the laundry. How TF would you not have the time? I have WOHM, SAHM and worked partime and so has my spouse and the one home with the kid does this stuff. That is how it is done. No, it is not fair to refuse to do household chores when you are not earning any income because your child is an "occupation". GTFO yourself.

I don't see my time with my kids as an "occupation" but I also don't see that I'm automatically responsible for more of the general household chores. I'll do them if I can, but they certainly aren't my "job" either.

I don't know what I think about that. I think as a general rule that stuff should be done by the person who has the time, or cares more. I don't see how the former would not usually be the SAHM. If I am really busy at work and my husband is off for any reason, I certainly expect him to do the household chores. I don't see why that would not be the general assumption. Your "job" is not staring at your kid all day, and anyone should be able to handle having a small child and doing the laundry. Sorry if that isn't popular, but come on.

To that end, everyone I know that employs a caretaker for young kids expects that they will do the dishes and do the laundry for the kid. Why would you not expect the same from a SAHM? Seriously, that's just a crappy deal if not. I would not take it. Sorry.

"A crappy deal"? You are negotiating your family's approach to childcare?

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.

This attitude is ridiculous. The kid is not a lump of clay. A child should not be a "datime occupation". This mindset is an issue. Staying home is not. Moms like this are honestly creating monsters and a real PITA themselves. Its not rocket science and hell yeah, you should be doing the laundry. How TF would you not have the time? I have WOHM, SAHM and worked partime and so has my spouse and the one home with the kid does this stuff. That is how it is done. No, it is not fair to refuse to do household chores when you are not earning any income because your child is an "occupation". GTFO yourself.

I don't see my time with my kids as an "occupation" but I also don't see that I'm automatically responsible for more of the general household chores. I'll do them if I can, but they certainly aren't my "job" either.

I don't know what I think about that. I think as a general rule that stuff should be done by the person who has the time, or cares more. I don't see how the former would not usually be the SAHM. If I am really busy at work and my husband is off for any reason, I certainly expect him to do the household chores. I don't see why that would not be the general assumption. Your "job" is not staring at your kid all day, and anyone should be able to handle having a small child and doing the laundry. Sorry if that isn't popular, but come on.

My "job" isn't watching the kids just like my "job" isn't washing my DH's underwear.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This attitude is ridiculous. The kid is not a lump of clay. A child should not be a "datime occupation". This mindset is an issue. Staying home is not. Moms like this are honestly creating monsters and a real PITA themselves. Its not rocket science and hell yeah, you should be doing the laundry. How TF would you not have the time? I have WOHM, SAHM and worked partime and so has my spouse and the one home with the kid does this stuff. That is how it is done. No, it is not fair to refuse to do household chores when you are not earning any income because your child is an "occupation". GTFO yourself.

I don't see my time with my kids as an "occupation" but I also don't see that I'm automatically responsible for more of the general household chores. I'll do them if I can, but they certainly aren't my "job" either.

I don't know what I think about that. I think as a general rule that stuff should be done by the person who has the time, or cares more. I don't see how the former would not usually be the SAHM. If I am really busy at work and my husband is off for any reason, I certainly expect him to do the household chores. I don't see why that would not be the general assumption. Your "job" is not staring at your kid all day, and anyone should be able to handle having a small child and doing the laundry. Sorry if that isn't popular, but come on.

To that end, everyone I know that employs a caretaker for young kids expects that they will do the dishes and do the laundry for the kid. Why would you not expect the same from a SAHM? Seriously, that's just a crappy deal if not. I would not take it. Sorry.

Sure, nannies are expected to clean as they go for kid related things- make lunch for kid, clean up, play with toys, clean up, but are they expected to vacuum the whole house and mop and do the husband’s laundry? I don’t know of any nanny who is expected to do this.

Yeah, the whole point is, a SAHM is not the nanny. The nanny goes home and does her own laundry and cleaning. Why would the SAHM not be doing both jobs? You can't have it both ways, all I am so busy, and yet...not even doing a normal person's job.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This attitude is ridiculous. The kid is not a lump of clay. A child should not be a "datime occupation". This mindset is an issue. Staying home is not. Moms like this are honestly creating monsters and a real PITA themselves. Its not rocket science and hell yeah, you should be doing the laundry. How TF would you not have the time? I have WOHM, SAHM and worked partime and so has my spouse and the one home with the kid does this stuff. That is how it is done. No, it is not fair to refuse to do household chores when you are not earning any income because your child is an "occupation". GTFO yourself.

What? I merely said if I have time to put in laundry or wash dishes, I do. If we are doing some special activity and we are out all day, I don’t stress about it. DH and I both do light cleaning at night or if one of us is home. I just said I’m not slaving away at home at housework. I’m not sure how this is so offensive to you. I do choose to stay at home to primarily be with y kid, not so my house can look perfect all the time.

It is not offensive to me, but moms who insist that they are OMGEnriching their childrens' lives all day every day by staying home and SOBUSYHARDESTBESTJOBEVERAMIRITEWHONEEDSACLEANKICTHENWHENTHEREISLOVINGANDEDUCATINTODO generally suck and raise aholes. I speak from lots of experience. I prefer a mom who stays home, shuts up about it, and can handle keeping her house clean.

I think you’re reading into my post. Maybe “occupation” wasn’t the right word? I see DH’s work as his occupation during the day and the kid as mine during the day. It’s my responsibility to watch and take care of the kid, I don’t see myself as an automatic housekeeper and cook, though of course I do clean when I can and cook. But I don’t see housekeeping as my job. I do all the grocery shopping and I’m certainly not letting dishes sit for days in the sink, but I’m not going to be dusting and vacuuming daily and folding all of DH’s laundry all day just because I am home. I’ll do some of it, but no I do not see that as the reason I am staying home.

Well, as far as I am concerned, I do expect the person I pay to watch my young children to take them to play dates, the library, make food, clean up, and do their laundry and that is standard. It is what I expected and did myself when I was at home. If you "don't care about that stuff," I would posit that it is part and parcel of child rearing. Old fashioned and inconvenient, but children need clean clothes, spaces, and nutritious food as much as they need baby class time.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This attitude is ridiculous. The kid is not a lump of clay. A child should not be a "datime occupation". This mindset is an issue. Staying home is not. Moms like this are honestly creating monsters and a real PITA themselves. Its not rocket science and hell yeah, you should be doing the laundry. How TF would you not have the time? I have WOHM, SAHM and worked partime and so has my spouse and the one home with the kid does this stuff. That is how it is done. No, it is not fair to refuse to do household chores when you are not earning any income because your child is an "occupation". GTFO yourself.

I don't see my time with my kids as an "occupation" but I also don't see that I'm automatically responsible for more of the general household chores. I'll do them if I can, but they certainly aren't my "job" either.

I don't know what I think about that. I think as a general rule that stuff should be done by the person who has the time, or cares more. I don't see how the former would not usually be the SAHM. If I am really busy at work and my husband is off for any reason, I certainly expect him to do the household chores. I don't see why that would not be the general assumption. Your "job" is not staring at your kid all day, and anyone should be able to handle having a small child and doing the laundry. Sorry if that isn't popular, but come on.

To that end, everyone I know that employs a caretaker for young kids expects that they will do the dishes and do the laundry for the kid. Why would you not expect the same from a SAHM? Seriously, that's just a crappy deal if not. I would not take it. Sorry.

Sure, nannies are expected to clean as they go for kid related things- make lunch for kid, clean up, play with toys, clean up, but are they expected to vacuum the whole house and mop and do the husband’s laundry? I don’t know of any nanny who is expected to do this.

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.

This attitude is ridiculous. The kid is not a lump of clay. A child should not be a "datime occupation". This mindset is an issue. Staying home is not. Moms like this are honestly creating monsters and a real PITA themselves. Its not rocket science and hell yeah, you should be doing the laundry. How TF would you not have the time? I have WOHM, SAHM and worked partime and so has my spouse and the one home with the kid does this stuff. That is how it is done. No, it is not fair to refuse to do household chores when you are not earning any income because your child is an "occupation". GTFO yourself.

What? I merely said if I have time to put in laundry or wash dishes, I do. If we are doing some special activity and we are out all day, I don’t stress about it. DH and I both do light cleaning at night or if one of us is home. I just said I’m not slaving away at home at housework. I’m not sure how this is so offensive to you. I do choose to stay at home to primarily be with y kid, not so my house can look perfect all the time.

It is not offensive to me, but moms who insist that they are OMGEnriching their childrens' lives all day every day by staying home and SOBUSYHARDESTBESTJOBEVERAMIRITEWHONEEDSACLEANKICTHENWHENTHEREISLOVINGANDEDUCATINTODO generally suck and raise aholes. I speak from lots of experience. I prefer a mom who stays home, shuts up about it, and can handle keeping her house clean.

I think you’re reading into my post. Maybe “occupation” wasn’t the right word? I see DH’s work as his occupation during the day and the kid as mine during the day. It’s my responsibility to watch and take care of the kid, I don’t see myself as an automatic housekeeper and cook, though of course I do clean when I can and cook. But I don’t see housekeeping as my job. I do all the grocery shopping and I’m certainly not letting dishes sit for days in the sink, but I’m not going to be dusting and vacuuming daily and folding all of DH’s laundry all day just because I am home. I’ll do some of it, but no I do not see that as the reason I am staying home.

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.

This attitude is ridiculous. The kid is not a lump of clay. A child should not be a "datime occupation". This mindset is an issue. Staying home is not. Moms like this are honestly creating monsters and a real PITA themselves. Its not rocket science and hell yeah, you should be doing the laundry. How TF would you not have the time? I have WOHM, SAHM and worked partime and so has my spouse and the one home with the kid does this stuff. That is how it is done. No, it is not fair to refuse to do household chores when you are not earning any income because your child is an "occupation". GTFO yourself.

I don't see my time with my kids as an "occupation" but I also don't see that I'm automatically responsible for more of the general household chores. I'll do them if I can, but they certainly aren't my "job" either.

I don't know what I think about that. I think as a general rule that stuff should be done by the person who has the time, or cares more. I don't see how the former would not usually be the SAHM. If I am really busy at work and my husband is off for any reason, I certainly expect him to do the household chores. I don't see why that would not be the general assumption. Your "job" is not staring at your kid all day, and anyone should be able to handle having a small child and doing the laundry. Sorry if that isn't popular, but come on.

To that end, everyone I know that employs a caretaker for young kids expects that they will do the dishes and do the laundry for the kid. Why would you not expect the same from a SAHM? Seriously, that's just a crappy deal if not. I would not take it. Sorry.

Anonymous wrote:I think she made it up to write her blog/article to make money. Never once has someone at a store asked me what I do. Bizarre.

People ask me all the time. Your not working today ? I just smile.

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.

This attitude is ridiculous. The kid is not a lump of clay. A child should not be a "datime occupation". This mindset is an issue. Staying home is not. Moms like this are honestly creating monsters and a real PITA themselves. Its not rocket science and hell yeah, you should be doing the laundry. How TF would you not have the time? I have WOHM, SAHM and worked partime and so has my spouse and the one home with the kid does this stuff. That is how it is done. No, it is not fair to refuse to do household chores when you are not earning any income because your child is an "occupation". GTFO yourself.

I don't see my time with my kids as an "occupation" but I also don't see that I'm automatically responsible for more of the general household chores. I'll do them if I can, but they certainly aren't my "job" either.

I don't know what I think about that. I think as a general rule that stuff should be done by the person who has the time, or cares more. I don't see how the former would not usually be the SAHM. If I am really busy at work and my husband is off for any reason, I certainly expect him to do the household chores. I don't see why that would not be the general assumption. Your "job" is not staring at your kid all day, and anyone should be able to handle having a small child and doing the laundry. Sorry if that isn't popular, but come on.

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.

This attitude is ridiculous. The kid is not a lump of clay. A child should not be a "datime occupation". This mindset is an issue. Staying home is not. Moms like this are honestly creating monsters and a real PITA themselves. Its not rocket science and hell yeah, you should be doing the laundry. How TF would you not have the time? I have WOHM, SAHM and worked partime and so has my spouse and the one home with the kid does this stuff. That is how it is done. No, it is not fair to refuse to do household chores when you are not earning any income because your child is an "occupation". GTFO yourself.

+1000

She's not slaving away while he sits back. You mean sits back earning the money to support YOU? Ugh.

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.

This attitude is ridiculous. The kid is not a lump of clay. A child should not be a "datime occupation". This mindset is an issue. Staying home is not. Moms like this are honestly creating monsters and a real PITA themselves. Its not rocket science and hell yeah, you should be doing the laundry. How TF would you not have the time? I have WOHM, SAHM and worked partime and so has my spouse and the one home with the kid does this stuff. That is how it is done. No, it is not fair to refuse to do household chores when you are not earning any income because your child is an "occupation". GTFO yourself.

I don't see my time with my kids as an "occupation" but I also don't see that I'm automatically responsible for more of the general household chores. I'll do them if I can, but they certainly aren't my "job" either.

Most of the articles in Arlington Magazine are worthless.