Because men don’t get pregnant and give birth. Simple as that really. Also most men prefer to be the one earning while the woman keeps the home and looks after the kids. I don’t really think society is any better off for having more women in the workplace at the expense of children/families. Many women really want to stay home but can’t.
- Status
J
JetteZ
Guest
If that is the case - that more woman then men want to stay home but it’s financially impractical to do so - having articles that suggest she, on her own, has a choice to make is rediculous.
Last edited:
J
jlc2k2
Guest
That (and the original article) assumes that motherhood is something that automatically happens when you get married. For many it will happen that way. But for many it won’t. Some of the holiest women I know personally have not been able to have children and they work outside the home. They are not doing a disservice to their families by doing so.
Also, I can pull quotes out of context too:
“Thank you, women who work! You are present and active in every area of life-social, economic, cultural, artistic and political. In this way you make an indispensable contribution to the growth of a culture which unites reason and feeling, to a model of life ever open to the sense of “mystery”, to the establishment of economic and political structures ever more worthy of humanity.” - Saint Pope John Paul 2 from his Letter to Women
https://w2.vatican.va/content/john-...95/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_29061995_women.html
Also, I can pull quotes out of context too:
“Thank you, women who work! You are present and active in every area of life-social, economic, cultural, artistic and political. In this way you make an indispensable contribution to the growth of a culture which unites reason and feeling, to a model of life ever open to the sense of “mystery”, to the establishment of economic and political structures ever more worthy of humanity.” - Saint Pope John Paul 2 from his Letter to Women
https://w2.vatican.va/content/john-...95/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_29061995_women.html
X
Xanthippe_Voorhees
Guest
And this quote is addressing a completely different time and place, one where children and household duties were shifting from agrarian to industrial and children were considered factory or coal mine fodder. This exhortation is more about ensuring care of children, not the binding of women.
X
Xanthippe_Voorhees
Guest
But again, MANY SAHM’s are not dealing with family VS career. They are caring for other’s children they are caring for elderly relatives. They are doing online work and MLM. It’s not a “traditional” job but it’s still work outside of caring for their own children.Xanthippe_Voorhees:
Because men don’t get pregnant and give birth. Simple as that really. Also most men prefer to be the one earning while the woman keeps the home and looks after the kids. I don’t really think society is any better off for having more women in the workplace at the expense of children/families. Many women really want to stay home but can’t.
Many times the women who want to stay home but can’t are saddled with a lazy husband who expects them to take care of all things domestic and child. And I mean, who wouldn’t want to come home to having all your needs met?
That’s the thing. This question is being asked of women–career or kids. However, we’re not asking men when they are getting married so they can “stop worrying” about laundry and meals and cleaning the house. The whole premise of this article is that somehow women are magically gifted with fairy farts of luck because they can “choose” (so can men) to stay home and do all things home related. It’s ridiculous and offensive.
I’m a WFHM. The other moms I know do various amounts of WFH, part-time and volunteering. This isn’t the SAHM dichotomy that the article presents. It never is. And yet most of these women are basically a gift to their husband more than they are to child-rearing.
W
whyeyeman
Guest
Perhaps because men and women are different? Perhaps because women are more suited to the raising of children?
X
Xanthippe_Voorhees
Guest
Men and women are different. But besides nursing an infant the whole notion that “women are more suited to the raising of children” has brought us now the 3rd generation of fatherless children. The article is incredibly demeaning to women because it tries to put at war earning money vs childcare as if it’s some kind of mutually detrimental occurance. Nevermind the fact that even if a woman has babies for a decade her years of hands on-baby parenting is only a few more than a dozen. If she homeschooles those children you’re looking at best at a couple dozen years in service of motherhood. Then what? If she started in her 20’s she’d be in her 50’s when the children are grown and then what? Retirement and SS aren’t until early 70’s these days. Is she less womanly because she doesn’t spend 2 decades twiddling her thumbs until that time comes?
X
Xantippe
Guest
Ah, but you’re supposed to have babies well into your 40s and then homeschool them. That should get you safely to 60+.
But yeah, that’s still 10 years until retirement.
C
Clementine14
Guest
I don’t like the implication in this article that “getting a career established first” is somehow negative.
Why is it wrong for a woman to make sure that she gets an education and starts working in a specific career before having children? Often today, it’s not possible to support a family on one income. And even in cases where it is possible, there is always the question of “what if something happens” to your spouse.
I always wanted to be a SAHM. We have one child, and I work part time and stay home with him full time. It is hard and it is stressful (and often does not feel worth it), but it does make me feel more comfortable knowing that if my husband lost his job or became otherwise unable to work, I have a solid work history and we can deal with it together, instead of having to rely completely on his earning capability.
That’s not to say that people should wait around forever, or that everything has to be perfect before getting married. But realistically, it used to be easier to live on one income. Taking that fact seriously and trying to be responsible isn’t a bad thing.
The article also assumes that all women are suited to staying home with children. Some women are better wives and mothers when they are doing work outside of the home.
If I had to, I would choose to have a great marriage. But the question itself is ridiculous, and does not consider that women’s career choices can actually influence their marriages in positive ways.
Why is it wrong for a woman to make sure that she gets an education and starts working in a specific career before having children? Often today, it’s not possible to support a family on one income. And even in cases where it is possible, there is always the question of “what if something happens” to your spouse.
I always wanted to be a SAHM. We have one child, and I work part time and stay home with him full time. It is hard and it is stressful (and often does not feel worth it), but it does make me feel more comfortable knowing that if my husband lost his job or became otherwise unable to work, I have a solid work history and we can deal with it together, instead of having to rely completely on his earning capability.
That’s not to say that people should wait around forever, or that everything has to be perfect before getting married. But realistically, it used to be easier to live on one income. Taking that fact seriously and trying to be responsible isn’t a bad thing.
The article also assumes that all women are suited to staying home with children. Some women are better wives and mothers when they are doing work outside of the home.
If I had to, I would choose to have a great marriage. But the question itself is ridiculous, and does not consider that women’s career choices can actually influence their marriages in positive ways.
A
AlNg
Guest
Who doesn’t accept a mother who stays at home taking care of her four children while the husband works?
X
Xanthippe_Voorhees
Guest
Xanthippe_Voorhees:
Who doesn’t accept a mother who stays at home taking care of her four children while the husband works?
Columnist: It Should Be Illegal to Be a Stay-at-Home-Mom with School-age Kids | National Review
An Australian columnist thinks mothers with school-aged children should be forced to work for the sake of equality.
www.nationalreview.com
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...g-still-happening_us_58addc05e4b0d818c4f0a4d2
And that’s just the top Google hits.
Need I go on?
A
AlNg
Guest
I wouldn’t take these commentaries with foul language seriously.
X
Xanthippe_Voorhees
Guest
Ok then.Xanthippe_Voorhees:
I wouldn’t take these commentaries with foul language seriously.
You asked who opposes SAHM’s in our society. These are the people who do. Just because they don’t use clean language doesn’t mean that you can automatically dismiss the fact that they, in general, are wildly popular ideas.
That, and only the last link has swear words.
But the vitrol is there. The hate is there. The shaming is there. You’d have to be blind, deaf and never go in public to not encounter SAHM shaming.
P
pianistclare
Guest
I would agree with this. For Catholics, staying home seems a worthy thing, but not for other folks of all walks of life. They respond like “oh you must be rich” OR “oh, so you don’t mind being poor? Your poor children, they’ll never have anything”
Either way, people can be VERY outspoken. Same thing happens to big families.
Either way, people can be VERY outspoken. Same thing happens to big families.
X
Xanthippe_Voorhees
Guest
It’s gotten especially bad since this article:
https://www.hbs.edu/news/articles/Pages/mcginn-working-mom.aspx
I worked in an office of my peers. When I had a girl and decided to be a WFHM due to her health issue many defriended me on Facebook. Not because I was no longer their co-worker but because they legitimately believed that I was basically more or less neglecting my child and her future by staying home with her and not working full time.
R
Rau
Guest
No, that’s not broadly true. Perhaps you live in a rough neighborhood?
Last edited:
W
Werbenjagermanjensen
Guest
Yes, I think that you need to go on. That is the view of two feminists with a access to a keyboard. There are also plenty of people with fringe views with internet access. I couldn’t support belief in a flat earth or geocentric solar system as a widely accepted view by quoting the first two hits of a google search.
X
Xantippe
Guest
I think people understand that there can (normally) only be one big job per family–you know, the kind where you’re on call round-the-clock and working well in excess over 60 hours a week or travelling a lot.No, that’s not broadly true. Perhaps you live in a rough neighborhood?
I get how there can be two 9-5ers in a single family (or maybe one 9-5er and a nurse working three 12-hour shifts a week), but if there are two Big Jobs in a single household, things tend to break down. That’s why (aside from the fact that it’s economically possible), couples in professional families tend to either have one Big Job plus a SAHP or a part-time working parent. Hence, I wouldn’t blink at a SAHD/part-time employed husband of a female doctor (although I also wouldn’t be doing solo playdates with him cause inappropriate).
Lower down the economic food chain, though, it’s less workable, and “Peter Pan” would be nicer than the language I’d use. There’s a dad in the neighborhood who quit his job in a snit, has been spotted enjoying a beer before noon, and doesn’t seem to be that much of a SAHD, and yeah, I do have the occasional judgy thought, especially since his wife seems to be struggling to support the family. There’s another SAHD in the neighborhood who is theoretically homeschooling kids but I fear it’s more like “homeschooling,” the kids seem a bit neglected, and their family also seems to be economically struggling. But a $100k a year professional’s husband who puts his heart into SAHD-ing? No problem. There’s a couple with four kids in our school community where the wife is a professor and the husband has what has to be a very part-time job (I suspect she probably outearns him by a factor of 3 or 4), but he’s a very active, capable dad and generally respected in our community.
X
Xantippe
Guest
What evidence would be good enough for you?
X
Xanthippe_Voorhees
Guest
Then use google.
The Harvard Business Review article that I gave in a later post is hardly “two feminists” and the Huff Post (not that I love Huff Post) that I cited questions MANY feminist and other messages that woman face. It’s actually an author answering many attacks from pretty mainstream sources. Not to mention the Australian newspaper who published the SAHM should be illegal piece is a pretty well-regarded paper and several editors had to approve it before it went to press. And while it caused chaos, it wasn’t exactly poorly recieved.
Last edited:
- Status