How does this relate to the debate?

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
How does this relate to the debate?
2771
Wed, 08-20-2003 - 7:56pm
Hey I rhymed! lol

Something occurred to me earlier and I wanted to see how others thought it might relate to the whole "which is harder SAH/WOH" portion of the debate that crops up so often.

I think that, when you look at either group *as a whole*, the WOHs might have it harder. And this is why ...

There are virtually no SAHMs who SAH because they "have to". There are virtually no SAHMs who are forced to SAH. A woman that SAH wants to SAH.(I'm sure there's a few exceptions out there; controlling dhs who MAKE their wives SAH, disabled children, etc) A woman that SAH doesn't hate her "job", or else she'd go get a WOH job. A woman that SAH is generally getting what she wants.

There are LOTS AND LOTS of WOHMs who WOH because they "have to". A single mom, or one whose dh doesn't make enough to support the family, or one with a disabled dh, whatever the case may be ... she may long, with all her heart, to SAH, but *can't*. Many WOHMs hate their jobs, but can't quit.

Anyhoo ... just wanted to stir up something new

Hollie

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Thu, 08-28-2003 - 9:29am
Here is the problem that I see. You are saying she has valid points...the only point in her post is that this particular SAH was an idiot.

Glad to know you support that....because elsewhere in this thread you have stated that you supported the idea that SOME WOH, work only to buy "things" then you have also supported that ALL WOH, work only to buy "things.

Now you are supporting the idea that this particular SAH is an idiot for thinking the way she does. (btw--not the poster..the person the poster was speakin of as the idiot).

What exactly, for my own clarification purposes are you supporting. Maybe you said it elsewhere, but all this mudslinging is getting my puter awfully mucky and I can't seem to be able to read all the words properly.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-29-2003
Thu, 08-28-2003 - 9:43am
Hey, don't worry. One of the purposes of this board is to dismantle just such stereotypes. I mean wouldn't anyone with half a brain recognize that MOST WOHPs are NOT working FOR "things" like SUVs. THAT's the stereotype -- and it comes up over and over and over.

Of course, i've asked the question -- Is it okay for a WOHD with a SAH family to work "FOR" things (you know, like WOHMs are often accused of doing)? But no one seems to think that's much of a problem.

I'll let you know the next time i drive by my neighbor's new Lexus SUV -- they're the SAH family....while i'm cruising by in my 1996 (bought used) Honda Accord with 120,000 miles.

But really, don't give the "war" (LOL!) another thought. It happens often around here. Some just never "get it".

eileen

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-01-2003
Thu, 08-28-2003 - 9:44am
My diatribe???> Lol that would have been your post. I dont think you are picking one me why would i? i dont have the time or really care to edit and check for grammer if that is difficult for you to deal with than dont read my posts and refrain from responding that is futile. what has been amusing to me is to watching the group continue with their diatribe and point out my error while they are blinded to their own.

Like they say it only proves weakness.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-01-2003
Thu, 08-28-2003 - 9:49am
i have never supported the position ALL WOHM's or WOHD's work for suv's have I? I dont recall ever making that claim. I know some do.

My position on this is wohp/sahp/wahp and dcp all work for different reasons.

i quess that make me a sterotype a troll and a 13 y old who cant type.

i thankyou, you are the only one who has responded to me in a respectful adult manner.


Edited 8/28/2003 9:59:39 AM ET by silverunity

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Thu, 08-28-2003 - 9:58am
Ya mean a jacka$$ on a saddle??

Woops, lets try that again..

a jacka$$ with a saddle....

Avatar for virgogirl914
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Thu, 08-28-2003 - 9:59am
As you see it, what are 'our errors' to which we are blinded?

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-01-2003
Thu, 08-28-2003 - 10:02am
Iam clearly not in a position to point our your error iam not that weak.
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-01-2003
Thu, 08-28-2003 - 10:15am
Well since you have missed the only 2 positions I have taken on this board concerning the topic ill refresh your memory. the rest of the debate has been the groups personal oponion of me.... LOL~

1.WOHP are not responsilbe for their childs physicall care while they are working they pay a provider for their responsibility. A sahm does not.

2. WOHP/WAHM/SAHM all have different reason for working in the home or out.



iVillage Member
Registered: 08-01-2003
Thu, 08-28-2003 - 10:31am
No, that would clearly be your reason for being here and of course also to tell me what Iam saying even when i clearly did not say it forwhatever reasona even after it is proven to you. I may disagree with you emensly however that does not mean your poionts are not valid. Iam sorry iam not so arrogant to believe others are useless with no cause for validation. Although eileen I have no intetions of entertaining you..Iam not your host.

Is it your job to tell me how to post on this board? im sorry but iam not looking for your approval. I have seen you debate nothing but your personal opinion of me and my claim of your mirepresentaion of my words PLUS yelling at me for saying things i have NEVER said. Who is "we" anyway? I am talking to directly to YOU.

To each his ownnn

your a techer... hummmm

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Thu, 08-28-2003 - 10:32am
ROFLMAO! (nt)

Pages