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: 08-01-2003
Sun, 08-24-2003 - 12:26pm
LOL! now that is funny, since you are the one who assumes Iam a stereotype care to expound since i simply stated she made some good points concerning BOTH sides to this debate?

Who is the stereotype? lol

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-29-2003
Sun, 08-24-2003 - 12:26pm
But what is the difference? and what if my child brought his toys to the provider OR likes his provider's cool toys just as much? if the child is playing and not interacting with you at that time --WHAT is the difference?

eileen

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-01-2003
Sun, 08-24-2003 - 12:33pm
Like I said for me the difference is the child is in MY house Iam the one who is taking full responsibilty for my child needs and their physical care throughout the day I do not go out to work and pay someone for childcare. You do and that is your choice, not mine.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-29-2003
Sun, 08-24-2003 - 12:34pm
Did you or did you not agree with this post.....<>

that's not stereotypical????? you do know that many wohms can't afford these either, right? And that wohms are working just as hard to "raise future adults, right?

i don't know if you "are" a stereotype, but you sure seem to be supporting viewpoints such as this tripe...might lead one to think that MSAHM is an appropriate title....i apologize if i've misconstrued your position.

eileen

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-01-2003
Sun, 08-24-2003 - 12:37pm
I think she made some good points concerning both side of the debate.
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-01-2003
Sun, 08-24-2003 - 12:42pm
Tell me where did I say anything was wrong with thinking that a provider is a asset, i know that providers are assets to childcare and parenting.

Why I feel CLW is so condesending and contradicts hersefl is b/c of the these exact types of comments. She will state what she believes as a sahm's weakness or inability to handle but will promote the women who is a asset to her and her childrens life the women who is staying home caring for her child. I find that repugnant.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sun, 08-24-2003 - 12:45pm
I disagree with <>

In some ways, those workers have MORE flexibility. Someone who is a clerk in a convenience store can choose a 1am shift, allowing their dh to be home with the kids while they SAH dureing the day. Someone who is an orderly, can choose a weekend shift so that her weekdays are completely off. There is a lot of flexibility in choosing your schedule for hourly workers, although not much flexibility in a given day.

I couldn't do my job on an evenings only or weekend basis. I suspect you couldn't choose an 8pm-4am shift either. A nurse could. A policeman could. Lots of hourly workers could get flexibility in ways that we cannot.

I don't think its the type of work (white vs. blue collar, salaried vs. hourly, professional vs. non) that determines the flexibility. There's a lot more to it than that.

Hollie

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sun, 08-24-2003 - 12:48pm
You put a lot more explanation into it this time. Last time you said <.

There was nothing there about contradictory. Nothing there to explain why you take it as condescending. We could only go on those few words, which imply its condescending to think your provider is an asset.

HOllie

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-29-2002
Sun, 08-24-2003 - 12:54pm
I suppose I got the idea from this statement:

"I totally agree and find it quite condesending how CLW states what a asset her provider is to her and her reason's."

You didn't give a fuller explanation that your meaning was only directed at cindy in that post. From that bare statement it seemed pretty clear to me that you found it "condescending" of cindy to consider her provider an asset. I would have a hard time understanding why you would consider this feeling about a dcp to be condescending when cindy expresses it, but not when others do.


Laura

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-01-2003
Sun, 08-24-2003 - 12:54pm
Oh yes I know woh and sah who cant afford either things and i know some who can and some who cant who have them anyway and live in debt up to their ears.

Whatever a women's reason is for work statis or sah statis is her choice to make i think that either can be best for a family it is what is right for your family. It would be such a waste of time and energy for me to go to work full i would pay out and lose time with childcare, commute, ect. It isnt worth it for me.

I am a bit taken back how defensive some of you have gotten and taken my words out of context. I am here to express my choice as you are yours, neither of us are right or wrong just doing what we see best, id assume.

Pages