SAH doesn't support change,

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-08-2003
SAH doesn't support change,
3723
Sat, 08-26-2006 - 4:58pm

"SAH doesn't support change, it supports going backwards to the 1950's,"

Statement in a post below.

I wholeheartedly disagree. To me, SAH is a choice. How is that going back to the 1950s, when a lot of women didn't have much of a choice.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Tue, 08-29-2006 - 8:55pm

Is it similiar to the feeling I got reading the exchanges in this thread about pumping, suck-power, and tongues?

In another context, it could have pomise, but in that conversation.....<<<>>>>.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-05-2004
Tue, 08-29-2006 - 8:55pm

I think I would recommend to my DDs that they live with their BF for a while before considering marriage, if they wanted to marry young. DH and I lived together for over 4 years before we were married. Our lives hardly changed at all afterwards (except for me changing my name, and joining our bank account) But our day to day existence was the same.

Those 4 years gave us the chance to find out if we could live with each other and stand each other for a long period of time ;)

That's why I'm all for living in sin before marriage. lol

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 08-29-2006 - 8:58pm

First off, there's a big difference between making 70K and $1300 month, which is what the poster claimed she could support she and her child on. Also, I assume that your husband has employer paid health insurance. The poster claimed she could support herself on PT work, which means no insurance. I don't care where you live. I think it woudl be next to impossible to be 100% self supporting (no help from the govt, family, etc) on $1300/month of PT income, plus go to school.

Susan

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Tue, 08-29-2006 - 8:59pm

Great point. Attitudes about responsibility at home have to change along with roles in the workplace. And this can be such a chicken-and-egg. Women are still socialized generally speaking to assume more responsibility at home - whether they also work or not. Plus, the thorny crown of "choice" often means to men "Well, you are *choosing* to work, so it is up to you to figure out how to get both you job and the rest of your "job" done - not my problem." Extreme, but illustrative.

It can be hard to go against that ingrained role, though, and simply refuse to carry that domestic burden. Let's face it. In part, women have to put down some of the load so that men *can* pick it up.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-01-2003
Tue, 08-29-2006 - 9:01pm

>>You're doing fine; hope you're better soon. <<

thanks, got a lot on my mind and i'm debating as a distraction. that isn't always the best way to debate though LOL.

>>But if it's true that women get bent out of shape over earning more than their husbands, I have to wonder what that says about feminism being defined as the right of each woman to choose whatever she wants. <<

i don't know that the problem is just with the income though. if that were the case then *any* marriage taht has the wife as primary/equal breadwinner would be in trouble. but the studies indicate that it is women with *careers* whose marriage seem to falter more so than other marriages.

there is a theory out there about marriages that i almost agree with. ina nutshell, the marraige must be balanced. the spouses can't be equally anything...equally assertive, equally passive, equally in love. one should be the giver, the other the taker (within reason, of course). so perhaps the issue with two career minded spouses is teh assertivness, agressivness, competitiveness etc taht goes along with a career. the two are in competition with eachother. the support for each other may not be there.

thats just a theory though, and food for thought.

i do think taht the feminist movement made great changes in every aspect of society...that includes men. i think at first your idea about men not caring too much about the changes to their own lives, but after a while men began to realize that the pendulum has swung...and right at their own worth. just because they were a little slow on the uptake doesn't negate the effect its had on them.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 08-29-2006 - 9:03pm

Personally, I'd rather remove my fingernails with a butter knife than scrapbook. If you like it, then more power to you. Each to their own. That's kind of the point of this whole debate, don't you think?

BTW, I have lots of WOH friends who are avid scrapbookers. Scrapbooking and WOH are not mutually exculsive.

Susan

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-05-2004
Tue, 08-29-2006 - 9:06pm
LOL. I'm there with you and i'm WAH. I do have lots of photos of my kids, and we have lots of family photos around the house, but scrapbooking is a little tedious to me. I do have a couple albums I have been trying to maintain with shots of each of my girls from every month or 2, so I can look back and see the progress from birth up, but even that gets neglected. I maintain our website more than anything else so that family that is far away can keep up with the girls.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Tue, 08-29-2006 - 9:07pm
I read similiar studies on the weight association a while back. The sticky point, though, is that "advantaged" kids are already so far ahead of the game in virtually every aspect that any change due to maternal employment - even a negative one - simply makes them "slightly less advantaged" and not the least bit "harmed". EG - and I'm making these numbers up from memory - 20% of economically disadvantages kids are obese and only 10% of advantaged kids. When mom WOH, the number for the lower SES group changed from 20 to 18 while for the higher SES group it went from 10 to 12. Yes, the changes were statistically significant - and even mildly interesting - but did not rise to the level of "WOHM are making their kids fat!" like some headlines proclaimed.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Tue, 08-29-2006 - 9:14pm

Well, I have two boys and statistics say that married men live longer and are happier.

I'm just not sure I want my DD to get married.

Maybe I *am* for gay-marriage afterall and my boys can marry other boys while my DD stays single :-)

Pages