SAH doesn't support change,
Find a Conversation
SAH doesn't support change,
| 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
Wow, your second in K already.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
It's not that I disapprove (that's certainly not my place), it's that I do not think you are being very realistic.
If you are right, why are so many single mothers of young children living in poverty?
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Have you ever experienced intellectual challenge and satisfaction in any job?
"I'm missing a steady paycheck
The steady paycheck, plus health and retirement benefits, stock and options, are very nice.
, kissing up to a boss,
I actually like my boss.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
It depends on the career.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
I don't think I claimed WOH is the "better" way or the "best" way to instill a work ethic, only that there's *no better* way. Which isn't to say other approaches couldn't be equally effective.
Ergo, claiming SAH is the *best* way to instill any particular set of values doesn't really follow. Anyway, I wonder what set of values SAH could possibly help to impart that couldn't be effectively imparted with a different work status.
I agree that WOH in itself isn't necessarily much of an example. It all depends on the climate surrounding WOH, the kind of discussions around it, the child's understanding of the nature of the work, and so on. But how does one approach any of those things without the WOH itself?
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Pages