SAH IS HARMFUL!!!

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-12-2002
SAH IS HARMFUL!!!
2888
Thu, 07-08-2004 - 11:32am

Or at least this woman thinks so.

Okmrsmommy-36, CPmom to DD-16 and DS-14

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Thu, 07-22-2004 - 7:21am
Actually, yes there IS a stereotype that women can't hack it in male dominated profesions and will hightail it back to female dominated ones after realizing they can't do it. This has nothing to do with babies. It applies to women with no kids as well.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 07-22-2004 - 8:18am
My Mom was a teacher for 46 years. Your "time off" is not "all that". Teachers have particularily inflexible scheduals during the school year and there is alot of responsibility and obligation outside the core classroom hours. All the teachers I know use daycare even for school age children. You seem to be describing a time freedom that would be more reasonably attributable to students actually, who are responsible only for themselves. Or maybe to teaching assistants. Are you sure you're an actual teacher?
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 07-22-2004 - 8:19am
And as I said...you are in no position to expect it.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 07-22-2004 - 8:27am
Transition from engineer to teacher = male manoever.

Apparently, you aren't too good at rocket science.

In fact - the whole "retrain for new profession" thing is a male thing. If men don't like their jobs, or otherwise want some other scenario, they are willing to suck it up and do what it takes to retrain for something they might like better. I know all kinds of men who've done this. Apparently they feel it is important not to just ditch their personal responsibilities to support themselves and their families financially. Very few women bother. Most women, if they don't like their jobs or otherwise want some other scenario - just quit at the first possible moment. The female version of "retrain" tends to equate to "find some unskilled thing to do" followed by "make very little money" followed by "try hard to convince people that they are doing something impressive and admirable".

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 07-22-2004 - 8:30am
Actually...no there isn't. Its far too rare, always has been. There is no stereoptype because it doens't, and never has, happend. Women don't hightail it back to female dominated professions...because that would require retraining. Women really suck at bothering to do that. They just quit to stay home with babies. Women don't retrain. They just quit. Men retrain.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 07-22-2004 - 8:34am
<>

How, when most of the men are the primary bread winners and most women are all to happy to have it be that way. Again, the onus is on women. "Get degree and work for 3-5 yrs before quitting to have babies" does not equate to women doing their part. And you are a prime example. Oh I know...you have a million good reasons why *you* had to stay home. Whatever. Noone really cares. It was what it was. How many years did your husband "take off" to allow you to persue YOUR career and education. Oh yeah...none.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 07-22-2004 - 8:38am
Yeah...I'm confused.

1)women aren't anymore likely to quit with babies than men.

2)in order to get rid of the stereoptype men have to adopt female behaviour and start quitting with babies far more often.

Probalby looking for a way to explain how the negative effects of her typical female behaviour to take like a decade or so out of the workforce to stay with babies and accomodate her husbands career, while he worked and studied without break - wasn't "her fault". The negative effects weren't caused by that - but by some male colleague of hers (not her husband of course) who DIDN'T take a decade off with HIS babies. Whatever.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 07-22-2004 - 8:42am
They do. An employer who figures hes looking at someone destined to spend 25 yrs in a profession...just loves it. That would describe most men afterall. Alot of people actually plan to retire after time in like that. Maybe even the boss himself!!!!!An employer who figures hes looking at someone destined to quit in 5 years to stay home with babies, doesn't love it so much. Face it. You loose.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 07-22-2004 - 8:47am
Because Grimal didn't quit after like 5 yrs to stay with babies...the employer MIGHT, thanks to her responsible behaviour... be ever so slightly less inclined to look at the next young female employee as someone who is probably going to quit in a few years to stay home with babies - and therefore not worth as much hr investment as her male counterpart. He might be some tiny bit more inclined to figure he has a quarter century worth of professional dedication to work with in that woman...much as he does with the male colleague. Every little bit helps. Of course if she quits in 5 years to stay with babies and all his effort to keep her is wasted...all Grimals influence will be gone and he'll judge (rightly) that overall you just can't depend upon those women to demonstrate any good degree of professional comittment.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 07-22-2004 - 8:50am
Her colleagues are mostly female remember. They have woh husbands who make lots more money and they really don't have to worry their pretty little heads about any consequences. Why...little old them? Don't be silly. Their darling husbands are so sweet as to allow them to work for their own entertainment if they so choose...but it certainly isn't required or expected of them!

Pages