SAHM's place in a household
Find a Conversation
| Sun, 05-30-2004 - 4:17pm |
They don't know me well enough and I just listened but I only do 60% of the housework and almost no cooking. My dh does almost all the shopping and takes the preschooler and baby and he likes to cook. He also works a job and earns a 6 figure salary occasionally doing overtime. He does all lawn and garbarge stuff. He also bathes both the kids. I do everything else plus the bills and if we have problems with anyone about anything my dh likes me to handle it since I can pit-bull anyone and calling the attorney general or the BBB is something I am familar with. I only mention it because these women did say their dh's were the ones to take care of business conflicts and the bills.
This got me thinking what do people consider a sahm role in the house to be? Obviously these women think in order to stay home and do your share, perhaps to make up for not bringing home a pay check, you do almost everything and if you don't you are obviously lazy. I have always thought of sahm as being more for the kids and me. My main concern is doing things with my kids as a family and showing them a good/educational time with their environment. It's really not to make my dh's life easier nor mine but if it happens anyway great. My dh married me for the person I am, not for what I could do to make his life easier. He would never think of degrading me nor threatening me over houswork which is one thing that alot of women in my playgroup said their dh's did.
So what is a sahm role or job duties in your personal opinion? Do you feel a person staying home should have to do more in order for it to be "fair" to the person working?

Pages
Jenna
ROFL - so I guess I have a child/big brother relationship with my father? He NEVER took off work for those mundane things.
Both my dd's are independent. "ME DO IT!" was dd#2's second sentence. "I did it" was her first. While I do watch my kids play a lot (I find how they develop and how their minds work just fascinating), it's unusual for me to do the playing. Play is preparation for life and at it's best when it's kid directed. Games, of course, are another animal. They require partners to play.
The closest we can get to a marthon play session is when dd wants to do improv on the piano. She likes me to play the base while she works out the melody but even that is unlikely to go for more than 30 minutes at a stretch.
What time off is NOT for is my asking DH to take off for something I could very well (and damn well better) do myself because I'M NOT WORKING. Don't you get it?
If you don't HAVE to, why would anyone in their right mind take a day off to take care of their kid when their freakin' wife is home to do it?
Oh, and by the way, I broke both of my arms when I was little. Sure, it's painful at first, but I didn't see my dad taking time off work to sit with me. My MOM was there to do it. That's a benefit of having a SAHM.
The last time I spent hours a day playing with a child on a regular basis - I was a child.
My brain has since then evolved into that of an adult. Which means, it can't be enterained and engaged by the same things that entertain and engage the mind of a young child - certainly NOT for hours a day. Fascinated as I was by the goings on of my own children, I never found it necessary to engage in play with them for hours a day in order to appreciate them or to interact with them. And my fascination with the child never translated into a fascination with the childlike persuits that fascinated them. I assume parents who do this have a strong deisre to monopolize the child's time and I don't view that as a healthy parenting perspective. Let the child be a child for heavens sake, and let the tots positively ignore you for hours on end instead. Let them direct their own play and develop their own interests.
Pages