SAH/WOH--extramarital affairs
Find a Conversation
SAH/WOH--extramarital affairs
| Tue, 02-15-2005 - 12:54pm |
I was just at the gym this morning and overheard a conversation between two women on treadmills who were discussing/debating as to whether married sahms were any more or less likely to have affairs than married wohms.
I thought it would be interesting to hear your thoughts on this.

Pages
Edited 2/26/2005 9:36 am ET ET by texigan
I don't know. What are you getting paid for it?
Whether or not you "do for" anyone, it doesn't change the fact that unless you are living off money you made prior to SAH, you are financially dependent on your dh's income. Why that's something to get your knickers in a twist over is a mystery.
Then maybe you should have gotten the context before jumping in.
I think she did have the context correct. She was saying that if a family does not have a sahp, they have a couple of choices. One is to do the work the sahp would do themselves, or hire it out. The sahp is providing a valuable service.
When I quit my job to sah, I was concerned about this very issue. Not making my own money. Dh pointed out that we were paying $1000/mo in daycare costs, $400/mo for our housekeeper, the $10/day I was spending on lunches out, plus we ate out a couple of times per week. He was more than happy to pay me to provide those services. So, each month, I EARN $1400, which he happily pays. It's about half of what I earned woh, but I'm happy with it. I'm not buying the lunches and my clothing spending has drastically been reduced.
Nick
I know exactly what the context of what I was jumping in was.
The thread started out with someone saying that it would be very stupid for a SAHM to have an affair and "bite the hand that feeds them".
That was followed by a thread stating that it is not exactly biting the hand that feeds you because the SAHP also provides services to the WOHP, and then listed some of those services.
You then jumped in and stated that aside from childcare none of the things on the list were things that you had to pay someone else to do.
I then replied that it did not matter whether or not those things had to be paid for or not it was still providing a service.
Very well said. You'd think it was a scandal or shameful or something. Earlier in this thread, someone (I think PNJ, but can't swear to it) made some statement about "spending *his* money" (emphasis mine) and any man that would put up with it as being a sucker for letting her. Amazingly to me, the comment went completely unchallenged.
Granted, I've never been married, but really, in a true, healthy marriage *is* there such a thing as "his" money or "hers"? Aren't ALL the assets of both partners the property of both partners? I mean outside the context of a divorce proceeding. In a marriage that will actually last and be worthy of the name, aren't the assets belonging to each? In a marriage where the choice between both partners involves one of them SAH, how does the other partner legitimately claim ownership of the money (over all possessive claims of the unemployed partner)?
I know I wasn't surprised the author of the comment made the comment--it was par for the course for whomever made the statement (and again, I think it was PNJ, but can't swear to it at the moment)...but that no one ELSE challenged it was a surprise to me.
anyway, guess this was just my very longwinded way of agreeing with your point here.
Karen
"A pocketknife is like a melody;sharp in some places,
Pages