Unique contributions to society
Find a Conversation
| Thu, 10-19-2006 - 4:12pm |
In another thread, the "unique" contributions of SAHM's were alluded to but it wasn't stated what they are. Let's play a game and find out what they are. First, pretend that as of tomorrow, all moms SAH and detail what will be missing from society then pretend that all moms go to work and detail what will be missing from society. I'm really curious as to what people think a world without SAHM's orWOHM's would look like.
If all the moms who SAH went to work then the library would move story hour to the evening and summer vacation bible school would be held in the evenings so that all kids can attend and not just the kids of SAHM's. Banks would likely shift their hours to later in the day and you'd see more 24 hour stores. I think there would be more home cooking style restaurants too. I think day care centers would improve because of increased demand.
If all moms who WOH suddenly SAH, you'd see fewer service industries around because moms could do things themselves instead of paying for them. The nursing shortage would be more of a shortage. We'd probably have a shortage of teachers too. There'd be fewer government services because there'd be less tax dollars to pay for them. I can't think of anything else right now.

Pages
You would think so; but the thread goes on....
Now I have to go to work, so I can start making my "unique contribution" to society for the day. ;)
So am I, then, but I don't pretend I'm making some "unique" contribution" to society simply by working.
She says that wohms are making a "unique contribution" to society simply by working; therefore, they are doing something "more" than sahms, since everybody takes care of their kids. I was trying to point out that most sahms are actually taking care of their kids during the day when they would be working if they were wohms. So *most* sahms are doing something more. It's not something unique, but then, neither is working.
I'm sure there are sahms who have no kids at home and are sitting around doing nothing all day, but I can't think of any off the top of my head. Most sahms I know go back to work when the kids hit school age, and I believe statistics bear that out. Of course you can tell me all about the exceptions, and that's fine--I can't argue with you about that.
but in this context working (engaging in paid work) is "unique"--sahps, by definition, don't do it, and wohps, by definition, do.
as i said, it doesn't affect the social value of childcare one bit whether it is being performed by a parent or a nonparent. a parent who engages a childcare provider to care for her children is making the same social contribution as a parent who never engages any nonparental childcare. the social value of childcare is embedded in whether it is done--not in who is doing it. when a wohp pulls out her wallet (or whatever) and sees to it that it is done, she is making the same social contribution as she does during those ever-so-rare moments when she does it herself.
this is where all those usual anti-woh rants actually do come into play. (generally--of course you could nitpick exceptions, though i would just have to quote your statement below in response) the childcare provider wouldn't do what she does for free; engaging childcare an economic transation. and what the childcare provider does is not equal to what the sahp does; it is less in that the very existance of the arrangment is entirely dependant on the efforts and will of they child's parent. now, the parent who locks her 2yo in her car in the parking lot while she works her cashier shift *is* failing to make the social contribution of providing care to her child; the parent who engages appropriate childcare during that same shift isn't.
Sabina
Sabina
Oh, life is a glorious cycle of song,
Pages