"We don 't believe in that [WOHM]"
Find a Conversation
| Mon, 01-09-2006 - 11:31am |
On Friday, as I was driving hom from work, I stumbled across an interview with the wife of the one surviving miner from the collapse in WVa. In the course of the interview, someone asked her if she worked.
Her response was that they don't believe in that. She explained that her husband was very proud of the fact that he was the sole supporter of the family, and that he didn't need her help in supporting them. She explained that they just don't believe in women working after they have kids and husbands, and that they believe her place is at home with the kids.
My heart really goes out to her, and this post isn't about her, but about the sentiment that women shouldn't work because their place is at home. And being a real man, even if it means working in dangerous conditions, long hours, holding two jobs and being a step away from poverty at every turn, means that your wife doesn't work.
I suppose this is the first time that I've heard someone, not a movie character or a character in a book, express this sentiment. I don't understand why anyone would be proud to limit their spouse's potential. Or why be proud that you live right on the poverty line?
If they didn't see the dangers of their POV before, surely that entire community, and even the whole country, has now seen the risk that we talk about on here all the time, the risk that suddenly the SAHM will need to find a way to financially support the family. I wonder if anyone will re-think what they believe in.

Pages
Not her but I think I will say this.
What better foundation are you laying because you are at work?
For me...It was about age. I know children grow up and you have to let go. I wanted my children to be home with me up until age 2. At which time I began to socialize them by putting them in preschool part time. When they were 2 I did 2 days and 3 I did 3 days, etc. I also know that in my line of work I could not have had the time I wanted with my children. My DH and I both had crazy schedules and I didn't think having a nanny or putting them in DC for more than 40 hours per week was good for our family. Everyone is different...that is what this is all about.
<>
For me and my family, I felt the need to be the one at home while my children were younger. I am talking about a moral, religous and family foundation. I never said I could not do it (or that anyone else could not do it) in daycare. *I* felt I could do it better while at home. It is where I felt at the time I belonged. I have never stated that the only way to do it is at home.
<< What better foundation are you laying because you are home?>>
I never stated *better*. I stated I felt that I (meaning me and me alone) could do it better with me at home.
<< This is always really interesting to me. I have found in my life that the moral fiber of most children have had little to do with the work status of their parents. I have also found that most children's level of success has little to do with work status of parents.>>
And once again, please quote me on where I stated this in my post. I have no illusion that my children are somehow "better" b/c I sah. that is the inference that you are making not me. In my dd's class, I cannot tell you whose parents work or whose parents do not work. However, since I felt miserable when I was working, I was not being the best parent I could be. Every stage in my life has been different. Before I had children, I held 3 different jobs. I loved working at most of my jobs. But, once I had my first dd, I did not feel right going back to work. Now I am the ONLY one in my family who has not returned to work right away (except for my sister). We never talk about it at all. It is just a given that eveyrone feels differently.
<< But I really do want to know what foundation you think you are laying? Could you explain.>>
Read above statement.
Pages