"We don 't believe in that [WOHM]"

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-11-2005
"We don 't believe in that [WOHM]"
2078
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

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003

I agree. I prefer my dd not wear anything ultra revealing (not allowed at school anyway), I am fairly lenient in letting her express herself with clothing and such.

dj

Dj

"Now when I need help, I look in the mirror" ~Kanye West~

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003

Who are you to judge what is ridiculous though? I dont know what era you went to high school, but I look back at my yearbook and have to laugh at some of the stuff we wore in the 80's. Its a totally normal, harmless way to express oneself and experiment a bit. Certain a safer way to express oneself than other avenues.

dj

Dj

"Now when I need help, I look in the mirror" ~Kanye West~

Avatar for ahlmommy
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
I am sorry but a 14, 15, 16, 17 yr old girl has no business walking around in daisy dukes and a cleavage baring tank top. That is ridiculous. Yeah..I look back at my high school yearbook from the 80's and laugh...I look at my DD yearbook and SHUDDER. It amazes me what a parent will allow their children to wear. I don't like the baggy pants either on boys. Boys walking around with their underwear hanging out of the top..in school or any place for that matter....again RIDICULOUS. If my DD wants to wear her hair crazy or a weird color...that is fine by me. However walking around looking like a hooker or my son wearing the latest gangsta wear isn't gonna happen....and it is still ridiculous.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003

As the mother of a teen girl, I can understand not wanting my dd to wear ultra revealing clothing. Like I said, it isnt allowed in her school anyway. But things like mini skirts or even tummy baring tops dont bother me outside of school-arent those kind of outfits intended for the young anyway?

As far as the gansta wear, I'm less concerned about what it looks like and more concerned about kids emulating the gansta type lifestyle. Most of these kids have no concept of what a gang really is, and doing stupid things like wearing do-rags in certain *colors* can be downright dangerous in some places. I really dont think a guys underwear showing is that huge of a deal in and of itself though-no worse than seeing a man walking around with "plumbers butt".

dj

Dj

"Now when I need help, I look in the mirror" ~Kanye West~

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Those dimples! They're both gorgeous!
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-04-2005
I meant exactly what pumpkinangel said. I did not explain it well in my first post so I attempted to repharase. I was not "flipping" my statement. And yes, there were plenty of girls who would frequetly talk about SAH. The conversations would go something like this "I love dating X faternity guys. They're all in the B-school and well connected. You just know, so and so is going to do so well that it will be no problem for me to stay home." Kids rarely entered the conversation. There were plenty of girls expecting to be supported and made it known. Those were the ones he found unattractive due to a lack of ambition for anything but being supported in a fashion to which they were accustomed.
Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 12-29-2004
It's only relevant if you think WOH makes people miserable. Maybe you were miserable, and maybe you thought the reason you were miserable was work. But a SAH can be miserable too. Misery is a feeling, not a work status.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-16-2005

No, I still don't understand. That's why I asked if by writing "sah *for herself*" you meant only for herself or in part for herself. You didn't respond to that.

I see the first as very self-indulgent, as in perhaps the husband was against it and they couldn't live on one salary. Or between 9am and 5pm the mother leaves her kids with the nanny and goes shopping everyday of the week.

If a sahm prefers sah because she prefers it to working or if a sahm gets a manicure and massage, I don't see that as sah only for herself since she is caring for her children.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-16-2005

What did you expect him to say after you dated and he fell in love with you? You made it clear to him that you are not one to sah. It's not for you. There's no way you could really expect him ~ after he fell in love ~ to say "on his own" that he still "thought" he wanted a sah wife.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-16-2005

What is "womens power" anyway? LOL. It's so interesting to see what goes on in others' dating lives and marriages. I guess I've taken it for granted that we've had no problem negotiating and compromising on all the issues important to us. It sounds like JJbean had to change a lifetime of her husband's way of "thinking" and was glad that "on his own" he *decided* he didn't real want a sahw. I would never have been able to do that, i.e., change my DH's way of thinking, even if I wanted to!




Edited 1/14/2006 8:31 am ET by tinderbox3

Pages