"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
If an employee is paid *by the job* and not *by the hour/time* then it isn't stealing. Many, many, many employers pay employees to do the job. Time isn't a factor.
And then, if my employer wants to deduct a few cents a day from my wages for the time spent online, then they can pay me OT for the time I spend working through lunch, staying late, and checking emails and answering phone calls at home. Hmmmm, maybe I should bill them for that ...
As long as an employee doesn't abuse internet priveleges, as stated by company/department policy, and does their job well, it doesn't matter to the employer. Which makes it puzzling why it matters to *you*.
Ladies -
To avoid having posts removed and/or this thread closed, please refer to the reminder that was posted here: http://messageboards.ivillage.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=iv-pssahwoh&msg=16508.1&ctx=0
Going forward, continued
<<(I make every effort not to make friends here!) >>
That is QUITE obvious. And it's a shame. Some of my best friendships began on this board. And, get this!, I can even be friends with people whom I vehemently debate. That may be hard for you to believe, but it is true!
"Group daycare is evil, especially for infants. It will prove to be the thalidomide of the 21st century."
Yeah but who cares?
<>
I think all religion is pretty abstract. My 7 y.o. goes to Catholic school. Her nickname is "Sister Meghan". She is so religious. And the funny thing is we are not. We go to mass and everything but we are not really, really religious. She loves learning about religion. She understands the basic concepts (even at 5 she did). She applies what she learns in everyday life. She does not use it negatively but rather positively. If I say, OMG, she will ask me "Mom, would you like me to say OH my Debbie?" If someone is mean to her, she will stte that is "Not the way Jesus wants us to treat each other".
Beleive me, they can learn the basic concepts at a young age.
Learning or comprehending at that age?
PumpkinAngel
Pages