Which came first, the title or the SAHW?

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-21-2003
Which came first, the title or the SAHW?
1695
Fri, 12-19-2003 - 9:04am
Last night I attended my husband's work Christmas party. I sat with the CEO, CFO, CTO, COO (Chief operations officer, I didn't know that acronym, I had to ask), Creative Director, Marketing Director and their wives. Near the end of the evening it was just we wives chatting mostly about kids. I made the observation that even though all the wives were intelligent, educated and accomplished women, not a single one (except me), woh. They are all SAHM's.

Any thoughts on why that might be? I have my own opinion but I'd like to hear from everyone else first. Do you think they sah because of their husbands jobs or their husbands have their jobs because the wives stay home? Or doesn't it matter?

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-21-2003
Sat, 12-27-2003 - 5:18pm
I disagree.

If that were the case, why aren't all the sahms pulling out all the research touting how kids of sahm's are just as advantaged as those of wohm's?

Think about it, the answer will come to you.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sat, 12-27-2003 - 5:54pm
I see you're into revisionist history. Many studies HAVE been referenced by the SAHMs on this board within the context of this debate.

Pretending that it isn't true won't make it untrue; it only destroys your credibility on this point.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-21-2003
Sat, 12-27-2003 - 6:44pm
LOL! And your saying that I my credibility is destroyed doesn't make THAT true either! Just your opinion, for what it's worth.

Think what you like, I know why some people feel the need to back up their opinions with any available ammunition they can scrounge for. Because they have to.

Oh, and I'd like to see those referenced studies by the SAHM's in this debate. I must have missed them.

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-16-2003
Sat, 12-27-2003 - 7:16pm
>>If that were the case, why aren't all the sahms pulling out all the research touting >>how kids of sahm's are just as advantaged as those of wohm's?


That's true, I have only seen one person post research in defense of SAHPs. Personally, I don't need to read a bunch of studies to decide what is best for my kids. Survey studies aren't that accurate because they can't isolate all the facotrs just give a generalization. So, no study can tell me what is best for MY children. Only a parent can say what is going to work for their child. And I know that for my 2 boys me SAH is what they need right now.


Powered by CGISpy.com 

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Sat, 12-27-2003 - 8:08pm
Especially in the case of the well educated but horrifying Hussein brothers, I'd say the fault is ENTIRELY their dad's. If mom had tried to do anything about it, dad would have had her shot.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Sat, 12-27-2003 - 8:09pm
Here's what I, a sahm, scrounge...er.. posted just yesterday.

http://messageboards.ivillage.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=iv-pssahwoh&msg=12653.730

There isn't alot out there that supports sahms these days. I can only speculate on why.

W

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sat, 12-27-2003 - 8:16pm

No

Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-16-2003
Sun, 12-28-2003 - 12:27am
Oh yes I do agree...I just sit here and laugh and wonder HOW or rather WHY some respond to her as if she were serious! Ahhh well we all are different aren't we.
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-16-2003
Sun, 12-28-2003 - 12:31am
ummm I don't see it as entirely their father's fault...it goes farther back than that. Afterall their father was only folllowing how HE was raised...and probably HIS father was going by how HE was raised...in essence you'd have to go all the way back to the dawn of time in order to place the blame. The only thing that can truely be said is that inspite of (or despite) all of their education they didn't learn that they could have changed things had they WANTED to.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sun, 12-28-2003 - 5:45am
Wow, again with the revisionist history; is there some reason you can't seem to quote or paraphrase accurately?

<>

The above statement is an EXTREMELY misleading representation of what I ACTUALLY said, which was that your insistence that NO SAHMs presented evidence from studies to support their debates here (a provably untrue statement, as sweetswah has already shown) destroyed your credibility ON THAT POINT. I made absolutely no claim whatsoever as to your credibility in any other thread, point, aspect, manner, etc. Simply on THIS point.

And when my claim that you are wrong is proven, as sweetswah has done, it no longer becomes opinion, but fact. You are wrong. And your insistence that you are not wrong, destroys your credibility ON THIS POINT. Again...fact. Because it's not my opinion that you have no credibility with me ON THIS POINT; it's a fact you have no credibility with me ON THIS POINT, and it was your insistence that an untruth was fact that destroyed it.

Pages