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

Avatar for cl_annieb67
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Mon, 12-29-2003 - 3:51pm

I thought you were a WAHM?

"There in the sunshine are my highest aspirations. I close my eyes, feel their beauty and follow where they lead."

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-08-2003
Mon, 12-29-2003 - 3:51pm
huh?

<<<"eliminating childcare expenses">>> how could this be a benefit, unless childcare expenses would have exceeded earnings? and as a sometimes sah and sometimes pt-wm, i'm wondering how many people come out ahead by this; when i sah i incur additional costs from paying for additional activities and events for my children.

<<<"maintaining the home, running errands...chauffering the children...being home for repairmen or workers...taking the children to the park, beach, museums, library">>> who doesn't? are you saying that you imagine that the homes of dual-income parents aren't maintained? their errands aren't run? their repairment aren't let in? their children are deprived opportunities to enjoy local amenities? puh-leese.

<<<"cooking more">>> isn't there an entire current subthread about how this isn't true?

<<<"freeing up time for their working spouses...cleaning the home">>> at least a dozen posters who have gone toe-to-toe with me about how they are sah to care for their children, not to clean their houses and run their dh's errands, as well as a general sentiment whenever this subject is broached, beg to differ.

<<<"volunteering at their children's schools">>> over two years, i've seen a pretty even 50:50 division at my dd's school, and if the school didn't allow sahps to bring siblings (some parents actually fantasize that they can tutor children who need reading help while keeping a toddler from interrupting the other children; it's fascinating and very, very wrong), no doubt the numbers would sway in favor of the wohps.

<<<"having more time to read to kids">>> and the magic difference between "parental reading" and "dcp reading" would be???? more to the point, as one of two parents who read to their children daily and often *and* as much as we would, what benefit would there be to have more time that we wouldn't use? and how does having more time to read benefit sahps who don't at all or rarely read?

<<<"being able to stay home with a sick child without juggling a work schedule or appointments">>> and the magic difference between "non-juggled" sick-child care and "juggled" sick-child care would be???

i'm not agreeing with the op's premise, but this is nothing but another effort to elevate elements of just about every parent's everyday life to some sort of (semi- the disclaimers are inevitable) exclusive sah-dom. most of what you list here is part and parcel of my family's *everyday* life whether i'm sah or working, because this is what it takes to live it and what we've chosen to make part of it. adding such marvelous distinctions as "without having to take time off work" doesn't make any of this something different than it is "with having to take time off work." it's wrong and wrong and wrong and wrong for you to try to co-opt these things as some sort of sah-specific bundle.

Avatar for tickmich
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 12-29-2003 - 4:04pm
Great post!
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-29-2002
Mon, 12-29-2003 - 4:11pm
Then you are essentially agreeing that there are families and circumstances where a SAHP could significantly contribute to the family income by working but actually helps the family more effectively by SAH? Because that is what I am saying and was certainly true for us and our circumstances. Dh has never made a huge salary, never will. My currently salary definitely makes the difference in terms of what we can afford and how....my potential salary would always have been a significant amount of our total income and definitely a difference in our lifestyles and what we could afford. We always managed on dh's salary, had good housing, plenty of food, able to go out once in a while and take the occasional trip...but it was never a luxury salary and was probably below your definition of required income. Nevertheless, my being at home for several years gave the family as a whole significant benefits, benefits that far outweighed the lower standard of living we had at that time.


Laura

Avatar for 1969jets
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 12-29-2003 - 4:13pm
I think the entire point is that not every mother who is AH would better thier kids lives by working. Many women in my neighborhood have husbands who earn enough money so that they can afford a nice lifestyle. In our case we have a big house, 2 nice cars, vacations, college accounts, retirement accounts, and extra spending money. Our life is happy and relaxed. We are a close family AND we have some of the nice material things in life.

If I were to go back to work ft and earn more money how would that make my kids lives that much better?

Jenna

Avatar for 1969jets
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 12-29-2003 - 4:16pm
That's just not true. Women can be capable of making money, but not NEED more money. There is truly a point where more just more, not necessarily better.

Jenna

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 12-29-2003 - 4:18pm
Oh geez another thing we have in common.............

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

Avatar for 1969jets
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 12-29-2003 - 4:24pm
And on top of that when I return to work in the fall it will be for less money than I would be capable of earning.

I will work from 9-3 for dh and his partner and be home when my kids get home from school. That is worth more to us than having me go out and earn the most money possible.

Jenna

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-19-2003
Mon, 12-29-2003 - 4:48pm
I agree. Most of those benefits do not apply to SAHMs exclusively.
Avatar for mygriffin
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-28-2003
Mon, 12-29-2003 - 4:54pm
YOU are the one who keeps pointing out that the discussion at hand is about benefits to our *KIDS* right *NOW.*

And in the same breath, you say "Um am I not allowed to see benefits to anyone but my kids in my working?"

Huh!!!!?????

Pages