WOH/Kids/Feminism: WDYT?
Find a Conversation
| Tue, 02-08-2005 - 9:06am |
Okay, let's debate something else. One morning a few months ago, I was crabby to DH about having to get ready for work. DH said, "Well, if you don't want to go to work, quit!"
Later that day, I told him I was just venting, and then I told him some of the reasons I really do like WOH. One reason was something to the effect that I wanted to WOH as part of at-home feminism for our DD's. He said he had no idea what I was talking about.
I thought about it some and decided that although this is a heartfelt idea for me, it's still fuzzy. I suppose I meant that I want to show my DDs how to live independently of a man, in the sense of income, ability to make one's way in the world, and so on, even if they choose marriage & kids. My feelings of pride in my own mom, who was a WOH mom, come into it, too.
Caution: I don't mean in any way to suggest anything the least bit negative about SAH moms. That's not what this is about. Nor do I mean to suggest that anyone has to WOH to teach their kids feminist or gender neutral values. That's not what this is about, either.
Do you think there's any value in WOH as part of raising kids? Please help me clarify my thinking.
Sabina

Pages
I find it highly amusing that you continue misrepresenting what I have said. To recap- *again*- a *good* education *is* necessary, but a good education (!)~In a school/district in the area of your preference is *not*. ~(!) You keep taking the first part of my statement and ignoring the rest, blatantly misquoting and misrepresenting. Or are you just being contentious because you enjoy an argument/debate? *curious*
Wytchy
If per capita income is $14k, a family of four would have an average income of $56k.
While a couple without children would have an income of $28k, they'd have commensurately lower expenses. Also, as I've said elsewhere, I'd take risks with two adults that I'd never take with dependent children.
Hmmm- and there is nowhere in a low COL area where there are no factories etc. thatt is hospitible to athsmatics? Bull----. And where did I say *anything* about medical situations??? You really are reaching here.
Wytchy
Again, you are not grasping the point of the reference. The post in which I was responding to was trying to compare living on 37,000 with a 350,000 ins payout to living on 12,000 with a 100,000 payout. While there *are* places where one can live on 37,000, I doubt there is anywhere one can do so with a family of 4 under the national poverty level. *That* was the point of reference. Understand now?
Wytchy
Yup, we are now living on much more than that.
Okmrsmommy-36, CPmom to DD-16 and DS-14
And just where did I claim that anything was "always possible"? Where did I suggest that anyone "should" do any given thing?
Wytchy
Wouldn't you agree that the term "comfortable" and it's derivative, "comfortably", are fairly subjective terms?
Maybe you don't see what they've described as comfortable. . but maybe those living that lifestyle DO see it as comfortable.
What do you define as "comfortable"?
I would consider safety a need. However, again, there are places where schools are considered lacklustre that *are* safe, in decent areas- not *great* areas, but safe ones that are far from what you describe where parents don't consider the schools to be providing a *good* education.
Wytchy
Funny- most people I know around here consider it reasonable. Would they try to minimize it? Sure, but it's not like they'd consider a home that far out out of the question either. In fact, many people around here work in the city and want the lifestyle/cost that the country/further 'burbs offer, so they actively *look* for places that far out.
Wytchy
Pages