Working for Lifestyle/Extras

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-22-2005
Working for Lifestyle/Extras
3621
Mon, 11-20-2006 - 11:13am

Hi Ladies :)

This is my first time on this debate board and I have been dying to jump into some of the topics, but I feel as though they are sooooo long (one in particular is over 1000 replies, yikes!) that starting my own specific one might work out better.

Anyhow, a recurring theme here seems to be what Moms should and shouldn't be going to work for. It seems some are of the opinion that is OK for Mom to work if she must to pay her bills but NOT if its to afford a nice car, house, good neighborhood. This is considered keeping up with the Johnses (who are they???) and thats bad.

Well, I want to know what in the heck is wrong with a women working to have nice things? I don't mean working and leaving baby in child care 16 hours a day, everyday...thats pretty extreme.

I enjoyed a certain lifestyle before having a child, should I have downsized that lifestyle once baby came so I didn't have to work? What about me *wanting* to maintain a certain lifestyle for myself, my husband, and my child makes me a (a) workaholic or (b) striving to keep up with the Joneses?

Don't some people (like myself) simply enjoy living in a nice place with nice things and want their children to have the same experience?

So please, anyone who thinks a women is wrong for WOH if she is not doing so to financially survive but does it to maintain a certain lifestyle...whats wrong with this?

Thanks all :)

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-09-2006
Fri, 12-01-2006 - 3:38am

<>

Whoopsey!! Aren't you the one who claimed women DON'T have to work?

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-09-2006
Fri, 12-01-2006 - 3:41am
But no one has actually shown anyone really DOES work for just extras as a lifestyle choice. That's simply a claim that's been made and it's been perverted to the point that some even claim wanting to fund college educations for one's children is nothing more than an "extra" with no more meaning or benefit than designer shoes or butt-ugly, over-priced quilted purses.
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-09-2006
Fri, 12-01-2006 - 3:43am
Sure, shoot me down ;)
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 12-01-2006 - 5:14am

"Children need consistency." We do not disagree, but consistency does not preclude othercare.

"If mom is working then she is not the person raising her children."

Can't you see how illogical that is? As the mother *I* choose my child's environment and who cares for my child and how. By your above logic, your dh is not raising his kids. Would you really claim that your dh has no influence in your children's lives? Lastly, if you really believe that, then I am guessing that kids should also not go to school, or how do you resolve that

"There is a large problem with our youth in our country and I think it stems, in a large way, from mother being out of the home and in the work place when she doesn't have to be."

So, please do not claim that you are just saying SAH is what is best for you. You have repeatedly made statements that strongly imply that you generally think it is better for kids to have a SAHM. Also, if mother's presence with the children is so crucial and important, what difference does it make whether or not she *has* to work? If she is away, the children are likely to suffer, according to your argument.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 12-01-2006 - 5:16am
You have yet to explain WHY mother has to be the one who provides sole care for the children. So far you have given me no reason to think anything other it being vanity.
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-08-2006
Fri, 12-01-2006 - 5:30am

except that people differ on what those "extras" are now, don't they?

Carole

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 12-01-2006 - 5:42am

What I said was, "...it is explicitly general and sweepingly so, " a mom," "mother." "Explicitly" here means "clearly" or "unequivocally."

I am aware that I need not share your opinion. I was simply making sure I understood you correctly, namely that you believe that ALL mothers should preferably SAH. Apparently, I understood you very well. Your assurance that you also believe women have the right to WOH only seems to mean that you would not want to make it a law or something that mothers MUST SAH. That is certainly reassuring, but if you are so convinced that women ought to SAH, why should any woman be allowed to WOH?




Edited 12/1/2006 5:51 am ET by sild
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 12-01-2006 - 5:47am
If it is bad for the kids not to have their own mother raising them, how does it matter why she is not doing so?
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-08-2006
Fri, 12-01-2006 - 5:50am

okay, I'm ROFLOL a bit here....let me try to make some sense of this because you seem to be saying two very different things.

<>

LOL! How could I NOT be raising my child? EVEN when they were in dc (we're LONG since that now) they were HOME for 128 HOURS per week. WE were the ones clothing them, feeding them, giving them a roof over their heads, extended family nearby, etc.

My dcp's would have looked at me cross-eyed if I even intimated that THEY were raising my children OR any of the children in their care. They had THEIR own children to raise.

<>

Good for you. I've been a consumer in that industry for 15 years -- with 3 children.

<>

All of that works the same if mom woh too.

<>

i'm not sure what proof you want. How about the PROOF that 70% of families in the US are dual-income? It certainly can't be true that ALL of them could cut out mom's wages and survive.

Hell, how about me? I was married - dual income. Then i got divorced and became a single income family. I make a fairly decent salary, but just not enough to cover all of the bills that need to be paid. So, we NEVER could have cut that salary OUT when we were raising our kids.

Also, i'm not sure WHY we should have! I LOVE my job. I LOVE to work. I LOVE raising kids and yes, I've done a damn good job of it.

<< Then I met up with my husband and it all changed. I found my purpose in life. I found my familial background wasn't the crock I thought it had always been. I soon grew to understand why the old ways of raising families is the best way. >>

I'm glad it was the best way for you. In hindsight, the fact that i kept my job was a g-dsend which had enabled us to keep floating as a one income family (yes, in an area where it takes two to just make ends meet). When I married my first husband nothing changed in that way. I always had at least a dual-purpose in life -- raise kids AND be a teacher -- and i didn't (and still don't, LOL!) see anything wrong with that.

Interestingly, I think that MY way of raising my family was the best way for US.

Y<>

doubt it. 70% of moms woh. there is just NO way that more than 1/2 of them are working for extravagent "extras" and not to help pay bills. Of course, what often gets missed is it may be that the family doesn't need her entire paycheck to make those ends meet -- so often there is extra disposable income. That still doesn't mean that she doesn't need to work.

<>

Yes, and they LOVE that I'm a teacher. They're excited to hear about my day and happy when I can help them with their homework, projects, reports, etc. Yes, at 15 and 11 (and a 12 year old non-verbal special needs child) they absolutely are MORE than fine and have excelled. Of course, that could be because I consider myself a very good parent.

<>

different strokes, i guess. My mom went to work when I was 13. I loved it. She enjoyed her work and I had a bit more responsiblity. She's still employed in the same position. She has encouraged all of her daughters (all three of us woh) to be WHO we are today.

<>

great for you. what do you think would happen to YOUR COL if we all moved out there, LOL! We stayed her because our family is close by. When we grew up we had no extended family here. Somehow, all three of us daughters settled within 5-15 minutes of each other. Our children have grown up with cousins as their friends (something we never had). Oh, and we love living in CT and New England. I don't see any of us leaving this area anytime soon.

<>

must be nice. I don't anticipate earning 6 figures as a teacher, LOL!

<>

why is it so hard to see that this is YOUR dream? and that other women have THEIR dreams. I always wanted to be a teacher. So my hubby helped me out. It suited BOTH of us and our family. He always made more than me, but it was my salary that closed the gap.

<>

re-read your posts. It comes through loud and clear.

Carole

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-08-2006
Fri, 12-01-2006 - 7:39am

<>

LOL! Thanks for that. However, all I've done is quote your words back to you with any comments I needed to make. Of course, if you don't like my posting style you are free to put me on Ignore...Also, I have trouble remembering exactly what I was responding to, so it's easier for me to have the quote right there. Different strokes, right?

<>

yes, xh owns his own company too . but alas, different companies are run differently. He had no choice but to STILL put in 50+ hours per week -- and that IS with good planning on his part relative to the business that he owns.

<>

Actually, the consistency does not have anything to do with having mom at home. Consistency is the FACT that children have a mom and a dad and, barring anything unusual or drastic, they have PARENTS there. Didn't you know who your mom was even after she went to work?

<>

Mine did more than adjust. Their childcare situations enhanced their lives. They didn't "lose" anything for that experience. Bottom line is that WE were/have been/are the CONSISTENCY.

<>

So, what do you consider a luxury or an extra? Because it certainly isn't anything that I own, LOL! I have an 11 year old honda accord with 166+ thousand miles that needs to last 2-3 more years. I've lived in my home for 16 years. We do vacation once per summer for a week.

<.

of course, raising kids involves much more than any dcp can give. I AM (and all the wohms who do a GOOD job) raising my kids just as much as you are.

<>

actually, NO. I gave you my experience to let you know that I was not some new parent with a 2 month old who had no actual experience. And I'm STILL trying to figure out WHY SHOULD YOUR DREAM (OF BEING A SAHM) ALSO BE MY DREAM? Why am I not allowed to structure a life for me and my children in a way that makes sense to US? Is it your contention that no matter how good a job I have done, that it will never be as good as what you've done with your kids -- because I would beg to differ mightily on that.

<>

Okay, but i honestly have no idea what you are talking about. I do like sarcasm though.

<.

Not at all. I'm suggesting that the causes of why those children commit crimes goes WAY deeper than any of us can fathom. If you think it's all done by kids of wohms -- now THAT's crazy.

<< There is a large problem with our youth in our country and I think it stems, in a large way, from mother being out of the home and in the work place when she doesn't have to be. >>

No. It has to do with parents who abdicate their parental responsibility to raise their kids well, teach them right from wrong, provide consequences, structure and firm boundaries. It has to do with parents who don't instill morals and values and compassion for others -- NONE of which has ANYTHING to do with whether mom sah or woh.

<>

fortunate? you're kidding me, right? how about my good and decent children are the DIRECT result of all the love, time and attention (along with tight structure and boundaries) they've been given from me. I won't even address the "blinded" part. That's just too ridiculous to comprehend.

<>

WHOEVER said that i was the ONLY good influence? However, as their MOTHER, I am their MAIN influence. Have been since day 1.

<>

Um, yeah. I do know what goes on. I'm very close with my kids and we talk all the time. Do I know every little detail -- No. But I'm sure you don't either because if you do then you're WAY, WAY too involved in your teenagers' lives.

Carole

Pages