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: 07-26-2006
Sat, 12-02-2006 - 11:59am
What she said was flipped. She said I believe it is best for mom to be at home. Someone came back with so you think that WOH are somehow inferior because they work. That isn't what she said in the post I was referring to. If she has since that post made this statement I haven't seen it. Have you? If she has can you point that post out to me? I am speaking of one of her posts many posts back.
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-08-2006
Sat, 12-02-2006 - 12:04pm

but that IS EXACTLY what she has said. She has purported sah as THE ONLY WAY OF RAISING KIDS.

Carole

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-08-2006
Sat, 12-02-2006 - 12:06pm

did you miss the part where she went on to say that...

wohms are abdicating their parental responsibility...

and that

dcps are raising the children in their care (as are school teachers)....

and that

children of wohms are "suffering needlessly".....

yeah, okay, she said "nothing" direct about wohms....

Nothing to flip here -- those are the things that she has said.

Carole

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-26-2006
Sat, 12-02-2006 - 12:09pm

<>

Well I don't think worrying about an adult woman having a child out of wedlock is a real issue. Not a lot anyone can do about what adults do.

<>

I am not sure what this has to do with anything. In the 50's the teen pregnancy rate was higher than it is today. That is true. However according to this site you posted more of those teens were married when they had these children. Today we have fewer teens pregnant but the vast majority of them aren't married. In the 50's you had about 81 teens pregnant and only 12% of them unmarried. In 2000 you have 50 pregnant and 80% of them unmarried. So if you do the math that is about about 8 unmarried teens pregnant in the 50's and in 2000 you have 40 unmarried teens pregnant. That is NOT an improvement.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-26-2006
Sat, 12-02-2006 - 12:10pm
She may have LATER in this thread. I don't know...I havent seen that. That still doesn't change what she said in the post that I was commenting on.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-26-2006
Sat, 12-02-2006 - 12:12pm

<

wohms are abdicating their parental responsibility...

and that

dcps are raising the children in their care (as are school teachers)....

and that

children of wohms are "suffering needlessly".....

yeah, okay, she said "nothing" direct about wohms....

Nothing to flip here -- those are the things that she has said.>>

Was this after the post that I am referring to? If it was I have no way of knowing what she said AFTER I commented on how someone turned her words around. I am not psychic. I do believe PNJ also stated that SAHM abdicate their responsibilities by SAH. Did you miss that?

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sat, 12-02-2006 - 12:13pm

She has said in other posts that she thinks that kids of WOHMs suffer.

Apart from that, as has been explained a few times now, if you say that SAH is best, it has to be better than something, right? In this case, the only "something" is WOH. I am not sure why you fail to understand that.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-15-2006
Sat, 12-02-2006 - 12:15pm

>>I can only do so much laundry, do so much cooking, cleaning, grocery shopping, and singing of "Itsy bitsy spider" before I want to pull my hair out. For m <<
wow. i'm sorry you feel this is all sah is.

and while woh is important to you,it sounds like a lifestyle may very well be part of it. isn't your part of california a very high col area? unless engineering there is something exclusive to that part of the country like oil is to houston,my priorities would not be tied up in an area i couldn't afford and only htwoh for. that's just me,though.

finally,statistics don't mean a thing to the priceless value some sahms sah for...many sahms mark great impressions because of philanthropy and other outstanding causes that don't require one dime to impress.

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-26-2006
Sat, 12-02-2006 - 12:18pm
I do understand that. However again I think it is better to debate what she said rather than change what she said. It is a lot easier to understand. Not to mention who cares? I mean really...do we all give our children the best? I know without a doubt I don't. I don't think anyone can. So why be offended if you think someone is implying that you aren't doing what is best for your children?
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-26-2006
Sat, 12-02-2006 - 12:19pm
Boy I am glad you aren't a teacher.

Pages