What is the Real Issue Here?

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-24-2003
What is the Real Issue Here?
72
Sun, 06-01-2003 - 8:56pm
What is the real issue about women working outside the home?? I have a sneaking suspicion that a lot of people in society are angry and upset that women are working at jobs and "competing with men". And that is the REAL source of the anger. It actually has nothing at all to do with people worried about children not having a mom at home, or being in daycare. I feel the real issue is people are upset (especially in these hard economic times) that there are some women out there getting the jobs "that men are supposed to get". But who really wants to admit it? I mean, no one wants to admit to having such bigoted attitudes. So, they claim their concern is really for "the children".

By the way, lots of women HAVE to work and its not a choice. Anyways, not all jobs are that great. Do you really think that a woman working the night shift as a security guard, or working at Wal-Mart checking groceries is just doing so to fulfill her ego or something? come on! Its called SURVIVAL.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-04-2003
Sat, 06-07-2003 - 5:24pm
I don't know - is it possible that his wages were garnished and she wasn't satisified with the attorney she was able to get with that money? In any case, it doesn't matter - he's hired what's widely considered to be the best divorce lawyer in their city, from a firm that I really don't think would be an option for her. And honestly, while I don't agree with people essentially being able to BUY themselves justice, I don't think she's being treated unfairly - in fact, I really think she did herself an injustice by not accepting the fact that she wasn't going to get what she thought she deserved a year ago, and that she was going to have to start supporting their son financially. If, during the course of their marriage, they agreed that she would stay at home, that's one thing. BUT, they're not married anymore, she's an able bodied adult who's fully capable of getting a job. Admittedly, she's been out of the FT workforce for awhile now, so she probably put herself at a disadvantage there. And I doubt she'll ever be able to provide their son with the lifestyle he's had up to this point, (and will pretty much continue to have when he's with his father). But the ex is not another child that has a right to support.

As far as her being a SAHM and being at an advantage for custody, well, in the first place, he's essentially semi retired, so no, any advantage she had there is pretty much gone now. And around here, if both parents want custody of the child, and they've both proven to be responsible, loving parents with plans in place for looking after the child, and neither of them plan to move away, chances are they'll be awarded joint custody, (one week on/one week off, etc). This is what happened with alot of my friends growing up, and this is another thing she's upset about because she assumed the court would automatically give her full custody because she's the mom. This is my point - she assumed ALOT, did not take care of herself financially during the marriage, (and doesn't have the advantage of legal advice from prominent attorney family members, as most people wouldn't), and now she's looking around, completely bewildered wondering what the hell happened. I feel bad for her on one hand, especially since they got married at a time when the message to let your husband take care of you financially was still pretty strong, but on the other hand I have to wonder. Hopefully they'll be able to keep things at least outwardly civil for the sake of their son.
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-04-2003
Sat, 06-07-2003 - 5:47pm
Well, there you go. This woman has had it pretty good for the past 20 odd years. And she's not losing everything now - he's given her the house, she can keep her car that he's paying for, basically anything she needs to take care of the little boy, he's not contesting. She'll be getting child support, extremely generous child support that's enough to give the son everything he needs, but not enough to give her the extra things she's become used to. The bottom line is, she is going to have to work if she wants all the extra things she's used to and personally, I don't see the problem with that. She is an adult, after all. But, I'm biased, because I know I'll have a good job in a couple of years and plan to keep on working after I have a child. To me, the idea of being financially dependent on my spouse is not an attractive option at all, and I wouldn't enjoy the SAH lifestyle, so it's not really an issue.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-21-2001
Sun, 06-08-2003 - 1:09am
Well, then that's ok for you, if it works out that way. It doesn't always. I know you are well-off financially. But, my dad was making $12K a year when my parents divorced, so my mom was pretty much screwed. My sister was in the same situation.

In that situation, I'd be ok. Dh and I make nearly the same amount of money. He makes a little more, but he was in school for 6 of the 7 years of our marriage (and hence, not making a lot of money - BUT, he brought more savings to the marriage because he didn't have college debt). Anyway, the "rule" depends on the sitch and the state.

I once had an argument with a man going through a divorce. His life was "so hard" because he had to pay child support, help pay the mortgage on the house his kids lived in, had to pay rent on his own apartment, and had to pay for dates with his new girl friend. My response "whaaah". "Too bad you have to financially SUPPORT your children."

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-13-2003
Sun, 06-08-2003 - 2:06pm
Well it sounds like she had some very unrealistic expectations and had some not so great legal representation. First of all, there is NO reason why her husband should have been able to hire the big guns and not her, secondly, why is he going to be so much better off than she, especially since he's semi-retired? In an equitable and fair divorce (not to mention an ideal world), both partners ahould be able to maintain an equal standard of living as they had PRIOR to the divorce. Now if the husband went on to become even more successful then of course his standard of living would be higher than hers, but it sounds like this guy isn't out there working much anymore.

No one should expect that there standard of living is going to upgrade after a divorce. That's just dreaming.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-13-2003
Sun, 06-08-2003 - 2:11pm
Very true. If you're making the same or more than your spouse, you can bet your standard of living will slip, because you won't be getting any help sharing the expenses of the household. Even if the husband is making lots of money, lets face it, that same paycheck will now have to support 2 households instead of one, so everyone's standard of living is going to change.

One of those things no one likes to think about but unfortunately, it happens more than we'd like to know, so all women should think about the "what if" of divorce, even if they're sure it could never happen to them.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sun, 06-08-2003 - 9:14pm
You're right, together we make what one private practice attorney would make.

Both of us want to spend as much time as possible with our kids, while each having the opportunity to have a fulfilling career. DH has had offers recently to leave and more than double his salary. But that would seriously impair our family dynamics. Neither of us wants to work killer hours, and the 4 of us like spending time together.

Our compromise is not to have one person with the killer career, and the other person have all of the domestic end. We each like some of everything :)

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

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sun, 06-08-2003 - 9:24pm
I haven't seen my kids since 7:45 am (unless I've had lunch with them) - I can't WAIT to come home and be with them!! Your post sounds a lot like the woman is the only one working the "second shift." DH and I tag team. He reads to them while dinner is on. I throw in laundry after I've hugged and kissed them hello (and into the dryer while DH is helping them brush teeth). I'm never doing laundry as late as 10 pm. I go to the grocery store once a week and do bills once a week. We do end up cleaning up the kitchen most evenings, and laundry 5 days a week. Baths every 2nd or 3rd night.

I love the change of pace. And I have DH and paid house cleaners and a nanny all to help, so I'm not pulling a true second shift, and I know it. Once my kids are older, and have evening activities and homework, I grant you it will get more hectic. But I sure hope to have less physical work (they can bathe themselves) and more sleep!

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

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-20-2001
Mon, 06-09-2003 - 5:47am
I believe you hit on a good one. In America that just couldn't be the reality, could it??? Some countries use religion to keep their women home. And there is a religious movement here in America trying to do just that. Flame suit in place.

Linda

 

Linda - wife, mother, grandmum                     &nb

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 06-09-2003 - 8:26am
ITA.

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

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 06-09-2003 - 12:45pm
I have a friend whose DH has been unemployed for over a year. She is a CPA that has chosen to stay home. They have 3 children-6,4,2 and, for awhile, no insurance. Can you imagine? She has no desire to go back to work. She believes God has called her to stay home and to home school. She even said, at one point, that she should not have to give something she loves because her husband can not find a job. I just do not get it. I could never go without insurance. Ever. If my husband could not get a job and the money was running out, I would get a job. Of course, I work now so it would not be a major life change.

This month they were going to have to make some really hard decisions and she was going to have to go back to work. Two weeks later-she announces she is pregnant. She told me that she guessed that took care of her having to work. I told her that I had gotten job while pregnant. I really do not understand the ideaology behind their actions. Personally, I could never be so tight financially that I was not sure where the next house payment was going. Plus, God never has called me home. I would not be married to a man with cancer if he had.

I love her dearly. They are wonderful people. I just do not understand the stance of staying home despite poverty and no insurance. They are 2 college graduates and they are living on the 10.00 a hour he makes at a temp job. It has really bothered me.

Kristi

"I do not want to be a princess! I want to be myself"

Mallory (age 3)

      &nbs

Pages