Jump to content

Menu

Is SAHM/W no longer a valid life choice?


Moxie
 Share

Recommended Posts

If it's not personally fulfilling to be a SAHM (as it wasn't for me), then why not change?  I did and it made both my life and my family's life considerably better.

 

As said before, when one is in their niche, the world benefits.  Perhaps I should add the family usually benefits too.

 

It's the same thing for anyone working and not finding fulfillment.  If they can change, do it!  If they think they can't, try looking at it from all angles and perhaps getting others to look at it too - perhaps it can be done somehow.  It's worth trying.

 

None of this is being judgmental.  It's trying to encourage round pegs in round holes and square pegs in square holes.  Any type of peg can be terrific (or bad) at raising children.

 

You know, not everyone can just *poof*  make major changes in their lives to make them more fulfilling.  Sometimes people go through periods of doing what they  have to do without regard to their own personal fulfillment.  Sometimes those periods are short and sometimes they are long. 

 

I'm happy for you - for anyone who has been able to pinpoint a way to personal fulfillment that also happens to be what's best for the rest of the family.  Discontented parents (mothers or fathers) aren't living in a vacuum, where their decisions affect only themselves. Many, many men work at jobs they hate and feel trapped in, but they have a family to feed and no opportunity to make changes.  Sure, sometimes creative thinking will help people find a solution, but for some people, that is simply not enough. 

 

In the meantime, when people are feeling personally unfulfilled, it can be helpful if they stop and think about why they are doing what they are doing.  During difficult periods of homeschooling, I had to buck myself up many times, reminding myself why I'd jumped on this crazy train and that at some point I would be done and ready to move on to something else. 

 

I think but am not sure that this is what Jodi Sue is talking about. Or sort of, anyway.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it's not personally fulfilling to be a SAHM (as it wasn't for me), then why not change?  I did and it made both my life and my family's life considerably better.

 

As said before, when one is in their niche, the world benefits.  Perhaps I should add the family usually benefits too.

 

It's the same thing for anyone working and not finding fulfillment.  If they can change, do it!  If they think they can't, try looking at it from all angles and perhaps getting others to look at it too - perhaps it can be done somehow.  It's worth trying.

 

None of this is being judgmental.  It's trying to encourage round pegs in round holes and square pegs in square holes.  Any type of peg can be terrific (or bad) at raising children.

 

This is not directed at your specific situation, but a jump off of your first thought (red).  I think it is easy for humans to rationalize that what they want to do is better for everyone involved.  I think, often, we say, "well, I'd be grumpy doing x, so it will be better if I do y" when often the solution that would be better is if we generally stopped being grumpy about doing x.  Again, not saying this is you, just responding to the idea.

 

As for why not change if something's not fulfilling?  Because sometimes the fulfillment of one's self is not the most important thing.  I mean, what if we all operated as if our own fulfillment were the impetus for doing things?  Following to its logical conclusion, at least in my house we'd not have school a lot of days, I'd not wipe a toilet or clean up vomit, etc, etc.  Applying it elsewhere, that would mean the breadwinner simply quits their job because they aren't doing "fulfilling" work.  It's not as if everyone who is doing a certain vocation is "following their dreams" to personal fulfillment.  That's where the idea of first-world perspective and decadence comes in.

 

Here's an example in reverse:  if a mom got her personal fulfillment from homeschooling and pulled her kids out of school because she wasn't fulfilled with them in school, that would be a horrible reason to homeschool (IMO).  It doesn't take their needs into consideration at all, right?  So should she be upset and complaining and depressed because if she's not homeschooling her kids?  What if a mom got her fulfillment from  having a lot of children and her husband did not want them?  What if someone who found staying at home personally fulfilling would do better for the family if they joined the workforce?  If my DH decided staying at home with the kids was personally fulfilling and he said, "well why not change it up because I'm a square peg in the round hole of the workforce" our family would be in deep carp.  It would totally upset our family's apple cart, and someone would have to go do very unfulfilled work in the gap, or else we'd end up going hungry.  So, honestly, I really know very few people who operation on the "if I'm not fulfilled I'm going to do something else until I am."

 

So it's not as simple as just changing things up for the sake of fulfillment and saying "this isn't fulfilling to me so I'm going to do something else".

 

I don't believe it is fitting any peg into any hole.  I think it is about mindset and attitude more than anything.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, there is nothing new about the fact that some people view domestic duties as drudgery / unfulfilling, whether they have to do them or not.  What has changed is that today, it is considered valid (in most circles) to make the other choice.  "How can you do that to your children, you selfish woman" is more of a fringe view, whereas it used to be rather mainstream.

 

And now SAHMs are sometimes finding themselves in the position WOHMs were in 40 years ago.  "Why would you want to do that?  Don't you have any drive?  Do you like being doormat?"

 

Both attitudes are wrong of course.  It's nice that in reality, people do have a choice.  And how popular our individual choice happens to be in a given decade should not matter.

Edited by SKL
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

My personal opinion: it is best for children to have a mother who is mentally well. A mother who is happy and content and at peace with herself. Whatever that takes is the best choice for this family.

 

Right.  But I think we've gotten to a point culturally where any dissatisfaction with current circumstances is seen as someone being mentally unwell, or that it should lead to someone being mentally unwell.  Like, if I have to stay at home with my kids for a season and I want to be doing something else, all I can focus on is that I want to be doing something else and it is physically impossible for me to be content being home with my kids.  Or if someone has to work a mind numbing job, then they are going inevitably have a bout with depression or something.  That people can't possibly decide to be content with less than ideal or "fulfilling" circumstances.  That we are all going to go crazy (literally) if we have to do something we find "unfulfilling".

 

ETA:  And, yes, I have experienced a downward spiral of discontent about my life as a SAHM, and as pinkmint talked about it, being on the brink of despair.  So it's not like I'm speaking from some utopia of having my husband's martini on a platter for him when he comes home and everyone is smiling and pressed and I never get stressed out about the kids' school or discipline issues.

 

And yes, almost everyone says out of one side of their mouth that someone can be fulfilled staying at home and then many, many people follow it with, "but I needed more than that, just for me, I needed more, but I respect your choice."  And of course no one means anything by it.

Edited by JodiSue
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, not everyone can just *poof*  make major changes in their lives to make them more fulfilling.  Sometimes people go through periods of doing what they  have to do without regard to their own personal fulfillment.  Sometimes those periods are short and sometimes they are long. 

 

I'm happy for you - for anyone who has been able to pinpoint a way to personal fulfillment that also happens to be what's best for the rest of the family.  Discontented parents (mothers or fathers) aren't living in a vacuum, where their decisions affect only themselves. Many, many men work at jobs they hate and feel trapped in, but they have a family to feed and no opportunity to make changes.  Sure, sometimes creative thinking will help people find a solution, but for some people, that is simply not enough. 

 

This is pretty much where I am. 

 

I can only conclude that life gives you hard choices sometimes, and feeling fulfilled is sometimes only possible at the serious expense of other very important things. Personally, I have my Christian faith to help me with this, knowing that this life is not all there is. Otherwise it would sometimes be depressing to the point of despair honestly. 

 

I don't know why some people have to make harder choices than others, but it's a reality. We're all coming from different places. I personally do not have a choice available to me that would be peachy for everyone (DH, myself and children). Huge compromises have to be made somewhere. 

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  So should she be upset and complaining and depressed because if she's not homeschooling her kids? 

 

She can be upset and complaining.  You (general) are not oblige to listen. As for the rest, divorce happens due to irreconcilable differences without any adultery. One of my uncles have an amiable divorce due to differences and is still on good terms with his ex-wife.

 

However if she is depressed over not homeschooling or over anything else for that matter, as a friend try to get her help.  Depression is a medical condition and people can't snap out of it just by adjusting their attitude and mindset. If my suicidal friends could, they would :(

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if you think about it, there is no right way to explain why an individual isn't a SAHM.

 

"I like working."  Selfish!

"I need external stimulation."  Insulting!

"My kids actually aren't better off with me here all day."  Rationalizing!

"We need the money."  Bull crap!

 

Perhaps this one would work:

"Actually I know I am hurting my kids/family but I care more about myself."  Ah ha!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FTR I don't view myself as "fulfilled" either way right now.  I am just busy!  Mostly peaceful, sometimes stressed out, enjoying what I can and worrying about the rest.

 

I didn't ever seriously consider being a SAHM.  Well actually, I would never have adopted if I believed SAHM was right for my family.  I don't believe there is any evidence that all kids are better off with a SAHM.  If one or both of my kids had needs that required it, I would do it.  Otherwise, I keep my various irons in the fire.  Because why not?

 

There was a time when I thought my kids should have as much of my time as I could possibly give them, but I don't believe that any more.  I have seen them benefit a lot from being with other caregivers.  Note that I'm talking about *my* kids, not your kids, not all kids ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that can come in many forms. Admittedly I'm pretty selfish these days (other than taking care of my family). But I grew up taking care of my parents. It was pretty difficult. I'm burnt. I also suspect I have some limitations (psychologically) that go largely unnoticed and don't interfere with my functioning because my life is lower key. Not surprising given the fact a good number of people in my family have some form of mental illness. And you don't grow up in that kind of environment without walking away a bit less than whole.

 

You wouldn't know that about me, but it does hurt my feelings that you basically are saying that anyone who can't manage something bigger doesn't have much worth. I've managed a lot. But again, most people wouldn't know that or understand that.

Hugs...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She can be upset and complaining.  You (general) are not oblige to listen. As for the rest, divorce happens due to irreconcilable differences without any adultery. One of my uncles have an amiable divorce due to differences and is still on good terms with his ex-wife.

 

However if she is depressed over not homeschooling or over anything else for that matter, as a friend try to get her help.  Depression is a medical condition and people can't snap out of it just by adjusting their attitude and mindset. If my suicidal friends could, they would :(

 

If every instance of lack of personal fulfillment led to suicidal clinical depression, humanity would not have survived very long.  If at all.  And to say that divorce is the option for someone who has differences in their marriage?

 

What I'm saying is if someone has their mind so set on homeschooling that they do it at the expense of their kids or family, because they need it to be personally fulfilled, then they should probably change their goals or attitude.

 

This is exactly what I was talking about in my post.  If we don't get to do what we want, then we must expect clinical depression or divorce?  Yikes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right.  But I think we've gotten to a point culturally where any dissatisfaction with current circumstances is seen as someone being mentally unwell, or that it should lead to someone being mentally unwell.  Like, if I have to stay at home with my kids for a season and I want to be doing something else, all I can focus on is that I want to be doing something else and it is physically impossible for me to be content being home with my kids.  Or if someone has to work a mind numbing job, then they are going inevitably have a bout with depression or something.  That people can't possibly decide to be content with less than ideal or "fulfilling" circumstances.  That we are all going to go crazy (literally) if we have to do something we find "unfulfilling".

 

As somebody who has experienced clinical depression, I find the attitude that one should just "suck it up" and try to be content for the greater good rather insulting.

 

 

And yes, almost everyone says out of one side of their mouth that someone can be fulfilled staying at home and then many, many people follow it with, "but I needed more than that, just for me, I needed more, but I respect your choice."  And of course no one means anything by it.

 

So what? Yes. I needed more - that is the truth about my life, and does not say anything about yours. What you need or not need has absolutely nothing to do with what I need to be happy.

My best friend OTOH is happy and fulfilled as a SAHM, and that is the truth in her life and does not say anything about mine.

And we both respect each other's choices without putting the other down. Which is more than I can say about some people here.

Edited by regentrude
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if you think about it, there is no right way to explain why an individual isn't a SAHM.

 

"I like working."  Selfish!

"I need external stimulation."  Insulting!

"My kids actually aren't better off with me here all day."  Rationalizing!

"We need the money."  Bull crap!

 

Perhaps this one would work:

"Actually I know I am hurting my kids/family but I care more about myself."  Ah ha!

 

If that's what you're getting from my posts then we're simply talking past each other.  My posts gave several examples in the converse.  It's not always about staying at home or homeschooling being the best for the family.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is pretty much where I am.

 

I can only conclude that life gives you hard choices sometimes, and feeling fulfilled is sometimes only possible at the serious expense of other very important things. Personally, I have my Christian faith to help me with this, knowing that this life is not all there is. Otherwise it would sometimes be depressing to the point of despair honestly.

 

I don't know why some people have to make harder choices than others, but it's a reality. We're all coming from different places. I personally do not have a choice available to me that would be peachy for everyone (DH, myself and children). Huge compromises have to be made somewhere.

Alas! It is this! This is where I am, too.

 

I have come to realize that if there is one value I prize highly amongst all the possible choices, it is stability. For instance, I knew a woman who was constantly changing her kids' education situation. They were all homeschooling; then one would abruptly go to a private school; then another kid would join the sibling there; then they would switch mid-year to public school. Then next year, they were home again...but then the boy went back to private school, etc., etc., etc. and this was during High School! From my vantage point, I could hardly imagine a worse mish-mash of educational source. There was no stability. It seemed to me that however crappy the Biology teacher might have been or however poorly they fit in at co-op, or whatever the issue de jour happened to be, it could not have been worse than this nomadic wandering in and out of educational settings.

 

I'm now in a tight spot. One kid in college, one at private school, one still hsing. But every day I am internally in conflict about my remaining hser. It would be really helpful for me to go earn like a big girl. I could worry less about those tuition bills. But...my little man. I don't want him cheated out of a couple more years of homeschooling; his sister and brother got that perk. And the last thing my stability-loving self wants is to toss him into school some random time mid-year, into middle-school - exactly what happened to me and surely a source of my extreme resistance to unstable educational experiences. So every day I wake up wondering if I should try to work FT and plan to put the little guy in next fall or just hang on for a couple more years and cross the necessary bridges as they arrive? I do not know.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if you think about it, there is no right way to explain why an individual isn't a SAHM.

 

"I like working." Selfish!

"I need external stimulation." Insulting!

"My kids actually aren't better off with me here all day." Rationalizing!

"We need the money." Bull crap!

 

Perhaps this one would work:

"Actually I know I am hurting my kids/family but I care more about myself." Ah ha!

I think this argument overall generally gets down to two essential things.

 

If the working mum says she didn't find fulfilment at home but presumes the stay at home mum did, then it implies the stay at home mum is somehow less than.

 

If the stay at home mum admits that she actually doesn't find it fulfilling but seems fulfilment in smaller ways because it's best for her kids, then it implies that the working mum isn't doing what's best for the kids and is selfish.

 

So in general we skirt around the issue with vague phrases like "it works for me" or "its best for our family at this point in time". But making one lifestyle choice does imply something all on its own without any words.

 

I do find it offensive when people presume that I stay home with kids because that is what ultimately is fulfilling to me, as though I'm nothing but a baby making machine. What's closer to the truth is that I think it's important for my kids to have someone there for them full time and I find fulfilment round the edges. But to say that contains implied judgment.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As somebody who has experienced clinical depression, I find the attitude that I should just "suck it up" and try to be content for the greater good rather insulting.

 

 

 

So what? Yes. I needed more - that is the truth about my life, and does not say anything about yours. What you need or not need has absolutely nothing to do with what I need to be happy.

My best friend OTOH is happy and fulfilled as a SAHM, and that is the truth in her life and does not say anything about mine.

And we both respect each other's choices without putting the other down. Which is more than I can say about some people here.

 

Oh good grief.  Perhaps you might consider that I'm not talking about your specific situation?  That I'm talking about the idea of personal fulfillment as a guide for what someone should do within the context of the family's needs as a whole.  It's a general discussion, right?  I'm speaking generally, not about regentrude's mental health, or even staying home vs. working specifically.

 

Given that, as for the so what you posed?  I do think it's a completely different discussion that's getting conflated with the idea of fulfillment, but I believe you aren't saying anything about me specifically.  I believe that when you say it, the idea of the converse statement doesn't even come up.  Perhaps instead of saying "more", perhaps "different" would be a better turn of phrase that would make it less condescending?  What you do says nothing about my life, I agree.  However, if you're contrasting your life as "more", the opposite of "more" is "less".  Again, you may not mean anything by saying you needed "more".  I believe you.  I believe that you probably don't think of SAHMs as less even if you say you personally need "more".  As your best friend is happy and fulfilled, I doubt you'd say you need "more" out of life than her, right?  You just get it in "different" places, right?

 

If someone looked at my vocation generally, no matter what it was, and said they just needed more out of life, it would not be a compliment, that I could see.  At best, in a RL convo it would be extremely awkward.  Even if they weren't talking directly about me.

 

But I think I've tried and failed many times to explain the difference and why it might be an awkward thing to say to someone.  I'm clearly not communicating well.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the working mum says she didn't find fulfilment at home but presumes the stay at home mum did, then it implies the stay at home mum is somehow less than.

 

Or the working mum could be envious that the stay at home mum can find fulfilment at home. 

However I don't see any working mom presuming anything about stay at home mums, just stating which works better for themselves at this point in their life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or the working mum could be envious that the stay at home mum can find fulfilment at home.

However I don't see any working mom presuming anything about stay at home mums, just stating which works better for themselves at this point in their life.

It's not specific to this thread but yes, working mums do often presume that if you are a permanent sahm you find the role personally fulfilling. Which is frustrating when you've made that choice, and it's not personally fulfilling but it is best for your kids. Edited by Ausmumof3
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If someone looked at my vocation generally, no matter what it was, and said they just needed more out of life, it would not be a compliment, that I could see.  At best, in a RL convo it would be extremely awkward.  Even if they weren't talking directly about me.

 

I am a workaholic and if I say I needed more out of life, it is 100% a reflection of who I am.  No insults or any other meaning intended.

 

My mom saying she is bored at home while we were growing up does not in any way mean that my brother and I make her life boring. I was always up to mischief.

My kids would sometimes say they want more out of life, doesn't mean hubby and I are being insulted.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "more must mean better" logic is failing me big time.

 

I might need more sleep and less exercise than you in order to feel good.  So yeah, that means you need less sleep and more exercise.  It doesn't mean YOU are "less" because you need less sleep.  It doesn't mean I am "less" because I need less exercise.

 

Similarly, the need for external stimulation (and most other things) naturally varies from person to person.  There is nothing wrong with needing less of it (or more of it).

 

Now if you actually do have an unsatisfied need for more external stimulation (or whatever) than you get as a SAHM, then you can say you are sacrificing for your kids because you believe their need to have you home is greater than your need to be out.  That is a valid choice as well.

 

I totally disagree that we can't talk about our own needs / feelings without making a statement about everyone else.  Frankly that sounds like a victim mentality to me.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not specific to this thread but yes, working mums do often presume that if you are a permanent sahm you find the role personally fulfilling. Which is frustrating when you've made that choice, and it's not personally fulfilling but it is best for your kids.

 

:grouphug:  That I have seen and heard in real life. My ex-classmate made sarcastic remarks about me not having to work before my oldest was born.

 

I had opt to be a SAHM when hubby and I were dating. However we were thinking along the lines of kids being happy in school and me being an active volunteer at their school.  Due to schools not being a good fit, I end up facilitating my kids education and looking for volunteer work elsewhere. I am annoyed at the education system here but I am not unhappy with life in general.

 

We went to a new optician recently and the guy asked what is my occupation even though I ticked the not working box on the form.  I was being exasperated that day as oldest was tired from all those pollen allergies so I told him happily unemployed. He didn't ask anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not specific to this thread but yes, working mums do often presume that if you are a permanent sahm you find the role personally fulfilling. Which is frustrating when you've made that choice, and it's not personally fulfilling but it is best for your kids.

 

Well what is so terrible about people presuming that you are happy, absent your telling them otherwise?

 

I know people from my mom's generation who were happy to be housewives.  The phenomenon exists.  I am not going to assume a SAHM is frustrated unless she tells me so.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well what is so terrible about people presuming that you are happy, absent your telling them otherwise?

 

I know people from my mom's generation who were happy to be housewives.  The phenomenon exists.  I am not going to assume a SAHM is frustrated unless she tells me so.

 

Happiness or contentment or being joyful (whatever you want to call it) is much different than personal fulfillment, in my mind.

 

I can be happy in life or content with my circumstances without finding personal fulfillment in, say, changing diapers or even teaching that yes, same as yesterday, 4+2 does in fact equal 6 today!

 

In fact, most of the time, I find all of that personally very stretching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "more must mean better" logic is failing me big time.

 

I might need more sleep and less exercise than you in order to feel good.  So yeah, that means you need less sleep and more exercise.  It doesn't mean YOU are "less" because you need less sleep.  It doesn't mean I am "less" because I need less exercise.

 

No, but concrete, tangible things like sleep and exercise are different that commenting on someone's vocation.

 

There's a difference between saying, "Oh it's so great you don't need as much sleep as I do," and "Oh it's so great you don't need as much intellectual stimulation as I do".  In the latter case, for one thing, you have no idea if that's true or not simply because they are SAHMs.  Perhaps they simply find other outlets?

 

I get that you don't see the difference, but it's there.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well what is so terrible about people presuming that you are happy, absent your telling them otherwise?

 

I know people from my mom's generation who were happy to be housewives. The phenomenon exists. I am not going to assume a SAHM is frustrated unless she tells me so.

Well I guess to give you a specific example - working girl meets stay at home mum. Comment was "oh I could never stay home with babies or my brains would turn to mush". When that's the back history, yes it's easy to be sensitive to comments that imply that somehow stay at home mums are less intelligent and so more easily find fulfilment at home.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, but concrete, tangible things like sleep and exercise are different that commenting on someone's vocation.

 

There's a difference between saying, "Oh it's so great you don't need as much sleep as I do," and "Oh it's so great you don't need as much intellectual stimulation as I do". In the latter case, for one thing, you have no idea if that's true or not simply because they are SAHMs. Perhaps they simply find other outlets?

 

I get that you don't see the difference, but it's there.

If someone is working at maccers and someone said "oh I tried working as a fast food service worker but it wasn't fulfilling enough, I needed something more" - would it be rude? Or "i tried working as a cashier but I found it so boring I had to find something else" to someone who is working as a cashier - would it be considered rude?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes  My husband does not hate his job, but it is not really what he loves to do.  It's mostly tolerable, but ultimately it pays the bills and takes care of his kids.  He said to me the other day his idea of a job he'd enjoy would be file clerk.  Kind of an odd thing for such a smart guy to long to do, but yep he said he'd love that because he could just spend all day thinking and that would be so relaxing.  But he won't get a job as a file clerk because that would make our lives very difficult financially.

 

This is not to say I feel people should martyr themselves always, but we are often doing what we feel is best even if that isn't what fulfills us personally.  If I only did stuff that fulfilled me personally, oh well gee things would look quite different. 

 

One thing I appreciate about my spouse greatly though is that he has always been supportive of me whatever it is I want to do.  He had no expectations that I'd stay home or anything like that.  It must be challenging when a couple is not on the same page with that.

 

 

This is not directed at your specific situation, but a jump off of your first thought (red).  I think it is easy for humans to rationalize that what they want to do is better for everyone involved.  I think, often, we say, "well, I'd be grumpy doing x, so it will be better if I do y" when often the solution that would be better is if we generally stopped being grumpy about doing x.  Again, not saying this is you, just responding to the idea.

 

As for why not change if something's not fulfilling?  Because sometimes the fulfillment of one's self is not the most important thing.  I mean, what if we all operated as if our own fulfillment were the impetus for doing things?  Following to its logical conclusion, at least in my house we'd not have school a lot of days, I'd not wipe a toilet or clean up vomit, etc, etc.  Applying it elsewhere, that would mean the breadwinner simply quits their job because they aren't doing "fulfilling" work.  It's not as if everyone who is doing a certain vocation is "following their dreams" to personal fulfillment.  That's where the idea of first-world perspective and decadence comes in.

 

Here's an example in reverse:  if a mom got her personal fulfillment from homeschooling and pulled her kids out of school because she wasn't fulfilled with them in school, that would be a horrible reason to homeschool (IMO).  It doesn't take their needs into consideration at all, right?  So should she be upset and complaining and depressed because if she's not homeschooling her kids?  What if a mom got her fulfillment from  having a lot of children and her husband did not want them?  What if someone who found staying at home personally fulfilling would do better for the family if they joined the workforce?  If my DH decided staying at home with the kids was personally fulfilling and he said, "well why not change it up because I'm a square peg in the round hole of the workforce" our family would be in deep carp.  It would totally upset our family's apple cart, and someone would have to go do very unfulfilled work in the gap, or else we'd end up going hungry.  So, honestly, I really know very few people who operation on the "if I'm not fulfilled I'm going to do something else until I am."

 

So it's not as simple as just changing things up for the sake of fulfillment and saying "this isn't fulfilling to me so I'm going to do something else".

 

I don't believe it is fitting any peg into any hole.  I think it is about mindset and attitude more than anything.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I guess to give you a specific example - working girl meets stay at home mum. Comment was "oh I could never stay home with babies or my brains would turn to mush". When that's the back history, yes it's easy to be sensitive to comments that imply that somehow stay at home mums are less intelligent and so more easily find fulfilment at home.

 

so what about ex-SAHM meeting SAHM and saying "I tried to stay home but my brain did turn to mush and I was unhappy"?

This is clearly her experience and does not imply anything about the other mom.

Is her experience invalid because it might be misconstrued as rude?

Can a personal experience be "wrong"?

 

ETA: I am convinced that pregnancies and nursing have cost me permanent brain cells, because I cannot focus on thinking at the level of abstraction I used to. Can I say that? Or will that be misconstrued as me saying something insulting about other people's brains?

Edited by regentrude
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If someone is working at maccers and someone said "oh I tried working as a fast food service worker but it wasn't fulfilling enough, I needed something more" - would it be rude? Or "i tried working as a cashier but I found it so boring I had to find something else" to someone who is working as a cashier - would it be considered rude?

 

Depends.  If you said it to someone who worked in fast food because it was their only option it might be better to keep that comment to yourself.  If it is just in general talking to someone not in that situation, it's probably fine.

 

What if I said to my husband, "I can't believe you work in a cubicle staring at a screen all day.  I couldn't do that."  Not very supportive!

Edited by SparklyUnicorn
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a message board it is difficult to understand the intent and the tone. 

 

A few made a comment (including myself) that we didn't want the harried rat race lifestyle.  The responses in opposition led me to think either people thought we were exaggerating, accusing them of not caring about time with their own family, or denial that this is a real issue.  Of course it is not a real issue for everyone.  If they can swing part time and make enough money, have flexibility, have family, have a lot of energy, or whatever then it probably works fine.  Not everyone has that.  Not everyone can just try harder to figure it out.  Of course I'm talking about those who have any sort of choice.  Sometimes there is no choice at all.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, but concrete, tangible things like sleep and exercise are different that commenting on someone's vocation.

 

There's a difference between saying, "Oh it's so great you don't need as much sleep as I do," and "Oh it's so great you don't need as much intellectual stimulation as I do".  In the latter case, for one thing, you have no idea if that's true or not simply because they are SAHMs.  Perhaps they simply find other outlets?

 

I get that you don't see the difference, but it's there.

 

Agreed! I know people probably don't mean it that way, but that's how it comes across. If you say you need more stimulation, you are basically saying my life is unstimulating. If you say you need more excitement than being a SAHM and I'm a SAHM you are basically saying my life is boring. If you say or imply that you need adult conversation I almost feel like you are implying I'm kind of simple to be able to endure a lack of it. 

 

Not to mention, oftentimes women stay home not because it is what they want most, but because they think it is what their kids need. 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I guess to give you a specific example - working girl meets stay at home mum. Comment was "oh I could never stay home with babies or my brains would turn to mush". When that's the back history, yes it's easy to be sensitive to comments that imply that somehow stay at home mums are less intelligent and so more easily find fulfilment at home.

 

Yes! I've heard this one many many many times. I want to reply, "so do you think mine turned to mush recently, or was I just always brainless so it doesn't matter?"

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If someone is working at maccers and someone said "oh I tried working as a fast food service worker but it wasn't fulfilling enough, I needed something more" - would it be rude? Or "i tried working as a cashier but I found it so boring I had to find something else" to someone who is working as a cashier - would it be considered rude?

 

Actually yes, if they are saying that TO the cashier, it would be rude. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed! I know people probably don't mean it that way, but that's how it comes across. If you say you need more stimulation, you are basically saying my life is unstimulating. If you say you need more excitement than being a SAHM and I'm a SAHM you are basically saying my life is boring. If you say or imply that you need adult conversation I almost feel like you are implying I'm kind of simple to be able to endure a lack of it.

 

But HOW then is a woman who tried to stay home and could not because she needed more stimulation and more adult conversation than she had during this time  supposed to express her experience?

She is not necessarily comparing her (former,actual, or imagined) life with yours - but with a version of her own life she misses.

 

If I say "I need more adult conversation..." the second half of the sentence is not "...than you do", but "...than I had when I was staying home" - or, fi she has not tried it "...than I imagine I can have when I am staying home".

This says absolutely nothing about your needs, your level of stimulation, you.

This says solely something about her - experienced or imagined - life compared to her life before or her ideal life.

 

Edited by regentrude
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's totally doable for some families with some personality types and schedules and not for others. Also careers and working hours. It wouldn't be doable for me! Not full time anyway.

 

I think this is like the whole "I could never homeschool thing."

 

I believe you that when you worked at it, it wasn't happening.

 

But people make things happen when they prioritize it. I "couldn't" homeschool. Except I know that I could, really, if I had to or if I really wanted to.

 

That's what's irksome about statements like that.

 

I believe you that who you are now, would not and could not and SHOULD not do the WOHM thing. And that is a valid choice, even a good choice.

 

But you could become a person who WOHM if that was a priority, just like I could become a homeschool  mom if that was a priority. I believe in us!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But HOW then is a woman who tried to stay home and could not because she needed more stimulation and more adult conversation than she had during this time  supposed to express her experience?

She is not necessarily comparing her (former,actual, or imagined) life with yours - but with a version of her own life she misses.

 

If I say "I need more adult conversation..." the second half of the sentence is not "...than you do", but "...than I had when I was staying home" - or, fi she has not tried it "...than I imagine I can have when I am staying home".

This says absolutely nothing about your needs, your level of stimulation, you.

This says solely something about her - experienced or imagined - life compared to her life before or her ideal life.

 

 

I guess when I hear "I need more adult conversation than can be had staying home with kids." and there person knows I stay home with kids, it sure sounds like the math works out to "I need more adult conversation than you do." 

 

I think then best most polite thing to do is to just say, "It didn't/wouldn't work out for me." 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed! I know people probably don't mean it that way, but that's how it comes across. If you say you need more stimulation, you are basically saying my life is unstimulating. If you say you need more excitement than being a SAHM and I'm a SAHM you are basically saying my life is boring. If you say or imply that you need adult conversation I almost feel like you are implying I'm kind of simple to be able to endure a lack of it. 

 

Not to mention, oftentimes women stay home not because it is what they want most, but because they think it is what their kids need. 

 

Makes me think of what my mother would say if someone complained of being bored.  "Well, then you must be boring."  What if I said that?  What, you find SAH boring and unstimulating?  Well then you must be very boring and unimaginative.  I don't agree with what my mother said, btw.  For one thing she could literally sit on a chair at the kitchen table for 20 hours straight without moving.  For her that sometimes took all the effort she could muster (mental illness). 

 

I do not feel that way though.  I just don't really want someone to critique the excitement factor of what I do.  Why would this be useful to me?  I mean sure it's fine to say it wasn't for me or I didn't enjoy it.  But it's boring, not stimulating, soul crushing....a bit much.  Depends how good a friend you are maybe.  LOL

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess when I hear "I need more adult conversation than can be had staying home with kids." and there person knows I stay home with kids, it sure sounds like the math works out to "I need more adult conversation than you do."

 

Now pardon my question: don't people actually need different amounts of interaction? I hear on these forums all the time that people widely differ in the amount of time they need to spend with people. The many introverts here make it very clear that they have different needs. So, why is it insulting to assume that different people have different needs and may be content in a situation in which others are not?

Or, if it is the case that you need and crave the same amount of adult interaction as, say, I, do: either you have found a way to be content with not getting enough, or you found a way to have enough. That can be a starting point for a conversation - because  we could commiserate that you don't get enough either, or maybe talk that I was the inept one who could not figure out how to find the stimulating conversation and you can give me ideas.

 Why is it seen as so offensive?

Edited by regentrude
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is like the whole "I could never homeschool thing."

 

I believe you that when you worked at it, it wasn't happening.

 

But people make things happen when they prioritize it. I "couldn't" homeschool. Except I know that I could, really, if I had to or if I really wanted to.

 

That's what's irksome about statements like that.

 

I believe you that who you are now, would not and could not and SHOULD not do the WOHM thing. And that is a valid choice, even a good choice.

 

But you could become a person who WOHM if that was a priority, just like I could become a homeschool  mom if that was a priority. I believe in us!

 

LOL.  And what if I said, "Yeah, homescholing isn't for just anyone.  For one thing not everyone is smart enough.  You know, not everyone can understand classic literature or quadratic equations."  That would be kinda mean!  But HEY I'm just being honest. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now pardon my question: don't people actually need different amounts of interaction? I hear on these forums all the time that people widely differ in the amount of time they need to spend with people. The many introverts here make it very clear that they have different needs. So, why is it insulting to assume that different people have different needs and may be content in a situation in which others are not?

Or, if it is the case that you need and crave the same amount of adult interaction as, say, I, do: either you have found a way to be content with not getting enough, or you found a way to have enough. that can be a starting point for a conversation - because either we can commiserate that you don't get enough either, or maybe I was the inept one who could not figure out how to find the stimulating conversation and you can give me ideas.

  Why is it so offensive?

 

Yes, but honestly until you just typed this out, I was under the impression you thought it was nuts and weird that some people don't want more interaction.  Which it's ok if you do, but it hurts to have it pointed out. 

 

So, I am sorry for complaining.  I guess I really just had it all wrong.  Again, message boards...it's hard to tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but honestly until you just typed this out, I was under the impression you thought it was nuts and weird that some people don't want more interaction.  Which it's ok if you do, but it hurts to have it pointed out. 

 

So, I am sorry for complaining.  I guess I really just had it all wrong.  Again, message boards...it's hard to tell.

 

Heck, I am married to an introvert. And I have given birth to an introvert son who, until he was 14, was content to interact with other kids once or twice a month. I am fully aware that people have hugely differing needs for interaction. I am also aware that I am so far on the extrovert side of the spectrum that it is almost pathological - I wither if I cannot be with other people daily - so I assume my need for interaction is much higher than yours.

And that is fine and there is nothing weird about it.

But I also do not see why stating something like that should be considered a value statement. It is simply a fact - such as needing more or less sleep (I need 8-9 hours... one could construe that inferior to a person who gets by with 6, but that would be stupid as well.)

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is one of those questions that brings out a lot of resentment in women towards each other.

 

I have been a working Mom and a SAHM (for a lot of years).  Of course I remember the most obnoxious things that women have said about this issue.  "My brain would turn to mush," and 'I didn't have child so that I could warehouse them all day."  Those kinds of things.

 

But I think most women understand that the issues are complex.  We know that our role as mothers is critical, consuming, and mostly satisfying. We also understand that it is satisfying to earn a paycheck, to know you can take care of yourself, to work in the 'world" where performance is evaluated, measured, and rewarded.  I would say most of my real life friends understand how much being a SAHM can be a blessing, and most of them also understand all the reasons why a woman might want to work.

 

I think when a working Mom says, "I would love to stay home but I can't afford it," what she is often doing is trying to say that what the SAHM is doing is good, and would actually be enjoyable, and trying to find a non-offensive way to explain not doing it.  Obviously, she does not owe any explanation at all, but I don't find that an offensive thing to say, even if it is disingenuous.  In reality she could say, 'I think letting a kid take on debt for college is a kind of failure, so I have to work."  She could just say that she thinks being a SAHM would be boring.  She could say that she is afraid of divorce and wants to know she can support herself.  But all of those things open a can of worms, and so she says something she thinks is more neutral.

 

Likewise, SAHMs say strange things too. I've heard all the comments about how particular working Moms don't need the income, just want toys, can't deal with their own children, etc etc.  I can't say for sure which side feels more judged and inspected.  I think if one looks for it, one could easily conclude that being a working Mom is not a valid life choice to a lot of people. 

 

I think the truth is that most of us don't really care about the choices others make as long as they don't impact us. We just want people to live with their choices. When I was at home, I was part of a carpool with a working mother, and she frequently implied that I should drive extra because she was working.  I finally told her, "We all make choices" and that I wasn't going to do that. Likewise, I think we expect that if a woman chooses not to work after she really could do so, she shouldn't demand that taxpayers to carry the burden of her children's student loans.  

 

But I think in the end, working and not working are valid choices.  Obviously there are millions of women who don't work after their children are in school.  Their are millions of women who work even though they have an employed partner.  And while many women are single and have to work, many are making these choices as part of a couple.  

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now pardon my question: don't people actually need different amounts of interaction? I hear on these forums all the time that people widely differ in the amount of time they need to spend with people. The many introverts here make it very clear that they have different needs. So, why is it insulting to assume that different people have different needs and may be content in a situation in which others are not?

Or, if it is the case that you need and crave the same amount of adult interaction as, say, I, do: either you have found a way to be content with not getting enough, or you found a way to have enough. That can be a starting point for a conversation - because  we could commiserate that you don't get enough either, or maybe talk that I was the inept one who could not figure out how to find the stimulating conversation and you can give me ideas.

 Why is it seen as so offensive?

 People totally need different amount of interaction. Just as not all people need other real-life adult interaction to feel intellectually challenged. So, I don't find it offensive when people say that they can't imagine staying home all day. It is their need. In my case,  staying at home gave me time to think about things I never had time to think when I worked. I have time to learn new stuff, another thing I couldn't do when I worked. I know some people can, but I couldn't manage it on top of housework and time spent with my husband. Besides, I am more intellectually challenged as a SAHM, because anything new happening at work didn't give me challenge for more then a week. It was routine, even developing new things was routine. I need change gears completely to feel intellectually stimulated and challenged. At home I can dive into writing a novel one month, learning a foreign language another, then switching to planning a trip to Europe and researching the history of all the places I want to visit. Every now and then I stop to make sure my homeschool is on track, make some plans, devote some time to going through the material I don't remember from my own school time, and then spend time researching techniques of epee fencing. The moment I feel that whatever I am doing at the moment is not challenging, I feel depressed. That is the time when I stop and change gears. It usually takes a few days or even weeks, but I feel that it is a challenge in itself. Often I return to something I already did (like that novel), but it is always on a new level.

 

I don't tell people how being chained to a workplace would turn my brain to mush, even if it is the truth and my own valid experience. I can honestly understand the need in socialization, but I do not understand why people feel the need to tell me I need other adults to challenge me more that I can do myself (That is something I was told in RL, not a reference to anything said here.) By the way, the worst offender here is my mom, who grew up with a SAHM, and now considers the looming retirement as the worst thing that could happen to a person.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I just don't really want someone to critique the excitement factor of what I do.  Why would this be useful to me?  I mean sure it's fine to say it wasn't for me or I didn't enjoy it.  But it's boring, not stimulating, soul crushing....a bit much.  

 

exactly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, but concrete, tangible things like sleep and exercise are different that commenting on someone's vocation.

 

There's a difference between saying, "Oh it's so great you don't need as much sleep as I do," and "Oh it's so great you don't need as much intellectual stimulation as I do".  In the latter case, for one thing, you have no idea if that's true or not simply because they are SAHMs.  Perhaps they simply find other outlets?

 

I get that you don't see the difference, but it's there.

 

Well first of all, nobody actually said "you don't need ___."  They said they themselves made a choice based on their own needs.

 

"Why did you major in education?"

"Because I like working with kids."

"SO, you're implying *I* don't like working with kids?!"

"No, I didn't say anything about you."

"Yeah, but you meant it.  I know what you really think.  You think all science majors hate children.  Jerk!"

 

Why does it make you angry that some people might assume you don't hate child care / teaching?  It's not like you're working on a garbage truck or scrubbing public toilets all day.  There are people who do like caring for children.  When I was a teen taking care of my kid sister, I absolutely loved it.  What am I missing?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If someone is working at maccers and someone said "oh I tried working as a fast food service worker but it wasn't fulfilling enough, I needed something more" - would it be rude? Or "i tried working as a cashier but I found it so boring I had to find something else" to someone who is working as a cashier - would it be considered rude?

 

I don't know.  I'm pretty sure I have heard people say similar about every job I've ever had.  I take it as what wouldn't work for them.  I don't recall ever feeling the need to defend my job choice based on the fact that some other people wouldn't like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heck, I am married to an introvert. And I have given birth to an introvert son who, until he was 14, was content to interact with other kids once or twice a month. I am fully aware that people have hugely differing needs for interaction. I am also aware that I am so far on the extrovert side of the spectrum that it is almost pathological - I wither if I cannot be with other people daily - so I assume my need for interaction is much higher than yours.

And that is fine and there is nothing weird about it.

But I also do not see why stating something like that should be considered a value statement. It is simply a fact - such as needing more or less sleep (I need 8-9 hours... one could construe that inferior to a person who gets by with 6, but that would be stupid as well.)

 

 

It's a fact, but many people do find it weird.  I've literally been told there is something wrong with my low level of need for being around people regularly.  This was by a therapist who was a crazy extrovert.  She insisted I join 1000 things.  I told her I was not interested.  She claimed I am interested and that I just don't know it yet.  I've gotten this far, I think I do know it yet.  My point being that yes other people do think it's weird and aren't just stating it in a matter of fact way.  A lot of things work in a way that favors extroverts and values extroverts. 

 

I realize I should not assume you mean any such thing, but plenty of people do mean it in that way. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know. I'm pretty sure I have heard people say similar about every job I've ever had. I take it as what wouldn't work for them. I don't recall ever feeling the need to defend my job choice based on the fact that some other people wouldn't like it.

Yep I imagine working in accounting or law people might make similar comments. 😄 The difference is they aren't jobs that people tend to think of as low brain power jobs, whereas unfortunately there is some history of this for stay at home mums.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ETA: I am convinced that pregnancies and nursing have cost me permanent brain cells, because I cannot focus on thinking at the level of abstraction I used to. Can I say that? Or will that be misconstrued as me saying something insulting about other people's brains?

 

Yeah, I often feel like being a mom has cost me some IQ points among other things.  But maybe it is OK for me to say it, since I haven't given up being a mom.  :P

 

FTR I think the "fulfillment" discussion is somewhat of a sidetrack.  Most of us don't parent for fulfillment, nor do we work at our current job for fulfillment necessarily.  Many people will never find "fulfillment" and will still die happy.  I really think it's more about the balance of the various needs and wants of the individuals involved in the decision, which is going to be different in every family.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heck, I am married to an introvert. And I have given birth to an introvert son who, until he was 14, was content to interact with other kids once or twice a month. I am fully aware that people have hugely differing needs for interaction. I am also aware that I am so far on the extrovert side of the spectrum that it is almost pathological - I wither if I cannot be with other people daily - so I assume my need for interaction is much higher than yours.

And that is fine and there is nothing weird about it.

But I also do not see why stating something like that should be considered a value statement. It is simply a fact - such as needing more or less sleep (I need 8-9 hours... one could construe that inferior to a person who gets by with 6, but that would be stupid as well.)

 

The assumption is the problem. Not all stay at home mums are introverts, some are extroverts who either desperately crave adult company but are doing without because they have made a choice for their family. Or they have made a huge effort to meet that part of their needs.

 

And yes there are negative connotations with being an introvert, believe me. Antisocial, quiet, weird, shy... Some people are very accepting and others just aren't.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...