Explain to Me Being a Non-WOH No-Kid Wife

[Arcadia]

In some chinese, japanese and korean social circles, a working wife with or without kids, would look bad on the husband's ability to provide. The guy would usually be quick to say that their working wives enjoy working if asked.

 

It might be traditional model but many of my grandparents and parents generation who has gone through rough times during WWII would see others having the choice to be a SAHW as that family having more financial stability than a need to be dual income family.

 

When I was engaged in 2001, almost everyone including guys friends asked if hubby's pay would allow me to choose not to work for pay. His friends asked him too. It is a cultural (subculture) status symbol.

[katilac]

It is strange that you think you know what this woman does all day. My neighbors (women who work) assume I sit home all day. They have no idea how many pots I have my fingers in!! I'm out more than home. Who knows how this woman spends her time?

 

Excellent point! We have eleventy venting threads a month because so many people assume they know how homeschool families spend their time, and what they "should" be able to do. 

 

In re-reading the original post, I'm wondering why Tsuga assumes her co-worker is supporting his wife.

 

Is it not possible the wife has her own sources of income?  Perhaps she has a trust fund from which she draws a handsome monthly/yearly sum.  Or perhaps she inherited lots of money and property outright and spends her time investing and managing it.

 

 

And another excellent point. Maybe she has plenty of money, and is making him work to earn his food and housing, lol.   

 

Also, I'm too lazy to hunt down the first post about it, but I am a nonreligious person who thinks that it is often to the benefit of a family to have somebody at home. It doesn't matter to me whether it is mom or dad. It could even be a grandparent or other relative, if their concepts of parenting and family were a close enough match. 

[OneStepAtATime]

For the record, even though I realize that taking care of kids was not supposed to be part of the equation, I wanted to mention that my mom stayed home until I was in High School. She worked hard.  She was not homeschooling us but she absolutely worked hard.  Dad was out of town a ton because he was military.  She was essentially a single parent for a lot of my childhood.  She definitely worked, even though what she was doing did not earn a direct income.  Dad and Mom were in a personal partnership that was not tied to who earned what.  They married because they loved each other.  They had different roles within that marriage but it wasn't based on balancing any monetary books.  And yes, Dad came from a very poor family and definitely believed you worked to earn your keep.  That didn't translate to "My wife isn't working for money so she hasn't earned her keep."  

 

(And frankly it really meant a lot to me and my brother that we had at least one parent that was actually around and had time and energy to spend with us, help us out, share time with us and keep things running behind the scenes.  Nothing against my dad at all.  I loved him.  But his traveling all the time and working long hours left us with really only one parent to turn to and keep things moving forward.  I am very grateful that Dad earned enough income that Mom could stay home and do all the other jobs that needed taking care of without being made to feel guilty for somehow not fulfilling her end of some business contract.  She was definitely working, not sitting around eating bonbons and watching Oprah all day.).

[Pawz4me]

It's also possible the DH is saying his wife is complaining as an excuse to head out of the office earlier than others.

[OneStepAtATime]

Unless we're in The Walking Dead and I have to be responsible for keeping her alive, I don't really care what their arrangement is. People tilt their head at me for being a sahm and homeschooling my kids. 

:lol:

[gardenmom5]

It is strange that you think you know what this woman does all day. My neighbors (women who work) assume I sit home all day. They have no idea how many pots I have my fingers in!! I'm out more than home. Who knows how this woman spends her time?

 

what happened to the suburban mom stereotype of sitting home watching soaps and eating bonbons?

 

This is an incredibly damaging outlook on life. First of all you DON'T have to work to get the government assistance that you mentioned in many states. Situations vary. Honestly if the outlook is that people must DO something to "earn" their keep why even bother keeping the disabled alive? Do they get a pass by default because of the disability? By this line of thinking it seems it'd be more beneficial to take a population control stance and put down any disabled person like an animal. No worries then about feeding someone who isn't "earning their keep." 

 

The give and take of a relationship is the relationship itself. The value of being in the relationship is because you love the person and they love you. It isn't counted by what you give someone monetarily or "earn." If it is then you don't have a relationship or marriage, you have a business agreement. That may work for you but some of us value personal relationships more than money. 

and elderly people who can no longer contribute/care for themselves.  and infants who have prognosis of severe disability, etc.   that's where this type of thinking leads to.

people have value because they're human beings - not because they "contribute" a paycheck  to a family.

[trulycrabby]

I think it is absolutely no one's business why this or any other person does not work.

[SKL]

I would point out that plenty of working class wives are SAHWs.  I don't know where someone got the idea that it isn't an option in the working class.

[SKL]

Reading this thread has me dreaming.  If I could work and only work ... what a thought!

 

But I can't complain.  I am so lucky that I can do my job sitting in my bedroom, and do cleaning and kid stuff on my work breaks.  I'm going to shut up now.

[eternalsummer]

That's interesting. I've never met anyone who thought that about women without a religious basis. Does it have to be the woman, or do you think that one spouse should be home regardless of gender?

 

Religion is, imo, not the source of many traditional social beliefs, but a vehicle for them.

 

This is why you have many of the same social beliefs through very different religions around the world (one of which, pretty often, is the segregation of gender roles).

 

I am not religious and I am quite traditional/conservative in these ways - because the understanding doesn't come to me through religion, but that doesn't make it invalid.

 

For example, you probably believe some things that other people who are religious also believe - that murder is wrong, for instance (to be as universal as possible).  An Orthodox Jew might well say that murder is wrong primarily because God said "No Murder," while you have a different understanding of what makes it wrong, but the instinct/belief is shared.  The vehicle is just different.

 

 

I think, personally, that some segregation of gender roles is natural and functional in society.  How this works out specifically depends on the circumstances of the society.

[gypsymama]

what happened to the suburban mom stereotype of sitting home watching soaps and eating bonbons?

 

and elderly people who can no longer contribute/care for themselves.  and infants who have prognosis of severe disability, etc.   that's where this type of thinking leads to.

people have value because they're human beings - not because they "contribute" a paycheck  to a family.

 

Exactly! Just existing is valuable. Being a part of someone's life because you love them and they love you is valuable. No money required. My kids don't bring home a paycheck and neither does my Golden Retriver and certainly not the fish (heck the fish do less than any of us :lol: ) but we get enjoyment out of being in each others lives. 

 

I would point out that plenty of working class wives are SAHWs.  I don't know where someone got the idea that it isn't an option in the working class.

 

This is a good point. We do have kids that I homeschool but even without that we have arranged our lives so that we live on very little at this point. We'd be able to live on a lot less if we didn't have the kids. I could absolutely be a SAHW without us struggling. We frequently joke that once the kids move out or if we didn't have kids we could travel FT and live out of backpacks on practically nothing. But that's just us :) 

[eternalsummer]

Also, to the OP (and Mergath, who asked specifically about non-religious people who saw a role for women in the home), I think the last 50 years or so have really skewed our understanding of how a stay at home wife works.

 

Men have invented many wonderful (wonderful!) things.  I remember being without a washing machine or money for laundromat for 6 months in NZ; we did the laundry in the bathtub.  It was really really hard.  Just insanely hard.  And that was just one device!  I think stay at home wives (kids or no, and there were much more often kids than there are now) used to have a lot more physical work to do.  As we've developed the technology to do the work for us (and men have, for one reason or another, largely been the developers of this technology) - from electricity to dishwashers to washing machines to electric ovens and refrigeration and cars and etc etc. - there is just a lot less homemaking to *do*.  So it seems more like indolence and less like a valid work-oriented choice.

 

On the other hand, in the first world, many men (not all) also have physically easier jobs (more women than men have these physically easier jobs, but still).  The proportion of people who *don't* do physical labor, both men at work and women at home, is much higher, due to the advances our ancestors won for us.

[madteaparty]

dp sorry

Edited May 25, 2016 by madteaparty

[madteaparty]

I think people should do what they want. :) I have SAHM friends with multiple nannies, housekeepers etc. Their problems are still real to them ;) just like mine are real to me.

I think it's a slippery slope, the judging... Kind of like finishing one's dinner because starving children or whatever. I judge a ton, I'm trying to reform.

Eta-- there's no reward for doing it the hard way...

Edited May 25, 2016 by madteaparty

[eternalsummer]

only faulting faults is faultless (says the Tao Te Ching).

 

I don't try to judge less, just judge correctly :)

[frogger]

It would be a nice twist to just work at a career, heck, even just a job without having to take care of everybody and everything else, wouldn't it? That sounds so simple. Yet, I'm glad I do have family and lots of it (not just a husband and kids but parents(6 of them) and grandparents too!

 

I come from a Christian point of view but have a lot of similar views as the atheist poster above. I see a family as a unit. My husband's pay is my pay. We are one. My homeschooling the kids is his homeschooling the kids. In actual tasks we divide and conquer but really it is our accomplishments. You could say he can accomplish more because he doesn't have to use sick leave to take care of kids or leave early to run errands or move to a new opportunity alone. You could say he helps me to home school by providing funds for living expenses and homeschooling materials but we don't see things that way. We are doing life together.

 

I worked before kids but I don't know that I will after they leave home. There will be other family to care for and remodeling the house to sell and the taxes will be ridiculous and if we are both working we will have to do all of that anyway. Whatever we decide, honestly my husband will probably support whatever I choose cause he is like that, but I will want us both to decide because it will affect us both.

[Murphy101]

I don't think being a sahw has anything to do with religion. Most of the ones I know aren't religious at all. Not church going or whatever.

 

I think a person's beliefs, religious or otherwise, will of course color how they approach it, but I don't know many who that is the base of the decision.

[gardenmom5]

I would point out that plenty of working class wives are SAHWs.  I don't know where someone got the idea that it isn't an option in the working class.

 

my bil is very much working class.  my sister's kids are graduated college, paired off, living on their own, etc.  she STILL is at home. (she's extremely liberal, so that has nothing to do with it.)  it works for them.

[Tita Gidge]

This OP could have been written about me, had my (now ex-) husband had his way.

 

When we met and married, I had a professional career.  He was a grunt on active duty. Even once we married and factored in housing, I earned close to double what he did. We come from different cultures. His is very macho and traditional when it comes to marital roles and expectations.  Mine is not macho, but does have narrowly defined family roles and a strong emphasis on social appearances. So though different, they complemented each other in a manner he felt put us on the same page: we'd marry, and I'd stay at home - kids or no kids.  Our pre-marital conversations led me to believe we were on (my) same page: we'd marry, and I'd work or not - depending on our situation at the time. My job is incredibly flexible in that I expected to work while he was deployed or on training exercises, and be home with him when he was 'home.'

 

I'm a much more practical person (the higher earner is expected to give up a job by virtue of being born with a vagina? yeah,no) and a person who derives much satisfaction and personal reward from the career I choose (I desired to keep working, kids or no kids.)  I thought DH was nuts. He got to go off and play army while I did what - picked my nose on the home front, waiting for him to return? What a bit of romanticizing on his part; no thank you!

 

We fought about it so much that it was quickly becoming a deal breaker, especially once his family started chiming in with their unsolicited opinions and the guys at work started giving DH a hard time about not keeping me 'in line.'  They all thought, to quote you, that I should be "literally earning [my] living as nothing more than being a wife."  The value to them would be, from my POV, any one or combination of these things:

 

ego, pride, pissing contests about one's worth as a husband, how to keep wifey in her place, how to create a dynamic of dependence rather than address their insecurities head on in an adult manner, and/or how to feel in control when one really felt out of control.

 

Compare this to the value one might retrieve if this was MUTUALLY AGREED UPON by both marriage partners:

 

compromise, support for one another's needs or wants, contributing to the marriage in different but equally important ways, how to create a dynamic of interdependence that is mutually beneficial, and/or respecting the relationship more than one's own vestment in it.

 

I think you're reading this couple's situation through the same lens I viewed my own situation - and maybe yours?  But we need to remember that this is a valid and mutually beneficial choice for other couples.  Because each person, couple, and marriage is different - and truly, that's a great thing because it means everyone has options. Some will gravitate towards more traditional expectations but others of us find ourselves free to not feel chained to those. This is social progress, especially for women. That the wife in question COULD work doesn't mean she SHOULD. That would definitely be a step backwards for women and society/marriage in general.

[Tita Gidge]

I mean, literally earning your living as nothing more than being a wife.

 

 

Which isn't really earning, per se... how does it work? What's the value to him? Why would a man, or a woman for that matter, do such a thing? It's 2016. She has a degree. They are from educated families.

 

 

I can't wrap my head around it. What am I missing? Pummel me.

 

One more thing. I retired a few years ago from that career I loved so much. Right now I'm a stay-at-home ex-wife who I assure you trades nothing - no house cleaning, no errand running, no sex (LOL) for his contribution towards my current living expenses - which nicely supplement my retirement. 

 

He complains at work, and colleagues who didn't know us while we were married think I'm a greedy ogre. And that's okay because he needs to process and I don't care what they think. But those who knew us during our marriage - who still only know a fraction of what went on behind closed doors - just let him vent and roll their eyes before moving on to more interesting topics. We all know a dramatic or delusional person who perceives himself/herself to be a perpetual victim when they're really a good portion of their own relationship problems!  Sounds like your DH's office has its person.

 

When I retired, our tax bracket dropped from 33% to 25% - two levels. He didn't use tax brackets as a reason when we were fighting about me being a SAHW, but he could have - and it would have been a valid point. If this woman is educated and has a professional career, it could be a consideration in their marriage also.

[Guest]

In thinking about this a little bit, thinking about the people I know who "stay at home" and so on, I realize how much they do to hold the world together.  They visit the lonely, they take people to their colonoscopy appointments, they write letters of encouragement, they help in emergencies.  You can always reach them.  They are available.  They answer the phone when you call.  They have time to listen, to wait.  They check in.  They help bewildered new moms, new brides.  They use their skills in pro-bono ways--lawyering for the poor, helping new companies with business expertise...

 

Some of them stay very low profile and pray and find their way through this life.  

Some make their homes and their souls a place of peace and beauty.  And they share this with the rest of us.  

 

As a society, we tend to honor and respect people for what they DO.  But we are not human doings.  We are human beings.  It's about what we ARE, and that's not going to look the same for everyone.  

[goldberry]

I think of it this way.  Some of us value raising children and/or homeschooling enough that we (including our spouses) are willing to trade income potential to stay home and raise kids/homeschool.  Not everyone understands and instead thinks that we should be out "contributing" or "making a living". 

 

Some people value having a spouse at home, to do the million possible things that have already been mentioned, enough to be willing to trade that income potential to have that situation.  Not everyone understands that and may think that person should be out "contributing" or "making a living".  

 

Families make these decisions about what is valuable *to them*.  We all have our own cost-benefit scale.  How heavily different things weigh in that scale will vary for each family.

[Murphy101]

We are very much working class family. Low income working class at that. But we still see value to me being home, even when I'm not taking care of babies or home schooling. It's not like how neat my house is or whether I have children is the defining mark of my character or sum total of my value as a person.

 

Thank goodness.

 

At the moment my house is trashed and my kids are caked in mud and sand.

 

It's been a really good day.

Edited May 25, 2016 by Murphy101

[Ausmumof3]

In re-reading the original post, I'm wondering why Tsuga assumes her co-worker is supporting his wife.

 

Is it not possible the wife has her own sources of income? Perhaps she has a trust fund from which she draws a handsome monthly/yearly sum. Or perhaps she inherited lots of money and property outright and spends her time investing and managing it.

 

I think one of Tsuga's posts said that she comes from a 'very, very working class background" (or something very close to that quote) and I'm guessing that's maybe why the possibility of the wife having income/assets w/o having to work didn't occur to her.. I'm also guessing that background is where a LOT of the disconnect in this issue is coming from. The poorer people I know/have known do tend to have much more of a "work or you don't eat" attitude (and understandably so) than do those who have some extra funds.

This is totally possible. One of the guys at dh's work has an extremely wealthy wife. He works by choice.

[Guest]

We are very much working class family. Low income working class at that. But we still see value to me being home, even when I'm not taking care of babies or home schooling. It's not like how neat my house is or whether I have children is the defining mark of my character or sum total of my value as a person.

 

Thank goodness.

 

At the moment my house is trashed and my kids are caked in mud and sand.

 

It's been a really good day.

 

I just had to say I love this. 

[marbel]

In thinking about this a little bit, thinking about the people I know who "stay at home" and so on, I realize how much they do to hold the world together.  They visit the lonely, they take people to their colonoscopy appointments, they write letters of encouragement, they help in emergencies.  You can always reach them.  They are available.  They answer the phone when you call.  They have time to listen, to wait.  They check in.  They help bewildered new moms, new brides.  They use their skills in pro-bono ways--lawyering for the poor, helping new companies with business expertise...

 

Some of them stay very low profile and pray and find their way through this life.  

Some make their homes and their souls a place of peace and beauty.  And they share this with the rest of us.  

 

As a society, we tend to honor and respect people for what they DO.  But we are not human doings.  We are human beings.  It's about what we ARE, and that's not going to look the same for everyone.  

 

Yes, and we have lost much of this with our (general our, society's) attitude that people are not useful unless they are making money.  I've posted here before about how hard it is to recruit people to take a meal to a sick person, take a disabled person grocery shopping, all those things that people without jobs (or with flexible, part-time jobs) could do. I've posted here before about my free-range childhood which was possible because the houses on our rural road were not empty during the day; there were homemakers* there to keep an eye out for the roaming pack of kids, able to help (or correct behavior) as needed.

 

*Some moms of kids, of course, but some empty-nesters and some stay-home wives without kids.

 

But you see, to some people (apparently to the OP?) this is all worth nothing because there is no paycheck attached.

 

[Guest]

This entire thread has me thinking what an odd world it is when a person can be questioned for NOT falling in line with the status quo, which these days is largely working for a huge, activist investor controlled corporation who doesn't give a second thought to you. I'm not sure when that became a more noble enterprise than choosing to invest in ones family and self. 

[Arcadia]

My hubby and his guy friends wanted SAHWs for a reason that I haven't seen mentioned yet. They wanted family with them on business trips and it was easier with a SAHW then a WOHW. My ex-boss paid me quite a lot for all the annual leave I didn't get a chance to take when I quit.

 

The companies that hubby and I worked for welcomes families on business trips. When he attended a conference in Hyatt Anaheim, spouses and kids enjoyed themselves at Disneyland nearby. When he was at San Diego for last minute client project meetings, we get to tag along and spend days at the beaches. Some trips our kids and I weren't interested in going but hubby loves that I don't need to get annual leave approved for us to go with him.

[marbel]

My hubby and his guy friends wanted SAHWs for a reason that I haven't seen mentioned yet. They wanted family with them on business trips and it was easier with a SAHW then a WOHW. My ex-boss paid me quite a lot for all the annual leave I didn't get a chance to take when I quit.

 

The companies that hubby and I worked for welcomes families on business trips. When he attended a conference in Hyatt Anaheim, spouses and kids enjoyed themselves at Disneyland nearby. When he was at San Diego for last minute client project meetings, we get to tag along and spend days at the beaches. Some trips our kids and I weren't interested in going but hubby loves that I don't need to get annual leave approved for us to go with him.

 

Oh yeah!

We had some great family vacations attached to my husband's business trips.  

[AimeeM]

Thanks, that's exactly what I was getting at. He doesn't view our marriage as some sort of scale balancing exchange but it can be tricky to explain to someone who doesn't have our viewpoint on the subject :)

Word.

I don't know of a healthy relationship that DOES view things as some sort of balancing exchange.

 

"Well, I cut the grass, so you do x."

"I bring in more $ than you, so I expect you to do more housework, even though we work the same hours."

"I give you steamy hot TeA once a week, and I expect xyz in return."

 

I mean, really - who does that? And this conversation is no different to me (or, rather, where this conversation has led).

[Artichoke]

nm

Edited March 7, 2017 by Artichoke

[happi duck]

I don't work.

It's no one's business to care...even if I'm not doing a bunch of awesome volunteering.

Knowing that there are people judging me hurts in my most anxious moments.

I'm sad that I get tempted to try and prove my worth.

I don't think some people matter more than others and get sad when things remind me that not everyone thinks like I do.

:(

[OneStepAtATime]

I don't work.

It's no one's business to care...even if I'm not doing a bunch of awesome volunteering.

Knowing that there are people judging me hurts in my most anxious moments.

I'm sad that I get tempted to try and prove my worth.

I don't think some people matter more than others and get sad when things remind me that not everyone thinks like I do.

:(

Please don't tie your intrinsic value as a human being to whether you earn a monetary income or volunteer for a bunch of things.   :grouphug:  :grouphug:  :grouphug:

[JoJosMom]

I don't work.

It's no one's business to care...even if I'm not doing a bunch of awesome volunteering.

Knowing that there are people judging me hurts in my most anxious moments.

I'm sad that I get tempted to try and prove my worth.

I don't think some people matter more than others and get sad when things remind me that not everyone thinks like I do.

:(

 

 

Please don't tie your intrinsic value as a human being to whether you earn a monetary income or volunteer for a bunch of things.   :grouphug:  :grouphug:  :grouphug:

 

:iagree:  What she said.  Really, I think this topic says far more about one person's biases, resentments, and insecurities than it does about any anonymous couple's lifestyle choices.  The very idea that a human being's value or a human relationship can be judged on a monetary scale is vile.  I'm sorry that the implication hurts you so.  I'll join in the :grouphug: .

[happi duck]

Please don't tie your intrinsic value as a human being to whether you earn a monetary income or volunteer for a bunch of things. :grouphug: :grouphug: :grouphug:

Thanks...this means a lot.

[MotherGoose]

When my DH got a raise and we moved, I no longer had to work for financial reasons. We didn't have kids yet. I have a Masters degree. I was burned out on my career, and didn't want to work. I stayed home, cooked food, worked in the garden, mowed the lawn, etc. eventually I got a part time job and I did volunteer work. Then we had kids. If we hadn't had kids, I doubt I ever would've gone back to work for pay. For one thing, when I worked in a very low paying job, and DH had a great income, getting up and going to work every day for the same number of hours for less money than DH even paid in taxes was rather demoralizing. I would stay busy, and I would not complain to DH. But I can understand why a woman might not work and why a DH might be okay without her working. Ironed shirts, clean house, nice meals, no spending your Saturdays shopping for stuff because you can do it on Tuesday morning at 10 am. No one has to take off work to meet the cable guy because the wife is at home. Def benefits.

[happi duck]

:iagree: What she said. Really, I think this topic says far more about one person's biases, resentments, and insecurities than it does about any anonymous couple's lifestyle choices. The very idea that a human being's value or a human relationship can be judged on a monetary scale is vile. I'm sorry that the implication hurts you so. I'll join in the :grouphug: .

Thanks...this means a lot.

 

I couldn't multi-quote on my phone.

 

You both made me tear up.

[Scarlett]

Because healthy adults are supposed to earn those things.

 

Growing up poor I heard it again and again, poor people deserve it because they DON'T WORK. Lazy. Shiftless. Useless. You don't work, you don't deserve to eat. Why do you think you deserve health care? Why do you think you deserve food? Why do you think you deserve an education? You're supposed to WORK for that. Poor people are so entitled. They think they can just have those things for free. Lazy. Lazy. Lazy. It's drilled into you. I grew up under Reagan. No free lunch. The guilt of being poor, the guilt of knowing how lazy we were. See the nice cars? He built that. He worked. See your car? You must not have worked. What I understood was that our misfortune, crappy schools, were a result of being lazy and making mistakes. Maybe a bit of bad luck but ultimately, poor habits. Not working.

 

Surely those habits are not good habits just because you're a married woman?

 

Surely the rule applies to everyone, work for rewards? No work, no food?

 

Or is that not a rule, that's just an excuse to blame poor people for their misfortune? And actually it is okay to get free stuff, so long as you aren't suffering?

 

Sounds like your upbringing was a little militant. I would take the deal your Co workers wife has. With no guilt. I would do less complaining and demanding probably but I don't do those things in general so probably a personality issue. Making and keeping a home has great value for a working spouse. For the couple. They are a partnership...or that is how we are. It isn't about each person making a certain amount of money to earn their keep. If that were the case I would be in trouble since I can make about 1/4 what my do makes. My time and energy is better spent making his life easier so he can make us a living.

[OneStepAtATime]

Thanks...this means a lot.

 

I couldn't multi-quote on my phone.

 

You both made me tear up.

You DO have value, absolutely, regardless of whether you are a wage earner or not.  100%.  Huge hugs and positive vibes heading your way.

 

And FWIW, I also don't think that someone making, say, $50,000 a year has more value than someone making $20,000 a year or less value than someone making $100,000 a year, nor do I feel that a child earning no income has less value than the child that got a part time job.  Our intrinsic value as people should not be tied to how much money we are bringing into our home.

[KungFuPanda]

I have an aunt that was a SAHW once the kids were grown. She and my uncle had a great partnership until he died last year. She kept a spotless house (even while raising 5 kids) and my uncle never had to do any cooking, cleaning, childcare, shopping, or errands unless he chose to. She helped the grandparents during the day. She raced around and find EVERYTHING during the day, then in the evening, she relaxed and hung out with my uncle. That woman stayed busy all day every day and was a happy, peaceful soul. They were a great couple.

 

I can see the benefit if you can afford it. Even DINK couples have to push their errands off until evenings or weekends and juggle who stays home for the plumber or cable guy. Some people don't WANT to eat take-out all the time or spend their weekends on laundry and housework. It seems a more fair arrangement then one where the husband and wife both work but the wife takes on most of the household responsibilities.

 

I don't think the problem is how this couple manages their finances. I think it's that she's too dependent on her husband god entertainment. It's possible that her social skills aren't that great and she's comfortable letting him be her only regular adult interaction. The relationship seems a bit precarious to me. On the surface it seems like she's needy, he's giving co-workers too much personal information, and their headed for financial risk. I'm guessing they're both a bit off and are with each other for a reason.

[Murphy101]

No. Food is not a reward for work.

 

Just like oxygen and love are not rewards only the self congratulatory who deem themselves worthy deserve.

 

2/3 of the world isn't living in squalor because they are just too lazy to step out of it or have bad habits.

 

The notion that only dumb lazy people don't have what rich people have is beyond blind to reality.

 

And it also gives a unhealthy view as to what hard work is supposed to mean. It is supposed to mean making a life or living, not just accumulating better or more stuff than the Jones and living more at work than actually living life.

Edited May 25, 2016 by Murphy101

[frogger]

Honestly, some Conservatives and others also do judge you a lot on how much you work. I completly understand where the OP is coming from. I don't agree with those people but I very much grew up in an environment that to be called lazy was THE worst insult way worse than a drunkard, a belligerent or just plain dumb. Most of these people worked their way up from nothing and the highest praise is to be called a hard worker after putting in a 12-14 hour day. Grandpa was a coal miner and got everything he had through pure struggle. So I wouldn't attack the OP. I think it is common for poor or working class to hear nasty comments from people about being lazy and worthless because you are poor and working class or unemployed. Actually, most people I know don't care how hard you work just don't expect them to hand the good life over to you when they worked their rear off for it. I think it is good to work hard but I don't (unlike many of my family)underestimate that some people struggle regardless. Perhaps they are dealing with illness or set backs due to family. There are a million variables.

 

After putting up with that, to hear that and see someone get a pass by society for doing what looks from the surface like diddly-squat well, I'm sure it can be frustrating.

 

I don't think we should judge others but Tsuga wasn't saying this particular person. She was wondering why this SAHW thing is ok. I'm sure their are examples of selfish SAHW who simply take advantage of their husband but I hope they are few and far between. Just as I hope controlling or lazy husbands or whatever other bad traits are a small minority but of course there are all types of people in this world. We all have to make these choices for ourselves based on our needs and values. My husband and I value my staying home for now. My husband actually has dealt with women at work who snottily said, "I couldn't just stay home and live off my husband. I would feel worthless." It bothered my husband and he had to make sure I didn't feel that way when he got home. He considers what I do highly valuable and every dollar he earns is ours not his.

Edited May 25, 2016 by frogger

[Guest]

I have an aunt that was a SAHW once the kids were grown. She and my uncle had a great partnership until he died last year. She kept a spotless house (even while raising 5 kids) and my uncle never had to do any cooking, cleaning, childcare, shopping, or errands unless he chose to. She helped the grandparents during the day. She raced around and find EVERYTHING during the day, then in the evening, she relaxed and hung out with my uncle. That woman stayed busy all day every day and was a happy, peaceful soul. They were a great couple.

 

I can see the benefit if you can afford it. Even DINK couples have to push their errands off until evenings or weekends and juggle who stays home for the plumber or cable guy. Some people don't WANT to eat take-out all the time or spend their weekends on laundry and housework. It seems a more fair arrangement then one where the husband and wife both work but the wife takes on most of the household responsibilities.

 

I don't think the problem is how this couple manages their finances. I think it's that she's too dependent on her husband god entertainment. It's possible that her social skills aren't that great and she's comfortable letting him be her only regular adult interaction. The relationship seems a bit precarious to me. On the surface it seems like she's needy, he's giving co-workers too much personal information, and their headed for financial risk. I'm guessing they're both a bit off and are with each other for a reason.

 

I'll TRY to make a long story short:  when we were DINKs we both made decent (OK, really good) money, and we were about even in salary.  When I wanted quit to stay home with the new baby, my dh was very much opposed because of the salary and stock options I was leaving behind.  I ended up quitting though.  We did lose the value of the stock options, but the salary thing was very interesting.  

 

We had saved in 401K, stock purchase, and any other way we could, about half of our take home, both of us.  So we were essentially LIVING on one salary (but that savings was a good thing to be able to do...I admit).  Anyway, when I quit, we noticed *very little* difference in our lives. We spent less on clothes, eating out, dry-cleaning, car insurance, entertaining (which we could more easily do at home and not have as much "catered").  And don't forget the childcare costs...ugh.  We were essentially spending my post-tax, post-savings salary on the cost of having two jobs.  

 

About 4 months after I quit, my dh took me out to dinner and made a beautiful speech about how he knew I had really not wanted to quit and had done it only because he hoped I would (??????what planet was he ON anyway?????) and how much better his life was now that I was at home.  He was more at ease about the kiddo, he was more rested, better fed; he got so much more leisure time to relax in because I could get so many errands done, our finances were stable and expenditures way down, and so on.  This had been so good for him, he wanted to thank me for my sacrifice.  (LOL)  And he produced a beautiful diamond ring as a thank you for all I had done to make his life better by giving up my paid employment (which I was sick to death of anyway).

 

I don't think that "better life" ended when I was no longer taking care of kids.  And it is better for me, too.   I don't think I could ever go back to the 9-5, because there is too much we both would  have to give up for me to do that, both materially and psychologically and spiritually.  

 

And he stuck it out at a job that he didn't like very much so we could have the off-hours be wonderful for both/all of us.  Now he is retired, too, and we find that we are redistributing jobs based on who likes them best/hates them least/has the better gifting to do them.  So I guess neither of us is "worth" very much at this point.  LOL.  

 

I make that last comment as a jest, but in case it inadvertently hurts someone, I want to say that I totally believe that value is intrinsic and (bear with me, here comes a Christian Comment) it is inherent in our being created in God's image.  So that makes us all completely valuable, including all who cannot contribute value to society.  Whatever that means.  I'm pretty sure it is the prayer of the monastics and the gifts of love from everyone that holds the world together anyway.  :0)

[LucyStoner]

I would point out that plenty of working class wives are SAHWs. I don't know where someone got the idea that it isn't an option in the working class.

 

It's definitely an option for the working class. Sometimes it isn't an option but a necessity. Contrary to a popular misconception the largest number of married SAHPs are from low income or working class families. Why? Because quite often they can't afford the work. If a couple has 2-3 kids and the earning power of the spouse at home won't cover daycare, commuting and other work related costs, getting a job could well mean losing financial ground.

 

For low income families they may find themselves in a bind where they can't earn too much without running the risk of loss of benefits they need more than they need a few extra bucks- for example health insurance for the kids or an affordable place to live.

 

A friend of mine just started staying home with his son because his wife makes a lot more than he can and childcare is so pricey here that it took him entire net paycheck from a retail job to for PT infant care.

 

Almost all news stories about SAHMs are about affluent college grads who opted out. In reality that is a fairly small group.

[Murphy101]

Most of the sahp that I know feel they can't afford to work. Very often their spouse has a job that means s/he can't just take off work to help with a sick kid so the other spouse doesn't miss more work and so forth.

 

No way my dh could do his job and help with the kids around any job I might have. Eventually, I would end up losing the job. Having to deal with kid conflicts was the number one cause dh saw for people getting written up at work or having to turn down work opportunities. Dh rarely had to do that and it was reflected in his pay and his ability to keep the jobs.

Edited May 25, 2016 by Murphy101

[OneStepAtATime]

Honestly, some Conservatives and others also do judge you a lot on how much you work. I completly understand where the OP is coming from. I don't agree with those people but I very much grew up in an environment that to be called lazy was THE worst insult way worse than a drunkard, a belligerent or just plain dumb. Most of these people worked their way up from nothing and the highest praise is to be called a hard worker after putting in a 12-14 hour day. Grandpa was a coal miner and got everything he had through pure struggle. So I wouldn't attack the OP. I think it is common for poor or working class to hear nasty comments from people about being lazy and worthless because you are poor and working class or unemployed. Actually, most people I know don't care how hard you work just don't expect them to hand the good life over to you when they worked their rear off for it. I think it is good to work hard but I don't (unlike many of my family)underestimate that some people struggle regardless. Perhaps they are dealing with illness or set backs due to family. There are a million variables.

 

After putting up with that, to hear that and see someone get a pass by society for doing what looks from the surface like diddly-squat well, I'm sure it can be frustrating.

 

I don't think we should judge others but Tsuga wasn't saying this particular person. She was wondering why this SAHW thing is ok. I'm sure their are examples of selfish SAHW who simply take advantage of their husband but I hope they are few and far between. Just as I hope controlling or lazy husbands or whatever other bad traits are a small minority but of course there are all types of people in this world. We all have to make these choices for ourselves based on our needs and values. My husband and I value my staying home for now. My husband actually has dealt with women at work who snottily said, "I couldn't just stay home and live off my husband. I would feel worthless." It bothered my husband and he had to make sure I didn't feel that way when he got home. He considers what I do highly valuable and every dollar he earns is ours not his.

 

I agree that sadly there are a lot of people who hear this.  Certainly in my own extended family there have definitely been times when someone who had little income was looked on as being lazy or making poor choices by another family member that made a LOT more money.  They both worked and worked hard.  What was not taken into account was that they came from different specific personal circumstances that had NOTHING to do with poor choices or laziness, they had different levels of available support from immediate family and luck also played a HUGE role in the difference in their income.  

 

I don't blame the OP for reacting in the way that she did, based on the message drilled into her head when she was young.  I do think since she said this is not a JAWM that open discussion and sharing of the various views is useful here.  The viewpoint that a person's value should be tied to monetary income can be incredibly harmful on all sides.

[Guest]

It's definitely an option for the working class. Sometimes it isn't an option but a necessity. Contrary to a popular misconception the largest number of married SAHPs are from low income or working class families. Why? Because quite often they can't afford the work. If a couple has 2-3 kids and the earning power of the spouse at home won't cover daycare, commuting and other work related costs, getting a job could well mean losing financial ground.

 

For low income families they may find themselves in a bind where they can't earn too much without running the risk of loss of benefits they need more than they need a few extra bucks- for example health insurance for the kids or an affordable place to live.

 

A friend of mine just started staying home with his son because his wife makes a lot more than he can and childcare is so pricey here that it took him entire net paycheck from a retail job to for PT infant care.

 

Almost all news stories about SAHMs are about affluent college grads who opted out. In reality that is a fairly small group.

That's the way it is in our area. If you average my husband's salary out over the two of us we are lower middle class for this city. Over the number of dependents we have? Just a smidge above qualifying for heating assistance. And yet hubby is in the top three percent of wage earners in this country.

 

Personal choices with finances and debt, cost of living for an area, childcare arrangements, energy costs, these all factor in to why a couple might have one member not working. We think we know someone but there is so much in every family that you have to be on the inside to see and understand - both good and bad. In our case what I'd make wouldn't offset the cost of me working to our family, let alone the less quantifiable things we'd lose in our quality of life like I outlined on the first page. It's a no brainer in our marriage and has been so from day one - we both wanted this and desired it for our various reasons and it suits us very well. Now we do it more out of necessity than desire but that only makes it make MORE sense for us.

 

We all judge based on our lives and experiences, but it's good to try and separate out what is a fair assessment and what is being colored by our values and experiences. Some things are pretty easy to divide in terms of better and worse choices, but how a couple designates their roles and finances really isn't one of those things.

[StaceyinLA]

Well, my kids are grown. I am no longer home schooling. I could get a job, but it's not likely to happen. It works for us because my husband enjoys coming home to a clean house, hot meal, clean/folded clothes, and a couple times a week a grandkid or two here for the night. We make choices based on our income. Maybe we can't afford every trip we want to take, or every new car we want to buy, but it's a lifestyle we choose and we are happy with it.

 

I look at it as the couple being a team. It's old-fashioned to some, but I like old-fashioned (now her whiny thing; that's kinda ridiculous). I have some friends that have never had kids (not by choice), and she is a nurse. She worked for some years, but they travel a lot and the last time they relocated, she didn't look for another job. She could earn a good income, but they don't really need it, and are both happy with her being home. She cooks meals, works out, does some therapy with her dog at the hospitals/schools, etc. It works for them.

[zoobie]

It's definitely an option for the working class. Sometimes it isn't an option but a necessity. Contrary to a popular misconception the largest number of married SAHPs are from low income or working class families. Why? Because quite often they can't afford the work. If a couple has 2-3 kids and the earning power of the spouse at home won't cover daycare, commuting and other work related costs, getting a job could well mean losing financial ground.

 

For low income families they may find themselves in a bind where they can't earn too much without running the risk of loss of benefits they need more than they need a few extra bucks- for example health insurance for the kids or an affordable place to live.

 

A friend of mine just started staying home with his son because his wife makes a lot more than he can and childcare is so pricey here that it took him entire net paycheck from a retail job to for PT infant care.

 

Almost all news stories about SAHMs are about affluent college grads who opted out. In reality that is a fairly small group.

 

Even middle to upper middle can have a hard time. I often do the math on frustrating SAHM days and wind up more depressed. 

[foxbridgeacademy]

*snip

 

 

 

My husband is not providing for me as a gift.   What an odd idea.  My working-class father would have snorted in derision at the notion that he was providing my mother, who never worked outside the home, for pay, after they were married, a gift.  She worked hard every day of her life, and he knew it, and he thanked her for it.

 

:iagree:

 

The ex told me this story about his grandparents....... The couple were in their 60's, he was about to retire she had worked prior to their marriage 40 years ago (that would have been the 1920's-1930's I think) but quit at his insistence when they got engaged, so here she is, 60 and she wanted a new refrigerator and since they were fairly well off and frugal she used the $$ she had saved from the grocery budget (or other such budget) over the years to buy one as a "present".  He went ballistic (I want to remind you they were reasonably well off, middle class of the 1960's-70's with good savings).  He said she was stealing from him.  She had raised their 5 boys and done all the household chores, chauffeured kids and cared for his mother in her last few years.... but buying a fridge was stealing?  She didn't speak to him for several days (moved to the guest room) then she gave him a bill of how much he owed her for all the years of work minus her share (as if they had been room mates) and said he could deposit the full amount in her new bank account by the next week or she was filing for divorce..... He transferred the money when she had her lawyer send him a letter stating that divorce proceedings would start on the a certain date.  I never got to meet her but from what I was told she was a quiet and reserved woman who'd you'd never expect to be that strong willed.

 

All that to say, the food I eat, the roof over my head, the clothes on my back I earned through hard work, they are not a gift and no one thinks I deserve them more then my husband.  

 

*I should add that he often added in after the story was told (usually by his son) that it was cheaper to give her the money then the divorce (they were in a community property state?). 

Edited May 26, 2016 by foxbridgeacademy