<p>Men need to move into jobs considered female</p>
<p><a href=“How Can We Jump-Start the Struggle for Gender Equality? - The New York Times”>How Can We Jump-Start the Struggle for Gender Equality? - The New York Times;
<p>An interesting read for me last weekend.</p>
<p>“Wow–am not aware of any nannies getting the salary you mentioned.”</p>
<p>I should have said that I was talking about NY/Boston/DC/SF/etc. Cash salaries in the $35-40k range are common even for undocumented women with experience and good recommendations. People with Green Cards, never mind citizens, can ask for more, though many still prefer to be paid in cash for the same tax reasons lots of people prefer it. In the neighborhood I know best in Queens, most of the nannies for upper-middle-class white and Asian families are Caribbean immigrants of undiscussed status. In my friends’ experience, they are often superb and would do a great job in any fancy preschool. Of course, you can find younger, less experienced, or less talented ones at lower rates.</p>
<p>Aptly parodied here: <a href=“Pregnancy, Parenting, Lifestyle, Beauty: Tips & Advice | mom.com”>Pregnancy, Parenting, Lifestyle, Beauty: Tips & Advice | mom.com;
<p>
</p>
<p>Any idea who holds the key to change this status of those who do this work? I have read that beginning in the late 1970s more women than men attended college, now 25% more women than men graduate from college, 60% of the primary breadwinners are women.</p>
<p>Another article indicated that barely half (51%) of American women under age 30 know how to make a roast where 82% of baby boomer women said they could do so. The use of pre-prepared, fast food and carry-out for meals has increased greatly. This article noted that certain other skills such as sewing/mending and stain removal have been assumed by dry cleaners.</p>
<p>Is it actually women who have relegated “women’s work” to low status? At least in my immediate group of friends, it is the wife who determines how much the maid gets paid. I have yet to have one suggest that they get paid more than what the current rate is.</p>
<p>I am not going to even attempt to argue women don’t frequently underpay other women. And there are definitely class issues at play here. imho</p>
<p>Did you read the article I posted from the NY Times last weekend? #321. I hadn’t really considered how much having men in traditionally female jobs changes things.</p>
<p>upthread one woman posted her brother, as a SAHP, was paid for the sort of tasks helping out others that women as SAHP, are expected to do for free. I have really been pondering that one.</p>
<p>I did read the article. It did not seem to address the way to get society to agree to pay more issue. I did not see a suggestion how to increase the status (especially the low pay) of nurses (for instance).</p>
<p>What did you see as the suggestion? I thought it lacked anything to suggest how more male nurses would result in higher status for nurses. Did you see something on this?</p>
<p>The article seemed to focus on social policies to make the female not have to make an “either or” decision.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I thought he asked for money, not a trade-out and that the women tended to trade-out. The SAHF got the working moms and dads to pay him for “women’s work.”</p>
<p>Many women choose to be teachers and nurses because they welcome the trade-offs allowed in those professions. Maybe some are seeking more status but most I know are glad to get home in time to make dinner and have days off to spend with their families. I don’t think this is a societal problem at all, necessarily. Each family has to figure it out on their own, and even if they do it may not work out. How is that even ever fixable?</p>
<p>Part of it is whether or not we actually value families as something other than a supply of workers.</p>
<p>Why do we only have two states with public paid family leave programs?
[US:</a> Lack of Paid Leave Harms Workers, Children | Human Rights Watch](<a href=“http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/02/23/us-lack-paid-leave-harms-workers-children]US:”>US: Lack of Paid Leave Harms Workers, Children)</p>
<p>
[Paid</a> Parental Leave: U.S. vs. The World (INFOGRAPHIC)](<a href=“HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost”>Paid Parental Leave: U.S. vs. The World (INFOGRAPHIC) | HuffPost Life)</p>
<p>“I don’t think this is a societal problem at all, necessarily.”</p>
<p>I would agree with you if the choices were really free in the aggregate. Society ought to be interested in talents being directed where they will generate the most value. If a woman really would prefer to be, and excel at being, a legislator, but chooses to be a teacher because the political profession is so much less accommodating of a primary parent’s needs, then society isn’t using her talents as efficiently as it could. We lose out on her leadership and input. We’d all be better off if we could find ways to make more fields more realistic for more parents. </p>
<p>Some jobs, like transplant surgeon, really can’t be adjusted to a predictable schedule, but a whole lot more of them could be than are. We shouldn’t just accept that law firms or banks are inherently hostile to parenting demands and shrug when women make other choices. Lots of fields have changed in ways that seemed impossible before they happened. Not that long ago, a part-time pediatrics residency was unheard of; now it’s practically the norm.</p>
<p>Also, what ek said.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What happens when we don’t see jobs as “male” jobs and “female” jobs? At that point, do salaries even out? Women have been moving into male dominated fields, not so much the other way.</p>
<p>cptofthehouse #184
</p>
<p>I wondered if I had misread this. Frequently I was asked to take the kids of others to the same activities as my own. No one ever offered me money. Only good friends offered any sort of trade-off arrangement. Usually the suggestion was “since I was driving anyway” I might as well. The post made me think of this: often, while homeschooling, I was asked by other moms if I could teach their kids as well as my own when we did certain subjects. I declined. There was a dad homeschooling and teaching the same subject. He was offered money to teach the extra kids.</p>
<p>cptofthehouse: did anyone ever offer to pay you for chauffeuring their kids along with your own? even contribute to gas? any other moms?</p>
<p>You are probably correct that women do this to themselves. If we don’t value what we do, no one else will.</p>
<h1>328 - excellent - I always get a lot out of your posts</h1>
<h1>327 - ditto</h1>
<p>I haven’t read this entire thread but if the concern is society as opposed to the SAHM being dissatisfied when her job is done I think you can make a pretty good case that that time spent raising children was a huge contribution to society.</p>
<p>I agree flossy. Not a choice I would make, but the exact reason I say there ought to be the same push to hire ex SAHMs as Vets. </p>
<p>I see these as things we need</p>
<p>Women do not have it easy. My own wife quit her job after we got married so she could move with me out west for my first job. She got pregnant soon thereafter and never rejoined the workforce. My career enables her to stay at home, and I think both she and the kids appreciate that, but she also feels undervalued outside the home and sort of directionless now that the kids are older. Several times we have discussed her going back to work but when we factored in the associated costs and hassles with kids’ illnesses and vacations, it just did not seem worth it. </p>
<p>I am very cognizant of the fact that I can be a dad and have a career, but for her the choice was not so simple.</p>
<p>I have a friend who is an engineer by education. She married an engineer who became disabled while in his 50s. They were wholly living on his income, as she was a SAHM and they had one child. Not sure what they’re currently living on, as his disability benefits may have been exhausted. They have not sold their lovely home yet and I believe it sits vacant and aging while they are renting a place near where their S and new DIL attend/ed law school in LA. </p>
<p>The SAHM prays a lot but hasn’t any ideas how to enter the workforce. It doesn’t appear her H can return either.</p>
<p>I feel bad for your wife, lurkerdad, that she feels undervalued and directionless. I have never felt that way, and my H and I are enjoying being empty nesters this year. I do have a lot of regular volunteer commitments that keep me busy.</p>
<p>*But I also think as women make more [money] they don’t automatically get to decide to transfer, whereas when men make more, they do. At least that’s what I saw in our generation.</p>
<p>I think our daughters will be different. I think both partners will have veto power, but it doesn’t make it any easier, maybe a little more difficult to be a “unit.”*</p>
<p>I do wonder how this will continue to play out. Will we see more couples breaking up because Spouse 1’s career doesn’t transfer well, but Spouse 2 can’t pass up a great opportunity? </p>
<p>In Calif, two moms in my social circle were married to men who got transferred routinely…one worked for Marriott Hotels and the other worked for Toys R Us. They never lived anywhere for more than 2 years. Both moms abandoned their careers simply because their resumes were so spotty it was embarrassing to even apply for jobs. By the time they’d get hired, they’d be leaving 12 or so months later. Soon it became apparent that no one wanted to take a chance on them.</p>
<p>I don’t know what they would have done if they both had had entrenched careers, then married, then had their H’s start this transfer business. I suspect that their marriages would have folded or (again) the wives would have quit. </p>
<p>I guess when dating and considering marriage, people are going to have consider what types of careers they have (how mobile) and what kind of careers their potential spouses have. It’s kind of sad to think, but probably necessary, that one partner is going to think, “hey, I can’t marry XXXXXX, because his/her career is firmly settled here, and mine will likely take me to a couple different states.”</p>
<p>“you can make a pretty good case that that time spent raising children was a huge contribution to society.”</p>
<p>Of course it was. But if we set things up a little differently, maybe she could have done that AND made her best contribution to the work world. We don’t know what her choice of balance might have been if some of our workplaces weren’t so hostile.</p>
<p>Several times we have discussed her going back to work but when we factored in the associated costs and hassles with kids’ illnesses and vacations, it just did not seem worth it.</p>
<p>Yes, it can be a pain in the tush when one long-working spouse has 6 weeks vacation a year, and a newly reemployed spouse only gets 2 weeks…with no flex time whatsoever. It can be frustrating for both spouses. It’s frustrating to the spouse that can’t take off and it’s frustrating to the spouse who’s not used to being concerned about whether his/her spouse has enough vacation days. </p>
<p>While of course people struggle thru these issues when the 2nd income is sorely needed. They have to. They both know that they have to “suck it up.” lol But, when the money isn’t needed, then it’s easy for the couple to think…it’s not worth it…because now they’ll be tied down by the restrictions of this new job of a low ranking employee.</p>
<p>One friend of mine wants to return to work, but everytime she considers it, her H reminds them of some upcoming family event, birth of a new grandchild, or something that will take them out of town. She knows that as a “new hire”, she wouldn’t be able to go…and her H doesn’t want to go alone (but does want to go).</p>
<p>That’s why it’s hard to judge why some SAHP don’t return to traditional full-time employment when the money isn’t really needed.</p>
<p>07Dad…</p>
<p>Back in post #278, you included someone’s quote of
“Quote:
All men are 100% committed to themselves.”</p>
<p>Where did that quote come from? Just curious.</p>
<p>60% of the primary breadwinners are women.</p>
<p>But doesn’t that include many single-mother households? I doubt that 60% of women are the primary breadwinners in married households.</p>
<p>Did you read the article I posted from the NY Times last weekend? #321. I hadn’t really considered how much having men in traditionally female jobs changes things.</p>
<p>Yes…and when a traditionally “male job” becomes a predominantly “female job” pay decreases.</p>
<p>I said that all men are 100% committed to themselves.</p>
<p>People seem to think I mean that this is selfish or bad. I don’t. I just mean a young woman had better be 100% committed to herself, as well. I don’t see these things as bad.</p>
<p>Let me explain. My daughter is 100% committed to herself and her career. Her fiance is, as well. For both of them this means they are 100% committed to the relationship as well as their careers. He moved with her for a job opportunity at graduation. She has a new opportunity in another city, but he has asked her to stay put for 3 years so he can get some time in at this new career he really likes.</p>
<p>Because she is committed to herself, she prefers to be in the relationship and is agreeing to this. But, it’s not seen as a no brainer the way it used to be. If she wants something else in three years, because of her career, then that will be a part of the conversation.</p>
<p>I think it used to be, at least when we were that age, not really all that long ago, not even much of a factor.</p>