<p>Well of course I agree with you, PG. Maybe society will catch up with us. In the meantime, we have had a generation of more of couple’s arguing about who’s responsible for various household tasks. I think that misses the big picture. Why aren’t those household tasks seen as enjoyable, worthwhile work rather than an annoying and tedious responsibility? Is it because they have traditionally been women’s work? Men do woodworking, landscaping, car work for hobbies. Does anyone see homemaking as a hobby? Well - me and a few others. </p>
<p>I don’t actually think of raising children or whatnot as “women’s work.” But, I think a lot of it “falls” to women as a default position, for whatever reason. Whether this is “right or wrong” is another discussion, or this discussion, but different than what I am saying. </p>
<p>I do believe if any man or woman decides to leave the work force to raise the kids and take care of being the support person on team marriage, they should get a post nup and make sure they understand that nobody outside of that relationship is going to “value” this work as “experience” for the future. I’m not sure whether I agree with this or not. It depends.</p>
<p>I think you and I are from the same general age range, PG, and we were told that we could do either, and that each were equally as valuable. In the end this hasn’t turned out to be the case, I don’t think. I think there are a lot of women who left the work force and did this support team work and they have ended up with nothing because of it. I chose a career, but I also made a couple of choices careerwise, like not moving to another place at a certain stage of my kids’ schooling, whatnot, that impacted my trajectory. (I’ve had a nice enough trajectory, anyway, and I wouldn’t change my path, but it did have an effect.) </p>
<p>All that said, a young woman, today, unlike the women our age, knows unequivocally that leaving the workforce is leaving the workforce and she had better get a post nup, same for a young man. Protect yourself is all. </p>
<p>I really like the post-nup idea.</p>
<p>Its essential, in my opinion, since when one person stays home it is a joint decision, nobody should give up their earning potential for free. That support position is responsible for a LOT of successful careers. If you can just run off to do whatever you want whenever you want, you REALLY benefit. Nobody should give that away for free. </p>
<p>Also, just as an aside, I do cook as a hobby. I love to cook. </p>
<p>and men cook as a hobby, too. : ) my husband</p>
<p>I’m off now to ruminate on Deborah’s zen nuggets.</p>
<p>“Why aren’t those household tasks seen as enjoyable, worthwhile work rather than an annoying and tedious responsibility? Is it because they have traditionally been women’s work? Men do woodworking, landscaping, car work for hobbies.”</p>
<p>Not all men enjoy woodworking, landscaping or car work as hobbies, though. For every guy who enjoys landscaping, there’s another guy who just sees the darn yard needs to be mowed again and isn’t there some teenager I can offload this to. People are different, that’s all. Some people enjoy cooking, others don’t. Some people enjoy organizing, others don’t. Give me all afternoon and a kitchen - I couldn’t be bothered, I still don’t want to cook. Give me your clothing closet - I’ll whip that sucker into shape in no time 
I don’t think it’s because it’s “women’s work” - I just think people are different, that’s all.</p>
<p>But you touch on something important here – why are women guilted into feeling they “should” like to do these tasks? Do guys feel guilty if they don’t know how to sew on buttons or hem pants or iron shirts? No - they say - I’d rather spend the time working and then pay someone to sew on buttons or hem pants or iron shirts, because it’s worth the trade-off. Why aren’t women “allowed” to feel that way? Why are the base expectations for what women can / should / like to do so different? </p>
<p>That’s actually one thing that bugs me about Michael Pollan and all that food movement. It subtly says we all “should” want to cook. Why, in a world when I can go buy healthful prepared food at Whole Foods? I don’t make my own clothing anymore, but I don’t feel guilty over that.</p>
<p>Actually, if I’m honest, I hate cleaning so damn much it partially drove my choice to have a career. I just did NOT want to be responsible for that stuff for anybody else. (In the end, I was able to hire people to be responsible for that for everyone else AND me, which was honestly my original not so lofty goal.)</p>
<p>I love to cook. I don’t care, though, if people eat frozen food, personally. It’s not anything other than I like it for me the way a friend of mine loves to garden.</p>
<p>From my perspective, there have always been plenty of folks trying to make me feel guilty for my life choices. I was “supposed” to have a career. Staying home was going to be “boring”</p>
<p>I am not arguing for one true path. And certainly not arguing that paths are gender linked. I’m about to go have coffee with deborah (if she’ll have me) 
I’m serving store bought cake.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl: your last three posts (edit–posts I’m referring to are farther up the thread, not most recent 3 posts, as more were posted while I composed this. . .) are an example of what NJSue, poetgirl and I were talking about: Devaluing the work of mothers and homemakers. This is why a lot of women don’t want to call themselves feminists. It seems more women than men want to degrade the work of other women who spend their lives in mothering/homemaking. Yes, women are still “free to choose” to be SAHMs/homemakers, (if they have support–that is, if someone agrees to “hire” them) but that is inferior to paid work done by women outside the home?
. Some would define “career” as only those jobs that require higher education–thus excluding maids, waitresses, sales clerks, etc. from having “careers.” I will stick with the Webster’s dictionary definition of “career” (job done for a long time). Possibility of getting fired not part of the definition. (For incompetent homemakers–divorce?)</p>
<p>Everything a mother/homemaker does can also found in paid employment. People pay others to manage their households, clean, do laundry, care for their children, prepare/serve food, shop/drive/run errands, tutor/help with homework, do yardwork, decorate/plan events, sew/repair things, pay bills, make appointments, provide counseling/psychological support, care for sick/injured, and yes, even have sex and bear children. So, if it is “paid for by others” it is worthy? But if a woman provides ALL of these services (and others) as part of a private “contract” (within her own family) with her husband earning money and supporting her (i.e. paying her) continuously for decades. . .it isn’t really her career? I do consider the support the husband provides as “payment.”
The fact that I feel the need to say here that I also work part time, do “contribute financially” to our household, and supported H for years while he was in school/not working-- is a symptom of this problem–inferiority complex that SAHMs have been given. Who cares if I, as a SAHM, contribute nothing but blood, sweat and tears? I wouldn’t be any less valuable to the people who depend on me. But to feminists, I’d be an oppressed, 50s throwback. And lazy, too. Because working mothers do all of these things (with a little paid help from those who have “careers” in childcare. . . ) AND have REAL careers on top of that.
Granted, it is a lot easier to be a SAHM with one or two kids, than with seven. But raising any number of kids is a completely different job/set of responsibilities than a single man coming home from work, cooking his own dinner and cleaning up after himself. (Which my 26yo S does, very badly.) </p>
<p>Pizzagirl, </p>
<p>Do you feel guilty? </p>
<p>People who have choices should make them and not feel guilty. </p>
<p>Why care if somebody thinks you should do this task or that task? If you don’t want to cook or sew, don’t cook or sew. </p>
<p>I don’t care what people think about what I do…except for my wife because she is impacted by what I do. People don’t care what I do or what you do. They care what they do. So… Don’t beat yourself up worrying about what others think. They aren’t thinking about you. </p>
<p>I don’t do any of these man hobbies. They are boring.</p>
<p>Try to do what you want, whatever it is, and don’t worry about others. Most people are crazy anyway. :)</p>
<p>Nobody gets all their choices. You can be married or single. Have kids or not. Choose to stay at home or make more money. </p>
<p>If a man is a sahm dad, his career prospects dim also. The family makes less money. That is ok. There are tradeoffs in life. </p>
<p>If a woman doesn’t want to get married or have kids, she shouldn’t get married or have kids. Same with a man. </p>
<p>Okay, I actually have to get to work. Haha. Not even kidding. </p>
<p>But, that is where I wish the feminist movement hadn’t gotten off track. I wish we didn’t make each other feel guilty. I have always tried very very hard to be clear I value all the choices. Above all, for me, anyway, I value choice. </p>
<p>I also recognize this to be a very high class SES position to take, and recognize this to be one of the main complaints about the feminist movement, in general, that it is a bunch of upper class white women arguing about a lot of “choices” most women don’t even have. </p>
<p>I hope the cake has buttercream icing. </p>
<p>“Yes, women are still “free to choose” to be SAHMs/homemakers, (if they have support–that is, if someone agrees to “hire” them) but that is inferior to paid work done by women outside the home?”</p>
<p>Who said it was inferior? Read my post carefully. I never once said inferior. I think you’re reading in there things I never said. </p>
<p>Not meeting the definition of a career.
Not paid=not worth as much/not as valuable. Just ordinary tasks and responsibilities that everyone does here and there, the sum total of which does not add up to a “career.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’ve heard a LOT of reasons why people don’t want to call themselves feminists. That has never been one of them. </p>
<p>Feminism fights for the rights of women AND men to pursue the path best for them. They also fight to have the social resources available to do that- like the rest of the developed world has figured out but we’re stuck in the 1800s about. </p>
<p>But that doesn’t make SAHM or SAHD a career. It doesn’t make it any less or more valuable than a career, but it’s not the same thing. </p>
<p>Let’s reverse it. You wouldn’t say you’re a parent at your job, because you’re not. You’d say you’re an employee. Likewise, you wouldn’t say you’re a boss to your children (in the job sense- you might say it jokingly), you’re the parent. </p>
<p>PG/Romani
Why do you want the definition of “CAREER” to exclude homemakers/SAHMs–so badly that you would spend multiple posts on how their work doesn’t meet your definition? I can’t really think of a reason, other than to say that their work “doesn’t count as much because it is not paid.” Again, it is hard not to see this as a putdown. I’m still sticking with the dictionary definition of career.</p>
<p>Romani: regarding reasons why some women don’t like to call themselves feminists–if you haven’t heard that reason (devaluing work of mothers/homemakers) you haven’t been around very long. And you probably haven’t talked to many older, traditional homemakers/SAHMs. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is ironic, considering I think pizzagirl has mentioned that she pays someone to do at least some of the responsibilities of a stay-at-home-mom.</p>
<p>So it’s a career when you explicitly get paid to do something in someone else’s home. If you do it in your own home and the financial renumeration is not explicit but you have access to household income, then it is not a career.</p>
<p>A similar situation is if the husband runs a business and the wife helps out with the business (or vice versa.) It may not financially be beneficial to have the spouse be paid.</p>
<p>This is partly the justification for splitting the assets 50-50 even if the man is the only one generating an income. </p>
<p>My opinion is that it should be considered a career, even though the financial renumeration is not explicit.</p>
<p>I used to listen to my daughter talk to her friends when she was a teenager. The converstations about other girls could be brutal. </p>
<p>I used to listen and think, “I am attracted to your sex? Mature women can’t be like this”. </p>
<p>I was wrong. ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s not a matter of my definition. I am using a sociological/economic definition. </p>
<p>Why is it so important to you to make it a career? Why is that important? Not being a career isn’t devaluing it unless you’re so locked in a Capitalistic framework that ONLY “careers” are valuable. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It most certainly is one of the reasons women don’t want to call themselves feminists. It’s not universal, but there certainly is a strain of feminists that looked down on the stay-at-home moms.</p>
<p>It took me a very long time to forgive: “I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies…” , which seemed to me incredibly divisive for no particularly good reason.</p>