 |
|
|
|
|
Zehava
|
 Thu, Oct 14 2021, 1:35 am
| amother [ Cinnamon ] wrote: | He works two jobs. I barely ever see him. Maybe most of us aren’t as lucky as you where you can afford to stay home.
I’m proud of working hard. He is too. He doesn’t want to take money from anyone.
I’m grateful to Hashem that I have a job and so does he, and that we can pay our tuitions in full and that we can pay the mortgage and we can give tzedakah. |
Great. Good for you. That doesn’t make a SAHM any less of an adult for not doing what you’re doing.
If he was making enough on his own to support the family wouldn’t you stay home with the kids?
| |
|
| Back to top |
0 
5 
|
amother
Cinnamon
|
Thu, Oct 14 2021, 1:36 am
| amother [ Wine ] wrote: | It’s not a contradiction. It is the most optimal choice and a luxury for those who can bh manage that.
Women were not meant to raise kids, run a household, and provide financial stability too. It was always meant to be a partnership where the DH provides and DW stays home to raise the kids and manage the house.
Unfortunately, not everyone manages on a one person income and therefore the DW does have to run herself ragged and juggle all balls. But why can’t you agree that being a SAHM is the optimal choice? |
It’s the luxurious choice.
Everything else you’ve said is completely devoid of knowledge of world history. The industrial revolution changed the household, but only for a brief bubble before it burst and expenses caught back up. For the majority of life, women worked extremely hard to maintain a household (without machines it was hard labor, not including farm life and sewing clothing) and often the household functioned by sending children out to work as well. My grandmothers helped out in the family business back in the heim, as did their mothers.
I’d like to see where the world promised you a rose garden, where you stayed home all day and played children’s games for optimal child development and this was somehow the blueprint for generations.
| |
|
| Back to top |
1
11
|
Zehava
|
Thu, Oct 14 2021, 1:39 am
| amother [ Cinnamon ] wrote: | It’s the luxurious choice.
Everything else you’ve said is completely devoid of knowledge of world history. The industrial revolution changed the household, but only for a brief bubble before it burst and expenses caught back up. For the majority of life, women worked extremely hard to maintain a household (without machines it was hard labor, not including farm life and sewing clothing) and often the household functioned by sending children out to work as well. My grandmothers helped out in the family business back in the heim, as did their mothers.
I’d like to see where the world promised you a rose garden, where you stayed home all day and played children’s games for optimal child development and this was somehow the blueprint for generations. |
TBH you seem resentful. And I wouldn’t blame you one bit. You seem to want to believe that your lifestyle is the standard. Or should be. Otherwise you’d feel disadvantaged.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
3
|
Zehava
|
Thu, Oct 14 2021, 1:46 am
| amother [ Cinnamon ] wrote: | No. I think it’s a wrong value to send our daughters that the only path is to stay home and deny yourself the ability to enter the workforce, and that men should be the only ones making a living. You get a degree and you do what you can. Otherwise we might as well bind their feet like the Chinese used to do - it’s crippling.
Maybe you don’t see that, but then again, it’s privilege to rely on someone else to make all the money. |
Are you maybe sending the wrong value to your boys by doing everything in the house? Isn’t it crippling to them that they’ll always need to rely on someone else to do the laundry and cooking? Isn’t that a privilege? Who says they’ll always have a woman in their life to do these things for them? Why don’t you make your husband cook dinner some days just so your boys aren’t denied the ability to do housework?
| |
|
| Back to top |
1
4
|
amother
Calendula
|
Thu, Oct 14 2021, 1:48 am
| amother [ Cinnamon ] wrote: | He works two jobs. I barely ever see him. Maybe most of us aren’t as lucky as you where you can afford to stay home.
I’m proud of working hard. He is too. He doesn’t want to take money from anyone.
I’m grateful to Hashem that I have a job and so does he, and that we can pay our tuitions in full and that we can pay the mortgage and we can give tzedakah. |
I'm sorry, I'm tired and it's late, so I'm not saying this nicely - you are obnoxious.
You know how we all hated that girl who studied three seconds for the math test, got a hundred, and wondered out loud why everyone studied so many hours? Well, that girl didn't actually exist, at least in my class, but this is exactly what you're doing.
Really not every woman has the kochos to work while taking care of the kids, all the regular household chores and appointments etc.... thank Hashem that you are able to do it without denigrating those that can't.
You are obviously an unusual woman of unusual abilities. Most women couldn't do it - your comments are uncalled for.
| |
|
| Back to top |
3
7
|
amother
Emerald
|
Thu, Oct 14 2021, 2:09 am
| amother [ Wine ] wrote: | It’s not a contradiction. It is the most optimal choice and a luxury for those who can bh manage that.
Women were not meant to raise kids, run a household, and provide financial stability too. It was always meant to be a partnership where the DH provides and DW stays home to raise the kids and manage the house.
Unfortunately, not everyone manages on a one person income and therefore the DW does have to run herself ragged and juggle all balls. But why can’t you agree that being a SAHM is the optimal choice? |
Personally, I am not sure at all that being a SAHM is the most optimal choice. I say this with the perspective of someone whose children are mainly all young adults now. (And who are embarking on their own career paths at the moment).
IMHO, being a SAHM is wonderful for the first two years of a child's life if possible. (Wonderful is not the same as optimal). Afterwards, I don't think there is anything harmful with a kid being out of the house till three everyday, which would allow a woman to work p/t.
Even during those first two years, there are many cultures where the grandmother steps in to help with childcare, allowing the mother to work without sending the kid to daycare.
In situations where a woman has 5,6,7 kids during her childbearing years, I can see how it could often be optimal to be a SAHM during those years. Often - not always. Because there are other factors to be considered. Things like a family's financial stability, financial peace of mind. The wife's wellbeing (intellectually, socially, personally). The husband's wellbeing. A woman's independence (being a SAHM for 20 yrs incredibly limits your options if you want to make changes in your life, including things like leaving a bad marriage).
I definitely don't think being a SAHM is optimal once all your kids are over three. (Of course, if you love it and can afford it, then go for it. But it's a luxury, not an optimal necessity). I do believe that at that stage, the cost outweighs the benefits for most women.
But of course, whether or not a SAHM is optimal needs to be viewed case by case. How many kids do you have? How old are they? Do you have an involved dh who will take over his share of household duties when you work? (In my circles, men definitely do a lot of housework and childcare). Do you live in a country where it's possible not to work f/t? Do you have a flexible job? Etc etc.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
9
|
|
Imamother is a community of frum Jewish women, where you can come to relax,
socialize, debate, receive support, ask questions and much more.
© 2021 Imamother.com - All rights reserved
|  |
