U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Relationships
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-23-2012, 01:47 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
4,464 posts, read 9,612,429 times
Reputation: 2818

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by onihC View Post
Nope. I did agree that both father/mother have to do their part in all aspects raising the child but as for deciding the baby's fateb (to let the baby live or kill it through abortion) a man has no word/opinion whatsoever.
Well yeah, that's obvious, I was speaking as if the child would be born, as parenthood is the topic.

EDIT: Well, he might have an opinion, in fact in most cases he would, but it's not his decision, I would find it a bit odd, if in a relationship a woman doesn't even want to talk with her partner to get his/her opinion on the subject though.

 
Old 04-23-2012, 01:48 PM
 
460 posts, read 547,845 times
Reputation: 741
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheViking85 View Post
So fathers are completely unneeded and has no say in their childs life? That's an interesting take on it.



Like I said, I think we'd both be inclined to work reduced hours, if possible, but a) I don't think you have to be with a child 24/7 to raise it.
b) There are plenty of very good day care facilities, at least in the environments I'm familiar with, that is of great benefit to the child and sending a child there would be an example of great parenting because the child would be better off because of it.

Just because you don't spend all waking hours in the presence of a child does not mean you're leaving it up to someone else to raise it.
I agree! I never implied otherwise. I was just saying that I know working parents would never say that but you seemed to be implying that at the time.

I don't agree that daycares are beneficial to children. I don't think the are necessarily harmful but not any more beneficial (at least in a home where parents are educated). I accomplish all the outside socialization needs with a 5 hour a week pre-school environment, play dates, swim lessons, and t-ball lessons for my 4 year old. The rest of the time he's with me and his brother (1 year old who does not need much socialization beyond the family at this time) doing various things.
 
Old 04-23-2012, 02:18 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
4,464 posts, read 9,612,429 times
Reputation: 2818
Quote:
Originally Posted by southshorelady View Post
I agree! I never implied otherwise. I was just saying that I know working parents would never say that but you seemed to be implying that at the time.

I don't agree that daycares are beneficial to children. I don't think the are necessarily harmful but not any more beneficial (at least in a home where parents are educated). I accomplish all the outside socialization needs with a 5 hour a week pre-school environment, play dates, swim lessons, and t-ball lessons for my 4 year old. The rest of the time he's with me and his brother (1 year old who does not need much socialization beyond the family at this time) doing various things.
As much as I'm not an idiot nor uneducated, I'm more than willing to admit that thee are many things that others do and know better than me, some of these things my children will be subject to in day care, others in school.

One daycare I know of for instance, grows most of their own food, raise farm animals (that are then, in some cases turned into food) etc. The children aged 1 through 5 take part in the care of the animals, the growing of food and learn a lot about the process as well as where food comes from (sorely lacking knowledge these days), now, I could attempt to teach my children all this myself, but they likely get a better understanding of it, when they get it from someone who does this professionally. In return, I get to focus my time with my potential children doing what I know best. I don't know how it's possible for them not to benefit from that.
 
Old 04-23-2012, 02:18 PM
 
2,653 posts, read 4,589,363 times
Reputation: 1893
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miss Crabcakes View Post
The "ladies of leisure" thread got me thinking about the breadwinner husbands in the deal where they work to support the entire family and the wife stays home to raise kids and tend to the home.

I didn't grow up in an environment where this was common and grew up thinking both parents were supposed to work and when I was older and heard of the SAHM concept, I thought it was odd; to have one parent work and pay for everything. I've since opened up and better understand but I still wonder sometimes if the husband ever feels some resentment from having to shoulder the full financial burden. I know I'm the breadwinner in the family (as well as the chief financial officer) and I don't care for it. I don't like the pressure of knowing that without my paycheck, we would not have a home.

So for the men, if you earned enough to support an entire family, would you prefer your wife to stay home? What about when the kids are school-aged? Are there any men who would prefer their wives to work and help with finances?

Just curious.
My wife has done both - SAHM and working mom, and I prefer the SAHM. She pulled in enough money to more then cover the cost of childcare, and both of our jobs gave us the flexibility to handle family emergencies like sicknesses, Dr. Appts, etc. so we had an almost ideal situation to be a two income family. But she decided she wanted to be at home, and my income grew to a point that we could make it work, so she took the SAHM plunge. The Pros and cons for the husband in my experience:

The pros:
1. Peace of Mind about my kids - I know my 2 sons are with someone I can trust and loves them more then anything. They seem to know it as well. While my wife and I talk and about and share decisions about raising our kids, she researches all the options and executes all our decision. She handles all the kids scheduling, issues at school, manages speech therapy for my youngest, shuttles kids to scouts, soccer, baseball, etc. She also has time to volunteer in school, PTA, etc. and I know our kids get the better teachers and more attention from the school staff because of it. Basically her full time job is to take care off the kids, and she is very focussed on it.
2. I travel frequently for work. If we were both working I would feel real guilty leaving her holding the bag with the kids all the time.
3. She now handles most of the errand running and day to day minutae of keeping up our house, I still handle the money, the yard on weekends, make the occasional grocery run, but by and large she does most of the rest. I don't have to think about those things anymore, scramble to get the dry cleaning picked up or exchange panicked emails/ voicemails about who's picking up the kids because my meeting/flight/commute home has me running late.
4. I can concentrate on my work. I have a high stress, high performance expectation career. I can focus on getting my work done and doing it well. From a career standpoint I have to take the needs of my wife and family into consideration, but I hve greeater freedom to go after roles that require travel or may involve relocation. If my wife was still working that would be a whole other conversation.

Cons:
1. Less money. I drive a 6 year old Honda. I could be driving a new BMW.
2. More financial pressure. While my work situation has not changed one iota, I am keenly aware my income is the only thing keeping us in our present circumstances. I worry about this A LOT more then I used to.
3. Often being her only outlet for adult conversation. Some days I come home and she is just bursting to vent about whatever her issue du jour is. And sometimes that comes and I am totally wiped out after a tough day in the office. It is not a fun evening when those 2 things intersect.
4. Sometimes my wife internalizes the messaging that being a SAHM makes her some how "less than" - Less important than me, the working spouse. Less significant or competant than a working mom, etc. I highly value the role she is playing in our lives and I hate that she is made to feel some how "Less Than" for being a SAHM. I have to pump her back up about this from time to time. I do it to support my wife, but it frustrates me that I should have to. I'm not frustrated with her, but with the enviroment that sends her those messages.

All in all, I think the pros outweigh the cons. Your mileage may vary. But I am happier now with this situation, and so is she.
 
Old 04-23-2012, 02:45 PM
 
Location: The Jar
20,071 posts, read 13,712,419 times
Reputation: 36706
Quote:
Originally Posted by TabulaRasa View Post
I can get behind the "parenting is a role, not a job" rhetoric (note, I said "parenting." Not "being a mother." The role of parenting for the father had been noticeably absent from this discussion, far as I can tell).

But it being a "role," versus a "job" doesn't change the fact that, yes, it is, in fact, hard work.
I agree!

It's obviously harder work, or there wouldn't be so many women out there trying to escape such by working jobs outside of their homes.

I wish I had a dime for every single friggin' time I've heard some "poor" woman talk about having to "escape" the horrible lot of being "stuck" at home providing for the kids. FYI: kids she helped bring into the world. ...

How by out of simply getting a "real" job or heading back to a job, she saved the family from certain financial ruin. Most of the time she can barely stand to wait the prescribed six weeks, especially if it happens to be kid #2...3...4... All that often being said in the same breath taken to book (via the latest model cellphone) a paid professional for one or more of these expensive necessities: haircut/dye job, nail appointment, house cleaning, dry cleaning, dinner reservations.

Oh yes, and lest we forget that she also has to rush (poor thing) home after all of the well deserved pampering to prepare a 'wholesome meal' for her tribe. Afterall, they can't "afford" to eat dinner out every night can they?! Oftentimes, that meal simply consists of drive-thru fast food fare. If she happens to be feeling really domestic, she may even take the precious time it takes to hit the grocery store for Crap Helper. BTW, she won't be eating it. Instead, she will skip because of the great, pricey lunch she enjoyed with her wonderful girlfriend she tries to get together with once a week. It could be that she pre-planned to eat the expensive, packaged, mail-ordered meal (gimmick). Mainly (as she has overly explained to all of us) because of the fact that she gained soooo much weight while pregnant with each "wanted" child.


If that isn't enough, I hear time and time again from these ladies, that they spend each evening (on average) a mere couple hours with their children . Certainly they would love to be able to spend more, but they couldn't possibly do it. They are just soooo tired from their long, arduous day at work. Also, they just don't have enough time to get everything done that they need to do in one evening. All of the paid help, doesn't seem to help! They do feel, however, sooo " incredibly blessed" to be able to afford the finer things in life for their family. Afterall, the children asked for the television sets in their rooms! That's what really warms the heart, too! Mind you, they could only afford the television, Game Boy/babysitter for each one's room, because of having such a good mother willing to sacrifice for them.

Meanwhile, all of the co-workers are gifted all day long with endless diatribe about how awful the teachers are for that school year. Those same teachers 'should feel blessed' to receive the benefit of having the confused, starved for attention/ADHD, lacking in discipline/self-control, little hellraisers in their classrooms. Afterall, any problems couldn't possibly be home related. The problems must stem from the teacher, ADHD, or some other factor. Certainly those problems could and would never stem from the self-described, "entitled" working mom.

Well, DUH! Pure rocket science, lady. Yep, makes perfect sense! Dump your kids off to some daycare, school, nanny, or nursery school and expect that some paid stranger is going to do all that is required to produce a person of character. Worse yet is dumping them on grandparents who really did sacrifice to keep mother home. They finally reach their Golden Years and respective freedom, only to be guilt tripped into raising /sitting for their grandchildren while mommy heads off to work.

We are to pat you on the back and salute you for supposedly juggling work, home, kids, and the whole nine yards. Right!

Hmmm... And we wonder why kids are so friggin' messed up.

In the words of a kid: "Do you wonder why?"

P.S. I'd prefer a mother to stay-at-home.

Last edited by picklejuice; 04-23-2012 at 03:57 PM..
 
Old 04-23-2012, 02:56 PM
 
Location: Middle America
35,802 posts, read 39,211,415 times
Reputation: 48593
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares View Post
I agree.
Im intrigued by a guy and his wife who recently had their first child. Although they both work, he is equally involved in the child care more than any young couple I've seen. Today he took off work to take the baby to the Dr. while his wife went to work.


In my situation, it would make much more sense for my SO to be the one to take off work and handle dr. appointments, because he has MUCH more paid time off at his job than I do, and works more flexible hours. He is able to telecommute/work from home when need be, whereas that won't work for my line of work. In the case of kids, I could see him being the one whose job is more structured to handle that sort of thing.

We basically already operate that way. If a repairman is coming midday, if the dog has a veterinary appointment, If some package or another is expected that has to be signed for, etc. he's the one who's there to handle that...he just works from home that day. He can do his job wherever there is an internet connection. For me, it's difficult to manage my classrooms from my living room.
 
Old 04-23-2012, 03:51 PM
 
499 posts, read 481,461 times
Reputation: 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamplight View Post
Now we're talking! If only it weren't for those short-sighted child labor laws! Of course, one can't reasonably expect a weak and ignorant toddler to do very much work, but once they hit six or seven, I'd at least expect them to get a good job working in a textile mill or a mine. Maybe hawking newspapers if they're lucky.
I just loved the humour of this
 
Old 04-23-2012, 04:17 PM
 
Location: San Antonio, TX
822 posts, read 961,458 times
Reputation: 1276
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares View Post
Quit playing ignorant. Im not debating being a SAHM isnt an important job. Im not debating that SAHM have a very good knowledge of economics. The statment was concerning Mrs. Romney never worked outside the home, much less as an economist. Thats all. SAHM's were never attacked or looked down on.
If you want to be an apologist for idiots, that's fine, but it was a direct attack. Further, MOST people don't have the faintest clue about economics. In fact, I'd say close to 95% of people I've ever worked with didn't know a f'n thing about how the economy works. These were supposedly college-educated individuals. Trying to say a woman who takes care of her kids at home isn't as sharp in economic matters is absolutely laughable; you do realize she has a degree from BYU, right? Hardly a fly-by-night university...
 
Old 04-23-2012, 04:19 PM
 
17,751 posts, read 14,995,086 times
Reputation: 6377
A bogus debate since the careered classes have exported their sex roles to Mexican nannies and plumbers. Nobody complains about the inherent sexism of the term garbage man. The unisex positions that do not dirty the finger nails of either the urban metro-sexual man or the urban "amazonian" woman is running into sex difference ceiling effect. I do hope one day to see the male Mexican nanny which may do something about the male pedophile bias at the play ground one day, but then again I would prefer that my neighbors experiment with the idea of the male nanny first.
 
Old 04-23-2012, 04:36 PM
 
Location: Cumberland Co., TN
19,961 posts, read 20,455,447 times
Reputation: 20351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Free Beer View Post
If you want to be an apologist for idiots, that's fine, but it was a direct attack. Further, MOST people don't have the faintest clue about economics. In fact, I'd say close to 95% of people I've ever worked with didn't know a f'n thing about how the economy works. These were supposedly college-educated individuals. Trying to say a woman who takes care of her kids at home isn't as sharp in economic matters is absolutely laughable; you do realize she has a degree from BYU, right? Hardly a fly-by-night university...
The point is her being a SAHM was not attacked by the media or anyone else. If anything it was defended. I agree the statement was stupid. The statement was that she had never held a job outside of the home. Period. Stop trying to turn it into some type of feminist hate propaganda.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Relationships
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:12 PM.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top