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.
There should be no stay at home men or women. In almost all cases the stay at home person cannot possibly perform enough work to offset or match the full time working person contribution. So folks if you feel you are due 50% then you must contribute 50%. This is a long term view looking at the total lifetime of the couple through all the working years, family years,and retirement.
20-25 years later when your 45, 50 years old you have a 20-25 year old master's degree and maybe a couple of years early on of actual work experience. Dont think your going to be that successful in obtaining a decent job in your field of study. Look how much technology has changed nearly every professional field in the last 20 years and there will be bright, energetic new graduates eagar to fill job positions.
Thats one major thing that would terrify me about putting my career on a shelf to be a stay at home mom for that long. Heck 3-5 years would put you at a disadvantage.
Clearly, I am speaking in generalities, and it depends dramatically upon what your career goals are.
For example, if you want to be an academic, there is little chance you can leave after your graduate work and re-enter 20-25 years later and get a tenure tract job. No way. I agree even 3-5 years off wouldn't work. Similar things would be challenging for ANY field that builds from your direct graduate work and is in an ever changing field.... like medicine.... And of course, if you want to get to the top of your field in just about any career..... you can't "compete" with those who never left the industry.
So I agree with you completely.
All I'm saying is that higher education is not wasted on people who leave the work force for a period of time. If you can complete a graduate degree in ANY field, it says a lot about you.... your determination, your dedication, your goals......and you are getting training that few people have, and it will have an impact on your children that is immeasurable. And it will even mean something to a future employer 20 years from now. OF COURSE, you cannot complete for the same jobs you did 20 years ago, but you will have more going for you nonetheless.
Of course, in my field/career tract, I will be lost if I take off time now to have kids. That's why I "need a stay-at-home wife".
Know any guys who are interesting, well educated, hopefully attractive to me, good with kids who want to be a a stay-at-home wife?
Didn't think so.... Most guys aren't looking for a wife like me either.
No. The purpose of getting married to me is to have two incomes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miss Crabcakes
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?
Funny enough I just asked my husband if he made a lot more money and we had a baby would he prefer me to stay home and he flat out said no. He feels that in this economy, its safer to have 2 incomes in case someone gets laid off (and we both have been in recent years).
No, I wasn't born in the 20s. I'm aware there are still men like this, though, and I don't care to associate with them.
Edit: Since someone may have a problem with me deciding not to associate with sexists: I can't respect a person who thinks someone shouldn't do what they want just because of the way they were born. It's wrong to assume someone should assume a role whether they want to or not in this context.
I really wish I could understand the logic of this posting
My husband loves it but he's also appreciated when I work when things got tight with money and when I worked it was always my idea, not his. He's always been the main breadwinner, though. His face does beam when he comes home to a hot meal and clean home. It's not that we TRY to "live in the 20s" it's just that I don't mind doing the domestic stuff and he doesn't mind being the main breadwinner. It works for us.
I agree with you 100% I grew up as a latch key kid as my Mum was a war widow and had to go out to work, she had no choice after the last war. I was determined that my kids would never have that sort of life. I was lucky my husband agreed with me so I was always there for my kids, even though there was eight years between the two of them. We didn't have much spare money but we were happy and my kids always came home to Mum being there and a hot meal. We bought our own home in London and when the kids grew up I went back to work but my husband refused to touch a penny of the money I earned. Can you believe that?
the toddler needs to be pulling his/her own weight as well. no reason for them to be luxuriating on a daily basis either.
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 thought I did. But I was wrong. If a woman can stay at home full time, with or without kids, she is not a very interesting person. If she is, she will make mischief, which is probably worse.
What a load of BS! Women who can afford to stay home (as I did) are usually far more interesting as they have been doing things, not just stuck in an office. I was able to visit museums and go to concerts and always had something to discuss with my husband. I also had very many hobbies which my husband was interested in. He appreciated coming home to contented children (and wife), a clean home and a well cooked meal on the table.
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.
Make sure whatever bosses they work for has whips. That'll teach them not to whine or cry when they get tired.
If she is the type of person to "make mischief" shes going to do it regardless. If shes in the workplace with constant day-to-day contact with the opposite gender the same thing will happen.
I agree with you 100%
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.
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.
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.
