Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

Is it an inconvenient truth that women would prefer to be homemakers?

Announcements Posted on
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Some women prefer to have a career, others prefer to stay at home with the kids.
    Some men prefer to have a career, others prefer to stay at home with the kids.

    Men stay at home with the kids?! Unthinkable.

    Who has the power here?

    (It's not so much women's fault for emancipating themselves as men's fault for not yet having done so.)
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by screenager2004)
    I don't know why you're bringing the word 'force' into the conversation. It's not a question of 'forcing' anyone to do anything. Everyone has the choice and the freedom to make whatever they want out of their lives. Just some women (unfortunately) make the free choice to be unemployed, to be dependent on another adult's wages (much like a child is), who despite being in full heath and sound of mind, do not bother to contribute to their society and sit at home doing a little tidying and cooking a meal because it's the easy way out of the 'drudgery of real work'.

    I personally resent women who take this easy option out because then you get men like the OP of this thread who think "all women secretly want to do it".
    Why is it the easy option? You try staying at home all day raising screaming children and see if you think it's easy then! For me personally it would be much easier to go get a job in some office than to spend my life raising kids at home.

    You talk about the 'drudgery of real work' but staying at home can be just as mind-numbingly boring and just as much of a chore as going to work, not to mention the loneliness. Neither option is necessarily 'easier', it's what suits the individual.

    Also, how can you resent women who stay at home raising children? I was raised by my mother at home and I can't imagine being put in childcare all day or having a nanny. It is much better for kids to have a parent around.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KJane)
    Nope. The idea of being cooped up in a house all day every day cooking and cleaning would drive me nuts, it'd be too boring. I don't see why women should be relied upon solely to be homemakers. My Dad is a 'house husband' so I see no reason why men can't be relied on to do their bit too, for me, home duties should be shared.
    I feel the same.

    It's a big generlisation. I personally would feel trapped as a homemaker, but other people would be content and be in their element.
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I'm not saying all girls are like this but I know plenty of girls who say they would quite like to just have a part time job whilst their partner could have a full time one. Then they could stay at home a lot more to look after kids and help around the house. So in essence I think there is a significant amount of women who do want to spend most of their adult life as homemakers.
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jennifex)
    Why is it the easy option? You try staying at home all day raising screaming children and see if you think it's easy then! For me personally it would be much easier to go get a job in some office than to spend my life raising kids at home.

    You talk about the 'drudgery of real work' but staying at home can be just as mind-numbingly boring and just as much of a chore as going to work, not to mention the loneliness. Neither option is necessarily 'easier', it's what suits the individual.

    Also, how can you resent women who stay at home raising children? I was raised by my mother at home and I can't imagine being put in childcare all day or having a nanny. It is much better for kids to have a parent around.
    Don't try and give the "ooo raising kids is difficult" argument, it's not.

    Working parents manage to earn a living AND raise the kids. Why the hell can stay-at-home-mums only manage one of them? Easy option for lazy parents.
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by screenager2004)
    No - that sounds like my idea of utter hell. SOME women prefer to be housewives, sure. But don't try and insult me and suggest that all women secretly want to be unemployed baby-pumping, glorified house-cleaners. Please.
    This. 100% Agreed.

    <3 x
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sparkyp)

    Anyways thats my 2 cents.
    Hi, does your partner geniunely feel she is discriminated at work?

    Last time I checked men only get two weeks of ordinary paternity leave whereas women get something like 25 weeks. This is one of the reasons why I think women get less pay because there is a good chance that further down in their life they will have kids and when it all comes down to profits - businesses need insurance on these 'risks' their staff will take maternity leave so thats why women may get paid less.
    I don't agree with this and think it's fair but I wonder if this is why women get less pay.

    On the other hand men can get discriminated as well but in different ways.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by screenager2004)
    Don't try and give the "ooo raising kids is difficult" argument, it's not.

    Working parents manage to earn a living AND raise the kids. Why the hell can stay-at-home-mums only manage one of them? Easy option for lazy parents.
    I agree. While I am not saying that homemaking isn't a fulfilling position, it cannot be compared to the formal careers which provides visible output and monetary benefits. Equality between the sexes in terms of accessibility to careers and ending stereotyping as men as the breadwinners is a long way if that is not understood.

    However, I think in this modern era few women from developed communities would prefer to be complete homemakers.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wW9ENhFoWBE


    Imagine if Alan sugar used the word "kitchen" instead of "house".
    • Thread Starter
    • 36 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Peppermint Sky)
    You see? It doesn't sound like he's being sarcastic, it sounds like he truly hates women.
    No, he's sarcastically taking the other poster's point to it's logical conclusion to demonstrate how absurd it is. He doesn't hate women.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Woman should have the option, but the career women shouldnt knock those who wanna be homemakers just because iss not what they would do with their lives/// Raising children is the most important thing however, they're the future without them the career women would go hungry in their old age so they shud really show some respect.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Some women probably do want to do that. Lots of other women probably don't.

    The point is that people should be allowed to make their own decision on what they want to do. Feminists shouldn't be ashamed of wearing make up or staying at home with the children if that's what they want to do.
    • Thread Starter
    • 36 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by screenager2004)
    I don't know why you're bringing the word 'force' into the conversation. It's not a question of 'forcing' anyone to do anything. Everyone has the choice and the freedom to make whatever they want out of their lives. Just some women (unfortunately) make the free choice to be unemployed, to be dependent on another adult's wages (much like a child is), who despite being in full heath and sound of mind, do not bother to contribute to their society and sit at home doing a little tidying and cooking a meal because it's the easy way out of the 'drudgery of real work'.

    I personally resent women who take this easy option out because then you get men like the OP of this thread who think "all women secretly want to do it".

    It's plain wrong to associate domesticity and child raising with dependence and unemployment, yes if you're a housewife the position is essentially unpaid, but if the woman wasn't available to perform that role the couple would end up paying somebody else to do it anyway, so what's the difference? If it costs £500 p/w for a full time nanny the value of the housewife's work is the equivalent of £500p/w, would you say that growing your own vegetables instead of buying them from Tescos is pointless because no money changes hands? No, that would be silly, being a housewife is exactly the same.

    Child rearing is a proper job, and judging by the state of the economy it's lot more valuable and rewarding than many other jobs currently out there.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    Despite the couple of decades' worth of propaganda we've been subjected to on 'equality' and 'positive discrimination' deep down wouldn't a lot of women much to prefer to be in the home raising children and performing necessary and often rewarding domestic tasks?

    In their eagerness to spread the ideals of feminism are 'liberals' devaluing an important social role that has historically been the preserve of women?

    There's absolutely nothing wrong with females wanting to stay at home raising children while the husband supports the family with a full time job.
    Who wouldn't want to be a home maker? I'm sure most men would love it too, sitting at home sleeping all day IT IS THE DREAM!
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Women have powerful maternal instincts that we shouldn't deny them. At the end of the day, somebody has to take care of the children - who do you think is generally more better suited to the job? The woman, not the man, is the better caregiver. Therefore the system of husbands going out and 'winning the bread' with wives caring for the young ones at home makes sense. Let's stop pretending that men and woman are the same; they're not! It doesn't make a woman any less of a person, it's just a fact.
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    It's plain wrong to associate domesticity and child raising with dependence and unemployment, yes if you're a housewife the position is essentially unpaid,
    I'm not associating domesticity with unemployment. I'm associating not having a job with unemployment. You can dress it up all you like, a 'homemaker' is just an unemployed person.

    but if the woman wasn't available to perform that role the couple would end up paying somebody else to do it anyway, so what's the difference?
    If you paid someone else to do it, they'd pay taxes on their wages. Those taxes would pay for hospitals and public services, plus the mum can then work and contribute to society with taxes on her own income.

    If mum just stays at home, not only is no tax being paid for the cost of childrearing, but the mum has no job either so she isn't paying tax either.

    If it costs £500 p/w for a full time nanny the value of the housewife's work is the equivalent of £500p/w, would you say that growing your own vegetables instead of buying them from Tescos is pointless because no money changes hands? No, that would be silly, being a housewife is exactly the same.
    Growing your own veg is not comparible because
    a) the majority of our food is imported from overseas, so your money is just going overseas anyway.
    b) environmental issues associated with home grown veg displace economic loss.

    Child rearing is a proper job, and judging by the state of the economy it's lot more valuable and rewarding than many other jobs currently out there.
    No it is not. Thousands of women have a REAL job AND raise kids. Housewives are just lazy.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Peppermint Sky)
    You see? It doesn't sound like he's being sarcastic, it sounds like he truly hates women.
    I don't hate all women. I hate women who take the easy option of having the best life they can manage. There is no honour in that. Caring for children, cooking and cleaning is disgraceful. Living free and freely by your husband's generosity, is a disgrace. By extension, having a very good job that pays well is also a disgrace. It's basically the same thing. Women have DIED so that today their sisters have the right to join men in gruelling, miserable jobs just so they can afford food and a roof over their head.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Is this thread from the 1950's? Haven't these arguments been settled decades ago? and is this really an issue men should be putting their 2 cents in at all?

    Choice is choice, and we as women are free to make it. No shame in being career driven, No shame in being family driven and no shame in finding a balance between the two. End of argument!
    • Thread Starter
    • 36 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by screenager2004)
    I'm not associating domesticity with unemployment. I'm associating not having a job with unemployment. You can dress it up all you like, a 'homemaker' is just an unemployed person.
    You're equating not earning a wage (i.e a housewife) with having no job, if this was true they'd be no such thing as a child minder, nanny, au pair etc. Clearly it is a job and in many cases one that can be quite lucrative for those employed in these fields. It may not command the sort of money that surgeons could command, but are you that shallow that you value a person purely on their bank balance and earning potential?

    If you paid someone else to do it, they'd pay taxes on their wages. Those taxes would pay for hospitals and public services, plus the mum can then work and contribute to society with taxes on her own income.

    If mum just stays at home, not only is no tax being paid for the cost of childrearing, but the mum has no job either so she isn't paying tax either.
    Right, so the choice is between staying at home and performing £500's worth of work or going out into the real economy and earning £6/700 just so your post tax income of £500 is enough to pay a full time nanny. Why would anyone with an ounce of common sense want to do this? If a woman stayed at home looking after the kids but had a part time job and sent her earnings off to the Treasury to 'do her bit' we'd think she's mad, but this is what you're proposing as a solution.


    Growing your own veg is not comparible because
    a) the majority of our food is imported from overseas, so your money is just going overseas anyway.
    b) environmental issues associated with home grown veg displace economic loss.
    The points you raise make no sense. The general argument -from your end- is that self sufficiency is like unemployment because you're not going out into the real world and eaning a wage. My point is, what's the difference? What's the difference between earning £X a month and exchanging it food, fuel, childcare etc and generating those goods/services by labouring for yourself directly?



    No it is not. Thousands of women have a REAL job AND raise kids. Housewives are just lazy.
    Digging a hole with a spade rather than grubbing around with your hands is also the lazy option, it doesn't mean it's wrong.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    You're equating not earning a wage (i.e a housewife) with having no job, if this was true they'd be no such thing as a child minder, nanny, au pair etc. Clearly it is a job and in many cases one that can be quite lucrative for those employed in these fields. It may not command the sort of money that surgeons could command, but are you that shallow that you value a person purely on their bank balance and earning potential?



    Right, so the choice is between staying at home and performing £500's worth of work or going out into the real economy and earning £6/700 just so your post tax income of £500 is enough to pay a full time nanny. Why would anyone with an ounce of common sense want to do this? If a woman stayed at home looking after the kids but had a part time job and sent her earnings off to the Treasury to 'do her bit' we'd think she's mad, but this is what you're proposing as a solution.




    The points you raise make no sense. The general argument -from your end- is that self sufficiency is like unemployment because you're not going out into the real world and eaning a wage. My point is, what's the difference? What's the difference between earning £X a month and exchanging it food, fuel, childcare etc and generating those goods/services by labouring for yourself directly?





    Digging a hole with a spade rather than grubbing around with your hands is also the lazy option, it doesn't mean it's wrong.
    That's a false example though. Most working women don't hire nanny's at all, only the very rich ones. I personally don't know anyone who has had a nanny, yet most of my friends have working mums. Children are at school all day during the week anyway, plus loads of people rely on grandparents etc. to babysit, and the occasional paid babysit for a night out or whatever. If many women manage to raise children AND have a career at the same time, then why is it that some consider raising children a full-time job?

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: April 3, 2012
New on TSR

GCSE mocks revision

Talk study tips this weekend

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.