So how do we help woh AND sah familes survive *happily*?

[my2girlsmama]

In the last thread (that just got yanked ...sigh) someone (Zinemom I think?) said somthing that stuck with me and hit home. Something I want to be certain is what I am fighting for as a sahm:

I think we need to advocate for social programs that assist mamas to be at home with their young'uns, and programs that assist mamas to work and know their children are getting quality care without breaking the bank.

This quote was it. It is basically what both sides NEED. Why can't our governments (whom I truly have issue with NOT the moms/dads who work etc) see this? My government (Canada) has begun to assist mroe for working families in regards to a daycare initiative, which i do see is a good thing, just not at the (again) expense of the sah family. So in light of that excellent quote above, just how do we GET these incentives to see the light of day? Do we exhautsively write letters to MPs, governing bodies, write editorials, get on radio programs??? I am curious what otehrs on BOTH sides think and feel on this.

As a sahm I find that the programs (some) out there for me tend to have a negative tone to them, a pitying sort of tone that seems to show a lack of understanding on the choice to sah. I went to one that was labelled a *mom and me* program filled with games etc.....and upon attending (years ago) it was a government sponsored thing with government aide-types there to *assist* me in how to parent i.e change a bum, not hit my child, learn to feed my child etc.....NOTHING to do with the whole fun factor at all....so I was turned off, as were others, and when we as a group comlained (all of us were experienced moms) we were told this was what the government offered and how they viewed sah familes/parents' needs. :

So just from that experience, I wonder what have others done to change this sort of occurance, or what programs in your area do you love/hate etc? Can we, as one person or such, even change things?

Let's try to keep this to non-debate. I want to also apologize to anyone for prior posts that may have offended. I now know what can and can't be truly freely stated in regards to opinion. For the record, I think woh and sah families are basically the same. Where the sah mom/dad struggle with so much on a plate daily, the woh parent has to learn precious balance and such.

Not easy for any of us, and we should be focusing on making our governments and cities etc responsible for helping us all out, not nitpicking on who made better choices.

[OTMomma]

That was a beautiful post.

I wish I had some wonderful insight to share as to how to change the problem that our goverment and our society don't value the family, and especially women. Personally, I think its a result of the overly patriarcal society we live in, and my plan is to vote for a woman every time I can. I don't even care if I agree with her politics. I think all women care about children and families, and obviously the current governments only pay lip service to it.

[my2girlsmama]

Originally Posted by OTMomma

That was a beautiful post.

I wish I had some wonderful insight to share as to how to change the problem that our goverment and our society don't value the family, and especially women. Personally, I think its a result of the overly patriarcal society we live in, and my plan is to vote for a woman every time I can. I don't even care if I agree with her politics. I think all women care about children and families, and obviously the current governments only pay lip service to it.

Thanks.

I agree, and actually have focused on voting for women, in fact am gearing up to chat with one in government who sent me some spiel last week about all her government has done...........I want to now focus on trying to do more advocating for my own sahm cause, mainly to see that my government understands somehow that sah families deserve the equal assistance/benefits that woh families receive here. Both are vital to society surviving.

[chalupamom]

I've been thinking a lot about these things, too. In Naomi Wolf's Misconceptions, which I largely loathed, she had an interesting couple of pages toward the end about how she'd like to see neighborhood centers spring up to offer child and parent activities, toy and book libraries, computing services, etc. It was a great idea and one that is probably unaccomplishable using public monies. (Maybe something we in which we can interest the Gates Foundation? :LOL )

Anyway, there's a fellow by the name of Charles Long who, in his book Making A Living Without A Salary points out that not working is bad for GDP - if you build your house and your neighbor builds her house neither of you has contributed a dime to GDP and your labors are economically unbeneficial (no matter what other good things might come of them). Now, if you build your neighbor's house and she builds yours and you each pay the other $10,000, then $20,000 is added to the GDP and now you're economic heroes for doing the exact same thing that you would have done had you built your own house.

My point with all this is that SAHPs are not good for GDP. We can argue all we want (however pursuasively) about intangible benefits associated with SAHPing for both our families and society at large and some might even point out that their families are financially better off for not working after removing the costs of working from the family budgets. But from the governmental picture, none of this matters. As long as the prevailing economic model requires a growing GDP, non-employed (as distinct from non-working!) parents likely aren't going to see the support they want and working parents aren't likely to, either, given that it's economically important that they remain on the treadmill at any personal cost. Some countries (France comes up a lot) have made the choice to support working parents in ways that promote as many people working as possible - given their relatively high unemployment - secure that the children are being well-cared for and reasonably well-educated.

Are there flaws - certainly. I'm not sure in many of these countries - France or Sweden, for example - that a single income family is the norm and might even be difficult to pull off, given the high taxes needed to support these social programs and the social pressure to be economically productive. So they might satisfy some of us who are at home, but not others - depending upon the reasons why we're home in the first place.

So, is all lost? No. Of course not! But as long as the mommy wars are being fought and so parents buy into the media-fed "us vs. them, we're doing it better, we love our children more" mentality we won't be able to organize together to obtain the political, economic and social changes we'd like to see. Some media outlets explicitly promote the SAHM as an ideal preferable to the denigrated dual-income family (Focus on the Family, Dr. Laura and others), while others (many mainstream media) don't necessarily explicitly promote employed parenting they certainly model a consumerist version of family life that requires two incomes (or more) to support.

Where does this leave us? I don't know. The recently renamed Family and Home organization that ostensibly advocated for the kind of social change that we're talking about recently downscaled its operations - working moms apparently felt left out and didn't supply the money they needed to operate. Similarly, other groups of moms seem to take on an identity that is "at home" or "working" and become hostile to the "other". I am still a member of my local BPW (Business and Professional Women) and I confess that I get a lot of strange looks at the moment and a lot of what I can contribute is really discounted - even though I have the time right now to carry out a lot of the advocacy positions. And then there's my local Mom's Club that declined to include me when it was revealed that I do have some professional interests that occasionally (like three times a year) take me out of town. Apparently, I was not "really" a mom. And so an organization called the "Mom's Club" defines who is a mom for their purposes. </allaboutme>

Basically, until moms (at least those who do wish to support ALL families, which by no means is every mom but I think a majority of us feel this way) begin to walk the talk there's probably not much that can be done. Changing our economic and social norms will require a great deal of organization, cooperation, understanding, compassion, empathy, muscle power and brains - all things that the governmental, religious and media powers that be encourage us (either tacitly or explicitly) NOT to share with each other.

[QueenOfTheMeadow]

I'm not sure how to do it, but it definately needs to be done! I know that sometimes there is a lot of disagreement that takes place between sah and woh moms. I am one of three sisters. 2 of us stay at home, one works. I can tell you we each experience guilt for what we've chosen. My family scrapes by sometimes, not being able to do a lot of things that we'd like to do, and not being able to get out of debt. I sometimes feel guilty that I should be working out of the house to get us out of debt. My working sister feels guilty about not being home with her children. In reality, we are all very good mothers, who strive to do the best for our children, our families, and ourselves. That is where we need to find common ground. I doubt that the "powers that be" would really like to see us all stand together to support one another, what a powerful force we could be. So how do we do that?

[my2girlsmama]

Originally Posted by chalupamom

I've been thinking a lot about these things, too. In Naomi Wolf's Misconceptions, which I largely loathed, she had an interesting couple of pages toward the end about how she'd like to see neighborhood centers spring up to offer child and parent activities, toy and book libraries, computing services, etc. It was a great idea and one that is probably unaccomplishable using public monies. (Maybe something we in which we can interest the Gates Foundation? :LOL )

Anyway, there's a fellow by the name of Charles Long who, in his book Making A Living Without A Salary points out that not working is bad for GDP - if you build your house and your neighbor builds her house neither of you has contributed a dime to GDP and your labors are economically unbeneficial (no matter what other good things might come of them). Now, if you build your neighbor's house and she builds yours and you each pay the other $10,000, then $20,000 is added to the GDP and now you're economic heroes for doing the exact same thing that you would have done had you built your own house.

(snipped alot)

So, is all lost? No. Of course not! But as long as the mommy wars are being fought and so parents buy into the media-fed "us vs. them, we're doing it better, we love our children more" mentality we won't be able to organize together to obtain the political, economic and social changes we'd like to see. Some media outlets explicitly promote the SAHM as an ideal preferable to the denigrated dual-income family (Focus on the Family, Dr. Laura and others), while others (many mainstream media) don't necessarily explicitly promote employed parenting they certainly model a consumerist version of family life that requires two incomes (or more) to support.

Where does this leave us? I don't know. The recently renamed Family and Home organization that ostensibly advocated for the kind of social change that we're talking about recently downscaled its operations - working moms apparently felt left out and didn't supply the money they needed to operate. Similarly, other groups of moms seem to take on an identity that is "at home" or "working" and become hostile to the "other". I am still a member of my local BPW (Business and Professional Women) and I confess that I get a lot of strange looks at the moment and a lot of what I can contribute is really discounted - even though I have the time right now to carry out a lot of the advocacy positions. And then there's my local Mom's Club that declined to include me when it was revealed that I do have some professional interests that occasionally (like three times a year) take me out of town. Apparently, I was not "really" a mom. And so an organization called the "Mom's Club" defines who is a mom for their purposes. </allaboutme>

Basically, until moms (at least those who do wish to support ALL families, which by no means is every mom but I think a majority of us feel this way) begin to walk the talk there's probably not much that can be done. Changing our economic and social norms will require a great deal of organization, cooperation, understanding, compassion, empathy, muscle power and brains - all things that the governmental, religious and media powers that be encourage us (either tacitly or explicitly) NOT to share with each other.

Well said. I hope that final sentance wasn't yet another dig at anyone in particular, as I see it we do all share the same basic needs but I still see sah families as under-cared for hugely and I don't agree that we don't offer enough money-wise etc. We still have that other parent working, and those who are single families etc we all pay taxes etc....Just because we may not agree on everything many of us DO walk the talk. I do agree the societal statur probably won't aid us overall.


That's too bad about the moms organization treating you as such. That's a shame.

[my2girlsmama]

Originally Posted by race_kelly

I'm not sure how to do it, but it definately needs to be done! I know that sometimes there is a lot of disagreement that takes place between sah and woh moms. I am one of three sisters. 2 of us stay at home, one works. I can tell you we each experience guilt for what we've chosen. My family scrapes by sometimes, not being able to do a lot of things that we'd like to do, and not being able to get out of debt. I sometimes feel guilty that I should be working out of the house to get us out of debt. My working sister feels guilty about not being home with her children. In reality, we are all very good mothers, who strive to do the best for our children, our families, and ourselves. That is where we need to find common ground. I doubt that the "powers that be" would really like to see us all stand together to support one another, what a powerful force we could be. So how do we do that?

I agree, and I think that is where alot of the fighting/attitudes on both sides comes from-guilt.

Woh parents have it, sah have it............and I guess (I too am guilty of it) instead of directing it where it should be (the governing powers, society) we aim at each other. I think too inwardly each side has some level of envy for the other.......... there are days I wish I was out working......and days my working mom friends wish they were home all day as I am.

[chalupamom]

Originally Posted by my2girlsmama

Well said. I hope that final sentance wasn't yet another dig at anyone in particular

I don't understand what this means. Could you clarify? What sentence? A dig a whom? The forces that would rather we target each other instead of them?

[my2girlsmama]

Originally Posted by chalupamom

I don't understand what this means. Could you clarify? What sentence? A dig a whom? The forces that would rather we target each other instead of them?

I apologize that came off snarky...

I just recall the prior threads (one pulled) where everyone got funky over this vs. that and a few had mentioned that those of us passionate about being at home got carried away in the debate (true, and I apologized then too) and I assumed here maybe you were stating that those few-myself included-aren;t walking our talk so to speak? Meaning we're wanting these changes etc equality for all but don't live it?

Sigh...........I'm sorry..not making much sense today at all...........nothing new.

[CerridwenLorelei]

see this I don't understand

"My point with all this is that SAHPs are not good for GDP. "

Because of several articles in newsweek and several of my hs mags from 2003/4 that talked about how by staying home the partner made it possible for the other one to make 30-40k more in their field. Doesn't that go into the GDP??
esp if that is in turn spent on stuff that benefits others ( grocerers get paid right??)

[Mothra]

Well, I hate men so my agenda is completely different.

How does helping the children of working families come at the expense of families that have a parent that stays at home?

[chalupamom]

Originally Posted by CerridwenLorelei

"My point with all this is that SAHPs are not good for GDP. "

Because of several articles in newsweek and several of my hs mags from 2003/4 that talked about how by staying home the partner made it possible for the other one to make 30-40k more in their field. Doesn't that go into the GDP??
esp if that is in turn spent on stuff that benefits others ( grocerers get paid right??)

First, I want to point out that the whole GDP thing is not something I necessarily agree with. I am just aware that it is the prevailing opinion and treated as true and so SAHPs are dealt with accordingly. The points made in your mags are may well have validity but I don't believe they have been genuinely entertained by most economists. Or, for that matter, whether there have been studies that project how much total income is foregone if/when parents leaves work to be at home with a family. Generally speaking, a person who is able to work and could find work and does not work for whatever reason gives a lot of economists heartburn.

I remember when I told an MBA classmate - an economist - that I was going to be drastically curtailing my professional activities he darn near blew a gasket. Not anything to do with me personally, though. He just got all red in the face, sighed and said, "Well, there's another 150k gone." In this case "gone" meant from the total economic production. From his perspective, I have actually harmed the economy by not being as productive as I theoretically could be.

I believe that for this mindset to change there needs to be a wholesale shift in how the economy is structured, not to mention our society. Things brings me 'round again to my original point: for these shifts to happen women will need to be much more empathetic to and supportive of each other. There are a lot of institutions and organizations that have a lot at stake in trying to ensure that doesn't happen.

[chalupamom]

[jessemoon]

While I certainly agree that the larger social/societal/economic/political powers-that-be are a large portion of the so-called "mommy wars" problem, I also believe that part (not all, mind-you) of the solution begins in our personal lives.

I think that while we have to agitate for real change on a national or global level, I also think that it is important to start in our own communities. It starts with telling your employed-mama-friends that you are proud of them for their work at home and in their jobs; with telling your sahm-friends how proud you are of their work at home with their children. We need to examine our own prejudices and refuse to be distracted by the one-ups-womanship .

We all have guilt about some of our choices as mothers, we all have pride in other choices, we all love our kids. The real fact is that we live in a society that doesn't value family in any real way (no matter how much lip service "family values" get) and it is not just one category of family that is devalued. To be concerned about children and family is to understand that our culture doesn't have the well-being of children at its core. There are lots of ways to be a great mom. None of those ways is truly supported by the workplace, the government, the media or our social institutions.

If we are to change that culture, we have to demand change on a wide scale, but first and foremost, we have to start at home. My next-door neighbor and dear friend works full-time. I quit my job before ds was born. I think that she is a wonderful mother. I am also so grateful that I do not have her life. I can't imagine how hard it must be to be her. She feels the same about me.

Nothing would be served if we let our friendship and support for each other fall apart because I firmly believe that sahming is best for my family and she firmly believes that wohming is best for hers. If we can talk, discuss and even argue sometimes, we can talk about common challenges, common ground and solutions that we would like to see. Sometimes those solutions look very different for her than they do for me...and that is O.K. A reasonable society that really wants what is best for all of its children (not just the children of privilege) will have institutions in place that suppport and encourage many types of families.

So, I guess the question is what do we do? Do we hunker down and sulk and exclude Chalupamom because she goes out of town three times a year, or do we build alliances with our fellow mamas? If we aren't clear on who our allies are, how do we ever achieve change? There will always be those of us who believe so firmly that "our way is the only way" that they will never be able to ally with wohms or sahms or single moms or lesbian moms or religious moms or whatever...but those of us with a wider vision need to be the grassroots of a mothering movement....I just don't know what that looks like yet.

Who is with me?

[Lucky Charm]

:

[QueenOfTheMeadow]

jessemoon-
I'm with you mama!! Very inspirational, could you lead us to the revalution!! But really, everything you said rings true. I think part of the problem also lies in the fact that as moms we have little down time to be activists (and I spend mine here!), whether we sah or woh, we tend to have hectic lives. But I did read the article in Mothering about being natural birth activists, and I guess the same thing would apply to this activism. As moms of small kids, start small. Find a group that is up and running and do little things like sending letters, making phone calls, or going to one time only fundraisers. Problem is I don't even know if there are any groups out there or in my area that support getting all moms together? Anyone have any suggestions?

[my2girlsmama]

Originally Posted by Mothra

Well, I hate men so my agenda is completely different.

How does helping the children of working families come at the expense of families that have a parent that stays at home?

Well, I love men-mine in particular.

And why should my government give aid/extra millions so that a working family can get money back (more of it back they already can claim it tax wise why can't sah familes get a claim also??? As someone pointed out OUR partners work also)/be given more TO put their child IN daycare, yet if I choose to stay home I have to live on no extras simply because my choice was to NOT work?

Nuh uh. Not fair.

Edited to add that I am NOT against teh woh mom/families at all by this post...I am just replying specifically to this posts' question. Neither side should suffer at the expense of the other. Period.

[my2girlsmama]

Originally Posted by chalupamom

I believe that for this mindset to change there needs to be a wholesale shift in how the economy is structured, not to mention our society. Things brings me 'round again to my original point: for these shifts to happen women will need to be much more empathetic to and supportive of each other. There are a lot of institutions and organizations that have a lot at stake in trying to ensure that doesn't happen.

This is SO well put. Much of why I posted the original question/post in the first place. If we here as a group of moms who don't even know each other fly off the handle at opinions aimed at our choice to be home with our children vs another mom who chooses to work, how on earth can we ever change anything? When that is exactly what institutions (re: my government by basically stating SAH familes are not worth extra $$ vs working families because they don't deem us as contributing-raising our kids as we choose doesn't count) want to happen.

[my2girlsmama]

Originally Posted by jessemoon

While I certainly agree that the larger social/societal/economic/political powers-that-be are a large portion of the so-called "mommy wars" problem, I also believe that part (not all, mind-you) of the solution begins in our personal lives.

I think that while we have to agitate for real change on a national or global level, I also think that it is important to start in our own communities. It starts with telling your employed-mama-friends that you are proud of them for their work at home and in their jobs; with telling your sahm-friends how proud you are of their work at home with their children. We need to examine our own prejudices and refuse to be distracted by the one-ups-womanship .

We all have guilt about some of our choices as mothers, we all have pride in other choices, we all love our kids. The real fact is that we live in a society that doesn't value family in any real way (no matter how much lip service "family values" get) and it is not just one category of family that is devalued. To be concerned about children and family is to understand that our culture doesn't have the well-being of children at its core. There are lots of ways to be a great mom. None of those ways is truly supported by the workplace, the government, the media or our social institutions.

If we are to change that culture, we have to demand change on a wide scale, but first and foremost, we have to start at home. My next-door neighbor and dear friend works full-time. I quit my job before ds was born. I think that she is a wonderful mother. I am also so grateful that I do not have her life. I can't imagine how hard it must be to be her. She feels the same about me.

Nothing would be served if we let our friendship and support for each other fall apart because I firmly believe that sahming is best for my family and she firmly believes that wohming is best for hers. If we can talk, discuss and even argue sometimes, we can talk about common challenges, common ground and solutions that we would like to see. Sometimes those solutions look very different for her than they do for me...and that is O.K. A reasonable society that really wants what is best for all of its children (not just the children of privilege) will have institutions in place that suppport and encourage many types of families.

So, I guess the question is what do we do? Do we hunker down and sulk and exclude Chalupamom because she goes out of town three times a year, or do we build alliances with our fellow mamas? If we aren't clear on who our allies are, how do we ever achieve change? There will always be those of us who believe so firmly that "our way is the only way" that they will never be able to ally with wohms or sahms or single moms or lesbian moms or religious moms or whatever...but those of us with a wider vision need to be the grassroots of a mothering movement....I just don't know what that looks like yet.

Who is with me?

I had no idea this post would inspire me so much. And change my views more than they already have been.

[Mothra]

Originally Posted by my2girlsmama

This is SO well put. Much of why I posted the original question/post in the first place. If we here as a group of moms who don't even know each other fly off the handle at opinions aimed at our choice to be home with our children vs another mom who chooses to work, how on earth can we ever change anything? When that is exactly what institutions (re: my government by basically stating SAH familes are not worth extra $$ vs working families because they don't deem us as contributing-raising our kids as we choose doesn't count) want to happen.

You still haven't explained how money from the government for better childcare is given at the expense of families with a parent that stay at home. That is the same money that is used for roads that you may or may not use, schools that you may or may not send your kids to, and all kinds of things that don't affect you directly.

I don't see your point at all.