Are stay-at-home moms making a 'Feminine Mistake'?

I am getting a little tired of hearing about things like this, that seem to assume most stay at home moms just jump in without any thought to the future. Every stay at home mom I personally know (myself included), has crunched the numbers a few times, heard the horror stories, and thought about most of the "what ifs".

We know what we're sacrificing, but to us, it is worth it. I've also found that being a stay at home mom makes it easier to put more in the savings account. We used to have maid service, eat out frequently on days where my round trip commute time was in the 2-3 hour range, and have our groceries delivered. Now that I have time to do the cleaning, cooking, and shopping myself, I've also removed a lot of stress from my life.

I think perhaps the "Feminine Mistake" is that if a woman chooses to stay home, she didn't think it through or assuming working moms love conspicious consumption more than their family. Not all women are cut out to be a stay at home mom, and not all women are cut out to be a working mom. Sometimes circumstances dictate that what is best for a family is not what we would have chosen for ourselves, but we do what is necessary to take care of family.

Reply

I grew up the daughter of a "modern woman" who put her career ahead of her children. I grew up in daycare and as a latch-key kid while my mom jetted to exotic locales like Hong Kong and South America on business. When I had my own first child, even though I already held a couple of degrees, I made it CLEAR that my kids and being with them came FIRST. I have NEVER regretted this decision and I have now been a stay-at-home mom (and free-lance writer) for 14 years.
I have spoken to many older women on this issue over the years and one thing seems abundantly clear: At the end of one's life, one never wishes they had worked one more day, or earned more money, or held more titles. The ONLY regrets come from the loss of time not spent with those who are most precious to us.

Reply

You know, this kind of thinking is, in itself, now ARCHAIC.
Who is the greater feminist?
The one who says a woman must CHOOSE between her children and her career or the one who acknowledges that you CAN have both?
I finished college, had my children, am now raising them, and fully intend to return to the workforce once they reach the upper high-school years. I estimate that I will still have between 25-30 years to climb the corporate ladder.
Why should I waste my youth, my energy, and my limited years of fertility on things that really, do not matter? The corporate world will not be there for me when I am old. The CEO's and VIP's I have met and succeeded along the way, will not mourn will I will pass... WHY should I give THEM the best years of my life???
The ME generation is OVER.
That kind of thinking is SO YESTERDAY and the Feminine Mystique has been revealed for what it really is: SELFISH.
If you want to have a career -- FABULOUS -- go for it and do your best! But don't disparage the woman who has decided that there are MORE IMPORTANT things in life than self-gratitude.
The greatest forms of fulfillment come from committing our lives to the success of OTHERS -- most notably in our legacy: Our CHILDREN.

Reply

Let's not forget that the most important woman - so far - in U.S. history put her career on hold to be an at home mom. After graduating from Stanford law, Sandra Day O'Connor stayed at home until her children were grown. She then ran for office, became a judge, and was eventually nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court. There, she spent several years as the Court's most influential justice, single-handedly shaping the direction of American law for a generation.

I can't think of a better role model.

Reply

Good issue for debate, but this would have been a much stronger post if you had actually READ the book before posting about it, IMO.

Reply

Quote: Maybe instead of penalizing a women for staying home, employers could begin to recognize what these women have to offer and provide a path for them to re-enter the workforce should they choose to.

Yes, there are financial risks. The women who choose to stay home and not unaware of these risks but they believe the benefits outweigh the risks.

Having said that, when the risks are realized, particularly through unfortunate circumstances and in particular when the other half of the equation doesn't hold up their end of the bargain, it would be nice if the courts recognized the financial loss as well.

Reply

While I agree with all the above commenters, I also agree that there IS a danger in staying at home. If something were to happen to my husband and I had to go back to work, I would have nowhere near the same earning potential. I would not be able to keep up the mortgage on our house. Most likely we would need to move across the country, closer to my parents, where it is cheaper to live AND I could go back to work for my father, who would presumably be more willing to take a chance on someone who hasn't been in the workforce for at least 5 years. It's a scary thought. Yes, I have credit cards, utilites etc in my name. I have my own IRAs and investment accounts in my name. Still, it's a very tenuous position to be in.

Reply

I'm actually reading this book right now, and think it's quite good. I figured it would make a lot of people angry, as these kinds of books tend to, but anyone who thinks they have a huge problem with the book might consider reading it first--instead of having a knee-jerk response. I have been pleasantly surprised by how balanced and well-researched it is, and am planning to teach certain chapters in one of my sociology classes in the fall.

Reply

Ms. Bennetts is an uptight, obese man-hater.

Why have children if you won't raise them?

Reply

I wonder how much she looks at some of the advantages stay at home moms enjoy today versus in the past. It's much easier to be a work at home mom and avoid the issues with not working and not having any personal income.

Reply

I'm so tired of this notion that working moms are not raising our children. My husband and I both work full time and we do not have full time child care. Our daughter is in school and we only have a babysitter for our weekly date nights--although we are very lucky to both have the degree of flexibility that we do as university professors. No one else is raising our daughter except for my husband and myself.

In the article this post linked to, Bennetts said "Women are so defensive about their choices that many seem to have closed their minds entirely." It seems as though someone, who probably hasn't even read the book, who calls the author "an uptight, obese man-hater" would fit that bill. Good grief.

Reply

Jeannie,
I fail to see how anyone's body fat levels are at all relevant to this discussion. Your statement might as well have been a racial epithet.

(Please excuse if this posts twice, it didn't show up the first time).

Reply

Lisa J.

Do you and your hubby teach at the College of Charleston?

Reply

No, we do not teach at the College of Charleston--nor do I see how that's relevant to this conversation.

Reply

I agree with the comment on leaving the workforce to raise children might be hard to go back to with the state of our economy, however, as a full time mother of two, my husband and I are able to work different shifts to accomodate the raising of our children. They are only in daycare and hour a day in between shifts. This is good for their social skills. It also gives my husband the chance to be their sole provider. I feel, when I was pregnant and not working, I was the all. It's nice to get the break, earn the money and ultimately, when our girls grow up, they'll see how their parents made a sacrifice of OUR relationship for their benefit. I do hope that all the stay at home moms are getting taken care of by their spouses they you guys are taking care of IT ALL!

Reply

Lisa J. - If your daughter is in school all day while you and your husband are at work - then I agree with you. You and your husband are raising your daughter. However - when children are younger than school age (babies, toddlers, and preschoolers who only go to school for 6 hours a week) and are being cared for by a nanny or babysitter for the majority of their day - that's a different story. In that scenario - I'm with Jeannie on this. Why have babies only to have someone else raise them 80% of the time? It's just selfish. Women who work full time outside of the home *BY CHOICE* (not financial necessity) while their babies and toddlers are being fed and diapered and psuedo "loved" by strangers are selfish. Plain and simple.

Reply

"Women who work full time outside of the home *BY CHOICE* (not financial necessity) while their babies and toddlers are being fed and diapered and psuedo "loved" by strangers are selfish. Plain and simple."

Ugh. How narrow. Nothing about parenting is "plain and simple." I guess because my daughter was in daycare was she was younger, I'm a bad and neglectful mother, right? Sorry--I'm not buying it. My relationship with my family suggests otherwise, and that's what matters to me.

Reply

It always seems to me that the ultra-feminists of these articles forget a very important fact.

There are indeed women who are "fulfilled" by their husband and children. Not every woman feels the same way and needs to have a job to feel like they have worth. Some women aren`t "making a sacrifice" by leaving the workforce to have children - Like me, there have to be others out there who really want things to be this way.

It seems that everyone somehow forgets that gender-equality isn`t about working (I`m sorry, I really dislike the term "feminism", we`re supposed to be equal, right? Not "women are better") - it`s about having the option to work. It`s about having the freedom to make that *choice*. Which means that the freedom to make the opposite choice should also be there. I wouldn`t want someone to force me to work just as much as I wouldn`t want someone to force me to stay at home. Unfortunately there are too many feminists out there who would love to tell me that I am horribly wrong, and that I am being oppressed, deceived, etc because I really am happy to stay home with my son, and I really am fulfilled by being part of this family.

Sometimes, there are things more important that "preserving your earning power".

Reply

Why is it that these conversations always degrade into the "you're a bad mum because of the decisions you made, and I have the right to judge you without knowing anything about it or caring why you decided to do what you do." sort of garbage? No, I don't think that women who chose to work out of the home are selfish horrible people, nor do I think that those of us (myself included) that chose to stay at home and make the sacrifices involved to our careers and whatever else are saints. Very few mothers make any decisions about their lifestyles and childrens lives lightly, why do we need to constantly divide ourselves into camps?

Anyways, I'm a stay at home mother because that's what I feel is best for me and my family. I'm not going to tell anyone else that because it's best for me, it must be best for you too. Good for you, Lisa, for not letting people make you doubt your decisions and feel bad about the choices you've made. Being a mother is hard enough without being made to feel guilty about doing the best you can.

Reply

I haven't read the book, but this is the second post / article I've read about it and as far as I can tell, the author is ignoring some important facts.

Like if you're a working mom, you are still very unlikely to have the earning potential of your husband, and much if not all of your additional earning is going into the family pot and getting used up, not going toward future security for you and your kids. Meanwhile, you are working harder and taking on more stress. And in many cases, neither your extra hard work nor your additional stress are particularly appreciated by your family.

A mother's decision to work or not should be based on whether it makes her a better, happier person overall. Some people really thrive on the creativity and intellectual stimulation of a professional job. Thus their job energizes them and enables them to really give their best and be a great example for their kids. But for others, the benefits of working outside the home are outweighed by the added stress, fatigue, and lack of appreciation. A few extra bucks that will probably go to pay for an immediate luxury such as a bigger car or a private education are not enough to justify guilting a woman into working when she doesn't want to or need to.

As for the dangers of being out of the work force, there are ways to keep from being completely shut off from the professional world. Like continuing networking, doing part-time consultancy from home, keeping current with the industry trends / journals, taking classes, etc.

Most of all, I am disturbed by the fact that this whole big warning is based on the belief that most of our marriages are doomed and we can't trust our husbands to do right by us and our children. Any move that we make based on lack of trust of our spouse is a move toward weakening the relationship.

I agree with prior posters who say that "feminism" needs to broaden its scope to encourage choices other than continuous full-time out-of-home work.

Reply