A topic not being addressed here is the impact on how working moms or sahms and the "family unit" has on our boys. These discussions talk about the pros and cons of working or staying at home and how we need to send the right message to our daughters. Okay, I think it's pretty clear that women can vote now, can choose a great career, earn lots of money and choose to stay home or not. But, when it comes to maintaining the "family unit" we all know with the divorce rate and incarceration rate how well we are doing with our boys. I think we all want our daughters to make the best choice for the man they're going to marry or for those "modern women" the right choice of who gets them pregnate.
Nobody wants a deadbeat man. We all want the man that can hold his own and provide. I think it's pretty clear the message that has been sent out to these young boys. It's not their responsibility to provide anymore, since the woman can do that now. Responsibility has been traded for the big screen t.v. and the working mommy. At least, if there were more responsible men, there could be more choice to stay home or work for many of these women.
I'm lucky to have a man who can love, provide, and not complain when it comes time to support his family and show his boys how important "the family" unit is.
It's a sad day in America when people no longer value the "family unit" and debate how important or not it is to take care of your own children.
Next time you read a post about a women who raised her kids by herself, ask, "Who raised the boy who became the man that she either walked away from or who left his family?"
So you're saying that because a boy is raised by a single mother they feel no responsibility when they actually father a child? So does that then hold true for Daughters raised by single fathers? If it's true for boys, it should be true for girls too. My father was raised by a single mother - actually she has 4 boys - all have faught to be in their children's lives - even so far as to fight for custody. Guess they're the exception to the rule...
I am not so sure that I agree with your point, but you did spark some questions in my mind. Being a woman who will not likely be a SAHM for an extended period of time when I do have children, has found that sometimes that is an issue with the men that we date. So my question is this: By staying at home, and being disingenuous to those who do not, are SAHMs fostering young men who will expect, perhaps demand, their wives to stay at home and take care of the children? It is one thing to be a SAHM, it is quite another to disrespect those who haven't chosen, or who do not have the ability to chose, that avenue in life.
I have nothing against either - those who stay at home or those who work. What I have issue with is those that put women down for working. I need to work to support my family. I think that - in this day - I AM being a role model for my son. By going to work each day, by supporting us, by showing him that I can do thing, shows him that women can do things. That he shouldn't expect or require a woman to stay at home because she has kids. (as your point) My other point - which is also a hot topic - I could be staying at home with him at others expense. Which is better? To show him that I work to support us or that I stay at home and get a check? I think in whatever circumstances, there is no clear cut right or wrong. There is no - 'You're a bad mom for not staying home.' or 'You're a bad mom for staying at home.' I think that if you look from someone else's view, it might be interesting what you see...
I have dated men who had SAHM's and were terrible "mommas boys". They were abusive, cheated and downright had no respect for the women they dated.
On the other hand, I have a husband who helps out and works with me as a partner, both financially and with the houshold unit and our son sees that it's up to the man to contribute not just financially, but emotionally and with the chores too.
Alot of times, I see men that think all they have to do is provide a paycheck, but there is so much more to the family unit then just living expenses.
Couples shoudn't have a "parent-child" relationship. It should be a partnership. 50/50. Whether you don't contribute to the relationship in one way, you can in other ways. It's about working together, as a team.
Being a SAHM doesn't automatically guarantee that your child will come out perfect, as many of us have seen otherwise.
Also, I've met a few men who were raised by single mom's. They saw how hard their mother worked to provide for them and protect them from these bad fathers that they learned that you work for what you want and that hard work pays off in the end.
My husband has "held his own" and provided for our family. When I stayed at home, naturally I did most of the housework and errands, but that didn't turn him into a deadbeat man. And now that I work full time again, he does more than his fair share of the work around the house. He alone gets the boys up and fed and ready in the mornings and gets them to school. He does dishes, he does laundry, he vacuums, he does yardwork. I do all that stuff too. It's not just one of us taking care of everything. He never hid from diaper duty, and in fact jumps right in with me on the most tedious or disgusting part of parenthood. (Mac and cheese puke all over the bed at 3 am anyone?).
I know women who have husbands who sit on their butts all evening and they are left to do everything (cooking, cleaning, errands, taking care of the kids, taking care of themselves) and fall into bed really late because of it. I think my husband is showing our boys how to be a man, by how he treats me and how he treats his family. And one day I'll have daughters-in-law who thank us for the husbands who know how to treat them, and who put their socks in the laundry basket, cook, and pull their weight around the house.
Originally posted by Imamommy: A topic not being addressed here is the impact on how working moms or sahms and the "family unit" has on our boys. These discussions talk about the pros and cons of working or staying at home and how we need to send the right message to our daughters. Okay, I think it's pretty clear that women can vote now, can choose a great career, earn lots of money and choose to stay home or not. But, when it comes to maintaining the "family unit" we all know with the divorce rate and incarceration rate how well we are doing with our boys. I think we all want our daughters to make the best choice for the man they're going to marry or for those "modern women" the right choice of who gets them pregnate.
Nobody wants a deadbeat man. We all want the man that can hold his own and provide. I think it's pretty clear the message that has been sent out to these young boys. It's not their responsibility to provide anymore, since the woman can do that now. Responsibility has been traded for the big screen t.v. and the working mommy. At least, if there were more responsible men, there could be more choice to stay home or work for many of these women.
I'm lucky to have a man who can love, provide, and not complain when it comes time to support his family and show his boys how important "the family" unit is.
It's a sad day in America when people no longer value the "family unit" and debate how important or not it is to take care of your own children.
Next time you read a post about a women who raised her kids by herself, ask, "Who raised the boy who became the man that she either walked away from or who left his family?"
The answer, imho, is quite simple - You (the parents) teach your son that a woman is to be respected and that she is NOT now, nor ever will be or should be, his servant, slave, brood mare, etc. She is his PARTNER in life. As such, it is THEIR responsiblity, not his or hers alone, THEIRS to financially, emotionally, and spiritually provide for THEIR family....in ALL WAYS. No son should EVER be taught that a woman is any less than an EQUAL, IN ALL THINGSpertaining to the family and to their community.
IMHO, do this, and you're raised a desirable partner for any woman. Any less, and imho, they're NOT worthy.
