Do you consider "homemaker" to be a job?

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

That’s an uncharitable take on the matter. I don’t think anyone is denying that caring for young children is a tremendous amount of work. And you’re assuming the dads here haven’t taken on a fair share if that work. We have twins, and I took an equal share in bottle-feeding, changing diapers, dressing, etc since day 1. And ever since they started going to pre-school, I’ve been the one who gets them up, dressed, fed, and out the door every morning.

But because I’ve been hands-on since day one, I’m aware of how dramatically the amount of work necessary to raise kids drops off as they get older. By age five, they’re in school most of the day. By 12 they’re doing their own laundry, washing dishes, cleaning bathrooms, making their own lunch, helping make dinner, etc. If I had quit my job to become a full-time homemaker when the kids were two, my wife would have been impressed and grateful. If I did it now, she would be pissed.

Where have I assumed anything of the sort about dads??? Seriously, what are you talking about in relation to my post?

[Mazrim]

Yes, it's a job. Funny story, but my wife and I did the math, and she's more valuable to our combined wealth as a homemaker than working the retail job she had.

In the past, my wife worked evenings in retail and essentially had opposite hours to me. I would see her for maybe a couple hours a day at most. We'd share most responsibilities for chores, but it wasn't a very fulfilling lifestyle. She ran into some health issues and couldn't work anymore, so she became a homemaker.

Having her around when I was at home was a huge boost to our mental health situations and our relationship. I was able to take a greater role in my own job and saw a noticeable increase in productivity and responsibility with my wife taking care of more things at home, and just being there for me. We weren't chained to her retail schedule for vacations either which was great for being able to attend more family functions and go to more places. I've gotten raises and bonuses because of the work I could do with our current working setup that wouldn't have happened before. Her value in that capacity is worth more than she was making in retail.

It's not all sunshine and rainbows unfortunately. Some family and friends don't see our situation as a good thing, which can make some of them pretty judgmental of her. It's stressful for her as she feels like she's supposed to be meeting these expectations of others and failing. It's hard to shake Sliver's mindset out of people and help them understand. The other downside is that it can be pretty isolating to be at home all the time, and this was before the pandemic. My wife does a good job keeping herself busy but does get stir crazy from time to time.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Sliver

"Find something you love doing and you'll never work a day in your life." - Sliver's wife

"Find something you love doing and you will eventually learn to hate it." - Locke

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by GGG

If you look at household labour for a week I’d say there is a good 20 hrs a week of labour required in cooking, cleaning, home maintenance, dealing with schools, driving kids to activities.

So if you can afford it why would you add another 40 hours to total household labour.

If you look a a working parent they may farm out cooking, cleaning, childcare, home maintenance and other tasks to third parties in order to allow them to work in a job that requires 40hrs of labour. So when Sliver says there are two income households that do 40-55hrs a week of work plus manage a household I think you need to take a close look at the number of hours you outsource. I would bet Sliver is hiring a cleaner.

I think a better question is why does anyone work outside the home? You give up 1/2 of your waking hours, incur stress, and get some satisfaction from accomplishments. So asking oneself if there was no financial incentive to work what would you do with your time. If the answer isn’t work your current job then the concept of “homemaker” as a profession shouldn’t be confusing.

A homemaker is essentially a person who has reduced their labour requirement to survive and can spend time on the things they want. Volunteering, small personal projects, crazy ideas etc.

As a goal reducing the required labour to sustain a household is essentially the entire concept of retirement. Some people have achieved 50% of it first.

On the financial side I’m always surprised when married couples have separate enough accounts that gift giving is actually a gift. Whether dual or single income you have a total household income from which you agree to spend. If one spouse has dramatically more spending power due to disproportionate incomes and it’s viewed as individual money that seems to be a point of potential conflict regardless of if you have a two income or one income family. Obviously each couple has there own system that works for them. We just run joint spending for household and each get an allowance for personal spending.

The only advice my dad ever said to me was: if you wan separate accounts, sleep in separate beds.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

The only advice my dad ever said to me was: if you wan separate accounts, sleep in separate beds.

I also disagree with this. My wife and I have been living together for 11 years and have separate accounts. Life isn’t a one size fits all situation.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

I also disagree with this. My wife and I have been living together for 11 years and have separate accounts. Life isn’t a one size fits all situation.

We have joint accounts, the only separate accounts I have are for my business and then as I pay myself that money gets moved into our joint account.

[Traditional_Ale]

My Mom never worked when I was growing up, and actually never did. Dad retired at 55. But aside from going to work he is absolutely useless at literally everything, has been on the wrong side of every social issue in history, has no friends, no hobbies, and has done nothing for the last 17 years but smoke cigarettes and watch TV.

My mom taught me everything I value as far as what parents should teach their kids. And not just things like how to cook (and really well at that), clean, laundry, drive stick shift, but also how to truly think about social issues and be a compassionate person. We also both really appreciate movies, like, the acting, the production, the cinematography, music, etc etc. Dad is a simpleton philistine that can't stand anything that isn't sports, sports related, or already confirmed to be popular so he can like it without having to spare a single brain cell to think about it.

So who really made the bigger contribution? What is the value of things money cannot buy, relative to what it can?

[TheIronMaiden]

I think a lot of work that a 'home maker' does goes unnoticed. Having lived alone for the last three years it drives me up the wall when my friends disregard what their wife does, as if clean or even tidy were a neutral state, or hell as If having food made for you everyday is something to sneeze at.


Some people went right from their moms to their girlfriends and it shows.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by GGG

If you look at household labour for a week I’d say there is a good 20 hrs a week of labour required in cooking, cleaning, home maintenance, dealing with schools, driving kids to activities.

So if you can afford it why would you add another 40 hours to total household labour.

If you look a a working parent they may farm out cooking, cleaning, childcare, home maintenance and other tasks to third parties in order to allow them to work in a job that requires 40hrs of labour. So when Sliver says there are two income households that do 40-55hrs a week of work plus manage a household I think you need to take a close look at the number of hours you outsource. I would bet Sliver is hiring a cleaner.

I think a better question is why does anyone work outside the home? You give up 1/2 of your waking hours, incur stress, and get some satisfaction from accomplishments. So asking oneself if there was no financial incentive to work what would you do with your time. If the answer isn’t work your current job then the concept of “homemaker” as a profession shouldn’t be confusing.

A homemaker is essentially a person who has reduced their labour requirement to survive and can spend time on the things they want. Volunteering, small personal projects, crazy ideas etc.

As a goal reducing the required labour to sustain a household is essentially the entire concept of retirement. Some people have achieved 50% of it first.

On the financial side I’m always surprised when married couples have separate enough accounts that gift giving is actually a gift. Whether dual or single income you have a total household income from which you agree to spend. If one spouse has dramatically more spending power due to disproportionate incomes and it’s viewed as individual money that seems to be a point of potential conflict regardless of if you have a two income or one income family. Obviously each couple has there own system that works for them. We just run joint spending for household and each get an allowance for personal spending.

Yes, we do have a cleaner. It's the best $350 I spend a month. Certainly not an expense that is worth my wife foregoing her own career to avoid.

Personally, I don't like work. I think the work week should be four days (maximum!). I moved my company to 4.5 days per week last year and we're sticking with it. I have given people the option to work 40 hours (9, 9, 9, 9, 4) or 36 hours (8, 8, 8, 8, 4). It's about a 50/50 split of 40-hours-per-week employees and 36-hours-per-week employees. The less people have to work the better. We are all happier with our Friday afternoons off.

I don't like seeing people being taken advantage of. If one person is working 0 hours per week (or even call it 20 like in your post; however, I would contend the spouse working out of the home 40 hours per week is likely doing a not-insignificant amount of that 20 hours of house work) and one person is working 40 hours per week, you have a host and a parasite. Somebody is leaching off somebody else's labour. How often have you seen the stay-at-home person outlive the breadwinner? Every time? The person who lived the feet-up life-of-Riley lifestyle for 80 years with very little stress lived their easy life at the expense of the poor person who had to toil through a career to support them. Had both worked, both people could have shared in the responsibility to labour to support their own lives.

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Some people went right from their moms to their girlfriends and it shows.

I laughed way too hard at this, because it is so true.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

I think a lot of work that a 'home maker' does goes unnoticed. Having lived alone for the last three years it drives me up the wall when my friends disregard what their wife does, as if clean or even tidy were a neutral state, or hell as If having food made for you everyday is something to sneeze at.

Some people went right from their moms to their girlfriends and it shows.

My house is clean (I know I just said we have a cleaner, but we still clean up after ourselves daily and the house is never a mess), tidy and somehow we manage to eat everyday without a homemaker involved. Really, there is absolutely nothing a homemaker does that everyone else doesn't do, too.

[DoubleF]

Coincidentally, I'm literally reading a resume right now that has "Homemaker" with a decade+ duration on it. I think it's there to help explain half a decade of piecemeal jobs...

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Sliver

My house is clean (I know I just said we have a cleaner, but we still clean up after ourselves daily and the house is never a mess), tidy and somehow we manage to eat everyday without a homemaker involved. Really, there is absolutely nothing a homemaker does that everyone else doesn't do, too.

But why do you care about other peoples situations that don’t impact you? Especially enough to tag those individuals with names like parasites. I just don’t get it. It’s a lot of assuming there is resentment in other peoples relationships, which isn’t necessarily the case.

It can certainly lead to more family free time, which some value more than others.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

But why do you care about other peoples situations that don’t impact you? Especially enough to tag those individuals with names like parasites. I just don’t get it. It’s a lot of assuming there is resentment in other peoples relationships, which isn’t necessarily the case.

It can certainly lead to more family free time, which some value more than others.

It's more of an exaggerated buzzword we like on CP. Like calling Airdrie a parasite community. I mean, the term is technically accurate, but you're correct that it's a bit loaded.

My interest in it is the same as my interest in pretty much anything else that doesn't affect me. I'm always fascinated by people who mount their winter tires on steelies and install them on their nice cars. Does it affect me? No, but it does fascinate me. Or people who have a fast car, but won't goose it off a light with me when I just want to race up to the speed limit? Very weird. Lots of things like this.

There may not be resentment within the relationship, but I do think it's unhealthy, unfair and unethical for one grown adult to put themselves in a situation where another grown adult has to support them through their entire life. Disabilities being an importance exception - both mental and physical. I have nothing but respect for somebody willing to support a disabled spouse as that is a person who took a vow seriously and is really living a life of service.

[woob]

Originally Posted by Sliver

My house is clean (I know I just said we have a cleaner, but we still clean up after ourselves daily and the house is never a mess), tidy and somehow we manage to eat everyday without a homemaker involved. Really, there is absolutely nothing a homemaker does that everyone else doesn't do, too.

Your house is clean because you have a cleaner. Yes, keeping a house tidy day to day is relatively straight forward, but the actual cleaning is not done in day to day tidying. The fact that you pay $350/month for a cleaner answers a portion of your question already; yes its a job. Factor in laundry, groceries, eating bonbons and getting your hair permed, and it's pretty full time.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by Sliver

I don't like seeing people being taken advantage of. If one person is working 0 hours per week (or even call it 20 like in your post; however, I would contend the spouse working out of the home 40 hours per week is likely doing a not-insignificant amount of that 20 hours of house work) and one person is working 40 hours per week, you have a host and a parasite. Somebody is leaching off somebody else's labour. How often have you seen the stay-at-home person outlive the breadwinner? Every time? The person who lived the feet-up life-of-Riley lifestyle for 80 years with very little stress lived their easy life at the expense of the poor person who had to toil through a career to support them. Had both worked, both people could have shared in the responsibility to labour to support their own lives.

Your entire mindset is predicated on two assumptions here - that you view a homemaker as a leech with no value, and that they don't work hard. It would be wise for you to consider why you automatically assume these two things and maybe reconcile that with that fact that many people have many reasons to be a homemaker that isn't the "trophy wife out partying while the husband works himself to the bone" mentality of 50 years ago.

[CroFlames]

If we are strictly speaking about a homemaker who stays at home AFTER the kids started school, then yes, that is leechy. Sorry to say.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by woob

Your house is clean because you have a cleaner. Yes, keeping a house tidy day to day is relatively straight forward, but the actual cleaning is not done in day to day tidying. The fact that you pay $350/month for a cleaner answers a portion of your question already; yes its a job. Factor in laundry, groceries, eating bonbons and getting your hair permed, and it's pretty full time.

$350 a month is nothing. Somebody making minimum wage earns that in less than three days. You're not going to keep a 45 year old person out of the workforce so you save $350/month. That doesn't even make sense.

Also, we don't get the cleaner in weekly. It's every second week. We clean on the in between weeks.

But yeah, I know about laundry, groceries, property care, etc. because my wife and I do all those things, too. We do EVERYTHING a homemaker does and waaaaay more.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

If we are strictly speaking about a homemaker who stays at home AFTER the kids started school, then yes, that is leechy. Sorry to say.

Hard to believe it's controversial. And yes, that's what we are strictly speaking about per the OP.

[nfotiu]

I do have to say that my kids' quality of life is enhanced because I've been fortunate to be able to work from home for their whole school lives. I know not everyone has that opportunity, and there is solid benefit to having a parent home with them if a parent stays home for the kids.