Do you consider "homemaker" to be a job?

[Scroopy Noopers]

Yes. Yes it is.

Most of the complaints in here sound like people not stepping up to the task of being a partner. I don’t necessarily believe you need a paying job to be a valuable part of the household. But if the opinion of you by your spouse is “they just sit around watching TV” then that’s another issue than just not earning an income. That’s clearly not sustainable.

Also, the curb clip is funny but I think 99% of people would think that the woman there is insane. People don’t actually act like that.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Not when the children are old enough to be in school all day.

I think that is an argument that it is less of a job, or perhaps a less valuable job.

Otherwise, of course it is a job. Willing to pay others to cook, clean, shop, and chauffeur kids around? Great. Willing to do all of those things? Great, but you can't just will those things out of existence.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Looch City

I look at it another way...If you're already well off enough to sustain a parent staying at home, why is a paying job necessary for the other parent?

It’s not always the case that a family with a parent who stays home is well-off. I know two couples where mom stays home and the kids are school-aged teenagers.

In the first case the mom tried working for a few years in her 20s and decided it wasn’t for her. Her husband is a teacher.

In the second case the dad has been out of work for over a year and is extremely stressed about money. But his wife getting a job just isn’t on the table.

In both cases the parents grew up in families where their own moms didn’t have jobs outside the home, so to them that’s just the model of how families operate.

[Kybosh]

To me, one of the key differences between "homemaking" (seems like an antiquated term to be honest) and "working" is that in a typical work environment you can adjust expectations. You are not afforded the same luxury with children, who generally cannot even understand this sort of thing until they are quite a bit older. Children are also relentless until school aged. They never stop, so you can't either.

[bc-chris]

"back in the day" my grandpa worked full time for CN and my grandma's "job" was to run the house. my grandpa gave my grandma 'x' amount of cash every month and that was hers to pay all the bills, get the groceries, etc. and of course she was expected to keep a clean house and have all meals prepared (remember... i'm talking about the 1940s/50s/early 60s)

my mom told me years ago that grandma was very savvy when it came to buying stuff and was able to have a good amount of left over cash at the end of each month that she put away in a bank account my grandpa didn't know about - ha! she could then go and splurge for stuff and my grandpa was none the wiser! ha!

[Flabbibulin]

Yes. I love my kids and spending essentially all Saturday and Sunday with them, but good god if it was all day every day?! Wife and I both work full time and the littles worms are in dayhome. Whatever we pay them probably isn't enough.

[you&me]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Homemaker isn't hard work IMO, it is a lot of work. Kids require a lot of attention before they start school and that can be very exhausting.

But it's not exactly the same stress level that the working parent typically has. Sales are down YOY due to the pandemic, you are faced with firing someone (or being fired), the company is doing a restructure, your boss is an #######, etc etc etc. I think sometimes its hard for the stay at home parent to relate because the only deadlines they face is to get the kids to their doctor appointment on time. Everything else is pretty fluid.

Well, if you want to take that stand, I'll play the other side -

The "typical working parent" is a small cog in a giant machine. The stress and general dynamism of their day-to-day is very likely overstated as a matter of their own perspective, relative to their actual contribution to the overall success of the organization.

The fluidity of the stay-at-home job is exactly what makes it more difficult than a lot of other "jobs" and the relative impact on the family is far greater than the relative impact on the company.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by you&me

Well, if you want to take that stand, I'll play the other side -

The "typical working parent" is a small cog in a giant machine. The stress and general dynamism of their day-to-day is very likely overstated as a matter of their own perspective, relative to their actual contribution to the overall success of the organization.

The fluidity of the stay-at-home job is exactly what makes it more difficult than a lot of other "jobs" and the relative impact on the family is far greater than the relative impact on the company.

I realize those things, because I also do them. Saturday's and Sundays are mom's time off.

And I do bed time on weekdays ( I have 3 under 5).

[Cecil Terwilliger]

It really shouldn’t matter whether it is considered a job. Or a career. For some reason being a stay at home mom or a homemaker have become offensive terms that belittle a woman’s role in the home. Or a man’s. But I feel like they started to get offensive as part of a move towards showing women’s roles in the home more respect.

I’ve never met anyone that doesn’t appreciate the difficulty of looking after and raising children before they get to school age. Tying it very loosely to the another definition that may or may not apply doesn’t actually get stay at home parents more respect.

Just think about the consequences of calling a stay at home parent unemployed. You might as well spit in their face.

We’ve demonized those terms but at the same time some of the words we use for describing parents who don’t work feel a bit disingenuous. Like we’re just pumping their tires. It can seem very patronizing.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Sliver

I think it is certainly respectable labour up until kids are in full-time school...say once your youngest starts grade one.

Originally Posted by Flabbibulin

Yes. I love my kids and spending essentially all Saturday and Sunday with them, but good god if it was all day every day?! Wife and I both work full time and the littles worms are in dayhome. Whatever we pay them probably isn't enough.

Agreed with little kids. Notice my very first sentence.

[Hockeyguy15]

I feel like being Sliver would be a job.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

Yes. Yes it is.

Most of the complaints in here sound like people not stepping up to the task of being a partner. I don’t necessarily believe you need a paying job to be a valuable part of the household. But if the opinion of you by your spouse is “they just sit around watching TV” then that’s another issue than just not earning an income. That’s clearly not sustainable.

Also, the curb clip is funny but I think 99% of people would think that the woman there is insane. People don’t actually act like that.

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.

[Elkyiv]

I don't really have a take on this but the one thing that I fail to understand is why the school day isn't better aligned with the typical work day schedule. Especially grades 1-6, where kids aren't able to fend for themselves at home alone.

What full time job permits you to pick up your kid at 2:50 pm? Just odd.

[GordonBlue]

Hey Sliver. I get what you're saying with your original post. my wife isn't working because of physical disabilities (but not the right kind to get assistance according to the government ), and she is home schooling our kid. It's not fair of me, but even then I sometimes feel some resentment for how much I have to do when I'm at home.

I'm thinking if our circumstances were different and she just chose to not work.
I'd be constantly resentful if she didn't have the entire house taken care of, and who knows if we'd last.
even then I'd probably still resent working to seemingly give her a life of ease.

[you&me]

Originally Posted by Elkyiv

I don't really have a take on this but the one thing that I fail to understand is why the school day isn't better aligned with the typical work day schedule. Especially grades 1-6, where kids aren't able to fend for themselves at home alone.

What full time job permits you to pick up your kid at 2:50 pm? Just odd.

The one that instead is scheduled so you can drop them off at 8AM?

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

I feel like being Sliver's wife would be a job.

fixed

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Elkyiv

I don't really have a take on this but the one thing that I fail to understand is why the school day isn't better aligned with the typical work day schedule. Especially grades 1-6, where kids aren't able to fend for themselves at home alone.

What full time job permits you to pick up your kid at 2:50 pm? Just odd.

It's because teachers have consistently voted for fewer instructional hours over the course of every contract negotiation. They don't even work Friday afternoons anymore, which makes it very challenging for people who work.

When my kids were younger, I would pick up my kids and more often than not a couple of their friends, too, when school ended at lunchtime on Fridays. I would then take this gaggle back to my work where I'd sit them in an office so they could veg out and watch TV. Luckily I own the place so I could do this ridiculous arrangement. I also did it for these other kids (one pair of kids had a single working mom with few options and one both parents worked so I helped them). It was nuts, though.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

I feel like being Sliver would be a job.

Being Sliver's partner would definitely be a job.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

fixed

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

[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.