babble: More Moms Cash In

FAQ | Forum Home

»	babble » walking the talk » labour and consumption » More Moms Cash In

Email this thread to someone!

Author

Topic: More Moms Cash In

steffie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3826

posted 17 July 2004 09:22 PM

quote:
Overall,79 percent of women under 55 without children were in the paid workforce in 2003.

This article talks about what is the only life (as an adult) I have ever known - working to survive. I think the headline, "More Moms Cash In" suggests that is is a) a choice, and b) an "added bonus", like cashing in bonds or a winning lottery ticket.

Working while being a mom is f**king difficult and so I say, it's a wonder only 80% of moms work outside the home! Where are the other 20%, living the life of leisure on their millionaire husband's (or wife's) salary?

From: What are the roots that clutch, what branches grow / Out of this stony rubbish? | Registered: Mar 2003 | IP: Logged

lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534

posted 17 July 2004 11:24 PM

It is an odd title, but perhaps just bad writing. Surely you wouldn't want to return to the days of economic dependency on the male breadwinner though?

From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002 | IP: Logged

skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 18 July 2004 11:34 AM

I can't make the link work, steffie, but I am puzzled. The sentence you've quoted refers to women who aren't mums, yes?

Me, puzzled.

From: gone | Registered: May 2001 | IP: Logged

Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 18 July 2004 11:41 AM

I'd like to say that working outside the home is a choice for me, but it's not. However, if it were a choice for me, I'd still work outside the home.

From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001 | IP: Logged

skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 18 July 2004 11:52 AM

I would always want to do what I consider my own work, but my idea of what is my own work has almost never coincided with working for a living. I don't think that having to work for a living is good for most people, women or men.

From: gone | Registered: May 2001 | IP: Logged

lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534

posted 18 July 2004 11:57 AM

There are two major problems, I think. One is the "unfinished revolution" - women have made a lot of progress in spite of everything over the last few decades, but social services and workplace recognition of family duties have not kept pace. And overall, neither has fathers' participation - though I know many notable exceptions and many men who take part in parenting in ways unthinkable a generation or two ago.

The other is that this progress has taken place in the context of a generalised rollback of workers' rights, a loss in buying power for basics - though families have a lot more "stuff" than 25 or 50 years ago. In many cases both parents of a family must work outside the home full time and still get family duties done. Usually an unequal burden falling on women's shoulders - not just children but dependent elderly, sick and many other family duties. And of course there are more single-parent families, once again the majority headed by women. Here again, it is wonderful that women have gained the right to leave abusive or harmful relationships - a "shame" two generations back - but there has not been commensurate social support.

All that said, steffie, by your profile you don't do the kind of work that people usually give up willingly. I don't quite understand your point, and wish you would elaborate further!

From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002 | IP: Logged

steffie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3826

posted 18 July 2004 12:05 PM

Ah, skdadl. If only I could learn how to read an article carefully before I rattle off a response. Of course you are right. "without children". The article quoted came from www.herizons.ca

I'm sorry, folks; just reacting strongly to (yes, a few poorly chosen words lagatta) probably because I am going through a rough stretch here financially. The work outside the home is not supporting the occupants of the home. And, ya know, it's really frustrating! Not to mention a deadbeat dad... but that's another rant altogether!

My wish is only that all women can be supported for all the work we do. And that I will get paid adequately for my own. Thanks for correcting me and acknowledging my position.

From: What are the roots that clutch, what branches grow / Out of this stony rubbish? | Registered: Mar 2003 | IP: Logged

lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534

posted 18 July 2004 12:14 PM

Well steffie, I don't think a "deadbeat dad" is another rant altogether - after all, they are his children too, even if you two are no longer in a relationship.

I certainly couldn't support a child on irregular freelance work. Just barely support myself and my cat Renzo. I'd no doubt have to do administrative work or something - and (horrors) wear pantyhose!

From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002 | IP: Logged

skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 18 July 2004 12:19 PM

Well, but steffie, that article still says that 72 per cent of women with children under sixteen are in the paid labour force, and 66 per cent of those with pre-schoolers.

I can't believe that all those women have satisfying or well-paying jobs. I suspect that these stats reinforce one of lagatta's points above, that pressure on working people generally has been increasing over the last fifteen years or so.

From: gone | Registered: May 2001 | IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time

Hop To: