No, not me.
Or wait, if you're interested, just out of curiosity, how much are you offering? A bit about me: I have penis envy, I love to have sex for hours, I am addicted to Reality TV, I am a fantastic cook, and believe men are the superior sex. (Disclaimer: some, or all of these statements may be untrue. Marriage to Mommyhasaheadache may also lead to heartburn, flatulence, migraines, impotence or fatal heart attack).
The funny, or not so funny thing, is that had I been alive in the 1830s, my husband could have sold me if he got fed up of the fact that I don't always cook meals from scratch/I only clean windows when you can no longer see through them/my breasts aren't as pert as they were when he married me. I was just reading Sarah Wise's book about the poor of Georgian London, The Italian Boy, when I came across this passage:
A market was held in Smithfield from time to time: making a "Smithfield bargain" referred to the sale by the husband of his wife and was believed in many working-class communities to be a perfectly valid form of divorce (it has its roots in Anglo-Saxon common law). The sale was usually prearranged, and the buyer was often a friend or a neighbor who, motivated by pity, wanted to bring an unhappy union to an end; the public nature of the sale was to validate for the community the ending of the marriage. At two o'clock on the afternoon of Monday, 20 February 1832, a man brought his twenty-five year old wife in a halter and tied her in the pens opposite the Half Moon pub, close to the gate of St. Bartholomew the Great. A crowd gathered and the auction began. Throughout, the woman made no complaint about her treatment. Some twenty cases of wife selling at Smithfield are on record between the 1790s and the 1830s, although the true figure is likely to be higher.
I suppose that in this context, women have come quite a way since then. But if it was still common practice, how many men would put their wives in a halter and sell them off?? Not mine, naturally, but there are some that would, methinks. I wonder how much they made, per wife?
And while we're on the subject of what a wife is worth, let me get onto one of my pet peeves. I meet middle class women all the time who tell me that it is such a 'luxury' that they don't have to work and can spend time at home with their kids before they start school. To which I reply that it is perfectly doable, if you are prepared to live within your means. If you don't live in a fancy neighborhood, send the kids to private school and buy clothes from thrift stores, like I do, you can easily afford to have one parent at home while the other earns a good but not spectacular wage (or am I being hopelessly naive here? Tell me if I am). But no, most American moms 'need' a minivan (Why? Two or even three kids can fit in a sedan, and extra children can easily be strapped to the roof rack with bungee cord). These moms also 'need' to shell out for lots of expensive music/art/Gymboree classes, as well as manicures, pedicures and bikini waxes (For crying out loud, why can't you do your own nails and rip out your own pubes?) Consequently, the only way you can stay home is if the man earns a massive income. Amazingly, at the beginning of the twenty-first century, it has become a status symbol to stay home with the kids!!
In my opinion, it's bollocks. And as for looking after kids being a luxury, it isn't. It's work. That's why if you don't do it yourself, you hire someone to do it for you. Nannies make at least $500 per week, and I'd argue that in most cases a mother (or father) looking after the kids is better than a nanny. I see nannies at the park who treat their charges more like objects to be washed, clothed, diapered and fed, but largely ignore them. And why shouldn't they? They're not constantly guilt wracked like your average mother/father about whether they're stimulating and entertaining the children enough.
So basically, I don't think it should be a luxury for the mother (or father) to stay home with the kids. It should be a human right.
Maybe I should just move to Sweden.
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)



























18 comments:
Yup, if I wanted someone to do my nails for me and rip out my...anyway, yeah, we'd both be working. We definitely had to make some sacrifices so one of us could stay home, but it's worth it. But there are still a lot of families where it's impossible for a parent to stay home, regardless of penny pinching and cutting corners, because most American jobs are family un-friendly. My coworker's cousin lives in the Netherlands, and she got something like a year's paid leave when she had her baby. That's common there, but unheard of here.
Once this OLD man hit on me by saying, "I can keep sex going for four hours at a time. How does that sound to you?" To which I replied, "Tedious. As. Hell."
Sex for HOURS? Really? HOURS?
When you know the SECRETS of love (like me) you can make love for UP TO 5 whole minutes!
:)
HOURS? Really?
Hippie Mama ... That's all I was saying, that you have to make a few sacrifices. I admit, it might not be possible for everyone if they have a low wage.
Oh the Joys ... I once invited a man back to my house for dinner and after coffee (we still had our clothes on) he said "Have you ever had someone go down on you for an hour?" The line piqued my interest and luckily he did deliver and he was, um, quite good. Where was I? Oh yes, intercourse for hours. No, not my thing. That was one of the statements that was untrue!
take me with you?
This is so my favorite "mommy-blog."
Ok..Emma both my socks or at half mast...
and I have a bottle of scotch tucked into my thrift shop leather jacket...
Here here...
We are a carless family, we walk everywhere...We do not have cable, we do not need a lot either...
Christ, I cut my own hair as I do my daughter's...
She is 8 and is in schoolfull time but I have to meet her everyday for lunch, as she finds it all too much staying...
She has had special needs that require me to be here...
And it should be a right for all. As she needs this forbut a shorttime... and in the end she will have the skillset she needs to succeed in the world.
Emma Emma,
One *can* rip out one's own pubes much like one can cut one's own hair... but some things are better hired out. As for staying home with kids being a luxury. I'm with you. If this is luxury, give me squalor.
In my experience, however, many women claim they can't afford to stay home to cover for the fact that they'd rather work. It may be better for kids when mom stays home, but I venture a guess it's much better for kids to have a happy working mom, than a sullen mom at home (I'm referring to myself here).
I agree with "hippie mama" that it's important to keep in mind many folks (regardless of how many mini-vans they don't own or manicures they skip)cannot afford to support a family (let alone health insurance) on one income.
'tis a good blog indeed
maybe you should move to Sweden
everything seems to be in order there, except the teenage birth-rate
do you think i can cash in on petra before it's too late? i'm thinking it's too late
Yeah, I'm with you on the SAHM thing. Me, and all my friends, are SAHMs currently, and our husbands don't earn large salaries... in fact, we're on the low to middling range. Funnily enough, we all are one car (old car) families, all the husbands cycle to work, and we all dress our kids in hand-me-downs.
Thus all of us SAHMs have enough money left over to spend our afternoons hanging out at each others house, drinking copious amounts of wine and ripping each others pubes out.
My friend gets to stay home and her husband earns a very good living, the kids are in private school and they splurge on the things they like.. but I wouldn't say they're all luxury - they use the money they have to live well. The kids are smart and loving and both parents are very active in discipline and entertaining them.. but she does work at home - watching them, educating them when they're not in school, extracurricular activities. They always always eat dinner together at the table unless he's traveling out of the country - which isn't too often, but she doesn't wear make up, barely does anything w/ her hair, no designer clothes - the family is the focus and no matter how you go about that, that's what's important..
Love the way you write!
as you well know, this is one of our favorite topics of discussion.. and you know what I think...
that there are quite a few moms we know who say they "have to" work but really they just want to keep up with the Joneses and have all the fancy things in life. I've blogged about it several times.
That being said, in America there are a number of people who truly do have to have 2 people working to make ends meet. And, I certainly wouldn't sent my kid to a cr*ppy B-more school and if I had to work to do it, I would.
But never mind all that materialistic stuff. we are all better off doing without.
And I love my junker car, I never worry about "hurting" it!
Emma:
Most of the intelligent comments have already been made, so I'll leave it at this:
I have a friend who stayed home with her two sons. Her husband made tons of money and they drove brand new BMWs, had a beautiful boat, and my friend always dressed expensively. I was jealous. Until I learned that for the five or so years I had been jealous of my friend, she was in counseling with her philandering pr*ck of a husband trying to keep the marriage together. They're now divorced, she's married to a wonderful man, and she's a first grade teacher. She's happier than I've ever seen her.
The lesson here for me was that appearances can be so very deceiving.
Wow that's a rich post!
At first it seems like the two subjects aren't related, but aren't they both kind of about who has control in the household? Maybe. Just a theory.
Anyway, nannies are just not an option for 99 percent of moms because of the costs of carrying a part- or full-time employee. It only makes sense if you have like, three kids under the age of three. Most kids these days over the age of about 3 are in some sort of group-daycare situation for at least a part of the week.
Which is not a bad thing at all-- I felt like with my daughter by her first year she'd seen and chewed on everything in the house, and she was happy to socialize, loved her teachers. I sure don't have the energy and resources to keep a toddler stimulated for hours at a time.
So when you've been in the house with a baby for months on end and they start like, part-time daycare, it really is luxurious!
Oh and one the last thing-- it's not the manicures, classes and pube waxing or lattes or whatnot that make people financially overextended, it's the big stuff: housing and utilities and big purchases like cars. Travel and restaurants can really add up too.
I don't think it would be possible for everyone to raise a family on one wage, but I agree that many more people could do it if they chose to live more frugally. I think that our society is so consumer-driven that we often feel like we NEED to have a bigger house, a new car, etc. but really we don't need all the extravagance. In many case, at least for middle class folks, I think we do have a choice as to whether we want to stay home with the kids or buy a bigger house. I chose something in the middle - a slightly bigger house and a Part-time job.
Sinda ... okay, do you think you'll fit in my hand luggage?
Malnurtured Snay ... Thanks for the compliment!
Pendullum ....It is great that you are a carless family and walk everywhere. Where do you live? Sweden?? No seriously, I didn't know there was anywhere apart from New York where you could walk anywhere in the US. Oh, and give us a nip of that Scotch.
crankmama ... hey, sorry if I sound like I'm on my high horse here. I never had the choice to work in the US since I don't have a work visa. And I think it's okay for moms to work if they want to. Actually, to be honest, it's those women who go back to work after a few weeks or months or whatever that I really don't understand. That just can't be normal or good for the baby, but on the other hand, they often lose their jobs if they don't. Crazy!
Kiki ... I have an American friend who is married to a Swede (a human not a vegetable) and she lived with him in Lund for seven years and almost killed herself with depression. She said that it was a great society in every way apart from the people were very depressing. Even though she learned Swedish and tried to communicate, the people were very closed. She went in the same grocery store every day and tried to make conversation and the staff never got beyond saying 'hello'.
Cesca ... Bloody good excuse to tell husband. "We needed to anaethetize ourselves to rip out our pubes, thus the wine bottles rolling around the yard."
miss devylish ...your friend sounds like she's doing a good job!
kira ... you're lucky you don't have to work. You'd be too cranky in the mornings like me!!
viscountess of funk ...appearances can be deceiving indeed.
d's c ... I'm with you on the point that being at home with kids all the time drives you nuts. I wasn't saying it was fun, just that you should be able to do it if you want to. The problem with a lot of people (Americans especially maybe) is that they think it's normal to refinance and have tons of maxed out credit cards. One should always follow granny's advice: if you can't afford it, don't buy it. I cut up all my credit cards long ago.
mommy off the record ... that's what I need, a part timem job.
I agree... let go of some the the wants,focus on the needs, and you can probably stay home with your kids if that is what you want...
Really, being a SAHM is a status symbol? Finally, I am cool! :-)
hmmm - i was in smithfield the other day. should have kept my eyes open ....
Emma
I needed you today and you were NOT HERE... I've already read this post... I need something new and snarky and clever...
HMPH!
Rachael
CrankMama
Post a Comment