Conference quark::human_relations-v1

    
    I don't mean to imply that you men can't put your 2cents in too.
    I know there will be some.
    

    I don't see why men should be cheated out of the joys of caring
    for their children, just because it is "traditionally" the woman's
    role.
    
    But please also see note 225 in EUREKA::PARENTING for a lengthy
    discussion on this issue.
    					Steve

    Well...
    
    I went straight from high school to college.  I got married in my first
    year and promised myself I wouldn't have any children until I graduated.
    Just over a year later, I discontinued birth control and had a son.
    At this time, I thought I wanted to stay and take care of my house,
    my newborn child, learn about cooking, etc.  Maybe I would have (and
    enjoyed it!) if I didn't have some other built-in problems (like my
    in-laws living with us and being completely dependent on us, rotten
    marriage, among others).  At any rate, I could not wait to get out of
    the house to go back to school!
    
    Two years later I had a daughter.  I was somewhat wiser and went back
    to work immediately after my maternity leave.  In this case, my workplace
    seemed to contain the only semblance of sanity in my life.  To say that
    I was spread thin would be putting it mildly.
    
    To finish the story, I left my husband in June 1985.  I have to work
    obviously to support myself and my 'part time' family.  Since I have
    the children every weekend and part of the week, I have a taste of what 
    it's like to be a full time mother and homemaker.  I really enjoy it, but 
    part of that enjoyment stems from the fact that I do go back to work on 
    Mondays.  I'm also taking a class at school and I do volunteer work for
    the Domestic Violence Prevention Center.  To put this all back into 
    perspective, I enjoy homemaking and childraising as a very significant
    part of my life.  But I could not do it and enjoy it in place of my 
    _paid_full_time_job_.  I need both.  I am a busy person and after learning 
    not spread myself too thin, I love it!
    
    
    							Terza
    
    
    

    	I don't think this is going to answer the questions raised
	by Ms. Bonazzoli, but I have to put in my 2 cents worth.

    small flame on:

	    It appears that Ms. B thinks all women want a husband,
	children and a house and that is just not true.  My husband 
	and I own a house, but at this point have no desire for 
	children - and my biological clock is ticking faster and 
	faster each day!  We both are satisfied with our careers, 
	make a comfortable living, can come and go as we please and 
	can see no reason to disrupt our lifestyle with any dependents.  
	Besides, what has that got to do with chivalry?

	   As a woman in 1986, I have the opportunity to become part 
	of the world, to have an opinion of my own - not my husband's, 
	to work for the mental stimulation as well as the financial 
	benefits, and to attend social events of a broader spectrum 
	than cub scout meetings and "grand poobah" award ceremonies.  
	Neither my husband nor I want me to be a "stay-at-home" wife.  

	   Chivalry should be an androgonous concept, as well as 
	common courtesy.  I have held many doors open for men, helped 
	them carry packages, etc.  Why should they try to struggle to 
	carry things while I just walk beside them empty-handed?  By 
	the same token, I expect the same in return. 

    small flame off.

	   Yes, I think the stay-at-home wife is an outdated concept,
	both by choice and necessity.

	   Conni

    This is something I too have a hard time dealing with.  To start
    off with, I work because I must work.  If I had a real choice,
    I'd have 2-3 kids and start a small landscaping/gardening business
    at home, but I don't have that choice.  So, in some ways I can
    understand the frustration in this woman's note - what happens
    to women who grew up watching Happy Days and decided that the
    wife/mother/homemaker role is what they wanted?  These days,
    college-educated women or women who have "potential for better
    things" (not mutually exclusive) feel guilty if they aren't out
    *doing* these "better things".  So their kids get raised by other,
    perhaps less upwardly mobile?, perhaps more relaxed and happy?,
    perhaps just as stuck?, women for most of the day.
    
    The other side of the coin is - why should WOMEN be the only ones
    with the choice to stay home and be homemakers?  Sure, there's
    a biological difference - the men can't breast-feed babies.  Sure,
    there's a social training difference - many men can't stand to
    be homemakers, without the status of a job - what do they say they
    do for work when someone asks them?  (before you jump on me, folks,
    imagine yourself or a man you know in this situation - deal with
    the parents/in-laws, deal with clerks at stores, deal with your
    wife's business associates at parties...)  BUT, there are some men
    who would jump at the chance to stay home and raise kids and clean
    the house and take classes at the local jr. college.  Why should
    they be branded as lazy good-for-nothings living off of their
    wives if they make this choice?  Why is this so rarely a choice?
    
    So, for me, there's a double-pronged guilt thing - if I stay home
    1) I am not fulfilling my "potential", whatever that means, and
    2) I am not giving my SO the same choice I have made.

    Sometimes I feel like I've been tricked.
    

    
    Sometimes I think I would indeed like staying home and being a so
    called "leave it to beaver" type mother... I mean it does seem enticing
    and rewarding...  the thought of not being too tired to listen to
    the days events from an eight and ten year old, being alert enough
    to aid with homework tasks and having the time to bake cookies for
    classroom events instead of running down to the bakery 5 minutes
    before I am due at work and the late bell at school is going to
    ring!!!
    
    But then I remember back to when the kids were small and I had a
    husband that made more money than he knew what to do with and I
    did stay home..  I was bored, lonely, un-challenged and felt like
    there were potentials and goals I should have been living up to
    that seemed almost illusive and impossible..  It was not the best
    time in my life if I recall correctly..  there was a time when the
    most exciting thing in my days was potty training and laundry!!!
    
    I wonder if maybe the grass is greener on the other side of the
    fence sometimes..  I have had it both ways and have longed for the
    other respectively..  I think the bottom line though is that having
    now achieved a certain amount of independence from the home life
    and having accomplished some of what I once viewed as so far away
    I am basically happy to be a working mother and remain so..  
    
    gailann
     
                           

    RE:  5
    ------------
    
    I couldn't have said it better!!  I totally agree with Conni.
    
    
    Toodles,
    	-Dotti.

    When I was small, I worked to earn my own money, to be
    independent from my parents.  Why, in heaven's name, should
    I be willing to trade off financial independence now for
    a different form of parenting?  I cannot deal with another
    person providing all the income, there's just too much play
    in that scenario for a power trip.  No, I don't feel tricked.
    No, I don't believe my children will lack anything (when they
    start arriving - not quite yet).  I will not allow myself to feel
    guilty for wanting what every American male feels he has a right
    to - a career in the business world. This is my *choice*. 
    And I don't believe that anyone can/should deny me that 
    *if that is what I choose to do*.  
    
    Choice has a lot to do with it, and in a way women today are
    in a rather enviable position.  We can *choose* to be financially
    independent within our marriages, sometimes (as in my case) earning
    considerably more than our spouses.  Or we can *choose* to stay
    at home and raise our children while our husbands support the family.
    Men don't have that kind of choice so readily available to them.
    We are easily seen as wives and mothers and more and more today
    as prominent executives and businesswomen.  Men are not yet as
    readily accepted as homemakers.  A woman who chooses to raise her
    children at home *is* a professional.  Her job demands the same
    kind of attention to detail as any executive.  She should be viewed
    as such.  A woman who chooses *not* to raise her children at home
    is *not* a "money-hungry fiend."  She is a woman who is simply a
    professional in another field.  It's not really a question of
    "old fashioned values."  It's simply "What do *you* do for a living?"
    
    Wake up people!  Let's give credit where it's due!
    
    Mary-Michael

    
    
.14>                      -< Home-making *is* a profession, darn it! >-

    	Damn, right.  A dieing profession at that.
    
.14>    Wake up people!  Let's give credit where it's due!

    	I replied in 88 to the case, a followup....
    
    Again, I disagree strongly with the statement that this way of life
    is gone.  Many couples I know choose the stay_at_home_and_be_tight
    vs the Both_goto_work_and_have_mucho_bucks.  And guess?  We
    have station wagons, shop at warehouse outlets, use coupons, sacifice
    Saturday night parties to save the money, don't have the latest
    style in the closet.  We are *not* YUPPIES!!!  And I'm proud of
    it.  We are willing to keep the tradition of the family unit alive
    and well.  No, we don't ship our 6 week old off to daycare and give
    a sigh of relief.  God help us if the mother (or father) stayed
    home, geez, we couldn't afford our BMW!  And yes, we sometimes lose
    our own identity to a child and, yes, we sometimes wonder if its
    worth it.  But, just one smiling face of that kid makes all the
    sacrifices well worth it.  Remember, that smile is that of a child
    who has one role model, not a whole daycare full of role models!
    
    George
    
    post_script:  Please don't feel offended if you are one who MUST
    work and must utilize the childcare system.  No offense intended
    to those conditions.
    

	   I've never considered myself a bra-burning feminist,
	so please don't take the next comment that way.

	  The Mr. Mom's of this world will definitely remain in
	the minority until women are paid on the same scale as
	men.  I realize that this is *slowly* changing, but for
	the most part, women are paid less and promoted slower
	than men in most professions. 

	  Bravo to all those men that do undertake this task, but 
	for the most part, the inbred macho image keeps most men
	from even considering this as a valid option.  As previously
	mentioned, just imagine having to deal with store clerks,
	grocery shopping, repair people, etc.

		Conni

    I'm with you, Mary-Michael!  I'm a professional engineer, and so
    is my husband; I've been at DEC for almost 11 years now, and other
    places before here.  Now that I'm in my early 30s (gee, I don't
    FEEL that old!), a lot of my friends (especialy the ones who aren't
    career-oriented themselves) have been asking me when am I going
    to "retire" and stay home and have and take care of children fulltime?
    These girlfriends just don't understand how little that role would
    agree with me.  It's not that I hate children.  But I do need much
    more intellectual stimulation than washing, ironing, cleaning, etc.
    can provide.  (I didn't put "cooking" in that last sentence because
    both of us enjoy gourmet cooking and very seldom eat out (we are
    also both severely allergic to smoke, which makes eating out hard),
    no matter how busy we are (and you'll find both us at the microwave
    ovens in our respective office areas every lunchtime, cooking lunch)).
    I wish there were more of a support network, such as in-house daycare
    (I'm not suggesting that DEC ought to pay for it, just that it be
    located nearby, as so many other companies have done), for professional
    people who also have families.  I know a lot of professional people
    who have patched together some really ad-hoc child and house care
    arrangements, and scramble madly when something comes unglued or
    when a child or sitter is ill.  Worrying about arragements getting
    fouled up drains their energy away from their professional activities
    as well as their personal lives, and seems so needlessly wasteful
    of their potential.  I guess as a professional woman I am sort of
    an anomaly.  I don't think the reason is biological, though, so
    much as it is the lack of facilities; women are culturally conditioned
    to be the ones to worry about these arrangements.  I suppose that,
    these days, I could AFFORD to stay home and be bored if I wanted
    to, as could my husband if he wanted to, although a few years ago
    when I was just starting out this was certainly not true, but I
    can't see either of us wanting to do this.  Also, if you "retire"
    from engineering for a few years, your future is pretty bleak if
    you try to return because you are too far out of date.  Even today,
    a career-oriented woman is looked at as someone unusual, while a
    career-oriented man is the expected norm.  So it goes...
                                         

    I'm getting a real chuckle here over these people who want
    to "coddle" men (dealing with clerks, in-laws, wife's business
    associates) - hrumph!  What do you think women have had to put
    up with all these years - classified as "the little women"  the
    "woman behind the great man" etc., etc.  We learned to deal with
    it!  Shoe's on the other foot now.  Time *you* did, too!
    
    Small flame on:
    
    I don't work because I *have* to - I *choose* to.  And I
    will *choose* to after my children are born as well.  You can
    set you children in front of a TV set as easily as you can set
    them in daycare.  It's the quality of time, a strong sense of
    family (attainable even when neither parent stays home), and
    instilling in the child the belief that while you both *do*
    work, you *are* accessible and the child *is* the most important
    thing.  Sure it takes a little extra work, sure I'm still going
    to give up those parties.  I don't even care about the BMW.  But
    when college time rolls around, I'll be damned if we can't afford
    to send that child wherever *he* chooses.  I'll work to assure
    my children's choices in life will be limited only by their 
    imagination, and to give them positive, loving roles models to
    look up to in the process.  So, you can call me a Yuppie if you
    like, but one thing my children *will* learn - you are loved,
    you are important, but *others* (including Mommy) have needs
    too!
    
    Small flame extinguished.
    
    Mary-Michael

    I feel one of the parents for the most part should be home with 
    the child.  It does not mean the wife has to be the one.
    I think most of the problems occurring with kids today is the
    fact that someone else is raising the children. I hope that 
    I am in a position when/if I get married to have either
    myself or wife stay home.  If you decide to have kids then
    I say be parents.  If you decide that the nice car and house
    is what you want then don't have the kids.  It is unfortunate
    but few people can have both.  There is more to being a
    parent then having a kid, it does take a lot of sacrifices.

  Brian

        I don't know if I've graduated from hippy to yuppy, but with the
        house in the 'burbs and the Fiero in the driveway and the
        increasing interest in my portable CD player I suspect that I'm
        at least begining to qualify. Despite that, our household is in
        the "Cleaver-family tradition". I work as a principle engineer.
        Selma gave up work to be a "full time mother", that is to stay
        home with the kids. Eighteen months of deficit spending ensued,
        but we seem to be back in the black and progressing on as an
        old-fashioned traditional family. 
        
        Guess you can even fine "traditionalist" families amongst
        the yuppies or at least the yumpies.
        
        JimB. 

    Sigh, why is there no middle ground for women? Now I'm a blazing
    femininst - which is about as far off tack as you can get.  Yes,
    I'm aggressive, probably more so than is "popular", and yes, I've
    got expectations which make me a little hard on my men, both past
    and present.  Sure it cuts down the choices, but do I want anything
    else? No!  I want a relationship, not a training camp!  I don't
    believe the things women are searching for these days are "out-of-line"
    they are simply what men have had for centuries.  I agree to an
    extent with Brian in that a.) if the couple can afford for one to
    stay home with children, and b.) one of the above couple *wants*
    to stay home with the children then yes, that's fine.  It's a 
    *choice* (I'm going to wear that word out singlehandedly). You don't
    impose things on each other you *choose* to do it.  That's what
    marriage is.  But I *don't* agree with Brian in that if you don't
    want to be parents, don't have children.  Sometimes, it don't work
    that way.  They euphamistically called "accidents" and they arrive
    long before you're ready, emotionally or financially to handle them.
    Obviously, you need solutions.  I know more than one set of parents
    who both work and who put their children in daycare.  And those
    children are *loved* and those children *know* i
    
    Parenting is a means to an end, and how you get there isn't half
    as important as how you *do* it. 
    
    Mary-Michael

        Besides harping on whether or not I beat my wife, it would
        appear that some unnamed (but readily identifiable) noters
        are overly fond of proper spelling and usage.
        
        I hereby confess that all though I do think of myself as a
        principled engineer, I am in reality a principal engineer by job
        title and not a principle engineer. What's that we used to
        say--"Last year I couldn't spell injunere and now I are one"?
        Teach me to note at 1:00 in the morning.
        
        JimB. 

RE: .14

MM, would you want/care if your husband wanted to stay home and take care
of the house and kids?

What would your (unthinking) *"reaction"* be?

Just curious... :-)

Jim.

    MM

      I agree accidents do happen and my response does not
      deal with that.  My response is more for people who
      decide that yes they are going to have children
      I am kind of old fashion that if you are going to
      have children you should be the ones to raise them.
      I still say most of the problems that are going to
      ensue is that fact that parents are not raising their
      own children.  As I said it takes a lot of sacrifice
      to have children.  If you wish to be parents then you 
      are going to have pay the piper.  If you don't others
      will eventually.

   Brian

    Ok, as promised, here are my views on the woman's perspective.
    
    It used to be that nearly all women were content being full-time
    homemakers while their husbands brought in the major income.  Several
    things have happened in the last generation (20 years) to change
    that.
    	1.  Women are, on the whole, better educated than they used
    	    to be.  More women go on to higher education (college, etc.)
    	    than before, and more train for specific careers.  These
    	    women want to use their talents and education as they were
    	    trained.
    
    	2.  The cost of living has increased so fast that many families
    	    cannot afford to live well on just the husband's salary.
    
    	3.  An increased awareness (call it women's lib if you want)
    	    that women are just as capable in the workforce as are men.
    
    Thus, we have a recent surge in the number of women who want to
    to have successful careers.  And what's more, they've been told
    over and over that it is not only their right to work, it is their
    duty to do so - that "housewife" is something to apologize about,
    etc., etc.  This is one pressure on today's women.
    
    But there's more.  While these women have learned that they can
    be right out there with the men in the workforce, it is entirely
    likely that the environment they grew up with, and the standards
    of society they grew up with, were of the world where all women
    are full-time "mommies".  "What do you want to be when you grow
    up, Suzy?"  "I want to be a mommy."  (If they didn't answer a nun,
    a teacher, a nurse, or any of the other "traditional" professions
    for women.)  Especially when these women have children, they feel
    an intense pressure from relatives, from books, television, and
    the world in general that it is their DUTY to stay at home with
    the child and raise it full-time.
    
    What we have here is a conflict of epic proportions.  Today's woman
    is besieged on both sides - and torn inside herself.  Does she want
    to be a businesswoman, a mommy, or - could it be - both?  Is it
    possible to "Have It All"?  Can she be "SuperMom"? - able to change
    a diaper with one hand and run a major corporation with the other?
    Surely it must be possible - just look at the ads on TV, the articles
    in the magazines, etc.  "If I can't manage to do it all, then I
    must be a failure!"  Burnout-city.
    
    My opinion, and this is ONLY an opinion - one which I admit people
    may disagree with - is that the majority of women today who are
    content being full-time homemakers are those who did not train
    for a well-paying career, and/or those who did not actually begin
    on a career path before becoming a "housewife".  Many women who
    go to college get liberal arts degrees - interesting, but not
    terribly useful in today's world.  Sure they could be
    secretaries, clerks, or the like, but it would take a lot of effort
    for them to learn enough to start on a good-paying career path,
    engineering for example.
    
    Other women, who have successful careers before marrying or perhaps
    before having children, are unwilling to give up the life they have
    made for themselves.  If such women can suppress the "SuperMom"
    instinct, they can be quite successful in both worlds, understanding
    that there is a balance everywhere.  It helps a lot more if the
    husband is supportive - and I mean more than doing the dishes and
    taking out the trash - I mean taking the kid to the doctor, staying
    home when she's sick, in general being a fully participative parent.
    
    As I said earlier, we look to our own parents for a guide to what
    we should be like.  My own mother was divorced when I was 3, and
    I basically grew up in a family without a father.  I was the oldest
    of four boys (my mother remarried and re-divorced), and my mother
    was always working, sometimes holding down two and three jobs. 
    She was a bright, independent woman who made the best of her
    situation and raised four boys on her own.  She was anything but
    a traditional housewife, and I think she did quite well.
    
    					Steve

    Am I an abnormality or something?  All I am is a woman who
    wants to make the most of her life, and enjoy it in the process!
    
    And now to answer a questions and give yet another rebuttal to Brian
    (who should be used to this as we sit two offices apart).  No, Jim,
    I wouldn't mind if my husband stayed home.  In fact, in my current
    (albeit estranged) marriage that would have been ideal, as I am
    definitely the more aggressive, career-oriented of the two of us.
    Granted, there are issues to deal with (how do you answer people
    who seems surprised that your husband isn't earning a decent living?
    I can think of at least three answers to those questions, two of
    them beginning with "None of your business."). I firmly believe
    in the life I need to answer to no one but God.  That means my
    neighbors, co-workers, parents and in-laws are going to have to
    live with my decisions, because I don't give two cents for what
    anyone "thinks" about what I do.  If people talk, so what?  At least
    this way I know what they're saying... If you let other people run
    your life for you, you're heading for an empty, lonely old age.
    
    And now, onto Brian.  Children who are loved, are loved.  That's
    it. No two ways about it. You can stay at home and care for the
    house, etc. etc. but if you don't pay the attention to them you
    should, they know it.  If you spend your days home with your children
    and manage to spend less than two or three hours a day listening
    to them and interacting with them, you may as well bound off to
    the workplace, because you're not doing any better than the working
    parents.  You need time with your children, and you need time away
    from your children, and your children need the same.  Otherwise,
    they won't become independent.  I know children whose mothers stayed
    home who sent them off to nursery school and kindegarten when they
    weren't mandatory.  Are they lesser parents because of this?  In
    fact, I believe my friend (the child that was "packed off" to school)
    is possibly slightly better adjusted than I, and my mother was never
    away from me for the first six years of my life (which in retrospect
    I believe is part of my problem).
    
    I'm not going to do that to *my* children...
    
    Mary-Michael

    
    re .27
    
    Steve,
    
    	I still get the idea that you think one uneducated, ignorant,
    stupid, or whatever type of women stay home.  Not true, THERE ARE
    ladies who choose this way of life.  They are intelligent, thoughtful
    women who love their kids and find no sacrifice in staying home
    during the first years.  Note that the majority also plan return to the
    workforce went the children are old enough, ie., school age.  Most
    who fall into this catagory are also the ones who worked hard the
    first years of the marriage and saved.  In most cases the male spouse
    is the more agressive career since the traditional family unit was
    planned in advance.  Your point of 2 incomes is valid, but realize
    allot of couples are waiting until later in life for the children
    since one income must be able to support the family.
    
    Well, back to work.

    Re .27:
       No, of course I don't think that.  Certainly I never used the
    terms uneducated, ignorant or stupid.  I do think, though, that
    a woman's path in life does significantly affect whether she feels
    more comfortable staying at home.  I also think that many who
    "plan to return to the workforce" will be very disappointed and
    distressed when they find out just how hard it is.  I also feel
    that many women who say they are happy at home really aren't, but
    society doesn't allow them to say so.
       But the point of the note was why many women today choose NOT
    to stay at home.
    				Steve

     I totally agree that staying at home is not enough.  I also
     agree that time away from the kids is a necessity.  I would
     hope that whoever stays home is also doing something
     away from the house.  Be it volunteer work, part-time job
     or courses of some type.  There is two reasons for this.
     The first is the mental sanity of the parent staying home.
     The second is that it gives the other parent the ability
     to be alone with the child. I see nothing wrong with
     kindegarten it helps to start interaction but sending your
     child out from 8a.m.-6p.m to me is wrong.  Quality time
     is more important then quantity this is true.  But if the
     most time is spent away from the parents how can you say 
     you are raising the child?


   Brian

    
    
    re .28
    
    	Right on Mary-Michael, I couldn't have said it better myself.
      
    	My mother had 4 kids in 5 years, and even though it wasn't
    	mandatory, off we went to kindergarten - good god, the woman
    	needed a break.  And I think we're all the better for it.
    
    	I get a lot of heat from relatives who want to know "what's wrong"
    	because we don't have any kids yet - as if it were their business!
    	But coming from the "old school" they have a hard time under-
    	standing my/our point of view, that we don't need to reproduce
    	ourselves in order to be fulfilled.  And like MM, I don't give
    	a hoot what other people think as long as I'm happy with my
    	decision/lifestyle/whatever.
    
    		Conni
    
    
    

    I have worked all my life, and will probably continue till I retire.
    I want it that way.  Now that I'm single, it's a good thing I want
    it that way 'cause it's the only choice I have!  But when I was
    married, I DID have a choice.  My reasons are/were all the things
    that have been mentioned here, plus one reason that no one has
    mentioned.
    
    Many years ago, before I was married and long before I started working
    for Digital, I remember a conversation with a male friend who was some
    15 years my senior.  He was having career problems, etc., and I naively
    suggested he just change jobs. He replied "Oh, I couldn't take a risk
    like that.  Jane (his wife) has never worked a day in her life, and
    could not support herself. I have to take a no-risk career path for her
    sake."  It was said in a very gentle, loving way -- there was not
    a hint of resentment in his reply.
    
    My reaction to that was pity for that poor man.  I vowed then and there
    that I would NEVER, NEVER put any man in that position. And I never
    have.  And I never will. 

    							Pat

    .31
    
    Oh yea, I agree. Time away from the rug_rats is a necessity but
    what the point I make is that there *are* some females who feel
    that staying at home and bringing up the young is a full-time,
    rewarding commitment, not something they *have* to do because society
    says so.  And, in most cases, the choice was made without the pressure
    of society or parents.  They want to do it.  The future plans are
    usually to return to the work place.  No, I don't think you'll find
    many of these "housewives" staying in that role one the young ones
    are in school.  With the popularity of job sharing and the increase
    in white-collar part-time jobs the market now has a place for the
    full-time mom.
    
    George
    

    
.35>                     I just don't think that those of us Moms who
.35>              *do* have careers (either by necessity or by
.35>              choice) should be made to feel guilty for *not*
.35>              being home all day.  It bothers me when I hear
.35>              people say that we shouldn't have children at
.35>              all if we can't stay home to raise them.
    
    Really?  Funny, I, as a male, get the guilt trip for "forcing my
    wife to stay home".  It bothers me to hear people accusing me of
    being a chavinist (sp) or my wife a simple_minded_ignorant_woman
    because she wanted to be a full_time mom.  I guess it depends what
    side of the fence you're on, huh?
    
    regards,
    

    from one working Mom to another

        Suzanne....well said.  bravo.
    
    GOG
    

    I may get flames,but so what!!I have not replied to many notes as
    I don't feel like "parroting" what someone else said.However,maybe
    I should just add some encouragement??
    Well...here goes,I would like to know IF all these women who say
    they have made the choice to work rather than stay at home and be
    a housewife....made that choice because they weren't happy with
    their marriage or they are the stronger of the two??Let me clarify
    myself.In most relationships,one person is more commited than the
    other...so,in reference to "the wife is not happy" who is more
    committed (who is more in love?)in most cases if the women is REALLY
    in LOVE she will WANT to stay home and do things she won't have
    time to do if she works.I don't claim to be a "know it all" this
    is just MY observations!!As for the second part...in a relationship
    if you observe closely,you can see which person has more control...it
    just happens that one person tends to be more dominate.Again,these
    are just my opinions!!
    Tony...

    Tony,
    
    In my case the answer to both your questions is no, I am not unhappy
    in my marriage and I do not feel I am either the dominant (or the
    dominated) partner - we have about as close to a marriage of two
    equals as I think it is possible for two people to have.
    
    I went to work because I'd just finished getting an M.A. in Biology
    before having my first son. Quite frankly I missed the world of
    education and was bored out of my gourd staying home. I managed
    to combine teaching and raising a family for over 12 years before
    I made the swtich to Digital for more $$$. Basically I went to work
    to use the gray stuff between my ears.
    
    Bonnie

    
    RE: .43
    
    Suzanne, I support what you did 100+%.  In my opinion you handled
    EVERYTHING in the best way possible with your priorities in the
    same order I would/do put them also as a single parent (even though
    I'm male).  Recognizing that your first obligation was to yourself
    (even though this may SOUND selfish, it ISN'T), and then to your
    young son, and potential relationships after that (for a set
    time-frame) while (I'm sure) you gave up some of your other needs
    to improve yourself to the point of being able to be independent
    and self-sufficient.  This gives you a buffer you need in case a
    serious relationship or future marriage doesn't work out.  By the
    same token, the self confidence you now have enables you to give
    SO much more to the other person in ANY future relationship by
    not being dependent on them!!
    
    					Joe

RE: .40
    > ...in most cases if the women is REALLY
    > in LOVE she will WANT to stay home and do things she won't have
    > time to do if she works.
    
    Does it follow then, Tony, that if a man is REALLY in love he will
    want to stay home and do things he won't have time to do if he works?
    
    							Pat