Are you a female breadwinner in your family?

JodyBPM

Tropez wrote: »

And I'm sure that's the case for some people, which is why I never argued that it was all about traditional gender roles, wage disparity and the rest of it. However, I would also hazard a guess that in many of the cases you refer to, the wage of the male who continues to work isn't so much less that it presents a large reduction in household wages.

Ignoring the fact that I work from home, when my girlfriend worked as a nurse she earned quite a reasonable sum of money but it was still a good £14k per year shy of what I earn for not even doing half as much work. But if we had children, and the wages were reversed, I would expect to be the stay at home partner looking after the children because 14k a year is a significant amount. In fact, I would consider it irresponsible to our child to forgo such a sum of money.

Of course there are going to be people with different ideas and of course you cannot say that this, this and this will happen and nor have I ever suggested that you could but there are certain consistent patterns. Anyone can present a counter example - you for instance know a good number of women who earn more than men, someone else said that their view of "tradition" was both partners working etc. but it does not mean that all the evidence that argues the contrary is wrong, it simply shows that society has gradually grown into a more equal construction whereby people will have different experiences but even then there is still plenty of clear cut research stating that in many cases women do earn less, and women are more likely to stay at home for this reason, just as there is a rise in the number of stay at home dads because their wives earn that much more than they did because traditional gender roles do not play quite as big the part that they did 50 years ago.

Actually, the wage gap in my group of friends is typically quite large, lower earner £20-30K, higher earner £50K+. It just shows the strength of feelings that some women have (point taken that we are talking some, not all, people) that they want to stay at home with the children. Interestingly, I am the only one of my friends who said before children that I wanted to SAH or work p/t when I had a child, all the others were insistant that they would go back FT after children, until they actually had the child and maternal instinct kicked in!

I do wonder if there are other factors that come into play here. Firstly my group of friends are typically fairly high earners - by the higher earner going part time we might be looking at a drop of total HH income from say £80k pa to £55k pa - huge drop, but still leaving a liveable salary, so there is choice. Also I am from the Surrey, just outside of London (Reigate) and I do think attitudes towards women are different here to perhaps some other parts of the UK?

It's interesting to hear other people's take on this. I must say I've never in my life (I'm 37) come across any discrimination towards me for being a woman from the workplace or from my peers. Occasional old fashioned, but harmlessly meant comments from the older generation , perhaps. I have occasionally been suprised by peoples attitues towards a "woman's place" on threads on here though!

Tropez

JodyBPM wrote: »

Actually, the wage gap in my group of friends is typically quite large, lower earner £20-30K, higher earner £50K+. It just shows the strength of feelings that some women have (point taken that we are talking some, not all, people) that they want to stay at home with the children. Interestingly, I am the only one of my friends who said before children that I wanted to SAH or work p/t when I had a child, all the others were insistant that they would go back FT after children, until they actually had the child and maternal instinct kicked in!

I do wonder if there are other factors that come into play here. Firstly my group of friends are typically fairly high earners - by the higher earner going part time we might be looking at a drop of total HH income from say £80k pa to £55k pa - huge drop, but still leaving a liveable salary, so there is choice. Also I am from the Surrey, just outside of London (Reigate) and I do think attitudes towards women are different here to perhaps some other parts of the UK?

It's interesting to hear other people's take on this. I must say I've never in my life (I'm 37) come across any discrimination towards me for being a woman from the workplace or from my peers. Occasional old fashioned, but harmlessly meant comments from the older generation , perhaps. I have occasionally been suprised by peoples attitues towards a "woman's place" on threads on here though!

As I do not wish to get flamed for suggesting anything untoward in the treatment of women I am not about to let on where I was born, raised and currently live but I will say, in agreement with what you say at the end of your post, that I live in an area/region with a rather more "traditional" view of the family unit and I could quite understand how more "modern" areas, such as those around London, may have evolved at a greater pace, equating to women being treated in the workplace in a much more equal way than they are here. Indeed, anecdotal evidence only I admit, but, I have two friends who work for one of the larger corporations that are based in the local area - one male, one female, and it has to be said that the male friend, despite a rather... dubious... work history with that company seems to be advancing through the ranks at a much swifter pace, despite the female arguably being a more diligent and qualified worker and lacking any of the dubious history.

Similarly, at a firm I used to work for, in which I quickly managed to ascend to a management position, it was common knowledge among the management that female employees were earning less which was brushed away as an insurance issue but it was very difficult for women to get ahead in that company. In the time I was there, no woman was promoted and I even recommended a female employee for promotion only to find the business decided to bring someone from the outside in.

I do know some academically exceptional, talented and hard working women, one of whom even studied at Cambridge, who have found it difficult getting a good job in this area despite their ample qualifications (go figure that most of them are now living in or around London) whereas I, who never even finished college (I have since obtained qualifications through the OU) have successfully fallen into rather cushy jobs. Whether it is due to my gender, I don't know, but I strongly doubt it is due to my sparkling personality!

But I would tend to believe that there is a certain mindset more prevalent in areas such as this that doesn't necessarily discriminate against women but perpetuates certain views such as the idea that there's no point promoting a woman because you'll spend all the money training her only for her to have a baby and take six months off. I am far from a crusader for women's rights but I do think there is an unfair element here and there is an idea of a man's place and a woman's place in work and at home. I've since considered it rather telling that boys and girls were split in home economic classes at schools so that the girls did sewing while we were doing woodwork - I'm only 27 but to me this seems like it should have been left in 1935.

I will also concede that if a woman does want to stay at home with her child, as a personal decision rather than a fiscal decision, that she probably will do it. I know I wouldn't argue with my partner about such a matter... I'd only lose and end up diaper duty for a year.

downshifted

This really is old news! In 1984 my husband resigned from his less well paid job and stayed at home with our 6 month old daughter. It worked fine for us - he went back to work several years later but actually never recovered a "career". He enjoyed what he did though and I had a great career and earned enough for all of us. We were all happy - it worked for us though wouldn't for everyone - and our daughter has a great relationship with both of us. He got chatting to a woman in the local park who happened to be a reporter and agreed to do a news article (in the local paper) for her - it was a minor article as I refused to be photographed!

Person_one

JodyBPM wrote: »

Its not all about glass ceilings, disparity in salaries and gender stereotypical roles - people are individuals regardless of gender, and some women, despite being academically and professionally successful actually WANT to stay home with their children, for a few years at least!

But then that must mean that hardly any men would prefer to stay at home with their children as so few actually do.

I know several fathers who would have loved to have more than the statutory 2 weeks paternity leave to get to know their new babies and be fully involved in their round the clock care.

Look at the negative reactions to Ed Miliband and that cricketer whose name I can't remember when they took full paternity leave, they were sneered at and accused of being 'wusses' or 'under the thumb'!

A system like the Scandinavian countries where both parents regardless of gender get the same amount of parental leave (and a generous amount that allows a baby to have parents around full time for the majority of its first few years) would go a long way towards resolving the gender inequalities surrounding child-rearing.