Holding back the Years

maman

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

The second money lesson I learnt was also from my father - his surprise/disapproval that my mother took so long to go back to work and he was having to be sole breadwinner:rotfl:. My father is a great believer in equality of the sexes:).

I don' know what generation your father is but that's so encouraging to hear. It saddens me that some women choose to be SAHM and eke it out for as long as possible, some IMO having more children just to justify their chosen way of life. What a waste! I know things aren't perfect but women have had equality of opportunity in education since 1944!

JackieO wrote: »

I am in agreement that 'life skills' should be taught in schools if nowhere else.Instead of the 'civics' that is taught today why not teach them something that will be of use throughout their lives.

Children are lucky if they are taught anything at school these days beyond 'hard' subjects. That's all the government isreally interested in in order to make league tables of which schools are best at getting pupils through exams. Life skills like and culturally enriching things like music, art and drama are all being squeezed out. Martin:money: has worked hard to get financial education onto the curriculum but it won't be compulsory or given adequate coverage until there's an exam in it that counts towards the league tables.:mad:

moneyistooshorttomention

My parents are both still alive - around 90 years old....

He's an intelligent man and logical thinker and I think he was probably pretty ahead of his time in many ways in that respect.

Fast forward to me - and I am watching with great interest as to how long it's going to take to remove the last traces of "grading" people according to whether they have a male or female body and treating them differently because of it. It simply doesnt make any sort of sense to me to do so. I think, possibly, I've been a bit "ahead of my time" in some respects on this one. I recall having an argument with a female friend about 50 years ago - as I was asserting I was just as entitled to ask men out on a date as they were to ask me out on date. She was disagreeing fiercely and I know hers seemed to be the majority opinion at the time.

There are a couple of things now - one regarding how women are treated (home equity schemes) and one regarding how many women in next generation down treat men on a personal relationship level that are blindingly obviously wrong to me and I have to look to the generation that is actually currently still at school now for that to be a "majority viewpoint". That generation can see it - but a high proportion of ones in even the generation down from me cant see it yet :wall::doh::huh::huh::huh:. So - yes - he is, in many ways, about 3 generations ahead of his time. I have great hopes for the generation currently about 5-20 years old in some respects.

bouicca21

IN some ways I am slightly puzzled by this thread. I was also brought up with money saving ways. Throughout my marriage we had to count every penny though I don't think I really counted as poor since our income was always a fraction above any kind of benefit level. I discovered that clothing the kids from charity shops was cheaper than sewing, but we always cooked from scratch and paid our bills - even when mortgage rate went to 15%.

My kids laughed at me. The first cookery lesson the eldest had at school was how to make a nutritious sandwich and it went downhill after that. No financial education. I was really worried that when they went to uni they'd be out of their depth, especially as it seemed to me that having to take out loans for uni meant that they were being taught that debt was ok (whereas to me debt is horrifying). But almost instantly they learned to cook and to budget. Maybe they'd picked up all that stuff by osmosis. Maybe it's just an attitude of mind. I don't think they'd be doing any better if they had had that stuff rammed into them at school.

maman

I think we're on the same wavelength moneyistooshorttomention.


Your dad sounds a remarkable person.:)


My MIL was ahead of her time too. She brought all her children up up to help around the house, cook, clean, DIY, babysit etc. regardless of whether they were boys or girls so my DH was a 'new man' before they were invented!:rotfl:

monnagran

I think that equality of the sexes is more a matter of personality. My great grandfather, born in the 1840s, had 5 sons and 3 daughters. All three daughters were given apprenticeships so that they need never be dependent upon a man unless they chose to be. One was a milliner, one was a secretary (unusual for a woman then) and my grandmother was a tailoress. Only the secretary gave up work on marriage.
He wasn't considered to be ahead of his time, he was considered to be a crank. He wasn't the only one but there were not very many men of his generation who thought it important that daughters should receive proper professional training for the workplace.
He also believed that women should have, if not equal pay, at least a decent living wage to enable them to support themselves.

moneyistooshorttomention

I have a cynics suspicion that those who are ahead of their time are often considered to be cranks (or worse) - rather than people thinking "Ooh...arent they farsighted...:)".

It is necessary to be a particularly "strong" person to be "ahead of your time" and/or have a "peer group" that is also in that position and will give moral support anytime criticism comes winging your way from those that arent.

[Deleted User]

My late Mum was a buyer for a large store in Glasgow who had worked her way up as she was born in 1900 and never married until 1935.She had no choice in staying on at her job as it was considered back in the 1930s that when you married you became the responsibility of your husband, and married women in her position just didn't work outside the home

She then had three children before and during WW2 (one of which was me ) and never returned to the workplace as my late Dad would have been horrified at the thought of my Mum going out of the house to work as he would have seen it a slight on his ability to keep her.
He too was of the generation who thought a woman's place was at home with the children. Luckily it was through my late Mum that I learned most of my frugal ways .

Wartime rationing made women shine at providing meals out of almost anything My Dad was a chemist and as such earned enough for us to live on although austerity bit into everyone's pocket and money was nowhere near as plentiful as it is today .

We never went without but on the other hand we were always taught that cash was something you worked for and debt was to be avoided at all costs.

My late Mum never owned a washing machine ,fridge/freezer or had a bank account or credit card, but her generation rarely did anyway.

She was an excellent cook and we never went hungry.My Dad firmly believed that women had their place in life as mothers and wives and sadly decided that as I was a girl education would be wasted on.

My two brothers on the other hand we going to grow up to be providers and therefore were expected to take women's roles to be subservient to men.

My eldest brother was very like my Dad ,but my middle brother was far more modern, and said to him women were just as good if not better at times than men.

My late OH although being born in 1933 was brought up by his widowed Mum and she instilled into him that women were as good as men and being a very tough little cookie (bless her ) made sure her sons treated women with the respect they were due .

My OH knew that to get what we achieved then it was a partnership and we both worked long hours to give our children the best start in life that we could

Both of our DDs have grown up as workers and my grandchildren all know the value of hard work and what it can achieve.

Hopefully out dated ideas from the 20th century will die out and women have far more opportunities today than my generation did .I know I have two granddaughters one of whom is a school teacher and the other a nurse , the boys all know that if you want something then you work for it I dropped my DGS Jack off at 0.845 am yesterday morning at his holiday job at a local cafe and picked him up to go home at 8.15 pm last night, he has three more long days until Friday which is his day off then he works saturday and Sunday on his normal shifts He is making the cash while he can as once back at school after the holidays he will be reduced to just weekend work. His next brother down Henry is hoping when jack goes to Uni next year he will be able to get his job.Part time jobs are as rare as hens teeth locally and there is always a line of youngsters waiting in the wings

maman

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

I have a cynics suspicion that those who are ahead of their time are often considered to be cranks (or worse) - rather than people thinking "Ooh...arent they farsighted...:)".

It is necessary to be a particularly "strong" person to be "ahead of your time" and/or have a "peer group" that is also in that position and will give moral support anytime criticism comes winging your way from those that arent.

That's food for thought. Perhaps we're getting close to the point where similar analogies can be drawn between women who expect to have fulfilling careers and for their partners to take an equal responsibility for childcare and domestic roles and those who stay at home being a 'kept woman'. I wonder which would be considered the 'crank' and which 'ahead of their time'?


I do appreciate that many more elderly posters remember when men saw it as a matter of pride to provide. These men still exist (sadly IMO) but I couldn't live with one of them as alongside that goes the implication that my career doesn't matter or I'm working for 'pin money'.


That being said, I can see why many men enjoy the 'old' ways. I've worked alongside men, doing the exactly the same job who've gone home to the metaphorical pipe and slippers. I always wanted a wife!:D

moneyistooshorttomention

I think men of older generation can maybe have seen it as a "matter of pride to provide" because it was their responsibility (according to Society). My mother got sacked when she got married (as was the norm, I gather, in the public sector) and I guess that meant Society expected she would give up work at that point. She just went straight out and got another job instead (private sector this time) until she had the first child (ie me). Not because she was being so "equality minded" I think - but my father just wasnt bringing in enough at that point - so there was no option. She did turn down an attempt by another employer to "poach" her for a better job/on way better money (as my father was on such low income she would have earned more than him at that point). I don't think he would have been bothered about it - but I suspect she would have.

I know I was a bit wary (in my generation) of what marriage might mean for me personally - as my mother was dragged round the world after my father (as were her children) until he left the Armed Forces for retraining. At that point - it became clear we were going to stay put at last (:) from my pov). So I was certainly concerned not to choose a "man that would move around" as I recall it was still expected a woman would follow him and I had the words "But what about MY Life" booming round my head - as I'd promised myself as an adult that I would never move unless I personally chose to do so.

I'm watching the youngest generation learn to take for granted that they are "people" and not so much to think of themselves as male or female in astonished admiration and wishing that had been the case for my own generation. Though I have to admit that I managed to be on full pension at younger age than I would have been if born later and (with a hell of a fight and a lot of luck - being single) to buy the house I'd always "known I would have". If in a younger generation - then I expect things would have been worse for me in those respects.