Yes, it’s all relative, none of us are invulnerable! As I said in the conclusion, it’s certainly not that I think no one should ever be a SAHM. But still, having a way to earn money yourself, at least if needed, does give you (and your family really) more options.
Well, that was pithy. I just want to bump this comment for the sake of highlighting what I consider to be the missing piece in this discussion.
Remunerative occupation is often felt as a risk/cost/sacrifice for the breadwinner, and any analysis that doesn't account for this is inadequate/incomplete.
Oh, it's better than nothing. Employers are exploitative and frequently cruel, but an income is an income. Particularly for the working class, who don't have the option to marry a rich guy and get a nice stream of alimony income, it can greatly increase a woman's options.
I just can’t agree with the idea that working a job is some kind of shield against vulnerability and dependence.
Why not? Obviously it's not fool proof but I can't see how it doesn't make you less vulnerable or dependent
Yes, it’s all relative, none of us are invulnerable! As I said in the conclusion, it’s certainly not that I think no one should ever be a SAHM. But still, having a way to earn money yourself, at least if needed, does give you (and your family really) more options.
Well, that was pithy. I just want to bump this comment for the sake of highlighting what I consider to be the missing piece in this discussion.
Remunerative occupation is often felt as a risk/cost/sacrifice for the breadwinner, and any analysis that doesn't account for this is inadequate/incomplete.
Oh, it's better than nothing. Employers are exploitative and frequently cruel, but an income is an income. Particularly for the working class, who don't have the option to marry a rich guy and get a nice stream of alimony income, it can greatly increase a woman's options.