The great SAHM debate

I've spoken a lot on my blog(s) about my life as a stay at home mom: the good, the bad, the gross and the adorable.  With so many statements and opinions about it by politicians and their teams lately, it's no surprise that the media has once again taken up the cause of the great SAHM debate; and should be no surprise that I would add my two cents (for whatever they're worth).

I'll be honest, I don't know if it was sheer naivete or just that I had no friends with kids when I was pregnant with Cam, but I had no clue that such a debate existed.  I knew it wasn't something a lot of people (especially where I worked) did.  My boss was sad, she felt I had more potential at my job and didn't want to see me go; of course I appreciated that (no one wants to think their boss is HAPPY to see them go), but we were resolute in our decision and it's worked out wonderfully so far.  However, over time, it seemed a lot of people had strong opinions on the topic.  Not that I ever once asked for them, but people were happy to tell me how bored they'd be, or how they viewed it as wasted education and job experience, or that somehow not contributing financially to my family meant I wasn't contributing at all.

Now, of course, I can debate all of these (and quickly): nope, not bored!  I'm clearly no less educated because I'm home; if and when I do rejoin the workforce, my brain will not have atrophied to where I can't complete a sentence or work a computer.  My contribution to my family is of high value (well, to my family anyway, I don't know what others consider valuable): my child is happy, well cared for, extremely verbal, social and probably the silliest little monkey I've ever met. Our house is taken care of, and dinner is made for the hubs when he gets in most nights so he can take the nug for a walk to the park or just sit down and play with her when he gets in.  Errands are run, laundry/ironing are finished, and since we don't have to get up early to get to work or daycare, we can have a flexible schedule that allows for a later bedtime (and wake up time) so the hubs gets to spend time with his little girl every night.  My husband is extremely appreciative of having all of those things taken care of so he can enjoy his limited time home with us.

Enter the editorial writer screaming in caps lock, "BUT NOT EVERYONE HAS A CHOICE!"  First off- thank you Captain Obvious.  No one is oblivious to what is going on in this country.  No one except that 1% is spared from sweating out rounds of layoffs and worrying about having money put away in case such a thing would happen.  I am well aware that there are many women out there who would love the option of being home with their kids, and that nowadays it's considered a luxury to be able to do this.  I know this, I appreciate this, but I'm damn tired of defending it.  I shouldn't have to preface every statement about being a sahm with "I know not everyone can do this, and I'm so lucky, but..."  Sahms are allowed to have tough times, rough days, and moments where they aren't happy in their situation: we are just as human as working moms.

I also think the idea that ALL working moms are working because they have to is an unfair assumption.  I know plenty of working moms who are working because they love what they do.  Being a sahm isn't for everyone, and I think the notion that everyone who can be a stay at home mom should  be one is ludicrous (along with the odd assumption that everyone who can be one is one).  That said, I make no assumptions about working moms- I don't assume they (or I) work harder, that they (or I) are more happy, or that our kids feel any less/more loved or well adjusted for either of our decisions.  I think the basic premise for good parenting is making the best choices for your kids and your family (cliche, for sure, but true).

There's a lot of misinformation out there that drives me up a wall.  For some reason, I see the same stupidity spouted from news outlets to blogger editorials; that all sahm's think that kids who go to daycare aren't being raised by their parents (I don't know anyone who thinks this), that kids of sahms are socially awkward and behind academically (anyone who's met my gabby child knows this is a big fat false), and the latest and most annoying: that we're all just like Ann Romney.  I read an article on the Huffington Post last week stating that being a stay at home in 2012 is a reserved luxury of the elite.  Luxury? Sure- Elite? Not so much.  Although this country  might think otherwise, there are some people left in the dwindling middle class- not everyone is of the poor/rich extreme, despite what politicians tell you.  If the author of that article would like to challenge me on that, she's welcome to come to my luxurious (20 year old) town home (that we've spent 5 years renovating on our own because the previous owner was my husband's chain smoking Grandmother: tar stained walls and permanently smelly rugs- yay!).  If she'd like to tour my town I can take her for a super smooth ride in my base model Mazda 6; before we go she can help me clip coupons to go grocery shopping and plot out my errands so I don't waste too much gas.  If she wants to see how I dress my child in exotic garb she can check out her awesome 80's style jogging shorts (side note- I'm seriously in love with them), courtesy of Walmart.  Are we hurting? No, we're okay- we're comfortable, but the Romneys' we are not.

At the end of the day, I find it amazing how many women attack other women on their decisions to work outside of the home (or not to, really).  Last I heard, feminism had more to do with women having any choices they wanted than hating on women who choose to be stay at home moms.  I don't lack personal ambition because of my choice, it doesn't mean I can't (or don't want to) do anything else, or that I don't value my own worth.

So there you have it, folks.  My two cents.  I hope that most people don't buy into the hype out there, or if you did, maybe I shed a little light on things. Here's hoping everyone is having a good week!