First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
Is the average stay at home mom's work really worth $138,095 a year?
10452 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 5/3/07 , edited 5/3/07
Bellow I will post a link to a piece of Yahoo News. It's an article on the value of a stay at home mother. Honestly, I think it’s total crap. According to the article the average stay at home mother should earn $138,095 a year. Total bull if you ask me.

Certainly, there are mothers that would earn that much and more. However, the word that is bothering me Is -average-! The average mother is a lazy prick, at least here in America. (The test didn’t range world wide. It was the average mother in America.)

It explained the reason of the value of their job as its variety. According to their studies a mother has ten jobs, and I quote:



The 10 jobs listed as comprising a mother's work were housekeeper, cook, day care center teacher, laundry machine operator, van driver, facilities manager, janitor, computer operator, chief executive officer and psychologist, it said.


This citation here was where I came to realize that this was most likely just another “feministic” attempt to devalue men.

(I put feministic in “” because true feminism is about raising women to create equality between the sexes. For me, this = good. However, most modern “feminist” or at least self proclaimed feminists, are all about lowering men to create superiority for the female sex. For me, this = bad.)

I mean, come on! How many stay at home mothers can operate a computer properly? I mean, anyone can do the basics, but whenever the computer needs hooking up one of us kids do it. Whenever it’s broken, I look at it (rarely actually able to fix it myself,) and then my step dad fixes it. And that ridiculous, “chief executive officer and psychologist” Who the hell are these “average” stay at home mothers they are getting?! And “van driver” ha! Could you get more stereotypical?

Like I said, it is, at least to me, crap; moreover, it’s just a sexist farce of a study disguised as a scientific fact proven by a feministic study. Well, how about the average stay at home dad? Or the average working dad for that matter. There are some lazy bastards who do nothing once they come home, but most of the time fathers have at least a few duties at home.

Am I the only one who feels that these studies are just another shot at men? A total waste of money to further breed sexism between the races by making men bitter at how they’re being bluntly devalued? Well, there’s no specific point in this topic except for discussion over the article in the following link.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070502/us_nm/work_mothers_dc

P.S, Sorry if I seemed overly adamant about all this, however it seems to be better for a thread. Also, I’ve summed up the above link in my post so you don’t have to read it except for your own self.
1971 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / F / UK
Offline
Posted 5/3/07
I think the value of the average stay at home parent (for the sake of fairness) depends largely on the age of the children. To stay home when your children at already at school/day care does not require that much work.

However young children are very time consuming and labour intensive. Maybe not enough to pay tons of money for taking care off (after all, I'm betting a hired nanny + housekeeper does not get paid that much), but certainly to be appreciated after all.

It's difficult for me to quantify $138,000 a year as paying for work is subjective. You can't quantify the time spent operating a laundry machine, for example. How much more than the few pounds it would cost to run the machine is that worth? Other people with normal jobs also do these tasks, should they get paid for them as well?

I'm not sure that this post coherently addresses the issue, sorry. But it's an attempt.
5986 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / lazing in England
Offline
Posted 5/3/07
Yes, a stay-at-home mother (or father) is worth that much. It's no secret that eldest brother and I are the main caregivers for our younger brothers and I can tell you that it's damn tough.

You are taking job comparisons too literally. It's supposed to make you see what kind of demands they have to answer. Here are my interpretations:

housekeeper - running the house ranging from ensuring everyone's fed and clean to kicking them out to school on time; paying bills on time; repairing; etc
cook - as it says
day care center teacher - you have to answer all sort of questions they ask, ranging from nano technology to how babies are made.
laundry machine operator - the bane of my life! Every day it's the damn washing machine. We are lucky enough to get someone in to do the ironing.
van driver - we don't drive, but many parents have a 4x4.
facilities manager - clothes, shoes, school stuff, bathroom stuff (toothpaste, etc.), dry stuff, entertainment, the usage of the house, etc.
janitor - cleaning the house, ensuring bedrooms, kitchen and living rooms are clean
computer operator - helping kids with their homework and other crap on computer, etc.
chief executive officer - overseeing housekeeping, education, budgeting, meetings with teachers (this is the worst), scheduling visits to doctors/dentists/etc, etc.
psychologist - handling children's emotional demands and behavioural issues
Posted 5/3/07
I agree with catex that there is a lot to do when your a stay at home mom. Stay at home moms are usually under-apreciated by their family and other women. Women with careers think that being a home-mom is just a waste of a life. Im basing my opinion on my own mother. Shes kinda like a super mom. When she was raising me and my brothers when we were younger, she had to take care of 3 kids, all around the same age and do all the household chores, shopping etc etc. It is time consuming but its also a nice environment to grow up for a kid to know there someone whos always going to be around for you.

Ok, so maybe the figure is a little exagerated, but a house mom's job isnt any less important than some business director somewhere. They just deal with different aspects of life. And house-moms come in all different types as well, there are the ones like in the Al Bundy family who dont do anything other than watch Oprah and eat bon bons.

This topic just reminds me of a fridge magnet I saw, had a picture of a woman from the 50's like a coke commercial with the saying "no one notices what I do until I dont do it. "
12887 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / Through the looki...
Offline
Posted 5/3/07
I think that the most amazing thing is when you consider the amount of work that is involved with being a full-time parent...According to that same study, a stay-at-home mom/dad is likely working around 92 hours a week caring for the home and family (if not also being heavily involved in the community). Now, if you think about it, working 90 hours a week is pretty rough. If you were to put a value at say around $10 an hour, that comes out to around $50000 a year...$27/hour and you get $38000 a year. Neither of those hourly wage rates are that high if you compare them to professionals who work 40-60 hour weeks, so in fact I do not find such a figure outrageous. It is purely a simple cost benefit analysis; it merely describes how much money that person would be bringing into the household if indeed they were putting the same time and effort into the workforce (or at least that is how an economist would put it; media tends to word things to their own liking ---> sells more copies / gets more viewers).

Personally, my dad (a former college professor) was a stay-at-home dad for most of the time I was growing up, doing everything from taxes, to cooking, errands, large-scale involvement with the church. He was at least as busy as my mom for much of that time...In a sense, I guess that all I am trying to say is that before you go accusing it of being a feminist study that is devaluing men and their role in the household, look at the reverse of the issue, and then clear out all of the bullshit spin that the media likes to put on things...
Posted 5/3/07
Yes completely if not more. My mum does so much that I never really appreciated it until now. I took for granted all the things she does. In fact I just felt it came in part in parcel with being a mum.
The job of housewife/stay at home mum is being considered too lightly. And I don't see it as some pathetic attempt to boost the status of women either. I think it's time to recognise that there's more to being a stay at home mum then "looking after kids".
It really pisses me off when my mum tells people that she's a housewife and they look down at her as if her job is nothing. She gave up practically her whole life for me and my sister, and I, for the majority of my life, gave no thanks or appreciation for anything that she did.
And SeraphAlford - I think you're taking the job comparisons too seriously. It's only to show the things that women are expected and probably do as part of their role of being a mum.
39308 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / canada
Offline
Posted 5/3/07
maybe cos they did a lot of house work and used a lot effort to clean up the house and do the laundry n stuff
10452 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 5/3/07

voxsilenti wrote:

I think the value of the average stay at home parent (for the sake of fairness) depends largely on the age of the children. To stay home when your children at already at school/day care does not require that much work.

However young children are very time consuming and labour intensive. Maybe not enough to pay tons of money for taking care off (after all, I'm betting a hired nanny + housekeeper does not get paid that much), but certainly to be appreciated after all.

It's difficult for me to quantify $138,000 a year as paying for work is subjective. You can't quantify the time spent operating a laundry machine, for example. How much more than the few pounds it would cost to run the machine is that worth? Other people with normal jobs also do these tasks, should they get paid for them as well?

I'm not sure that this post coherently addresses the issue, sorry. But it's an attempt.


Yes, that's true. I think it does depend on the age range. Also, the number of children. However, once a child gets into daycare or school a stay-at-home-parent has a lot of free time.

Maybe I didn't address the issue as I should have, and I'm sorry for the failure.


sheighton wrote:

I think that the most amazing thing is when you consider the amount of work that is involved with being a full-time parent...According to that same study, a stay-at-home mom/dad is likely working around 92 hours a week caring for the home and family (if not also being heavily involved in the community). Now, if you think about it, working 90 hours a week is pretty rough. If you were to put a value at say around $10 an hour, that comes out to around $50000 a year...$27/hour and you get $38000 a year. Neither of those hourly wage rates are that high if you compare them to professionals who work 40-60 hour weeks, so in fact I do not find such a figure outrageous. It is purely a simple cost benefit analysis; it merely describes how much money that person would be bringing into the household if indeed they were putting the same time and effort into the workforce (or at least that is how an economist would put it; media tends to word things to their own liking ---> sells more copies / gets more viewers).

Personally, my dad (a former college professor) was a stay-at-home dad for most of the time I was growing up, doing everything from taxes, to cooking, errands, large-scale involvement with the church. He was at least as busy as my mom for much of that time...In a sense, I guess that all I am trying to say is that before you go accusing it of being a feminist study that is devaluing men and their role in the household, look at the reverse of the issue, and then clear out all of the bullshit spin that the media likes to put on things...


If stay-at-home-mothers were all perfect, this would be true. Like I said, I’m not contradicting the figure given (though I do think it’s exaggerated, and $27 an hour is a very high wage rate. Then, that may be perception. You’re probably more financially blessed than most people…) What I am contradicting is the word “average.” Most stay at home moms, from my personal (though limited as a result of age) experience, don’t do near as much work as they get credit for.

Then again, it is true that feminists have a tendency to devalue the stay-at-home-mom’s labor. It’s not an easy job, and I can tell you this, cuz I’ve done it for a brief period of time and was whipped out after a week. I can’t imagine doing it for a few years. (After my parents were divorced we stayed with my dad while my mom went out and got herself settled in a home. My old man was suffering from a mental break down and thus much of the responsibility of the younger children fell on me and my big-brother, who was always off with his friends.)

Certainly many stay at home parents are worth that much, if not more. Especially if they have young children. My mom included, (though she’s slightly bipolar so she works for a few weeks, then quits, stays at home a few weeks, gets a new job.)

My complaint was that it also assumes that the stay-at-home mother does all the work all day. That the working partner comes home and does nothing. This is very untrue. I also hate that the article said, “Stay-at-home-moms are worth bla-bla-bla” not “Stay at home parents.”


6347 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / SDF-1
Offline
Posted 5/3/07

The average mother is a lazy prick,


I can't believe the shit that comes out of your arrogant mouth. Listen to yourself talk for once. Misanthropic asshole.
6212 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / US
Offline
Posted 5/3/07
Realize this is based on 100 hour workweek,

the overtime is insane.

I would just about slit my throat before I did that.
7413 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / F / By the water
Offline
Posted 5/3/07
Just a quick thought before I, the stay at home mother, do some landscaping. The average nanny in this state, and many others, ranges from $11-$20 an hour. That is just taking care of children. It does not include any other house hold chore.

Not only do I take care of my entire household, pay bills, and watch two children who are not my own, I work for my father running a real estate business and also manage several properties in a city adjacent to my own. If I was actually paid for what I do I would be making an insane amount of money.

So yes, being a stay at home parent requires lots of hours of input. In essence this would require a big fat pay check. Since that is not the case the only pay off that I am looking forward to is my son being relatively adjusted and able to take care of himself without relying on me.
6347 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / SDF-1
Offline
Posted 5/3/07
I still think that putting a hourly wage on a job of a mother is fucking bullshit. Hypotheticals or not.
29091 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Body in NY Mind i...
Offline
Posted 5/3/07
Some of the things people say these days *jeez*. If you had some depriving childhood then it might give you the right. But thats just pure arragonce. A person that supports you 1/4 or 1/2 of your life. Deserves more respect then such comments as those.
623 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / F / North Carolina
Offline
Posted 5/3/07
There is a lot of negative association with the term "stay-at-home mom" just because of the atmosphere of the last few decades regarding opportunities for women. With this in mind, I still think that it is a ridiculous show of the small-mindedness of our nation and world when we analyze a life choice based on how much money it is worth. Yes, it is a lot of work to maintain a household and provide care for children. But monetary compensation for motherhood? Is ridiculous. There are some rewards in life that are NOT money. People--generally speaking--don't have children to get paid for it--quite the other way around, children suck up a lot of money. (I should know, because I know that I sure do.)

I agree with SeraphAlford in that this article seems a way to screech out indignity about some "situation" regarding stay-at-home mothers, but the comparison is completely unfounded in reality. And think about it--every time we compensate a mother for bandaging a scraped knee, would we have to compensate the father as a sports coach for playing catch with his kid?

15944 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/3/07
If that is he case then fuck college, I will just drop out of medical school and just be a sta at home mom
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.