Not Stay-at-home moms or people that work from home. These are women (the article only mentions women) that are married, unemployed, and without children who just decided life was too stressful and hard and so decided to just stay at home all day and “take care of the house”.
They’re fucking slackers, these are not people who can’t work because of some medical condition or greater responsibility. They just flat out don’t want to work. They prefer to just do nothing every day using the excuse of cleaning the house and running errands while their husbands actually do all the work of earning a place in society and life.
Let me point out the obvious to these lazy bitches: Cleaning the house and running errands is not work, they are responsibilities that you have to carry out no matter what unless you want live in squalor. I know it sucks but even if you work you have to clean up your house and tend you duties outside the home. And that goes to their moron husbands too, they have as much obligation to their house and other menial bullshit as much as their wives. I suppose these people think bathing and cooking their food is also a job.
This type of conspicuous consumption is just insane in today’s world. What if her husband gets injured somehow and can’t work anymore? Tough luck because who’s going to hire a woman who has a huge gap in her resume or who quit her last job to spend her whole days at home for no real reason? What if he gets wise and decides he doesn’t want to be maintaining someone who adds nothing to the marriage?
If I ever get married (and God smite me down if I ever do) my wife better damn well work. I’m not gonna go through the hassle of dating and marriage just so I can screw the maid. If she doesn’t want to work when we have kids then fine. I understand there are more important things in life than a career. But until then, I don’t care if I’m filthy stinking rich, she’ll work or walk.
Why do you care? I agree that allowing your marketable skills to lapse is a dumb move, and it’s certainly not a lifestyle I’d choose, but what business is it of yours what these women do? As long as you don’t marry a woman who expects never to work again, how does this affect you in any way at all?
Qualified people voluntarily leaving the job market… more opportunities for me!
Seriously. The article profiled only a couple of women, and they were, in fact, working: either part-time paid work, or charity work (I don’t have enough data to know whether that’s productive or not, but it might be) or else creative writing, something that requires a lot of time invested before it begins to pay off. Number of women in the article who weren’t working at all except for housework? Zero.
If someone is earning enough to allow his spouse to retire at the age of 25, why do you care? How is that any different from the lifestyles of the independently wealthy? My beef is with the income disparity that allows this: how can one person make enough to support two adults when two full-time minimum-wage earners can barely get by?
I say, my good man!* What of those strumpets whose husbands allow them to work outside the home? Both partners coming to a mutual decision about what might be best for them and doing that which will make them happy? The nerve!
You would think that these harlots and their fool-grooms have come under the belief that they aren’t responsible for living up to the standards of random strangers! They have forgotten that the point of a marriage is not to love and cherish one another–perish the thought!–but to portray a model of behavior that can be admired by those with whom they have no contact.
It is imperative you read this post while imagining I’m wearing a monocle.
I usually don’t argue with something someone else decides to Pit, but this one confuses me. If a couple decide the wife can/should stay at home, what is the big deal? I can understand griping about a person who decides not to work when the money is needed by the family, but if a husband decides he is cool with his wife staying home, what is the problem?
I have a friend who was ready to go back to work as soon as her youngest daughter hit high school, but her husband doesn’t want her to go back - and he can afford for her not to. He wants her to be able to take off and go on business trips with him and take care of things - 3 kids, a horse, 3 cats, 6 dogs, a large house, etc. He likes her being there when he comes home for lunch. That is their choice and I really don’t see what the problem is.
I’d quit my job in a heartbeat if we could afford it. My SO is one of those ‘I can’t imagine not working’ types so it would work well for us. And if the OP thinks that would make me a lazy conspicuous consumer, then he can bite my ass. I’ll be the one that doesn’t have to work.
Huh. Used to be that a woman wasn’t doing her duty if she didn’t take care of the house. Now she’s not earning her keep if she doesn’t have a paying job?
My boyfriend was out of work for six months. While he spent much of his time looking for a new job, he also made time to prepare dinner for me every night, do my laundry, run major errands, do the grocery shopping, etc… It was so lovely!
We seriously spent some time sitting down to consider what made more sense - my salary with less stress for both of us or two salaries with more money but more stress. In the end, we decided that our debt load couldn’t support a stay-at-home boyfriend, and we value our summer vacations in Germany. But it was a close call, and I’m rather sad now that he’s started working again.
If someone wants to act like an entitled bitch and never do a lick of work, that’s one thing, but if your salary can support two people, having a helpmate at home is wonderful.
And who are you to make that decision for someone else?
No, you don’t—the people involved do. And it sounds from the article as though husband and wife are both happy with the arrangement.
I suspect what’s really bothering you may be the double standard: that you, as a man, don’t have the option to stay at home and live off of someone else’s income.
Well, to me it seems like an incredible waste. Even if they can afford to do it it doesn’t seem like a good reason too.
Most of these people have opportunities that many others don’t and throwing away your chance at a successful career just because you can seems crazy. there’s also no telling how long such good times may last and it’s better to have a job in case something bad happens. Otherwise they’ll end up with no career, and no one to maintain their previous lifestyle.
And if you can retire at 25 then you can afford to start another career. I had a friend when working at wal-mart who made it rich at 40, retired from his engineering career and decided to start in sales, for fun he said he wanted to see if he could start from the bottom up, it was weird seeing a cashier coming to work in a jag. The point is he didn’t just give on on working. Many times life is too short but it’s also too long to throw it away lounging at home.
Back about 10 years ago, I was out of work for 6 months and my wife happily supported me. Now she finds it hard to get work that she is qualified for, except for some casual work, so she’s the one staying at home. I think the OP has some very narrow views about what works best in domestic arrangements.
I am fortunate enough to have opportunities that many do not. Does that mean I’m bad if I don’t take all of them?
You started off calling them slackers and pitting them for their offensive choice. Now you’re just saying it’s not a wise choice.
There’s certainly nothing wrong valuing work and career as much as you do. But some people think: life is too short but it’s also too long to throw it away working.
