I, like many of my friends, firmly believe that it is extremely important for a woman to be independent, she should contribute financially to a family. Some women choose to stay at home to take care of children and elders, I totally respect that but also think that at any given time, she should be prepared to go find a job if need be, she should have worked at some point in her life. Women are extremely talented and it is such a shame to let all that talent go waste. I have some friends who are smart and talented but are forced to stay home because their husbands don't find the necessity to send their wives to work. If the decision is jointly made by the couple there is no point of contention, but if it is the husband or the parents-in-law making the decision, it a totally different situation altogether and should be strongly opposed. We have but one life, and should try to achieve as much as possible in this short time. One thing I have noticed is that working mothers are able to instill a higher level of confidence in their female children. I definitely do not have any kind of research backing my statement, it is just a mere observation.
6 comments:
Mothing children is a financial contribution to the family. Not mothing them necessitates day care, for starters. Many women have to work to support their families, but if a woman doesn't have to, I think being a stay-at-home mom is a valid choice. Also, women carry their babies, so ideally, they shouldn't have to work if they don't want to. Of course husbands, parents and in-laws shouldn't dictate what women do. Mothers should have more financial support from society, both directly and from their jobs, if they do choose to work.
http://alegramarcel.blogspot.com/2007/05/mommy-wars_30.html
This is a link to my friend Alegra's posting on this topic, which reviews several economic points on this issue, particularly concerning poor mothers.
Yes, a woman can make a choice to stay back home and not work, but I definitely think that having worked at some point in does have its advantages. Of course, she doesn't have to work if there is no necessity but should be prepared to go out and make money if the need arises- "Some women choose to stay at home to take care of children and elders, I totally respect that but also think that at any given time, she should be prepared to go find a job if need be"
Calling your post "women should work" and saying not working is a waste of talent make it sound like although you "respect" the choice to care for children or the elderly, you disapprove of it. I agree that it is better to not be financially dependent on a man, but a divorced caretaker should have societal support, I'm just not sure how this can be regulated. Also, is a poor mother working at Wal-Mart more or less of a waste of talent? For non-professionals, is their job or raising children more valuable? Economics dictate that they work. Then they pay other people to take care of their children.
All I am saying is that women should be prepared to work, under no circumstances should money be a deciding factor in making crucial decisions. There are thousands of women in India, who are forced to stay with their husbands in spite of domestic violence and torture. They are scared that they will not be able to go out and live independently. Few divorced women get money from their ex-husbands. They should have the courage and independence to go find a job if need arises. That is what I am trying to convey! And having prior work experience is definitely a confidence booster in such cases. No job is inferior, all I am saying is you need a job. When I say that "it is such a shame to let all that talent go waste" in the very next line I say that some women are "forced to stay home because their husbands don't find the necessity to send their wives to work." I never imply anywhere that some jobs are inferior to others.
Post a Comment