'Wingnut' Revisited: RebelMom Asks A Good Question
Posted on 07. Mar, 2009 by Brian Reid in General
Earlier this week, I posted a bit about a Missouri legislator who wanted to give at-home moms — but not dads — money for school, arguing that women are nuturers and should therefore get a leg up. It’s a silly argument, grounded in outdated and discredited notions of what men do versus what women do.
But RebelMom had a question:
Curious, RebelDad — would your stance change if she said the bill was for women only because of the strong statistics showing maternal barriers to paid workforce re-entry as well as the mommy wage gap, which endures throughout mothers’ careers? That’s the harder question …(BTW, A first year law student could see that her bill based on her support is unconstitutional.)
My initial reaction was one of support: if this is about remedying discrimination against moms and boosting their ability to re-enter the workforce without paying an undue penalty for their time doing the childrearing, I’m all for it. And the data is pretty compelling that moms take a huge hit when they leave their career for kids.
But the more I thought about it, the more I worried that this isn’t airtight. Though the data isn’t as robust, the anecdotal evidence is that at-home dads re-entering the workforce have a tough time, too. I guess the question is whether the wage gap is due more to gender or more to caretaking status. If’s a question of gender (and therefore sexism), I’m all for remedying the problem with a gender-specific program. But if it’s about society looking askance at at-home parents, generally, then my objections still stand …
Matt
07. Mar, 2009
My objections still stand as well. There is no reason to believe that a man that takes time off from the workforce wouldn’t have an equally difficult time getting back into the workforce.
Dave
08. Mar, 2009
Since I started being a stay-at-home when my first kid was born 6 years ago.. my value has dropped like a stone. Even people that used to respect my opinions just smile and nod with a look of, “what do you know.. you’re just a daycare worker.” … so… I’d say any at-home is deserving of help.
PittCaleb
09. Mar, 2009
I have to agree with Matt. I’ve been home for 8 years now and was nearly earning 6-figures when I ‘retired’ as I call it. I won’t be going back for 2 more, when my youngest is in school full time.
After 10 years out of school having worked in the Software field, I believe my re-entrance to the work-force will be quite difficult. No different than what any drop-out-of-the-workforce mom would face. Except the questions I will get will be more rude from potential employers.
PittCaleb
Trevor
13. Mar, 2009
I believe this is prejudice. The law cannot stereotype. In my case I had custody of my daughter due to the mother just not having interest in her child. As a father of my two year old at the time I could not find a reliable sitter for work. I had a low paying job and was going to college full time. I got assistance from HHS for daycare at $250 a week which suddenly ended a week later due to the fact I needed a court order that I have primary custody. There was no opposition against my primary custody. I ended up leaving school and moving into a studio apartement. I went to court which was a long expensive process believing getting primary custody of my daughter who lived with me was just going to be a technicality. The mother actually showed to court and got primary custody of the child she barely new. They were kind enough to give me 50% custody as well as pay child support. A week later I had my daughter again on a night which was not my night. The mother was in a gang fight where a stabbed man fell on top of my childs mothers new baby. It’s the hardest thing in my life but I could not go back to court money wise. I do find it hard getting jobs again. This case had prejudice all over it!