Tradwife Dilemma

I have always understood feminism to mean supporting women's right to make their own choices, whether that means pursuing a corporate career or choosing a life focused on marriage and raising children. From what I've observed, women are seldom criticized for having careers but are frequently judged for being homemakers. I don’t understand why some women choose to manage both corporate work and household responsibilities, as balancing both roles is extremely demanding and can leave little time for personal care or rest.

Many women I know prefer staying home and taking care of the children, rather than working a paying job. However, the reality is that two incomes are now often required to live. In my view, companies are too greedy to increase salaries to keep up with inflation, so families feel forced to have both parents working just to make ends meet. In addition, daycare has become so expensive that it can take an entire second income to pay for it. In this regard, then it would make more sense to give up that second income and stay home and raise your children instead of having a stranger raise them for you. The saying, “Happy wife, Happy life,” is true in the sense that mothers who only have the responsibility of taking care of children are much happier than those who work paying jobs and take care of children.

Even marriage as an institution is now less desirable, as seen by high divorce rates. Meanwhile, mainstream media promotes career achievement for women, sometimes at the expense of relationships and social life, and suggests that the single life is better. However, companionship is a basic human need, and wealth does not guarantee happiness. For some women, being married to a loving husband and raising children brings fulfillment. Additionally, I have heard some career-focused women later regret not prioritizing marriage and family earlier.

Another factor shaping these decisions is government assistance, such as food stamps and housing aid, which has significantly affected social dynamics. The current system mainly helps single parents, which incentivizes staying single for more benefits. Single-parent households often have a tougher impact on children than two-parent households. Adjusting assistance to consider take-home pay rather than gross income could help more families. For example, a married couple with one child and a 65K income is denied help and struggles due to inflation. They only get about 50K after taxes, which would qualify them. Before these programs, support often came from communities and churches. This incentivized greater social engagement and community involvement, creating a safer, happier atmosphere. Now, people often do not know their neighbors, and interactions with strangers are usually negative.

Women who are married and stay home with their children have more time to actively teach, guide, and interact with them without relying on technology. Working moms have less flexibility in their schedules, which affects the amount of direct time they spend with their children. Children of working moms often attend public school and use electronics after school, which limits parent-child interactions. These different routines sometimes lead parents to choose homeschooling. Some stay-at-home moms prefer their children not interact with “iPad kids” because of their inability to manage their emotions, destructive behaviors, and other possible side effects due to electronics. In addition, public education now focuses more on pushing political agendas than on teaching academic skills. Data show that among high school graduates, more are struggling with reading, writing, and basic math. Our children are our future and need to be protected. They thrive better being raised by their mothers at home.

Ultimately, while the tradwife movement may not be for every woman, many support it. Homemaking is the most honorable role a woman can undertake. Therefore, a woman who chooses to be a homemaker deserves respect and understanding.