Ann Romey, SAHM, has "never worked a day in her life."

[Witsec7]

She has dealt with breast cancer, and has MS, a chronic illness. I don't know about MS from personal experience but I do know about breast cancer. Pampered perhaps but neither diagnosis is a walk in the park.

Ann's life of wealth and privilege gave her the best treatments money could provide. She did not have the worries or concerns of dealing with a job and coping with breast cancer at the same time.

Unlike my friend who has MS Ann has optional therapies that her family can afford, that includes dressage which she claims has contributed to her well being. She didn't struggle to care for 3 children, work and run a household while coping with her MS.

[Dhani_C]

Agree 100%.

I don't. I am a Mormon woman and working toward a professional medical degree. I have no desire to be a stay at home mother (I do want children, though) and plan to work so I can provide the best possible life for my future family. Many of the women in the singles branch I attend are doing the same. I have never been told by anyone (let alone anyone in leadership) that I shouldn't get a solid education or work. The main thing the church encourages (as they did this past General Conference) is to not put off starting a family. If a woman wants to be a stay at home mother, wonderful. If not, that's fine too. But don't assume that because a person is religious that they only made that choice because they felt "pressured". That's a huge generalization and I know for a fact does not ring true where I live.

[fakepigtails73]

I love these nuggets that the Mittster once said to prove that "he's close to the working class":

"I know the american auto industry , as we own 2 Cadillacs!" :shock:

or my fave: "I can relate to middle-class people because one of my best friends owns a Nascar team!" :lol:

I wish I had the date they were said and the newspaper names though, so I could properly source it!!

[Terrie]

The comment was poorly phrased, but some of the responses I've seen... My "favorite"? The only reason moms need to work to support their families is because taxes are so high. :doh:

[asinglevoice]

Mostly, I think it's just a joke that Romney has his wife running around to figure out what women are concerned about most, when in reality women's concerns or rights are not even on his radar. He has been on the wrong side of every women's issue in recent history.

Regardless of whether or not Ann's ever worked a day in her life - and no one's saying being a SAHM isn't hard work, but I'm sure it's a whole hell of a lot easier when you've got a bunch of in-home staff to help you out - the question really becomes, "So what's your husband going to do about alleviating the concerns of these women?" The answer to that is, "Probably nothing." Same answer as always.

[delilahdog11]

My friends on the religious right are saying that Ann raising five kids makes her one of the most qualified First Lady's in recent history. I don't understand how having or not having kids makes a person qualified for any position. Or how having a large number of kids makes a person more qualified to lead the country? Or just more qualified in general. Experience, education, intelligence, personality, etc attest to a person's ability to do a certain job. Why is her stay at home status an issue?

It is obvious that the Repubs are going to spin this to show how the Democrats don't encourage family values and they look down on stay at home moms.

[Austin]

This is about Ann Romney never once in her life having experienced financial hardship or worry. Rosen worded it awkwardly, but it hasn't the slightest thing to do with with SAHM vs WOTHM. I was a SAHM for ten years, and I have been in the workforce plenty, too. Nearly every woman with children that I know has done both. All have had financial worries and concerns at one point or another, and none have had in-home help such as full-time housekeepers or nannies. You can bet Ann Romney had both.

I am not insulted by Rosen's words, although I wish she would have not given fodder to these idiots. Ann Romney hasn't experienced any of the financial concerns that the average American woman has, and so in that sense, she hasn't worked a day in her life. I believe that was Rosen's point. This does not make Ann Romney a bad person, but let's not have her held out as someone who can relate to the vast majority of American women.

[Beeks]

I don't. I am a Mormon woman and working toward a professional medical degree. I have no desire to be a stay at home mother (I do want children, though) and plan to work so I can provide the best possible life for my future family. Many of the women in the singles branch I attend are doing the same. I have never been told by anyone (let alone anyone in leadership) that I shouldn't get a solid education or work. The main thing the church encourages (as they did this past General Conference) is to not put off starting a family. If a woman wants to be a stay at home mother, wonderful. If not, that's fine too. But don't assume that because a person is religious that they only made that choice because they felt "pressured". That's a huge generalization and I know for a fact does not ring true where I live.

Where do you live? I think you might be in the minority of Mormon women. Also, not to say this will be you, but I have known many (many many) Mormon women who have gotten professional degrees and worked a few years then quit once they had kids. Yes, Mormons strongly encourage education and self-sufficiency, but I think it's tough to argue they don't encourage women to stay home to raise their children.

[Witsec7]

This is about Ann Romney never once in her life having experienced financial hardship or worry. Rosen worded it awkwardly, but it hasn't the slightest thing to do with with SAHM vs WOTHM. I was a SAHM for ten years, and I have been in the workforce plenty, too. Nearly every woman with children that I know has done both. All have had financial worries and concerns at one point or another, and none have had in-home help such as full-time housekeepers or nannies. You can bet Ann Romney had both.

I am not insulted by Rosen's words, although I wish she would have not given fodder to these idiots. Ann Romney hasn't experienced any of the financial concerns that the average American woman has, and so in that sense, she hasn't worked a day in her life. I believe that was Rosen's point. This does not make Ann Romney a bad person, but let's not have her held out as someone who can relate to the vast majority of American women.

This.

I will add that Rosen should have thought a bit more about her wording and not thrown gasoline on the SAHMvsWOTHM fire. I would have preferred that Rosen address the right wing war on woman and woman's reproductive rights.

[GolightlyGrrl]

This is about Ann Romney never once in her life having experienced financial hardship or worry. Rosen worded it awkwardly, but it hasn't the slightest thing to do with with SAHM vs WOTHM. I was a SAHM for ten years, and I have been in the workforce plenty, too. Nearly every woman with children that I know has done both. All have had financial worries and concerns at one point or another, and none have had in-home help such as full-time housekeepers or nannies. You can bet Ann Romney had both.

I am not insulted by Rosen's words, although I wish she would have not given fodder to these idiots. Ann Romney hasn't experienced any of the financial concerns that the average American woman has, and so in that sense, she hasn't worked a day in her life. I believe that was Rosen's point. This does not make Ann Romney a bad person, but let's not have her held out as someone who can relate to the vast majority of American women.

WORD!

Ms. Rosen's choice of words could have been better, but I totally read between the lines. Ann Romney is not Satan, but let's not pretend she has a clue on what average Americans deal with.

[kpmom]

My friends on the religious right are saying that Ann raising five kids makes her one of the most qualified First Lady's in recent history. .

My understanding is that there is no actual position called "First Lady". It's simply an honorary title given to the president's spouse, who, so far, have all been women. So I'm not sure what the qualifications would be. Ability to say "I do"?

[Glass Cowcatcher]

This is about Ann Romney never once in her life having experienced financial hardship or worry. Rosen worded it awkwardly, but it hasn't the slightest thing to do with with SAHM vs WOTHM. I was a SAHM for ten years, and I have been in the workforce plenty, too. Nearly every woman with children that I know has done both. All have had financial worries and concerns at one point or another, and none have had in-home help such as full-time housekeepers or nannies. You can bet Ann Romney had both.

I am not insulted by Rosen's words, although I wish she would have not given fodder to these idiots. Ann Romney hasn't experienced any of the financial concerns that the average American woman has, and so in that sense, she hasn't worked a day in her life. I believe that was Rosen's point. This does not make Ann Romney a bad person, but let's not have her held out as someone who can relate to the vast majority of American women.

This sums it up beautifully.

[Cannelle]

I do wish Ms. Rosen had phrased things better, but I agree with her. Someone like Ann Romney has never struggled to pay for daycare. She probably hasn't gone without food so that her kids could eat. If the Romneys wanted a night out, I'm sure they could afford to pay for a babysitter (or had family/friends willing to take their kids for the evening).

I stay at home (and am currently a part-time student) because there's no fucking way I could make enough to cover daycare (also, I have back problems, but that's beside the point). I've skipped meals so that my child could eat. And I can count on two fingers the times when my husband and I have gone out by ourselves in the past three years. So no, I don't think Ann Romney has a fucking clue what it's like to truly be concerned with economic issues when you're raising a family. The whole "They're attacking SAHMs!" bullshit is just a smokescreen so that the right doesn't have to deal with the real issue.

[EmmieJ]

She has dealt with breast cancer, and has MS, a chronic illness. I don't know about MS from personal experience but I do know about breast cancer. Pampered perhaps but neither diagnosis is a walk in the park.

No, but she is certainly in a much better position than the average citizen who is diagnosed with either condition, in that she has nearly unlimited financial resources at her disposal with which to seek any and all treatment options, she doesn't have to worry about losing her job because she is out sick too often, nor about having to choose between getting a prescription filled or buying groceries.

I have empathy for her MS, as I have a sister with MS. She is now living in a convalescent hospital because her husband could no longer care for her. In order to qualify for Medicare so she could have her nursing home paid for by the state, they had to sell their home and turn over that money, and basically my brother-in-law is now struggling to get by. Somehow, I don't see anything like that in either Mrs. Romney's future, nor that of her husband or children.

I am not jealous of her wealth, although I am disgusted by the way that Mitt Romney accumulated much of that wealth. To me, it's dirty money, gained off the suffering and loss of jobs of others.

I do not want Mrs. Romney to ever think she can speak for the average American woman, or that she has even a glimmering of what the average American woman deals with in her daily life. She would be a lousy First Lady, but of course, wouldn't hold a candle to the horribleness that would be her husband in the Oval Office.

[mirele]

Ann Romney was not raised in the Mormon faith. She converted as a young adult when she was engaged to Mittens.

Yes, but that doesn't mean she didn't swallow the rhetoric hook, line and sinker. And I can tell you that when she became a Mormon, the only real, honest and true purpose for women was to be a wife and a mother. It's still held up as the ideal. Go read the church manuals on lds.org if you don't believe me.

[lilwriter85]

Where do you live? I think you might be in the minority of Mormon women. Also, not to say this will be you, but I have known many (many many) Mormon women who have gotten professional degrees and worked a few years then quit once they had kids. Yes, Mormons strongly encourage education and self-sufficiency, but I think it's tough to argue they don't encourage women to stay home to raise their children.

I also think there is a minority of Mormon women who don't want to be SAHM's. I have heard of several Mormon families in which the moms continue to work after having children. But I have heard of several Mormon women who get degrees work awhile and then quit when they start having kids. There are some Mormon women that do bash working moms quite a bit.

[mirele]

I don't. I am a Mormon woman and working toward a professional medical degree. I have no desire to be a stay at home mother (I do want children, though) and plan to work so I can provide the best possible life for my future family. Many of the women in the singles branch I attend are doing the same. I have never been told by anyone (let alone anyone in leadership) that I shouldn't get a solid education or work. The main thing the church encourages (as they did this past General Conference) is to not put off starting a family. If a woman wants to be a stay at home mother, wonderful. If not, that's fine too. But don't assume that because a person is religious that they only made that choice because they felt "pressured". That's a huge generalization and I know for a fact does not ring true where I live.

I know women who have taken the advice the male leadership of the church dishes out in general conference, considered it, and then dropped it into the round file as not applicable to their lives. They are few and far between. I don't know where you live, but I've lived in the Jell-O belt for the last 18 years of my life, and the optimal lifestyle for a Mormon mother is to be a SAHM. This is what you hear in church. This is what you hear in general conference. The apostles and seventies do not get up and praise women who work outside the home. They're not mentioned. Rather, the guilt is laid on about how the most important role for women is that of a wife and mother.

As for not waiting to have children...well, with all due respect to the elderly gentlemen in Salt Lake City, we know statistically that if you marry young and start having children right away without the proper financial stability, your marriage may not last. Even if you do get married in the temple. Finances can and do cause enormous stress in a marriage. Encouraging young women to marry young men just off their missions with MAYBE two years of college under their belts, MAYBE, is just asking for trouble. And, once women have started having children, it's easier to lay on the guilt trip about how important it is to be a mother, how one should stay at home to be with the kids, this is the most important role Heavenly Father has given you, etc., etc.

Let me be blunt here. As a former member who resigned over Prop 8 in 2008, maybe I'm bitter. But the fact is that the LDS Church works well for people who fit into a certain groove, and that groove is marriage, family and following the example of your priesthood leadership, which generally includes Stay At Home Momhood. As a woman who never married, never had kids and is now in menopause, I FAILED at the Mormon prime directive for women. So yeah, even though I got two university degrees and a law license, and then went on to another career and hold down a full time job and have a mortgage, I am an incomplete woman according to Mormonism. I think I'm entitled to be a little bit bitter about that.

I do know when Ezra Taft Benson gave a talk called "To the Mothers in Zion" in 1987, that it was published as a pamphlet by the church and handed out. I also know, from church scuttlebutt, that talk got more comments from anguished women who worked outside the home, not for luxuries, but to keep their families fed, and yet, this was held up as the goal. I don't see this has changed very much in the ensuing 25 years.

I wish you all the luck in your future endeavors, but please don't come here and tell those of us who have been through the mill that we don't know what we're talking about. We do. And Ann Romney is a very privileged woman who didn't have to work very hard to live up to the LDS ideal, because she is wealthy. Unlike many of the women I knew who stayed at home and scrimped and saved to try and obey the words of the prophet to be stay at home moms. Or worked outside the home and felt guilty during Sacrament Meeting, Sunday School and Relief Society when the role of women is hammered over and over.

http://emp.byui.edu/SATTERFIELDB/PDF/To ... ofZion.pdf << the notorious talk.

[lilwriter85]

My friends on the religious right are saying that Ann raising five kids makes her one of the most qualified First Lady's in recent history. I don't understand how having or not having kids makes a person qualified for any position. Or how having a large number of kids makes a person more qualified to lead the country? Or just more qualified in general. Experience, education, intelligence, personality, etc attest to a person's ability to do a certain job. Why is her stay at home status an issue?

It is obvious that the Repubs are going to spin this to show how the Democrats don't encourage family values and they look down on stay at home moms.

I know people who have a similar view in which they believe people with large families or women who are SAHMs are more qualified in leadership roles. To people on the religious right, they view a SAHM as someone who truly values family, while a working mom isn't view as valuing family. I have seen ultra conservatives call working moms "materialistic" and "child neglecters." The same people with these views tend to view SAHMs as women who always put their family first. SAHMs are no better than working moms. Working moms do put their families first and for some that is the reason they work.

I think experience and education are keys in leadership roles. I know some SAHM's who are great leaders when it comes to family but when it comes to some things outside the home, I wouldn't give them leadership roles.

[Austin]

I know people who have a similar view in which they believe people with large families or women who are SAHMs are more qualified in leadership roles. To people on the religious right, they view a SAHM as someone who truly values family, while a working mom isn't view as valuing family. I have seen ultra conservatives call working moms "materialistic" and "child neglecters." The same people with these views tend to view SAHMs as women who always put their family first. SAHMs are no better than working moms. Working moms do put their families first and for some that is the reason they work.

I think experience and education are keys in leadership roles. I know some SAHM's who are great leaders when it comes to family but when it comes to some things outside the home, I wouldn't give them leadership roles.

I don't understand why having and raising children makes a person more qualified to be the spouse of the president. Why? And why would Ann Romney be the "most qualified"? The job, to the extent that it can be called that, is not "First Parent of Many".

Anyway, most First Ladies have had children. Only the following did not: Rachel Jackson, Florence Harding, Dolly Madison, and Sarah Polk. So every first lady in recent history has been a mother. Big deal.

[Feberin]

I currently stay at home with my son but I don't consider it working or a job. I'm not sitting around on by butt all day and it's challanging at times but it's raising my child not my job. I worked for the first year and a half of his life (excluding my 12 weeks of FMLA thanks Clinton :) ) and that was so much more difficult for me personally then staying at home. I know everyone is different and some find SAH more difficult. We are fortunate to enjoy a comfortable existance where we can afford to meet our needs and some wants. But if we had the kind of money the Romeys have then SAH would be a walk in the park! And even if they didn't have nannies raising the kids just having money to do fun stuff makes the day so much easier. I'm sure if she wanted to take the kids to a museum it wasn't a consideration of if they could afford it. Or if they were running errands all morning and it was lunchtime they could stop and eat out without fear of messing up the budget for the month. I'm sure there were family vacations at least once a year and babysitters could be hired whenever they were needed. All things that make staying at home with kids easier and more fun. Yet I doubt she's every thought of going out to eat or on a vacation as something that needs to be budgeted. Or had to miss out on something fun because the grandparents weren't available to watch the kids and a babysitter would have been to expensive.

[lilwriter85]

I currently stay at home with my son but I don't consider it working or a job. I'm not sitting around on by butt all day and it's challanging at times but it's raising my child not my job. I worked for the first year and a half of his life (excluding my 12 weeks of FMLA thanks Clinton :) ) and that was so much more difficult for me personally then staying at home. I know everyone is different and some find SAH more difficult. We are fortunate to enjoy a comfortable existance where we can afford to meet our needs and some wants. But if we had the kind of money the Romeys have then SAH would be a walk in the park! And even if they didn't have nannies raising the kids just having money to do fun stuff makes the day so much easier. I'm sure if she wanted to take the kids to a museum it wasn't a consideration of if they could afford it. Or if they were running errands all morning and it was lunchtime they could stop and eat out without fear of messing up the budget for the month. I'm sure there were family vacations at least once a year and babysitters could be hired whenever they were needed. All things that make staying at home with kids easier and more fun. Yet I doubt she's every thought of going out to eat or on a vacation as something that needs to be budgeted. Or had to miss out on something fun because the grandparents weren't available to watch the kids and a babysitter would have been to expensive.

I agree the Romneys' wealth makes Ann different from a lot of SAHMs. Most of the SAHMs that I know fit into the category of constant budgeting.

[ADoyle90815]

I agree the Romneys' wealth makes Ann different from a lot of SAHMs. Most of the SAHMs that I know fit into the category of constant budgeting.

This. She's never had to budget, or figure out how to feed the children on her husband's unemployment after being laid off, as her husband was the one laying off employees whose families had to deal with the financial hardships. While she bought into the Mormon idea that a woman should stay home when she converted, she never had to struggle like many Mormon families do. She came from a wealthy family, so she didn't need to work her way though college when she met her husband, while most women who eventually stay at home probably did work while going to college because books are expensive, especially for grad students.

[lilwriter85]

I wonder if ZsuZsu has been reading here because her new blog posting is on this subject. She doesn't mention Ann Romney but she discusses other things in regards to the comment about " SAHMs not working a day in their lives."

[lilwriter85]

This. She's never had to budget, or figure out how to feed the children on her husband's unemployment after being laid off, as her husband was the one laying off employees whose families had to deal with the financial hardships. While she bought into the Mormon idea that a woman should stay home when she converted, she never had to struggle like many Mormon families do. She came from a wealthy family, so she didn't need to work her way though college when she met her husband, while most women who eventually stay at home probably did work while going to college because books are expensive, especially for grad students.

A friend of mine lived in Utah for several years and she saw Mormon families struggle quite a bit. I have read some Mormon blogs and often some of these families struggle financially. Some of them don't have extra luxuries. Ann has never struggled financially and she probably didn't relate much to some of her college classmates who might have jobs while going to school. My sister had a friend in college who came from a wealthy family and she was always amazed about how most of her friends from school were working and going to school at the same time. She just couldn't picture herself being in that position.

[contrary]

i also came to add zsu zsu's two cents, predictable and bland as they are.