The "Un-Real Housewives"...
I have an issue with that show, "The Real Housewives of New York City."
My main issue is that pretty much all of them work outside the home. Therefore, they do not fit the definition of "housewife"... Which is:
A wife who manages a household while her husband earns the family income.
In the show, four of the five women have jobs outside the home. Full-time jobs. They have housekeepers and nannies to take care of the children.
Additionally, one of the "housewives" isn't even married. She doesn't even live with her boyfriend. So how is she a "housewife?"
Also, is it just me.... Or are the women on this show just really tacky? Perhaps that is too harsh. I mean, I do enjoy the show... But only because I have personally worked with society women from the Upper East Side of Manhattan in past lives... And these "Housewives" women probably wouldn't even get a nod of acknowledgement from the socialite wives.
I know there are PLENTY of women who do not work in New York City, and are married to men (and some to women). They are the "real housewives of New York City." These women on the show aren't the real thing.
I will also add, since some wrote an anonyous "c-u-next tuesday" comment that I refuse to publish (because they are a "c-u-next-Tuesday") that I do find "The real Housewives of Orange County" to be a lame show as well. Yes, I do realize that the OC ladies (who are equally tacky) do work as well. And no, I do not think they are "real" housewives for the most part.
HOWEVER, at least the OC ladies fit the "housewife" mold a little better. They do take care of their house and their children more so than the NYC ladies. The NYC ladies have very obvious "hired help." If the OC ladies have this as well, they don't show it on TV.
So, betch who left the comment, "bite me."
Don't get me wrong though... I don't think those people who choose to be a housewife (or house husband) are lame. I think if you want to stay home and not have a job, there's nothing wrong with that. It's not what I would choose, but there is certainly nothing wrong with it.
I just don't think women who spend most of their time working and socializing should get to be glamourized on a show called "The Real Housewives"... Especially when I know of women myself in NYC who do not work, run the home and take care of their children. It is a lot of work to do all that. It's not an "easy" life.
I mean, do we call husbands who work all day "househusbands?" We do not. I don't think women who work outside the home should be called "housewives."
I don't consider myself a housewife. I organize my household. And I work outside the home. Even when I have kids in a few years, I still won't consider myself a "housewife." Because I will be one of those women who employs a nanny, and probably a cleaning lady, to take care of my home. And there's nothing wrong with that either. But just having a child and a home does not make one a "housewife."
My main issue is that pretty much all of them work outside the home. Therefore, they do not fit the definition of "housewife"... Which is:
A wife who manages a household while her husband earns the family income.
In the show, four of the five women have jobs outside the home. Full-time jobs. They have housekeepers and nannies to take care of the children.
Additionally, one of the "housewives" isn't even married. She doesn't even live with her boyfriend. So how is she a "housewife?"
Also, is it just me.... Or are the women on this show just really tacky? Perhaps that is too harsh. I mean, I do enjoy the show... But only because I have personally worked with society women from the Upper East Side of Manhattan in past lives... And these "Housewives" women probably wouldn't even get a nod of acknowledgement from the socialite wives.
I know there are PLENTY of women who do not work in New York City, and are married to men (and some to women). They are the "real housewives of New York City." These women on the show aren't the real thing.
I will also add, since some wrote an anonyous "c-u-next tuesday" comment that I refuse to publish (because they are a "c-u-next-Tuesday") that I do find "The real Housewives of Orange County" to be a lame show as well. Yes, I do realize that the OC ladies (who are equally tacky) do work as well. And no, I do not think they are "real" housewives for the most part.
HOWEVER, at least the OC ladies fit the "housewife" mold a little better. They do take care of their house and their children more so than the NYC ladies. The NYC ladies have very obvious "hired help." If the OC ladies have this as well, they don't show it on TV.
So, betch who left the comment, "bite me."
Don't get me wrong though... I don't think those people who choose to be a housewife (or house husband) are lame. I think if you want to stay home and not have a job, there's nothing wrong with that. It's not what I would choose, but there is certainly nothing wrong with it.
I just don't think women who spend most of their time working and socializing should get to be glamourized on a show called "The Real Housewives"... Especially when I know of women myself in NYC who do not work, run the home and take care of their children. It is a lot of work to do all that. It's not an "easy" life.
I mean, do we call husbands who work all day "househusbands?" We do not. I don't think women who work outside the home should be called "housewives."
I don't consider myself a housewife. I organize my household. And I work outside the home. Even when I have kids in a few years, I still won't consider myself a "housewife." Because I will be one of those women who employs a nanny, and probably a cleaning lady, to take care of my home. And there's nothing wrong with that either. But just having a child and a home does not make one a "housewife."
Comments
http://www.realitytvworld.com/news/bravo-reveals-real-housewives-of-new-york-city-cast-debut-mar-4-6383.php
but yes, i agree, the only one I would actually say is a "housewife" of NYC is LuAnn...and she has a full-time, live-in nanny/housekeeper...and i have not seek her keep the house all too often! because, honestly, if this is "class" in NYC...i will happily stay in boston.
i have to believe that the "real" housewives of NYC wouldn't lower themselves to be put out for exploitation like these ladies, that the "real" society women of NYC have too much class for a show like this.
Though, then I would have to point out... Alex does nos live in Manhattan. She lived in my beloved Brooklyn.
And Bex, I agree with you. Romona and Alex do bug me, greatly. And LuAnn does appear to be the only non-working wife. But she spends a lot of air time bossing her housekeeper around.
If I had stayed in NYC and not moved to Boston, I would have kept living in Brooklyn.
HOWEVER...if you're actually going to try to have an intellectual discussion about this show, I think it's important to realize that perhaps the definition of "housewife" is a bit broader nowadays and definitely includes women who work outside the home...B/c regardless of how much help one has...women...even working women are still responsible for the bulk of managing the house/children, etc....being a working mom and a housewife are not mutually exclusive.
While I don't disagree that the majority of women in marriages do the majority of the work in their households... I don't think they should be defined as "housewives."
To me, and to the dictionary, a "housewife" is one who does not work in order to stay home and tend to the household.
I DO NOT think we should be redefining "housewife" to include wives in general. I think that undermines the women who stay home and tend to the running of the household.
To say, for example, that I am a housewife because I do more of the organizing of our home, I think, would be insulting to the real housewives.
I mean, does the fact that I work outside the home mean they are "lazy" because I can be a "housewife" and a financial contributor?
And, again, I will clarify that I have nothing against women and men who choose to not work and tend exclusively to the home. However, I do caution them against making this choice because I feel they are taking a financial risk.
What happens in the event of divorce, death or serious illness of their spouses?
Even with "tight-knit" pre-nups (which most women don't have), you still run the risk of being left in a very difficult financial spot when you choose to leave the workplace.
And to say that you can "always re-enter" is a bit misleading. Yes, you can re-enter, but it will be very difficult to pick up where you left off.
If you can accept that fact, then I say, "Go forth and become a 'housewife.'"
But if you're living in the delusional world that your spouse would never divorce, die or develop a serious illness that would put a hamper on the income... Then I wish you "the best."
Tammy, your pet peeve is one of my pet peeves too.
Imagine being the only wife out of all your husband's work colleagues who DOES work.
Everytime we meet up for a group function with everyone else, I get the following questions:
1. How come you're still working? You know you don't have to, right?
2. When are you guys going to have kids?
The first question makes me never want to not work... Even if the only job I can find is as a shop girl on Bloor Street in Toronto.
The second question forces me to push off the idea of children another six months. Right now, I have pushed it off to 35. And I only just turned 31.
Anyway, the show is ridiculous and only as entertaining as rubberneckers watching the latest disaster on the freeway.