Men with stay-at-home wives more sexist than men with spouses in employment, says Jill Filipovic

‘More mothers at home makes for worse, more sexist men who see women as mommies and helpmeets,’ says author

Ms Filipovic argues mothers who stay at home are ‘psychologically and emotionally worse off’ than those who choose to work (Getty)

Feminist author Jill Filipovic has said men with wives who stay at home rather than working are more sexist than men whose spouses are in employment.

The comments were fiercely criticised by Conservatives in the US where the so-called “stay at home moms” movement has gained increasing traction - with working mothers sometimes shamed for juggling motherhood with a career.

Ms Filipovic also argued mothers who stay at home are “psychologically and emotionally worse off” than those who choose to work.

She tweeted: “More mothers at home makes for worse, more sexist men who see women as mommies and helpmeets.

“Men with stay-at-home wives are more sexist than men with working wives; they don’t assess women’s workplace contributions fairly; and they are less likely to hire and promote women.”

Ms Filipovic made the comments while sharing an article she wrote challenging Matt Bruenig’s recent piece in the New York Times which argued the US government should pay parents to stay at home and look after their children.

The writer argued this is not a feminist policy and isn’t “good for women” - explaining the proposed measure would mostly impact women as they are more likely to forgo their careers and shoulder the burden of childcare.

“Stay-at-home mothers are psychologically and emotionally worse off than working mothers by just about every measure, from depression to anxiety to anger; they are much more likely than working mothers to say that they are struggling, and less likely to say that they are thriving,” she also tweeted.

Ms Filipovic argued the “carer/earner nuclear family model” is highly “isolating” as well as frequently being “financially devastating for the carer” - noting this individual is a woman in the vast majority of cases.

She said: “We need a robust social welfare state. No one should be living in poverty - not adults, and certainly not children. You don’t solve that problem, though, by paying mothers a small stipend. You solve it by giving poor people enough money to live, period.”

Ms Filipovic called for “paid parental leave policy” which “heavily incentivises men” to take a substantial amount of time off work as she also demanded “universal high-quality childcare”.

Research conducted by YouGov last year found families living in the US spend an average of £6,423 ($8,355) a year on childcare per child..

Commenting on Ms Filipovic’s comments, Joeli Brearley, chief executive and founder of UK campaign group Pregnant Then Screwed, told The Independent: “The issue is that the work ’stay at home mums’ do is not valued by society.

“In a relationship where one is the breadwinner and the other is managing the house and the children, both parents are working but only one is being remunerated and rewarded for that work.

“This devaluing of women’s work can lead to stay at home mums being particularly susceptible to bouts of depression. Moreover, it inevitably leaves women in a more vulnerable position where they are entirely dependant on their partner for financial stability resulting in a lack of choice should they be unhappy in the relationship, and a higher propensity to be poor later in life.”

Ms Brearley argued many women living in the UK are forced to stay at home rather than it being a choice as the “system leaves them with little option”.

“In this country we know that for two-thirds of families childcare costs the same or more than their rent or mortgage, leaving many women in the position where they cannot afford to work. It is this lack of choice that embeds and entrenches sexism,” she added.

A previous study by the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development found the UK has one of the most expensive childcare systems in the world.