Still living with the Mammy

Mister Vain · 21-05-2015 10:57AM #1

With rent prices going up, is there still as much stigma with living at home? Adults living with their parents often get a hard time. I came across this article; its a few years old granted but is sums up the mentality of a lot of people:

What are you playing at? You get one life and you're living it in your parents' house, as a strangely tall child, presumably with secondary sexual characteristics.

I've always believed that people should have one of those things that start with a birth, end with a death and have lots of stuff going on in the middle. You know, a life.

Bar exceptional circumstances, this level of over-parenting is approaching child abuse.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jun/03/barbara-ellen-kick-out-stay-at-home-kids

This idea that someone still living at home doesn't have a life or is still a child is a bit ridiculous. Terms like "Mammy's boy" and "mollycoddled" are insulting. Yes some people are just lazy and I have seen examples of over parenting too, but not everyone's circumstances are the same. Some people just can't afford it. You wouldn't be as quick to insult someone who is in debt or has mortgage arrears.

Menas · 21-05-2015 10:59AM

Horses for courses. I left home at 16 and would not change that for the world.

everlast75 · 21-05-2015 10:59AM

Girls don't want no scrubs!

Mint Aero · 21-05-2015 11:00AM

I left home when I was 12 to join the chimney sweeps. Declared myself against the euro by 14 went into the mines at 15. Was married with 3 children by 16 and divorced at 19. No way would I live with a relative. Not even the 3 childer.

fizzypish · 21-05-2015 11:04AM

Living abroad now and have lived up the country for work. If I was working around my home place I would totally live at home. Just me and the father. We get on like a house on fire. Couldn't live with the mother though.

rubadub · 21-05-2015 11:15AM

Mister Vain wrote: »

Some people just can't afford it.

yes, and not always the children. Her view is very one sided, like the only reason she can think of is that they cannot afford it and/or the need to be "mollycoddled", and a inferred presumption the parents want rid of them. When in many cases I would expect its the opposite, or the benefits are pretty much equal, i.e. the children "mollycoddling" the parents just as much by doing tasks which could not be done by eldery parents.

Lemming · 21-05-2015 11:21AM

So, somebody is living at home with the parents; could be for a variety of reasons. Maybe they moved out before, and have had to move home, maybe they can't afford it, maybe they're lazy, unsure, just haven't found somewhere, or whatever.

TL;DR: judgemental muppets need to get over themselves and look at their own lives instead.

the_monkey · 21-05-2015 11:22AM

Usual here for people to live with their parents in their 40s and 50s ... and Mammy still making them lunch/dinner everyday.

In fact , I know some people that BOUGHT apartments but rent it out to make money and still live with mammy getting lunch/dinner and laundry done for them everyday.

Perfectly normal here ... encouraged even.

Senna · 21-05-2015 11:23AM

What about parents moving in with the kids.
FFS man, you're 87 years old, start living your life.

Mister Vain · 21-05-2015 11:25AM

rubadub wrote: »

yes, and not always the children. Her view is very one sided, like the only reason she can think of is that they cannot afford it and/or the need to be "mollycoddled", and a inferred presumption the parents want rid of them. When in many cases I would expect its the opposite, or the benefits are pretty much equal, i.e. the children "mollycoddling" the parents just as much by doing tasks which could not be done by eldery parents.

Exactly. I know of a few cases where the "child" is the only one in the household who is working and earning money, or else their parent is ill and needs help. And yes, not all parents are desperate to get rid of their offspring either. Some people actually get on with their folks.

retro:electro · 21-05-2015 11:25AM

I still live at home but only because she recently has lost the power in her right arm and can't manage much around the house. It's just the two of us so its not too bad.

conorhal · 21-05-2015 11:25AM

Senna wrote: »

What about parents moving in with the kids.
FFS man, you're 87 years old, start living your life.

That's just the circle of life, they listen to you cry, wipe your arse raise you up and gently move you out. Then you gently move them in, listen to them cry, wipe their arse and eventually lower them down.

21-05-2015 11:32AM

It depends on the reason. If you're perfectly capable of supporting yourself but live at home and hand up a pittance to your parents for upkeep and enjoy full service in terms of cooking, cleaning, laundry, bills paid, and do nothing but enjoy the fruits of their labour, you need to grow up and sort yourself out, for their sake. Or even if you prioritise a new car or accelerated savings at your parents expense while they foot your bills, then again grow up and sort yourself out.

If you're broke, in education, unemployed, or are needed to help with the everyday care of your parents or running of their home, hand up a reasonable rent and pull your own weight on the chore front, then it's not unreasonable. It's probably not ideal for an extended length of time, but it's not unreasonable in the short or medium term.

21-05-2015 11:32AM

Sure it is grand. My neighbours still have their youngest son (late 30s') and his husband living with them. The good Irish mummy doing the cooking and laundry etc, and the dad saying nothing about it... No need for any voting tomorrow, it is happening in Ireland now :-)

Mister Vain · 21-05-2015 11:50AM

Candie wrote: »

If you're perfectly capable of supporting yourself but live at home and hand up a pittance to your parents for upkeep and enjoy full service in terms of cooking, cleaning, laundry, bills paid, and do nothing but enjoy the fruits of their labour, you need to grow up and sort yourself out, for their sake.

The bills paid for I wouldn't agree with. I think they should be contributing there, but I know some mammies who are happy to do all the other stuff. Force of habit maybe. Sometimes the situation can benefit both parents and the kids. Someone else mentioned living close to their work. Great convenience there. The mammy doing a bit of cooking and cleaning, nothing wrong with that.

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy · 21-05-2015 11:55AM

the_monkey wrote: »

Usual here for people to live with their parents in their 40s and 50s ... and Mammy still making them lunch/dinner everyday.

In fact , I know some people that BOUGHT apartments but rent it out to make money and still live with mammy getting lunch/dinner and laundry done for them everyday.

Perfectly normal here ... encouraged even.

Foxrock?

21-05-2015 11:58AM

Mister Vain wrote: »

The bills paid for I wouldn't agree with. I think they should be contributing there, but I know some mammies who are happy to do all the other stuff. Force of habit maybe. Sometimes the situation can benefit both parents and the kids. Someone else mentioned living close to their work. Great convenience there. The mammy doing a bit of cooking and cleaning, nothing wrong with that.

Ah there is. If the mammy has been at it all the kids life then she needs to be allowed retire from it. And it's better for the grown up kid to do their own stuff, for their own sake. Even if the mammy seems happy to do it, it's not fair to keep taking advantage of that, as an adult.

the_monkey · 21-05-2015 11:58AM

the_monkey wrote: »

Usual here for people to live with their parents in their 40s and 50s ... and Mammy still making them lunch/dinner everyday.

In fact , I know some people that BOUGHT apartments but rent it out to make money and still live with mammy getting lunch/dinner and laundry done for them everyday.

Perfectly normal here ... encouraged even.

oh yeah forgot to mention, amount of rent/maintenance handed to the parents : 0.00 - even when they have good jobs.

keithclancy · 21-05-2015 11:59AM

Mister Vain wrote: »

This idea that someone still living at home doesn't have a life or is still a child is a bit ridiculous. Terms like "Mammy's boy" and "mollycoddled" are insulting. Yes some people are just lazy and I have seen examples of over parenting too, but not everyone's circumstances are the same. Some people just can't afford it. You wouldn't be as quick to insult someone who is in debt or has mortgage arrears.

I think it's because we all know someone who's kids won't leave home or make a proper go of things because they always have the safety net of going home to their parents house.

IMO if the safety net isn't there and your in a job that you hate, you really think twice about saying "i quit" and walking out

Nothing wrong with it, just don't expect to be able to bring chicks home in your 30s and get the ride

muppetkiller · 21-05-2015 12:01PM

I recently broke up with my lady and moved home as we had been renting together. I'm 38 so hadn't lived at home in about 15 years.

Currently saving for a house so suits me for now to stay there for 6 months and save an extra 3k. Also gives me an opportunity to spend some quality time with the folks while I still have them around.

Can't say it's much fun though when it comes to privacy. Also mums will be mums , so when you are up watching Game of Thrones till 2am she'll be giving you the chat in the morning about how "you shouldn't be up late on a work night.... blah blah" lol

Mister Vain · 21-05-2015 12:04PM

Candie wrote: »

Ah there is. If the mammy has been at it all the kids life then she needs to be allowed retire from it. And it's better for the grown up kid to do their own stuff, for their own sake. Even if the mammy seems happy to do it, it's not fair to keep taking advantage of that, as an adult.

Well if she's doing 100% of the cooking and cleaning then fair enough. The kids should be chipping in there as well, doing the odd bit of cooking and so on, but some mammies will insist on doing the cooking because they're better at it.

keithclancy wrote: »

I think it's because we all know someone who's kids won't leave home or make a proper go of things because they always have the safety net of going home to their parents house.

IMO if the safety net isn't there and your in a job that you hate, you really think twice about saying "i quit" and walking out

Nothing wrong with it, just don't expect to be able to bring chicks home in your 30s and get the ride

Well there's always her place, or the back of the car.

Matt_Trakker · 21-05-2015 12:07PM

I think it's a bit sad when I hear of people still living at home.
Let go of the apron strings and man up.

Mr_Muffin · 21-05-2015 12:08PM

Have a child and get a council house - easy way to move out if your stuck.

JillyQ · 21-05-2015 12:08PM

Trigger Happy wrote: »

Horses for courses. I left home at 16 and would not change that for the world.

Left home at the same age wouldnt have it any other way

JoDunlop · 21-05-2015 12:08PM

If your happy with your with your situation leave well alone!!

Mister Vain · 21-05-2015 12:11PM

Matt_Trakker wrote: »

I think it's a bit sad when I hear of people still living at home.
Let go of the apron strings and man up.

Well...

JoDunlop wrote: »

If your happy with your with your situation leave well alone!!

anncoates · 21-05-2015 12:17PM

Mr_Muffin wrote: »

Have a child and get a council house after waiting for about 10 years or more at current waiting times.

Fixed.

Kinda ruins the splenetic moralizing a bit, though.

The Backwards Man · 21-05-2015 12:18PM

Matt_Trakker wrote: »

I think it's a bit sad when I hear of people still living at home.
Let go of the apron strings and man up.

I think it's a bit sad when I hear of people living in squalid hovels, living off takeaways because they can't cook and throwing out their secondhand clothes after wearing them because they can't wash them. But hey, at least they're 'manning up' right?

anncoates · 21-05-2015 12:19PM

I myself left home before I was even born.

zzfh · 21-05-2015 12:21PM

b-b-but i'm saving so much monies..

Mister Vain · 21-05-2015 01:31PM

keithclancy wrote: »

don't expect to be able to bring chicks home in your 30s and get the ride

Just going back to this bit actually. My folks live in the sticks. Going out to meet women usually involved heading into town, (which is a fair distance away.) If I was to meet a woman who was up for a bit of hanky panky, then getting a taxi all the way back to the bog for a shag was not really a viable option, regardless of whether or not I was living with the parents.

And that brings me back to the whole "secondary sexual characteristics." Yeah because everybody who has their own place is constantly riding. There's no such thing as a sexually inexperienced tenant.

Still living with the Mammy

Comments