misleading discussions about generic gender roles
There is a war on women being waged right now. It seeks to erase who we are as women, to replace our value as wives and mothers, with our ability to pursue wealth and careers. It seeks to rob women of our identity as the nurturers and givers of life and to change us into the providers of casual sex, a job they promise will be accommodated by providing us with free birth control and access to abortion. It’s a war that seeks to replace the role of men with the role of the state. Insanitybytes
A few American Christians are in a tizzy about something they call ‘the role of women’. These people seem to think humans pop off a conveyor belt from a generic person specification, which is designed to determine what we do with our lives based on what genitals we were born with.
Some basic facts for these confused people:
- Around 20% of women don’t have children during their lives, for a variety of reasons both within and outwith their control. They are women too and, unbelievably, they have a ‘role’ in society.
- Family structures aren’t generic and are never guaranteed. People get ill, people die, people fall out, people lose their jobs. If you limit the financially-providing skill set to one adult in a relationship, and one of these frequently occurring facts of live comes to pass, you are condemning the de-skilled stay-at-home parent to years of stress, insecurity and potential poverty – still with a family to support.
- Societies and communities within your country and around the world are all different. Families can function under a million varying successful models:
- Some people live in close communities with extended family nearby – childcare can easily be shared by trusted family and friends.
- Some people have the luxury of the kind of job where childcare can be accommodated into their day, with both parents working while caring for the children.
- Some people live far from their families, many in dispersed urban settings. Life as a stay-at-home parent would be limited socially and would be unfulfilling for children who require space, fresh air, variety and regular contact with their peers.
- Some people live in countries where they can take paid time off work (up to two years) to spend the time required with a baby to form strong parental bonds – and they can share this time regardless of their gender.
In my opinion, the most important factor in all this is that people have choice to carve out what kind of life works best of them in their circumstances. You don’t give people choice when you force unrealistic roles down their throats as the only way to live. You don’t give people choice when society doesn’t support people at their most vulnerable stages. You don’t give people choice when you make assumptions about how their lives will be.
And let’s not forget. It’s 2014. Men exist too. And most of them who have children in this day and age actually want to spend as much time with their children as mothers do. So let’s bop these terribly misleading discussions about generic gender roles on the head, and remember that everyone is different, and there are many ways to live our lives in a fulfilling manner, both with and without troublesome offspring.
I started reading and thought … IB
One of the things feminists get attacked for is wanting to deconstruct the gender binary. I know, terrible jargon, so I’ll rephrase it to ‘wanting men and women to be treated as people’. Similar desires, wants, needs, aspirations, feelings, capabilities, just, people. But not put in little boxes that say smart girls do this and clever men do that.
To be viewed as a breeder and domestic slave is rather insulting.
LikeLike
It’s just difficult to believe their experiences of life can be so limited that they express these kind of opinions. Here’s another one:
http://quinersdiner.com/2014/11/01/stay-at-home-moms-are-un-american/
LikeLike
Wow, who was that prat who engaged with you? He’ll be one of the ones who doesn’t want to pay for someone else’s life-saving health care, some old person’s meals on wheels and carers, someone’s addictions, well just nobody except his obnoxious greedy self.
Reminds me of the woman who went for a job, carer couldn’t come, took kid in car, had interview, came out to be arrested. Hell, she needed the money. What part of this don’t they get?
LikeLike
You should subscribe to them, honestly, you’d love it! Catholic Republicans – a charming mix of right-wing politics, sexism and insanity.
LikeLike
Yeah, just my cup of Assam. Thanks for the tip. In return, I’ll offer you revolting Europe, socialist, egalitarian, very anti capitalist, women’s rights, yawn, too boring really I suppose.
LikeLike
You’ll get on like a house on fire!
LikeLike
LikeLike
Arch, we all know Victoria told you how to post images and things but I got serious grief from my man for hitting on that music one (no dancing) I promise, and disturbing his nap. Even worse, he knew the words, while is never heard it before in my life. Now, sssh. Stop partying on violet’s blog. Get your own.
LikeLike
“(no dancing) I promise” – THAT was your mistake, and you’re trying to blame me for it! If you had danced in your underwear, as I suggested, he would have THANKED you for disturbing his nap! But would you listen to me? Nooooo —
I buy you books and buy you books, and what do you do? You eat ’em!
And as for “Vi’s blog” – if she hadn’t gotten all sexist, and complained about men rambling, I’d never have felt the need to post the song!
See? It’s everyone’s fault but mine!
LikeLike
“To be viewed as a breeder and domestic slave is rather insulting.”
Indeed it is. Ironically I’ve never been perceived that way by anyone other then feminists and liberals on some sort of social justice quest. Do you not hear how demeaning you own definition of motherhood is to other women?
LikeLike
One can be a domestic slave without being a breeder. It’s not all about having children. It is about perceiving the ‘natural role of women’. There isn’t one, nor should there be one. Plenty of women can’t have children, choose not to have children, choose to have a career (and still have children and look after the home), and others choose to have children and be the archetypal housewife. Each to our own, or in Violets words, we have, or should have a choice. As should men.
It’s not my definition. Merely that of, mainly religious, people who consider that women have a specific and tightly defined function in life.
LikeLike
“One can be a domestic slave without being a breeder.”
Oh, how generous of you. No, breeder and domestic slave is NOT the perception religious people have about the role of women, it is the perception people like YOU have about the role of women.
LikeLike
I think you missed something out there in my accusation. My perception is that of someone who sees an awful lot of religious people saying that the role of women is to have children, look after their man, and generally play the submissive helpmeet role. I think you said publicly on your blog that you submitted to your partner?
There is an alternative, where people, of whatever gender, actually share all the domestic household and every other task involved in the day to day relationship of life. Including going to work, because, sad as it is, most of us need money.
Violet, Ark and I have emphasised choice. What part of choice, for both men and women over old-fashioned patriarchal religious indoctrinated views is not clear?
I’m aware you are a deconverted feminist. I feel like saying the classic Christian comment. You can’t have been a real feminist.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Actually, the breeder and domestic slave is exactly the perception of women found in many very religious scenarios. This was one of the big reasons that marriage for women is so important, and why virginity before marriage is as well. The whole concept of damaged goods comes to us from the religious. It was certainly one of the pieces that helped liberate me from any of the Abrahamic religions. Kept me out of many of the others as well. Why does the Government allow women to claim their husband’s Social Security after his death? Why is a child whose father has died but whose mother lives considered an orphan? Think about it.
LikeLike
“Why does the Government allow women to claim their husband’s Social Security after his death?” – I would imagine that it’s because there’s an unspoken assumption that she was partially responsible for his earning the money the Social Security deductions were taken from. Another possibility is that in marriage, the two are considered one. To be certain, I would have to ask someone familiar with SS regulations.
“Why is a child whose father has died but whose mother lives considered an orphan?” – I’ve never heard that that was the case. Is this a widespread custom, or only a localized one?
LikeLike
“…you are condemning the de-skilled stay-at-home parent to years of stress, insecurity and potential poverty…”
Oh Violet, ouch! De-skilled?? Is that anything like being de-clawed? Are you implying that women who stay home to raise children actually start to de-educate themselves, to dumb themselves down, to slowly render themselves de-skilled and ready for the junk heap?
Are you completely dismissing the rash of skills women who stay home develop because of the job they do? Accounting, cooking, science, psychology? If a woman cooks fabulous meals in her home is she not just as skilled, if not more skilled, then some arrogant TV chef doing the exact same thing? Why is he perceived as being more skilled than her? Sexism perhaps, of the sort being perpetuated by privileged females?
How about those pre-school employees, why are they being perceived as child development specialists while the mom who stays home is a de-skilled child care drudge?
LikeLike
Did these mothers study three to four years on a culinary arts program and learn further skills under a master chef? Did these mothers study child psychology and development for three to four years and follow a clear structure with promotion prospects? Are they working full time exclusively on cooking or educating children? Do they have an opportunity for career progression and further training in their role? Are they being paid a reasonable full time salary for their work and getting holidays, praise from their clients and other benefits? It’s not comparable.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So you look down upon the skills and wisdom of women developed over centuries and instead perceive the institutional skills of the male dominated patriarchy as being far superior?
LikeLike
Where did I do that? You took a quote out of context from a point specifically about ‘financially- providing skills’. My point stands – parents who stay at home full time become de-skilled in terms of their earning potential, and it’s simply not wise in the times we live in. Once you remove your foot from the door of paid work, it’s terribly difficult to return, and people do get trapped.
You then asked specifically about cooking (professionally both a male and female area of expertise) and early years education (again both male and female, although primarily female these days) and claim they are skills of a male dominated patriarchy when I point out the differences between them in a career context and in a home context. I’m confused.
You kind of sound like someone defending the traditional skills of the hunter/gatherer or miner – screaming that we are losing these traditional skills and the wisdom associated with them. True to a certain extent, but we move with the times.
Finally, in your eagerness to be outraged by the post, you’ve missed the overall message – people should be free to choose. If women or men want to take the risk of losing their financial earning capacity by abandoning the workplace altogether in order to look after children and home, then that’s their choice. But they should be aware that it’s often a thankless task, with no sick pay, no days off, and often the attitude of the working spouse that while their full time job may be 40 hours a week, the full time job of the stay at home partner is 168 hours per week. It’s a bad trade-off.
LikeLike
“My point stands – parents who stay at home full time become de-skilled in terms of their earning potential, and it’s simply not wise in the times we live in”
Ah, I see, Women should be free to have a “choice,” it’s just that it’s not wise to chose to stay home. Or like the President said it’s not a choice we want Americans to make. So, we’ll just mock and ridicule you for you choice, call you unwise, and discourage you from making it, all the while proclaiming this to be a promotion of freedom and choices. Got it.
LikeLike
I am basing my assessment on cases where I know mothers have stayed at home, and I’m afraid none I’ve been exposed to have been ‘success’ stories. Anti-depressants, loss of confidence, and lack of choice are the big things that spring to mind. I’m not saying these things can’t hit anyone in any type of set-up, but in the cases I know about it was specifically because the mothers became de-skilled in terms of financial earning potential, lost their sense of self-worth and were essentially trapped in the situations they found themselves.
I realise this is a very personal topic for you and I understand your defensive reaction. Please note that throughout this I’ve said that both parents should have these choices – you’re the person attempting to limit the conversation to women. Do you not think that men should be equally involved in child-rearing and matters of the house, seriously? I can’t imagine being in a relationship where I had to cook all the meals and do all the cleaning, and look after the kids. It just isn’t a balanced way to live. I’m not mocking anyone who wishes to do it, I just hope they understand the risks for if things go wrong or they change their minds …
LikeLike
It looks like the person setting up the quote from the President did the same thing to his statement that is regularly done with the Bible, grabbed a few lines and took them out of context. What I recall his message was about was not to denigrate the stay at home parent but rather to help them not lose their place in the workplace since so many must return to it.
And, yes, you do lose salable skills when staying home with small children for any length of time. And no, most stay at home moms are so bloody tired after trying to keep up with small children, keep the home relatively clean, and all the other tasks involved, that they seldom if ever have the energy left to become first class chefs or anything else for that matter. By the time you could learn enough to be a good child psychologist they’re borrowing the car and taking off for the mall and it’s moot.
Been there, done that, got the grandchildren to show for it.
LikeLike
In a world where ”dollar” is king self-reliance is crucial. The ”Doris Day” white picket fence Apple Pie mum is a thing of the past , if she ever really existed, and an image so alien to a woman in certain parts a country such as Pakistan as to be contemptible.
Without self-reliance ( and like it not this includes financial) the potential for disaster is two pay checks away.
After literally thousands of years of women striving for equality your tacit measure-me-up-for-an-ironing-board-attitude is denigrating and socially unacceptable.
That everyone who reads your comments and your blog realise that you underpin such atrocious attitudes with religion is morally reprehensible; like a bludgeon to the head for all the millions of women who are still under the thumb (cosh?) in countries where they have little or no voice.
I find your remarks callous, self-serving and offensive.
LikeLike
“I find your remarks callous, self-serving and offensive.”
So what ? I find you to be an arrogant, elitist, privileged ass, more puffed up on ideology then common sense.
Also, you do the women of Pakistan no favors by promoting your rather male dominated view of the world and attempting to project it upon them as if it were the ideal existence for them to have. What if some of us don’t want to support your idea that the “dollar is king?” What if we have other ideas about what is worthy and valuable in the world? What if 75% of the world’s labor has always been unpaid work being done by women? You now seek to ridicule and mock that labor while self righteously declaring women have no voice?? Then you try to give lectures about self reliance, as if women have no capacity for self reliance unless we listen to you and adopt your worldview? What do you think women have been doing for thousands of years, waiting for you to come along and save us?
LikeLike
Not in the least. I am disgusted that you project an image of ”I’m all right Jack” while millions of woman are treated like stock to be bought and sold at the whim of someone else.
Male dominated view? What a very silly remark.
I have stated openly here and on your blog that choice is crucial .
Your attitude tacitly suggests that the choice women should make is to stay at home and be a ”good wife”.
You constantly promote a view of women based largely on a biblical image / template.
This is archaic and completely unacceptable to the vast majority of women irrespective of culture or religious persuasion.
When one considers what so many women go through even in this day and age you should actually be ashamed for the attitudes you are promoting in this regard.
LikeLike
:When one considers what so many women go through even in this day and age you should actually be ashamed…”
What a surprise, yet another man who feels entitled to tell women what they should feel ashamed about. How progressive of you.
LikeLike
Please don’t tell me you’re trying to turn this into a feminist moment!?
LikeLike
Why not make it a feminist moment? I’m trying to advocate for the rights of all the women who are being accused of being de-skilled breeders and domestic slaves who ought to be ashamed of ourselves.
LikeLike
Once again, you are manipulating the words to fit your own warped biblically based agenda.
It was pointed out to you how you (purposely?) misinterpreted Obama’s speech and now you are doing a similar thing here.
Are struggling withing comprehension ?
I have no desire to tell women what to do and if the majority of women believed as you do then we probably wouldn’t even be having this conversation.
Your views are not representative of the vast majority of women on this planet.
That you can even exercise such views are largely because of the efforts of other women who have, in many cases, lost their lives to ensure you could
do such basic things as vote, and expect parity in the workplace. Oh, and the choice to exercise what they do with their bodies, of course. But you will have little or no truck with pro-choice women I suspect.
What you believe – for you – is a personal issue. That you put forward this image/role as tacitly the best standard for all woman is demeaning and quite frankly, ridiculous.
And , yes, under the circumstances, you should be ashamed.
LikeLike
“Are struggling withing comprehension ?”
Yes. Probably a girl thing, no doubt related to my de-skilled breeder and domestic slave status. I am ashamed, deeply ashamed I tell ya, for my poor withing comprehension.
LikeLike
And now the asinine response from one that believes the best defense is to whine.
Good for you . A role model indeed.
Perhaps you should rather stick to ironing?
LikeLike
I’m not whining at all. I’m doing my very best to meet your withing comprehension standards.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting you’re ignoring many of my serious responses and focusing all your attention on the ramblings of the men.
LikeLike
Your comments are far more intelligent then the ramblings of some of the men, but they still express the precise same idea, just cloaked in better deception.
LikeLike
I see. Not keen to address serious points about choice for all.
LikeLike
Well, you’ve gone and projected several issues when you said,
” You don’t give people choice when you force unrealistic roles down their throats as the only way to live. You don’t give people choice when society doesn’t support people at their most vulnerable stages. You don’t give people choice when you make assumptions about how their lives will be.”
You also don’t give people a choice when you mock and ridicule them for their choices, tell them their choice is unwise, and discourage them from making it. When you then make it even more economically unfeasible by, for instance, raising taxes to pay for universal pre-school, you pretty much tie their hands. Women these days do not have the choice to stay home, mostly because of what we’ve done to the economy and to the culture at large. When a woman does chose to stay home, she faces a whole lot of criticism from the political world that believe she is making the wrong choice. That is not freedom, it’s actually a form of social engineering.
The choice to stay home is being removed from women for all the reasons you listed above.
LikeLike
Wow, I can see why you’re so afraid:
“Leading economists agree that high-quality early learning programs can help level the playing field for children from lower-income families on vocabulary, social and emotional development, while helping students to stay on track and stay engaged in the early elementary grades. Children who attend these programs are more likely to do well in school, find good jobs, and succeed in their careers than those who don’t.”
Must be scary to think your government wants your country to catch up with the rest of the developed world, and even the playing field for kids from lower income families:
“A zip code should never predetermine the quality of any child’s educational opportunities. Yet studies show that children from low-income families are less likely to have access to high-quality early education, and less likely to enter school prepared for success. By third grade, children from low-income families who are not reading at grade level are six times less likely to graduate from high school than students who are proficient. Often, the high costs of private preschool and lack of public programs also narrow options for middle-class families.
High-quality early childhood education provides the foundation for all children’s success in school and helps to reduce achievement gaps. Despite the individual and economic benefits of early education, our nation has lagged in its commitment to ensuring the provision of high quality public preschool in our children’s earliest years. The Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) estimates that the United States ranks 28th out of 38 countries for the share of four-year olds enrolled in early childhood education. And fewer than 3 in 10 four-year olds are enrolled in high-quality programs.”
LikeLike
Hey! – I was born a ramblin’ man —
LikeLike
THERE’S one you can dance around in your underwear to, Roughseas – hell, I may join you! Neuro has a picture of what that might look like —
LikeLike
Rather than withering sarcasm and similar fatuous remarks why not try to understand that advocating your worldview re: the ”expected” role of women is incredibly demeaning to the vast majority of woman across the globe.
Furthermore, this is not about trying to prevent women from staying at home or ridiculing them for doing so, but ensuring that everyone has the choice to freely exercise this option – and not that it should be the Standard a la Insanitybytes and her damn bible.
LikeLike
Fact is irrespective of “progress.”
LikeLike
Ark may be a lot of things, but I would not describe him as arrogant, elitist, privileged or an ass. Or even a donkey which are quite delightful.l
He is only privileged in the sense that he is male which applies to approx 50% of the world.
If you wish to have a go at him, although I think personal attacks are in poor taste, and not something that violet encourages as far as I am aware, go for something where you are on stronger ground eg his dubious taste in music
LikeLike
Right that’s it! That is so below the belt. I don’t have to sit here and take that sort of thing from anyone.
Well, maybe Arch.
I am going for a cup of tea and then you’re gonna see …
Sheesh…
LikeLike
Ah. Your twin. Of course. Although, I did feel a twinge of guilt as I like Honky Tonk Woman. I would have felt much better had you posted Hendrix or Steely Dan 😉
LikeLike
“Well, maybe Arch.” – Well acknowledged!
LikeLike
That’s unfair isn’t it. Luella de Ville lumps me with the pair of you but I get dropped like a whatever when it comes to boys own privileges 😦
LikeLike
“Luella de Ville lumps me with the pair of you” – If I were you, I’d print that out and hang it on the fridge, or possibly frame it, your grandchildren may want to see that some day!
LikeLike
Certainly not. And anyway grandchildren is about on my horizon as much as children were(n’t).
LikeLike
Then to whom are you going to pass on your infinite wisdom?
LikeLike
His poor taste in music is an excellent start. He is fairly sexist in a lot of ways though. And his arguments often come down to calling people ‘dickhead’ which isn’t very impressive.
LikeLike
Ah dear Violet. How do I love thee. Have forsworn never to call Ark sexist ever again so I leave that now to you.
Sometimes though, when he calls people dickheads, he is right, they are. For example that horrible D P hunting person who both glorified killing animals for fun and was disgustingly sexist. Dickhead in his case, was generous.
LikeLike
“Have forsworn never to call Ark sexist ever again” That was rash!
dp’s a bit like Insanity – some of his opinions make sense and then it’s just off into la-la land. I like it when he pops over to Arks and beats him soundly in a verbal thrashing, only to be called ‘dickhead’ for the 100th time.
LikeLike
He gets easily upset. So long as he knows I think it, I can live with that. Gotta get along with people sometimes …
I think Ark makes more sense than IB and DP put together and multiplied by ten. We all lose patience. I mean, seriously, what would you call Diriculous?
LikeLike
Is there another Ark on the blogs, as I do not recall getting a verbal thrashing from anyone. Maybe, Arch, but then I have to pretend to be ”pistol whipped” otherwise he sulks. He’s a bit like you in this regard. So, Vi, perhaps you could direct me to this thrashing I got?
LikeLike
I’d love to but I’m not having much success navigating round your old posts. I tried to find some of the posts where you’re incredibly sexist for Roughsea’s benefit but had no luck. dp always gives you a run for your money and you always end up looking like a furious foaming-at-the-mouth-argument-loser spouting “dickhead” and threatening bans. 🙂 Love your work.
LikeLike
Oh, dp is like PEW , a dickhead wherever he visits.
And to suggest he gives anyone a run for their money who then put you squarely in the firing line … *my dear ( sexist pejorative)
Threatening bans? Lol. Sheesh, I think I have threatened Arch with bans more than anyone, though I readily confess to moderating one or two comments from PEW back in the day.
I probably moderate you if I could get away with it but Arch, Roughseas and Victoria would slag me off across blogland.
*The key is to recognise when it is a genuine sexist term and when it is a sexist term delivered by a non-sexist.
LikeLike
“I probably moderate you if I could get away with it but Arch, Roughseas and Victoria would slag me off across blogland.” – Moderate not, lest ye be moderated —
LikeLike
Moderate me? You’d have to rely on Sonel for picture praise if you did that. Can’t cut your fanclub in half. 😉
LikeLike
“Love your work.” – Ooooh, Ark – BIG-time burn! Ouch! THAT’S gonna leave a mark!
LikeLike
“Maybe, Arch, but then I have to pretend to be ‘pistol whipped’ otherwise he sulks.” – Don’t you have somebody’s coat to hold – maybe somewhere else –?
LikeLike
And that Peter Sellers gravatar of his looks so f’n smug!
LikeLike
I have to agree about the smug gravatar.
LikeLike
You didn’t get it, did you. None of what you replied about relates to what the Ark wrote. Oh, and yes, the dollar is king, cause without them, (at least here in the US) you live under an overpass in a cardboard box… IF you’re lucky.
LikeLike
Are you implying that women who stay home to raise children actually start to de-educate themselves, to dumb themselves down, to slowly render themselves de-skilled and ready for the junk heap?”
IB, I can’t begin to assess what she was implying, but I CAN speak from personal experience. As a single father, raising four daughters, the youngest being 9 months, I know that I found myself dumbing down, simply from holding conversations all day long with pre-schoolers, having to break everything I said down into terms a pre-schooler would understand. Over time, it takes its toll.
LikeLike
“..simply from holding conversations all day long with pre-schoolers..”
Ah yes and fortunately, out in the “real world” one never has to encounter anybody that tries to just suck the life out of your brain?
So, rather than supporting women who choose to stay home, rather then advocating for that and making it possible, we label those women unwise, de-skilled, domestic slaves, and breeding machines, as has been done in this thread.
Then we self righteously declare ourselves to be feminists and talk about giving women choices.
LikeLike
Again, you’re getting carried away with some kind narrow rant and not addressing the topic as a whole. The suggestion was that anyone, male or female, who chooses to step outside the workforce and lose whatever financial earning capacity they have in order to exclusively raise children, is being unwise. They’re limiting their choices, they’re potentially limiting the learning environment of their children (I certainly know that would be the case if I chose to stay at home) and they’re not being realistic about the instability of the world we live in.
You’ve obviously come out the other side of stay-at-home motherdom and feel strongly about it, but be honest, when you had a gaggle of under 5s while running a house, did you feel intellectually stimulated, challenged and like those you cared for appreciated your work? Good on you if you did, but it’s certainly nothing I’ve seen for women in similar situations.
LikeLike
“it’s certainly nothing I’ve seen for women in similar situations.”
Ahem! Or men –?
LikeLike
I didn’t do any of that – I merely corrected your mis-impression that the “dumbing down” is self-induced. And trust me, no one can suck your brain like a 3-year old brain bandit!
LikeLike
Mere zombies are WAY out of their league –!
LikeLike
Yep. Choice it is. Something the Insanitybytes of the world can’t seem to get their head around.
LikeLike
LikeLike
“Who and what people are, lies between their ears, not between their legs.”
Thank you for that enlightened comment, too. So have we now established that feminist love and liberal progressivism attempts to define women like me as “de-skilled domestic slaves and breeding machines who’s only value lies between our legs?”
Yes, we have now established that. Therefore equality under the guise of feminism seeks to demote rather then elevate women, does not support our choices as women, and in fact, wages a war against women, much like my post indicated:
“It seeks to erase who we are as women, to replace our value as wives and mothers, with our ability to pursue wealth and careers. It seeks to rob women of our identity as the nurturers and givers of life and to change us into the providers of casual sex, a job they promise will be accommodated by providing us with free birth control and access to abortion. It’s a war that seeks to replace the role of men with the role of the state.”
LikeLike
“It seeks to erase who we are as women” – and here you are patronisingly declaring that the lifestyle ‘choice’ (if it is that) of women who don’t work defines who we are as women. It may define you and the other 20% of the female population who ‘choose’ (if that’s the case) to stay at home full time with children.
“to replace our value as wives and mothers, with our ability to pursue wealth and careers” Or, to compliment our value as wives and mothers (if we’re in the 60% who have these labels and functions) with the opportunity for personal and professional development in a field of our choosing.
“It seeks to rob women of our identity as the nurturers and givers of life and to change us into the providers of casual sex, a job they promise will be accommodated by providing us with free birth control and access to abortion.” Eh? Right down the rabbit hole now. Who’s providing casual sex? And please, bring on the free birth control!
“It’s a war that seeks to replace the role of men with the role of the state.” Is the the role of men where they make all the laws for women?
LikeLike
It seeks to erase who we are as women, to replace our value as wives and mothers, with our ability to pursue wealth and careers. It seeks to rob women of our identity as the nurturers and givers of life and to change us into the providers of casual sex, a job they promise will be accommodated by providing us with free birth control and access to abortion. It’s a war that seeks to replace the role of men with the role of the state.”
Absolute hogwash and there would not be a person in the entire world of true democratic process that would ever get elected to any sort of office pumping that vitriolic crap.
All the women from both sides of my family worked. Some full time.
My sister, Lizzy, left school and became a nurse. After she got married she elected to be a stay at home mum for years. She raised four sons.
He youngest was born with a rare form of Leukemia and she would commute between home and hospital every damn day, filling in and helping out the nursing staff while looking after her kid while he underwent chemo.
She is now a highly qualified nursing specialist currently doing two years volunteer work in Malawi.
She saved the life of a three week old child on her first day on the wards in a small local hospital.
So don’t you dare even think you can preach your screwed up form of feminism.
In the real world outside of your indoctrinated (fundamentalist) christian worldview you want to know why you are considered irresponsible, ill-informed and in many issues unintelligent?
Then read Your own comment.
LikeLike
Note to all readers of vw’s blog. Please note that
1) the ‘terrible A twins’
and
2) ‘breeders and domestic slaves’
are registered trademarks ® of roughseasinthemed and accordingly copyrighted ©
Please do not use these phrases in a derogatory sense without due accreditation to roughseasinthemed. Also do not subvert the original version and add personal misinterpretations from other comments, eg de-skilled.
Many thanks.
Roughseas
(Non-breeder and occasional domestic slave)
LikeLike
The following is the Biblical description of the ideal wife:
10[b]A wife of noble character who can find?
She is worth far more than rubies.
11 Her husband has full confidence in her
and lacks nothing of value.
12 She brings him good, not harm,
all the days of her life.
13 She selects wool and flax
and works with eager hands.
14 She is like the merchant ships,
bringing her food from afar.
15 She gets up while it is still night;
she provides food for her family
and portions for her female servants.
16 She considers a field and buys it;
out of her earnings she plants a vineyard.
17 She sets about her work vigorously;
her arms are strong for her tasks.
18 She sees that her trading is profitable,
and her lamp does not go out at night.
19 In her hand she holds the distaff
and grasps the spindle with her fingers.
20 She opens her arms to the poor
and extends her hands to the needy.
21 When it snows, she has no fear for her household;
for all of them are clothed in scarlet.
22 She makes coverings for her bed;
she is clothed in fine linen and purple.
23 Her husband is respected at the city gate,
where he takes his seat among the elders of the land.
24 She makes linen garments and sells them,
and supplies the merchants with sashes.
25 She is clothed with strength and dignity;
she can laugh at the days to come.
26 She speaks with wisdom,
and faithful instruction is on her tongue.
27 She watches over the affairs of her household
and does not eat the bread of idleness.
28 Her children arise and call her blessed;
her husband also, and he praises her:
29 “Many women do noble things,
but you surpass them all.”
30 Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting;
but a woman who fears the Lord is to be praised.
31 Honor her for all that her hands have done,
and let her works bring her praise at the city gate.
The Biblical depiction of the perfect wife was the ultimate “do it all” woman. She brought home the bacon, fried it up in the pan, and never ever let her husband forget he was a man. The ideal wasn’t a woman who spent all her time raising children. She did that and so much more, including having a career and investments.
Sorry for the block of text, Violet.
LikeLike
Oh, I’m sorry, I forgot to include that that comes from Proverbs 31.
LikeLike
Thanks, that’s really interesting! Really doesn’t sound at all like the vision Insanity has in her head.
LikeLike
I’m not sure where this idea that women should stay at home and not pursue their career came from. I will say that I don’t agree that it is unwise for a woman to choose to stay at home with her children. No one should be ridiculed or shamed for their decisions either way. Each family has to decide what is in the best interest of them as a family.
I will say, though, as a woman who hasn’t had children and is divorced, regardless of the reason, it has been exceedingly difficult to sit in sermons and have the preacher say that a woman’s highest honor and achievement is wrapped up in her being a) a good wife and b) a mother. As a human being I’m much more complex than that. I have more to offer than that.
LikeLike
I will say that I don’t agree that it is unwise for a woman to choose to stay at home with her children. No one should be ridiculed or shamed for their decisions either way. Each family has to decide what is in the best interest of them as a family.
Just for clarification: I do not think that staying at home with the children means that a man or woman should forfeit their own earnings potential. That would be unwise. There are ways to keep your foot in the door, especially by keeping up any continuing education, licensing, part-time work outside the home, etc. It certainly doesn’t hurt to be a bit entrepreneurial either.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“I don’t agree that it is unwise for a woman to choose to stay at home with her children”
I didn’t say that exactly, or if I did it’s not quite what I meant. I said I think it’s unwise for either partner in a relationship to leave the workforce completely, given the high chance of relationship breakdown, illness and myriad other problems. I think it’s sensible in current society for all people should be as self-sufficient as possible within their living situation, for their own welfare. There’s no ridicule or shame in that – just sound advice.
LikeLike
That I completely agree with. I did offer clarification of what I meant as well.
You are right about that, though. My own life is an example of such. My mother chose to stay at home and not further her education or pursue a career of any kind outside of the home. When my dad died it left her with four children and no job prospects. We got by, but it definitely took a toll on her.
LikeLike
A mix of on and off topic here. We were joking about a replacement for me today.
‘Must have good computer skills, be extremely literate, numerical (can do annual accounts, tax returns, estimates etc), can cook vegetarian food as there is no way I’m paying for meals out, and does the odd bit of cleaning. If interested please note you take third place behind dogs and land rovers. Photos of computer, food and slight evidence of cleaning skills appreciated. Really don’t care what you look like.’
Joking apart though, it was about what people bring to a relationship. And to continue with Violet’s theme, it should be about choice, and possibly best use of skills but not necessarily based on gender.
The idea that woman’s main role in life is the little woman indoors totally denies their intellectual capacity. And, it also insults men by suggesting they are incapable of nurturing and managing a household. Where would I have been for the last x months without a man who has done absolutely everything at home?
Again, as violet says it is 2014. Not proverbs 31. Interesting text though.
LikeLike
I agree. I was using that text as an example that, even the idea of women staying at home, isn’t exactly Biblical. That passage encourages women to pursue intellectual and economic advancement.
But your point is very well taken and something I meant to say. In today’s economy women are the breadwinners in many instances and the family decides the man should stay at home. Or they decide that neither should. But the idea of delegating some of the responsibility for child-rearing to “hired help” isn’t exactly revolutionary or new.
LikeLike
What racked me off about that excerpt was that the woman was regarded as the worker, the labourer, the industrious one, even the entrepreneur. But not clever enough or respected enough to sit with the city elders, I got the image of some woman running herself ragged while her husband is sitting in some gentlemen’s club.
The main earner in our relationship has always fluctuated, him, me, him, me, us. His BiL (as mentioned on your blog) decreed that as he earned more money she should do all the domestic duties. That always struck me as not far from paying for a housekeeper. A relationship has to be more than who brings the most money into the household.
LikeLike
That is a rather nauseating aspect of that particular excerpt. I wasn’t holding it up as some standard to attain[though I once ran myself ragged trying]. No, I was simply demonstrating that this attitude that women should stay at home and not pursue careers is nonsense according to even their own book!
Furthermore, the attitude you said your BiL displayed was the same as my BiL. My sister had worked her entire life. She became unexpectedly pregnant at 39. They, together, decided that she should stay at home because,in fairness, he did earn more money and they[mostly him] didn’t want their child in a nursery. From the moment she quit her job to be the stay-at-home party he treated her as if she were somehow less-than. Since he earned all the money he would take pot-shots at her in front of other people about the fact that she wasn’t earning any money, the implication being she wasn’t making an equal contribution. He did a number of times and so when I had her alone I asked her about it. She said she only put up with it because she was dependent, at that point, financially but that once my nephew was in school that would all change.
Sadly, this is not all that uncommon. I realize that both parties to a relationship should contribute, but it isn’t as if staying at home and keeping the house and tending the finances is not valuable. That is a contribution. The last time he did it in front of me I told her she should make an invoice for childcare, cleaning, cooking, accounting services, concierge services, etc. and leave it for him.
LikeLike
And, unless you can’t help it because of some [ahem!] affliction, it really isn’t wise to give up self-sufficiency. Even some who are [ahem!] disabled can be industrious and self-sufficient in their own way.
LikeLike
Maybe the quarrelsome lady would be interested to know that the very Christian Amish of the US don’t feel it’s proper for a man to work outside the homestead. Yes, some must, but it is looked down on. Makes ya think!
LikeLike
They don’t want their cult members to be exposed to “outside ideas”.
LikeLike
Yeah, but if you noticed, she didn’t do it alone, she had servants.
LikeLike
Bingo! Delegating household responsibility is not a novel concept.
LikeLike
Pingback: violetwisp