Caution: Blood-Boiling, Feminist TRUTH Ahead

(I know it’s a bit long…read it anyway.)

Oh boy…after repeated accusations that I get my anti-feminist ideas from “pre-50’s” literature and Google searches for “feminism is bad”, I decided to do an open-minded search for these new claims of modern feminism.  The claims that “old feminism was hostile to men and family, but NEW feminism is all about choice and respect of that choice…that motherhood is a perfectly honorable “choice”, as long as it’s not the only one”.  That should soften my ideas a bit, huh?

WRONG!!!  My blood was boiling after just a few news stories…and I only had room to post a smidgen of the stuff I found.  It’s hard for me to fathom that these conclusions were made by someone who claims to be educated.  Now I know what the Bible means about the “wisdom of the world being foolishness”.

Feminism does one thing REALLY well…LIE.  And they continue to.  Yes, some feminists thought their previous agenda too judgmental, so they have opted to use softer terms like “choice” to make all women feel included.  Well in truth, that is not the feminist agenda–never was, never can be.  They are still about belittling the family, the role of marriage and motherhood–they hate “choice”, and on the destruction goes. Read carefully and stay tuned to the bottom of the page for the “solution”:

 

Linda Hirshman asks:  “More and more women are leaving the workforce to stay home and raise kids. Has feminism failed?”  (If you listen, the question itself reveals the heart of feminism.)

“In interviews, women with enough money to quit work say they are “choosing” to opt out. Their words conceal a crucial reality: the belief that women are responsible for child-rearing and homemaking was largely untouched by decades of workplace feminism. 

The family — with its repetitious, socially invisible, physical tasks — is a necessary part of life, but it allows fewer opportunities for full human flourishing than public spheres like the market or the government.

Women who want to have sex and children with men as well as good work in interesting jobs where they may occasionally wield real social power need guidance, and they need it early.

Step one is simply to begin talking about flourishing. In so doing, feminism will be returning to its early, judgmental roots. This may anger some, but it should sound the alarm before the next generation winds up in the same situation. Next, feminists will have to start offering young women not choices and not utopian dreams but solutions they can enact on their own. Prying women out of their traditional roles is not going to be easy. It will require rules — rules like those in the widely derided book The Rules, which was never about dating but about behavior modification.

  • So the first rule is to use your college education with an eye to career goals.

 

  • If you are good at work you are in a position to address the third undertaking: the reproductive household. The rule here is to avoid taking on more than a fair share of the second shift…When couples marry, the amount of time that a woman spends doing housework increases by approximately 17 percent..to avoid this kind of rut, you can either find a spouse with less social power than you or find one with an ideological commitment to gender equality. Taking the easier path first, marry down.  (emphasis mine)..Rhona Mahoney recommended finding a sharing spouse by marrying younger or poorer, or someone in a dependent status, like a starving artist.

 

  • If these prescriptions sound less than family-friendly, here’s the last rule: Have a baby. Just don’t have two (can you hear me going “AGHHHHHH!”)….women who opt out for child-care reasons act only after the second child arrives. A second kid pressures the mother’s organizational skills, doubles the demands for appointments, wildly raises the cost of education and housing, and drives the family to the suburbs.  It is true that if you follow this rule, your society will not reproduce itself.  (!!!  She’s educated, people!)

“Why do we care?  We care because what they do is bad for them, and is certainly bad for society.”

“At feminism’s dawning, two theorists compared gender ideology to a caste system. To borrow their insight, these daughters of the upper classes will be bearing most of the burden of the work always associated with the lowest caste: sweeping and cleaning bodily waste.”  (My note:  There you have it:  the feminists summation of raising the next generation–forget life-changing impacts, shaping characters and destinies, building strong minds and lives–just cleaning up bodily waste.)  

From America’s Stay-at-Home Feminists, Linda Hirshman

 

This article even spewed the stupidity that if a mother’s income is only enough to pay for child care, it is “incorrect to say she would be better staying home”.  The author said the fair assessment is to combine the total household income, and subtract childcare, leaving the total household profit.  There…that should make us all feel better, shouldn’t it? (ditzy voice:  “I went to Harvard and I’m very good at math.”)  Because the MAIN thing is to stay away from home and the children.

In a nutshell, feminism is nothing more than a ME religion.  It dismisses what is best for any person, now or later, besides ME.  It even dismisses the reality of a total, societal-self-destruction…as long as I can do what I want to do right now; after all, I’ll be dead when it all hits the fan.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to go put my hair out.  It may cause me to go into labor.

 

I had to add this clip of Hirshman for a little comic relief…I think you’ll enjoy it.

__________________________________________________________________

101 Responses to “Caution: Blood-Boiling, Feminist TRUTH Ahead”

  1. Sara says:

    Kelly,
    I graduated from college a mere five years ago, and I had taken enough “Women’s Studies” classes to almost have a minor in the subject. The same lies are being taught, even if some have softened to a more politically correct tone, and underneath most, if not, all of the teaching is a sheer scorn for the traditional family and traditional woman’s role.
    I would have to say that really early feminism had some of it’s base in real problems that hurt women and children, many years ago, and while some feminists still like to focus on these issues they’ve become twisted so that they actually hurt women and children (can’t anyone see that pushing for easy access to abortion for every woman in the world is causing the mass destruction of female babies in places like China and India?)
    Anyway, what I noticed was while modern feminism certainly has a lot of problems, the main culprit isn’t all that different than the sin all of us struggle with all the times. The worship of self. And this is maybe the most destructive part of feminism–it teaches women to worship themselves, and it claims that it is right.

  2. This article makes sense ONLY if finding fulfillment in the workforce while balancing a family is MORE IMPORTANT than committing to nurture your marriage and family. It only makes sense if my plans are more important than God’s plans, if my career is more important than giving life to another child. Feminism, to me, is not exactly a lie; it’s an alternate reality to the one that I want to live. Perhaps on its own terms and in its own sphere, it has merit, but to me, making money and having “influence in the public sphere” can never measure up to the joys of having a healthy marriage, a growing family, and a happy home.

    That said, I don’t think that motherhood can or should be the only choice for all women. (How silly.) I think that MANY (dare I say MOST) women will be called to marriage and motherhood, but certainly not all are. And, for that, I am grateful that we have a society that welcomes women into various spheres of work and influence. BUT, I believe that if you ARE a wife and mother, that is your primary vocation, and compromise should NEVER undermine or endanger that calling.

    ~Bethany

  3. Dose of Joy says:

    Hi Kelly,

    Like Bethany, I can’t say feminism is a ‘lie,’ it’s just a lifestyle that I am choosing not to take. Honestly, this article made me laugh a little bit. I love that she mentions, in case we didn’t know, that when you marry, the amount of time you spend doing housework will increase? I hate using this word, but: Duh! You’re taking care of your family! Anyway, that’s a minor point.

    You know, I am entering ‘the workforce’ for the next few years (teaching) while my husband goes to seminary. We need a salary, I love to teach (I’m a musician, so teaching music), and God provided me with a job. Do I look forward to staying home when our children our born? Yes. I give that a resounding yes. However, I disagree with this article’s point that your college education must be used with ‘an eye to career goals.’ Sure, the things I learned in my schooling will help me greatly as I teach. However, many, many of the courses I took relating to psychology and education will undoubtedly aid me as I raise my children and educate them. So, I think she’s selling that a bit short.

    I cringe when I hear anyone say “Marry Up.” Nevermind, “Marry Down!” Whatever happened to marrying who God brought you to? Lastly, it bothers me that she makes becoming a homemaker something to be avoided at all costs. She had a mother, didn’t she??

    Again, I agree with Bethany. Not all women must be called to Motherhood, nor do all marry. God gives us different paths. I am blessed to have maintained and strengthened my faith as I made my way through a very unchristian college. I am thankful for the job I am walking into, and I will not say I am giving into feminist ideals because I am going into the workforce for a few years. I truly believe that women can keep their hearts and minds focused on serving their families while pursuing a career through prayer, balance, and communication. True, when I have children, I will certainly be at home to raise them instead of foisting them into a daycare, but I suppose I am just somewhat of a middleman (or middlewoman if there are any feminists offended by that, teehee), in that I do not believe it is sinful to be in the workplace if you are a woman, especially in the field of education. I truly hope to bless the children I teach with a respectful, nurturing, and thoughtful environment.

    Okay, spiel done 🙂

  4. Rachel Falaschi says:

    Wow…I’m pulling my hair out too.

    I’m sure you’ll receive the comments of “that what she thought, but not all feminists think that way, ” yada yada… what I would like people to remember is, you may think differently as a feminist, but what was quoted is being taught to our daughters in school and is what is being lobbied for in Washington. Very scary.

  5. Word Warrior says:

    It should probably be noted that this post may not give the full “punch” of the article. The article’s thrust was that the fact many educated women are choosing to stay home with their children is an indication that the feminist movement has not succeeded–i.e. the point of feminism is to get women out of the home at all cost, regardless of her preference. In fact, it is suggested if that is her preference, it’s only because she’s been brainwashed to think that way.

    People keep telling me that the feminist movement is not about telling women they shouldn’t be homemakers…but by all accounts, that is exactly what this author projects. She says we must teach our younger daughters that staying at home is not a healthy choice. Splitting everything down the middle is the only alternative–recognizing NO differences in gender or roles.

    To her, a woman at home (especially educated) is a blight on the face of the feminist movement.

  6. Elizabeth says:

    Linda Hirshman has been EXTREMELY controversial on feminist blogs. Basically, she has been panned by other feminists. I know this for a fact because I have taken a TON of flak from other feminists for defending her.

    That having been said, a lot of mainstream feminists have gotten away from the concept of “choice” feminism. Because not all choices ARE equally feminist just because a woman does them. You are free to submit to your husband but that is clearly an unfeminist choice. Some choices are feminist, some are unfeminist, and some are neutral.

    You have to remember that Hirshman is talking to a feminist audience. So she is saying IF you hold certain feminist goals (such as making it easier for women in the workplace or achieving more representation of women in politics), then you aren’t going to be furthering those goals if you stay home. This makes sense to me.

    She isn’t saying, “Let’s force all women by law to do things my way.” She is saying, “If we want to accomplish certain things, we can’t pretend that staying home is going to get us to where we want to be.” I think she is unnecessarily rude at times, but I think she is basically correct.

  7. I actually agree with Elizabeth on this one. That’s exactly what I was trying to say when I spoke of the “alternate reality of feminism.” Feminism works to achieve its own means–not to achieve a traditional, God-centered life or society. It’s silly to try to understand feminism as a tool for the latter; it’s trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.
    ~Bethany

  8. Elizabeth says:

    This article even spewed the stupidity that if a mother’s income is only enough to pay for child care, it is “incorrect to say she would be better staying home”. The author said the fair assessment is to combine the total household income, and subtract childcare, leaving the total household profit. There…that should make us all feel better, shouldn’t it?

    It is not a matter of making anyone feel better. It is a matter of how couples decide whether one person (almost always the woman) should stay home. For some reason couples routinely seem to deduct the nanny/day care/housecare costs from the woman’s paycheck rather than both paychecks equally — and then conclude that it makes more economic sense for the woman to stay home. But in doing so, couples ignore the fact that the woman is losing out on earning her own income, sacrificing her future earning capacity, and sacrificing the opportunity she may want to do work outside the home. It is just a sexist way of looking at the economics of the situation –to the woman’s detriment.

    I think Hirshman’s advice is extremely sound if you are a woman who wants to avoid the pressures to “opt out.”

  9. Elizabeth says:

    I will say I think Hirshman has been really contemptuous of housewives in many of her comments. Feminists have absolutely clobbered her for that, as have traditionalists. I can’t defend that contempt — but I think she is really mocking the idea that you can be socially powerful in the way feminists want to be socially powerful AND be a stay-at-home mom at the same time.

  10. Elizabeth says:

    Sorry, I will shut up soon but I am very into Linda Hirshman!

    I think in a just world, feminist women SHOULD be able to stay home without worrying that they are adding to the lack of equal representation of women in the workplace. And feminist men SHOULD be able to stay home without feeling like they will be looked down on. But right now that isn’t the case, because all the social and cultural pressures are always on the WOMAN to stay home — which means women are not as well represented as men in the public sphere.

    In a feminist utopia, we wouldn’t be dealing with these unequal pressures and power imbalances between the sexes. In such a world, it would be no big deal either way if a man or a woman wanted to stay home to work on home and childcre full time. It would be an entirely individual choice.

  11. Rachel Falaschi says:

    Elizabeth,

    It isn’t necessarily cultural or social pressure that is put on women to stay home, but biological. Women were created to birth babies, feed babies, etc. It makes sense biologically that they would be the ones home with the children. No matter how we change culture or society, women still have the bodies, thus the role of bearing and caring for children.

  12. madge says:

    I have to agree with Elizabeth here. We are moving from a situation where my husband works full time and I don’t work at all to one where I work part time, mostly on the weekends, and he does more child and home related care too. Why? because I love my work and I want us to have more options as time goes on. Have things changed a bit? sure. Are we happier? Actually, yes we are. In an ideal world, each family should be able to work these details out, for the glory of God and the benefit of all involved.

    It isn’t just “my” choice. It’s our choice: my husband’s choice to be a more involved father and share the income production and domestic work. My choice to begin again doing work that I love that is ministry to people in need. Our children benefit because they have a model of a mother who is fully present to them and engaged in the world of work, and a dad who can do laundry and dishes as well as I do. There’s not one thing in scripture that argues against anything we are doing, either.

    I’ll agree with Rachael’s biological argument up to a point, but once babies are weaned all the constraints against men taking a more involved role in childrearing are strictly cultural–not biological. I’d argue–and there is evidence to suggest– that boys and girls benefit from a dad that is more involved in childrearing ( not just around but actually engaged in their daily care).

  13. Word Warrior says:

    Elizabeth,

    I fully understand what Hirshman is saying about viewing childcare expenses as being paid partly by the husband and partly by the wife…it’s still stupid. Why? Because you can tap dance around it all day, but children fare better at home, with a present parent. That is the ideal if it can be had at all. If a wife’s salary does nothing more than pay for child care, and she still opts to have someone else raise her children, that is destructive choice. The husband can’t half his salary and give it to his wife to make it all even, and why do we think it’s sexist? Why can’t he do his job and she do hers and reap the benefits of a model that works instead of twisting numbers just to get around it?

    AND, feminists balk, but women are not just biologically better suited for the job at home, they’re more emotionally suited–ask any honest person–male or female, and in general, tis reality. Doesn’t mean a man *can’t* care for children if the need arises, and doesn’t mean a woman can’t provide income. But to have an ideal situation for a mother to be present with her children and purposely shun it to avoid “sexism”? It’s wrong thinking. That’s my whole point…it is NOT sexist to suggest that family and children and marriage thrive if/when a woman embraces that role. And it is blindness to suggest that home is just a peripheral “second-shift” of cleaning up human waste.

    Reality is what it is. Because God made it that way. You can deny the ocean is salty all day…but the ocean is still salty.

  14. Word Warrior says:

    I forgot to say in her example, the husband’s income was higher, which would be part of the logic of her opting to stay home. Still, the idea that men and women are equally suited to manage the home and children is, IMO, just not true. I’m certainly about father being involved–even family businesses where everyone can be together is ideal, but if one has to go out and one be home, I think my sheer design, a woman was created for that role. I said it. ROLE.

  15. Dee says:

    Women were made to care for children. We have bought into the “lie” that daycare or being around other children is better than the mama raising them. And, for some women, this may be true. I know a lot of women, who, really do not want to be stay at home moms, who hate being with their kids. Not sure about the answer to that, if they hate being at home with their kids, what do you say? You can’t make someone else want that? I stay at home and love being with my kids, but, I cannot make other mothers want that with my example. So, what is the answer to that? If they hate being with their kids and have no desire to homeschool, hate when summer arrives – because they have to do something with their children, what do you do? I live in the real world, with real people at church, etc., and this is what we encounter. There are also people on drugs, who drop their kids at church all the time, what do do you do about that? Ignore the kids because no one loves them/cares for them? It is hard being salt/light, I’m just writing these thoughts as they process.

  16. Word Warrior says:

    Dee,

    I think a whole lot of what we see with woman hating home and disliking their children is all part of the cultural message…home is not taught to be loved, motherhood is not positioned as a fulfilling, important job. If Hirshman’s description is what women are taught to think–“sweeping and cleaning bodily waste”–what woman in her right mind would want to be home and raise children?

    I think it’s just years of losing sight of the powerful role of motherhood…we’ve got to teach that to a new generation of women, not what Hirshman says to teach them.

  17. Sarah says:

    Um, mothers wield “real social power”, now don’t they? What an idiot! Oh, wait, that wasn’t nice. What a deluded fool.

  18. Sarah says:

    In response to Dee’s comment:

    “I know a lot of women, who, really do not want to be stay at home moms, who hate being with their kids”

    Isn’t there a Bible verse about older women teaching the younger women to love their husbands and their children? If they have to be taught, then logically it’s not always natural. I don’t think a mom (a Christian one, anyway) can use the excuse that they don’t love their children. As an act of obedience they are supposed to. With God’s help (and maybe the help of some of those older women).

  19. Sarah Falk says:

    Wow! What a terrible view she has. I couldn’t watch the video on your site, but I found it on youtube. She clearly hates children, wants for women and men to trade places, and thinks that the only meaningful thing a woman can do is earn a paycheck. Ick! This is the stuff of legends when it comes to leftist Liberal feminists and their “agenda”. Wow. I personally think that the most important thing a woman can do is be there for her family…husband and children. Also….there is great liberty in serving others…just as Christ served us. wow….disturbing.

  20. Sarah Falk says:

    I think that women should have the choice to stay home or the choice to work. God designed it after all….that we would have the free will to choose Him or not. God created free will. He gave us the capacity to choose a good path…a mediocre path…or a bad path. I think feminism is beginning to be about taking away women’s choices all together! Caring for your children and being there for your husband is a valid occupaion….even if you don’t earn monetary value for it!

  21. madge says:

    Don’t get me wrong for a minute–daycare sucks. I wouldn’t do it. Didn’t do it.

    the “home as second shift” mentality is awful too. That is a huge trap for women.

    But I don’t buy the notion that somehow women are essentially better at caring for children and home once the kids are “school age”. Why? In our house, were my husband home full time, I know the kids would be more disciplined (we do quite well with this anyway, though) and the house would be cleaner (he’s a neat freak). They would experience just as many nurturing moments. It would be different, but it would be fine.

    This woman may be nuts–I’m not familiar with her–but I do think it is a mistake to assume that a woman can’t find a vocation as mother and as worker simultaneously fulfilling. There is always a sacrifice to be made, and children have to come first right after God and the marriage (frankly, they often come after a lot of other stuff regardless of the working situation, and way too many “stay at home moms” spend their time piddling with home decoration, home businesses, or hobbies instead of raising up their children).

  22. madge says:

    Hopefully this is not a repeat post. Something just happened to my other one.

    What about “stay at home moms” who piddle their time away with mindless hobbies, trivial aspects of home life, or “at home businesses” that are self indulgent at best? How are those expenditures of time different than a mom using hard earned skills in a job outside the home that either is lucrative financially or helps make the world a better place?

    I always told my husband when I found time to do detailed scrapbooks–the kind that take hours for a page–I needed to get a part time job. And that’s just what I did, and our family is much healthier. And pictures still get put in books 😉

    I don’t know this particular writer you are so upset about, but the idea that women can contribute both maternally and in other ways is not so threatening to most of us Christian mothers.

  23. Dose of Joy says:

    I think Madge raises good points, and my, I hope my husband and I can have the kind of teamwork in our marriage that it sounds like she and her husband have. It was refreshing comment to read 🙂

  24. As a Christian wife I cannot over look the verse in Titus 2, that we are to be “keepers AT home”, not keepers OF home. This does not mean that we never leave home. ;o) But that home and being our husband’s helper (Genesis), is our duty. That is what God created us for. This is what God says.

    I also have several hobbies and a home business, in addition to homeschooling. All of these things are done in different seasons, and in balance.

    Working from home is on my schedule, which means my husband, my kids and my home are my priority.

    On a practical level-
    There are days I have to go work with my husband ( he is self-employed). When I come home I am exhausted. There is little patience or desire to cook, clean or do school with the kids. I’m glad I don’t have to go on a job site very often with him. ;o) But when he needs me I am there, God created me for him. A woman’s place is at home, nurturing, helping, teaching and creating.

    I’ve been told that a woman that stays at home is wasting her life/brain. What a joke! A woman who truly manages her home and cares for her husband and children has a full time job, and her life is never a waste!

    You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

  25. Word Warrior says:

    madge,

    This post has nothing to do with a woman contributing, or even women who do a bad job as home managers. If you read my blog, I’m all about the freedom that being at home gives women to earn income and contribute to society in a host of ways.

    This post is about revealing the truth that feminism isn’t really about choice; not if that choice involves devoting one’s self to home. Hirshman is outraged that women would choose to stay home at all, claiming that it defeats all the work feminism has tried to accomplish.

    She says in the video, “if women choose to stay home, they are making the wrong choice”. And that is liberating?

  26. KB says:

    Kelly,
    Hubby and I watched the video. Hilarious!!!

    When it came to the part about gender roles we both looked at my bulging belly (which has become a moonwalk for our “littlest miracle”). “There’s at least one reason I can’t do what you do,” observed hubby, “not to mention the other four who are playing all over the house.”

    Seriously, why is it that folks who don’t want their roles chosen and dictated to them feel that they can turn around and do that very thing to other people. (There’s a term for that, I think…)
    I wonder if she defends the right of individuals to hold their own personal worldview…oops, never mind!

  27. KB says:

    Oh, and as for Social (IN)Security…
    I wonder if Jim Bob and Michele Duggar feel worried about being sent to a nursing home once they’re superannuated…

    And incidentally, said above program will be insolvent within the next couple of decades. Apparently having two, one or NO children has the odd effect of not producing enough workers to sustain such a program. Ah well…

  28. Mrs. U says:

    Boy did this make me laugh!!! Her logic is SO skewed!!! And for the record, growing up I NEVER had ANYONE tell me to stay at home. All I ever heard or was taught was about having a career, being successful, making money, being independent. NO ONE encouraged me to stay at home. I think she needs to do a little more research!!!

    On one hand feminism makes my blood boil. But on the other hand, I am so very very sad for all the women who have bought into the lie.

    His,
    Mrs. U

  29. Lisa says:

    I was just thinking on the comment that some women who work hate coming home to their kids. Um, WHY is that??? Kids don’t raise themselves! Well, their not meant to raise themselves, anyway, but many are. Or at least, they might as well be, being left in the hands of day care or the public school. And that woman said there is no evidence that not having mom home affects the kids. Ha! I’m not saying that all kids of stay-at-home moms are angels, but they do have a way better chance of behaving the way you would like them to be if you’re actually there working with them.

    Not to mention, if a woman cannot manage to keep her own kids under control (raising kids doesn’t bring honor, so it can’t be *that* difficult, right?), how is she qualified to go out into the career world and manage things there??? I would say it’s *not* raising your kids that doesn’t bring you honor. “A child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame.” I worked up until our second son was born, leaving my oldest with my parents in between my husband’s and my schedules. They were the next best thing to being there ourselves, and they did an awesome job. But you can tell the difference between him and my younger two…we are still working hard at making up for the past with him. If I had to do it all over, I would have been home from the very start!

  30. Lucy T says:

    K.B.,
    I LOVE IT!YOU ARE AWSOME!
    I can’t believe how blind so many people are.
    I love being home,
    I love spending every day watching my kids learn ,discover, play,
    I love that my 13 year old son still thinks I am the greatest person in the world to spend time with,
    I love that I wake up every morning to the sweet smile of a little pink bundle of baby girl,
    and a can sit an rock as long as we want,
    I love that I have the time to find the awnsers to all the many questions my 6 year old asks,
    and I can set and look my 7 year old in his huge brown eyes while he dreams of being all the wonderful things 7 year olds dream of,
    I love that my 11 year old thinks it is soooo funny to frieghten his poor mom daily,and I thank God I am here to hear his giggles at my reaction
    I love that I get to be the keeper of our memories, by scrape booking all the sweet pictures I have the time to take ,because I am present ,
    I love that I get to hang laundry out to dry in the warm summer sun, enstead of setting in an office some place,
    I love to fix my tired husband a cup of coffee, and run my hand across his greying hair, and feel proud of the 22 years I have spent serving my own husband, not some one elses who I might be required to serve if he was my boss or client.AND YES LINDA HIRSHMAN I LOVE THAT I HAVE DIRTY DIAPERS TO CHANGE LITTLE BUTTS TO WIPE AND SNOTTY NOSES FOR THAT MATTER TOO.

  31. Lucy T says:

    Oh,and for all those moms who hate being at home with thier children prehapes you hate it because you have not been doing it enough no one else will raise a child the way you want them raised the only moms I know who claim they hate staying home with thier children seldom are at home they have no idea what to do with thier child because thay don’t really know thier children.The phrase practice makes perfect comes to mind.The more you do it the better you are at it the better your kids will be also and some day you might just find yourself praying God will restore the years the locus has eaten or maybe thats just my personal experiance.

  32. KB says:

    Linda T,
    Thanks for the compliment, but I can’t take credit.
    I’ve been thinking a lot lately about these “menial jobs” that are so “unfulfilling.” Like you were saying, changing diapers, preparing food…Sorta like Someone who washed His disciples feet, huh?
    (But that only means something when you’re trying to be like HIM.)

  33. Lucy T says:

    Kelly,
    I have to quit reading your blog I am so stinkin mad I can’t sleep between your blog and the stupidity of J

  34. Lucy T says:

    SORRY I added my comment to soon could be that this mom should get herself to bed so I can enjoy my sweet baby in the morning.No more rants for me tonight.I was about to go on about a reality T.V.show that most people who read here probably have the good sense not to veiw.However that wouldn’t be me.

  35. alix says:

    Like religious fundamentalism, there are many types of feminism. That’s one thing religious fundamentalists don’t seem to understand! I’m a feminist. All women I know are feminists. Most of us are also Christians. By feminism we mean that men and women are equal and should be treated as equals in all areas of life. My type of feminism believes that women have the right to choose the way they lead their life. If you want to stay home or work, that’s your choice. All feminists I know are married with children, or want to marry and have children someday. We don’t hate men, on the contrary! What makes my blood boil is your attitude that all feminism is bad. It’s a question of basic human rights, people! The inferior position of women in history is a well known fact, not a feminist invention. Read the laws and the memoirs of women from the past and you’ll see that not everything was perfect. A lot of happily married women fought for women’s rights, as well as many men. Reading your post on Dabney’s opinion could have made me laugh or cry. Since I have a great sense of humor, I decided to laugh at this perfect example of Victorian sentimentalist misoginy. The cult of domesticity, of the “angel of the virtuous home” was an artificial construct, used by the Victorians to exclude women from the public sphere and to stop them from entertaining dangerous desires for independence and self reloiance. These men were in fact afraid that if women got any rights, they would discover that they were able to run their own lives and no longer need men’s guidance. So they used this silly rhetoric of the threat to women’s delicacy, purity, etc. In fact, the main threat posed by the early feminist was to the perpetual childhood-like state in which women were kept by law and society. And guess what, the Victorians were right to be afraid. Women have proved that they are just as capable as men,in fact, we’re better at many things. Anyway, it’s great that you chose to post the opinions of a man who wrote: “It is well known, that, as a general rule, Negroes are a graceless, vagabondish set, and contribute very little to the support of the State by which they are protected. They are not citizens, never can become citizens, and wherever found in large numbers they are an expense and a source of trouble…” A racist is such a great role-model, especially for a Christian who claims to promote (her version of) Biblical womanhood. But don’t worry, patriarchy adepts, feminism hasn’t won yet. We’re still paid a lot less than men ( and we work a lot more and do a better job, too). If feminism is the religion of ME, than patriarchy is the cult of the husband/father. You attach such great importance to things like submissive wives, abortion, quiverfull and you forget love and tolerance for others, which is the essence of Christianity

  36. madge says:

    Thanks for this, Alix–this is part of what I was thinking last night but ironically I was too busy helping my kids get to be to write down!

    Christianity and feminism are in no way mutually exclusive, and so much of the stuff that gets superimposed on Christianity is entirely extra-biblical and supports agendas of human design.

  37. madge says:

    I meant to type that I was getting my kids to BED 😉

  38. Mrs W says:

    I very much have mixed feelings. I do NOT want anyone, man or woman, to tell me that I HAVE to work outside the home in order to be fulfilled. However, it is often how we are made to think as women. When we were first married (he knows better now haha) my husband told me that what he did at work was FAR more important than anything I did at home, even raising our at the time one child, because HIS work brought in income, therefore it was the only work that was really valuable. That made me struggle a lot, because if I was only valuable if I was earning money, then I wanted to earn money of course! My husband knows better now so I don’t really struggle with that anymore.

    However, my new struggle is the fact that he goes to work for 7, maybe 8 hours a day, for ten months of the year. And I am supposed to serve him hand and foot when he gets home (according to others, not him), and make sure he doesn’t have to do ANY work in the house or with the kids, simply because he worked for a mere 7 hours that day. He even gets weekends off! I work far more than 7 hours a day, don’t get weekends off, and work 12 months in the year, yet somehow I’m supposed to not expect HIM to do anything else around the house because the “poor man” has been working ALL day? No way!

    The last thing I struggle with is where is the balance? I don’t know about you, but I don’t want to have a male midwife deliver my baby. So I hire a female midwife. A female midwife with six kids. She’s a working mom, and her husband is a stay at home father. Most all of us are inconsistent in this area…we say that working moms are bad or wrong, yet we hire them because we don’t want a male seeing our private areas. So we are enabling the working moms by giving them money! Yet, I for one am GLAD for female doctors, midwives, and nurses when I need them.

    That being said, I’m a stay at home mom and I love it. I don’t send my kids to daycare. But there was a comment made above that made it sound like you only love your children if you home school them. I say that I’d rather not, if I can help it, home school my children BECAUSE I love them. I know many more children who were home schooled that strayed from the faith than those who went to school. So I’d rather go with what I have seen to be more sucessful at making kids want to live out their faith…going to school!

    Also, most of the stay at home moms I know get to go out and take their children places. I don’t. We only have one car, and my husband has it at work. Which means I am stuck in our small house ALL day every day. I love being at home, but sometimes I want to take my kids out and run errands, or take them to the park or something, but I can’t.

  39. Word Warrior says:

    Alix,

    I understand you claim that “not all feminist hate men and family”…and I’m sure that’s true, although maybe it’s just a confusion of terms. Why do you have to be a feminist to support the rights of humans, which we all do? By and large, whether you read early feminist literature or current, one can’t deny the skeletal frame of anti-family and a superiority complex among women. No not all women, but it’s one of the fundamental tenets that must be there to fan the flames of feminism (as Hirshman so clearly explained).

    And you said…

    “The cult of domesticity, of the “angel of the virtuous home” was an artificial construct, used by the Victorians to exclude women from the public sphere and to stop them from entertaining dangerous desires for independence and self reloiance.”

    I don’t believe this for a minute. Because, it’s not a Victorian idea that a home thrives when women embrace their roles there as a full-time, powerful job; it’s a biblical concept which though challenged, is not wrong.

    And still I go back to an earlier post/comment (can’t remember) where I asked Elizabeth to be ho nest about our socieity…it’s a mess! And I’m not the only one who places a large part of the blame on the feminist movement…even some former feminists themselves are admitting that the movement has had a huge hand in destroying families and by default, the entire culture.

    It’s so obvious, I’m just dumbfounded that people refuse to see it.

    The biblical womanhood I support has NOTHING to do with unequal rights or women not being capable or whatever…once understood, you would see that women according to Jesus were liberated, honored, exalted and praised for their specific, beautiful roles…something that is only a facade to most feminists.

  40. Tracy says:

    It’s a rear occurrence that I might even kind of agree with Steven Colbert (sp?) but he actually makes some very right on points. It amazes me how much people don’t know/understand. It seems to fall more into the secular world. But I know it also ends up in the church. I would love to be able to stay home but right now that is not a position that we are able to be in. I do however believe that my main role is (after God and Jesus Christ) to my family. “The hand that rocks the cradle rocks the world.”

  41. Kim M says:

    I can’t get over Hirshman’s comment about power. Someone may have already mentioned this (I didn’t have time to read all the comments), but evidentially she hasn’t experienced the power that a wife and mother has over the home AND over society. The power a woman has to control the finances of the home so she can actually get MORE than just mere social (in)security. I see a very sad person who just doesn’t get it.

  42. Rachel Falaschi says:

    Alix,

    I get so frustrated when women say that feminism is about women’s rights. This is something fed to the masses so they would follow and support it. It has nothing to do with women’s rights, but POWER for women. Women had rights before feminism. (The ones they didn’t have, like voting, would have come along without the aid of feminism anyway as our country was changing from one vote per family to one vote per person.) There are many great peole that support increase in women’s rights without being feminist. What feminism has done is claimed that they are increasing women’s rights while actually stripping them of respect. There was a time when cursing in front of a woman was a crime. Thanks to feminism, that has been away with. Is this some right I should be celebrating? “Yeah, people can use dirty language around me now, I’m so free…”
    Just because you support women’s rights does not make you a feminist, it makes you a respectable human. A true feminist is someone who wants women to shun family and grab for power.

    You can claim the title of feminist if you want, but if you don’t hold to the basic tenents of the “faith” such as abortion on demand, power for women, shun family, etc. then you are not a true feminist. Just like you can claim to be a Christian, but if you deny Christ died for you and raised from the dead, you are not a really a Christian.

    Just my thoughts.
    Rachel

  43. It’s interesting, but what I read from most of this is there is a human failing, for men and women, that leaves us in the cult of SEE ME!!! The Feminist Movement served to “enlighten” women to the same things we have always thought of as obnoxious traits in “boorish” men. What is attractive about someone who needs so much external recognition? It’s childish. See me work, see me mother, see me scrapbook, see me lead book study, see me throw the best birthday parties, see me win the big case/account/client, see how thin/smart/young-looking/rich I am, see me do it all and say how great I am….it goes on and on – I’m a (hopefully) recovering member of this cult,in the interest of full disclosure, so I feel qualified to comment.

    It comes down to worshipping false idols, and caring more about what other women think than what God thinks. I don’t remember reading ANYTHING in the Bible that speaks of personal fulfillment, feminist self-actualization, or
    the satisfaction of one’s political agenda meaning anything apart from God’s commands – (somehow I’m agreeing with Debi Pearl and Rick Warren in the same statement – I must have a fever). And because he loves us and knows us, he kept it pretty simple because he knew from our first parents (before they did) we would go out of our way to complicate matters. I don’t remember Him saying to Rahab, wow, you’re a great lookout, won’t you please come join the military now? And Abigail, you’re terrific, leave your home and become a hostage negotiator. You, too, Esther! And hey, Lydia, that purple cloth is rockin’, why don’t you put your kids in daycare and try out for Project Runway? I guess what I’m suggesting is maybe, just maybe, our real power IS in the home. And even though all logic points in that direction, what we really want, more than legitimate, Biblically authentic influence, is recognition, adoration, idolization. And a little money to legitimize our pursuits. And I know these examples are fairly simplistic, but I working towards a goal of being remembered only for how I served others according to God’s instruction. It’s very liberating.

  44. Lisa says:

    I agree, Kim. It’s frustrating to hear women who talk about my lifestyle like that, when they’ve never experienced it themselves. They have no idea how truly freeing it is! Making a contribution to society, it starts in the home. It all comes back to selfishness…I’m not interested in having everything that I want and bringing *myself* honor. I’m interested in the kind of world my kids are going to live in…what the next generation is going to be like. I don’t want to “have it all” at the cost of my family. I don’t want to invest half of my waking hours giving my loyalty and energy to someone who’s not going care what happens to me when I retire and I’m not on their payroll anymore (would your corporate associates be surrounding you on your deathbed…would you even want them to be?). And for what? For that bigger house that I’m not even home to take care of? That new car every few years? The latest video game for my kids? I know there are women out there who really do need to work, I used to be one of them! Yes, on one income we have had to learn to live without things we had previously thought of as “necessities.” But now, I don’t even look at giving up those things as a sacrifice…they were a burden. More *stuff* that I wasn’t even around to take care of anyway. Or maybe there are some who are using their careers to earn honor and respect. Um, personally, I really don’t care what the world/society/strangers think of me, as long as I’m bringing *God* glory and honor. Especially if my kids are out of control and I have a bad relationship with them because I never see them and don’t even know them. Why should I care what my boss thinks of me if I don’t even have respect from those that are closest to me? And there it is again…me, me, me. “Furthering” myself at the expense of those I am supposed to love and nurture. Why are we so desperate to seek approval from people who we don’t even know, and who probably don’t even really care about us, who are only using us to further *them*selves! I get so much more love, honor, and respect in my home than I ever got at work. I work WAY harder than I did working outside the home, but I can honestly say my stress levels haven’t reached the height at home that they did when I was working outside the home. Not even close! Why? Maybe it’s because I’m getting WAY better “pay” and “return” for my investment. Maybe it’s because I’m finally doing what I was really made to be doing. Maybe because I’m seeing the fruits of my labor and I have real relationships with those I “work” with. 🙂

    Am I saying you don’t love your kids if you go chase a career? NO. But, are you loving them the very best you can? Are you putting everything you have into them? Do you think the day care or the public school is putting everything into them? Lots of people don’t think they can handle more than 2 or 3 kids. A teacher has to deal with 30, sometimes 40 kids for 6-8 hours every day. Do you really think that teacher is doing a better job with YOUR child than you can do yourself? Sadly, even with such a big class, I dare say the teacher probably actually knows quite a few children better than their own parents do. Can you honestly tell me the next generation wouldn’t be better off if moms invested more time in raising up their kids themselves???

  45. Elizabeth says:

    I know many women at home who are competent, tough, smart, and valuable to their families, and happy with what they are doing. But they do not have power. At most, they have influence over their husbands and their children. Even John Adams ignored Abigail’s advice at times.

    I think history has shown that IF women want to be treated fairly and equally, we need to enter public life. Men, even the men who love us, aren’t gonna do it for us. It’s never gonna be their priority. That’s why it took 75 years to get the vote. That’s why the authorities routinely pooh-poohed claims of rape and domestic violence until recent years. That’s why marital rape was perfectly legal until within my lifetime. That’s why women of my mother’s generation had to tolerate groping and other harassment in the workplace. That’s why women couldn’t qualify for credit on their own even when making a good income. And on, and on.

    Women didn’t change these injustices by staying home and getting their husbands to fix these problems. They changed them by storming into public life.

  46. Word Warrior says:

    the cottage child,

    You have hit the nail on the head (and managed some humor too–brilliant)…which makes a case for a point I’ve always held to…our view doesn’t make sense to non-believers. If you don’t believe in the authority of Scripture, or even that God is right and has our best interests in mind, why would you think any differently than Ms. Hirshman?

    So while all women WOULD benefit from the simplicity you described in regard to the power of the home, we can’t really expect them to. BUT…it is imperative we keep teaching our fellow, younger Christian sisters because that’s our job too, and the feminist agenda is creeping into the church.

    This line of a Watermark song I was listening to this morning had new meaning for me today…taken from Scripture:

    “If I ever find my life I have lost it.”

  47. Word Warrior says:

    Mrs. W.

    I had to address this statement that I”ve heard you make before…

    “I say that I’d rather not, if I can help it, home school my children BECAUSE I love them. I know many more children who were home schooled that strayed from the faith than those who went to school. So I’d rather go with what I have seen to be more sucessful at making kids want to live out their faith…going to school!”

    I don’t want this to turn into a homeschool debate, but I’m open-mouthed at this comment. While I can’t argue with your personal experience, mine (and many others I’ve heard) is the direct opposite. Even being a school teacher at a CHristian school, SO FEW children walked with the Lord. Conversely, out of the hundreds of homeschool families I know, only a handful have left the faith, and of those, many came back.

    Beyond that, I’m wondering if you’ve considered doing something for your children based on a commitment of what is best instead of “what you’ve seen”…in other words, if we’re commanded to flee from the appearance of evil, just sitting in a classroom where the antithesis of God is being taught is subjecting our children to evil instead of helping them flee.

    If we’re commanded to “walk with the wise” while “a companion of fools suffers harm”, should be place our children with other “fools” (children, by definition) all day long?

    If we are commanded to teach them all day to love the Lord (morning, noon, and night) how can we justify sending them to a place that openly hates God, bans God and teaches the opposite of His commands?

    I’m just trying to ask you to think about taking not a pragmatic approach (“well, most homeschooled kids leave the faith so I’m not doing it”–which again, I think you may want to get to know some more before you settle on that conclusion), but that you and your husband would base your decision on what is best for your children.

    It’s kind of like saying…”all the people I know who eat healthy get sick, and the junk-food people are well–so I’m eating junk food”.

    Meant in respect, mind you…not an arguable tone.

  48. Michelle says:

    yikes! I may have to put my hair out as well…

    I didn’t know whether to laugh at the video or shoot the computer screen with my S&W 9 mil…

    How did the Fem’s get so screwed up in the head?

  49. Kelly, I agree completely – my circle of influence at the moment is quiet example, both to Christian and non-Christian women. I am suggesting that both might -and I reserve the right to fail 🙂 – wonder “why is she so happy being imperfect”? and I would love to be prepared to share, again, more by example than anything else.

    Elizabeth, I am awash in your point, so this isn’t a fuss as much as a challenge….yes, there have been benefits certainly, brought about by the actions of women. What I mean by power, and yes I have lots actually, though perhaps not in the sense you might mean, is wouldn’t it be a lot more compelling to raise a man to adulthood who understood the fundamental equality of a woman to himself, to hold her in true esteem, to view her as a partner rather than a tool to use or toss aside at his whim (funny, that’s what a lot of women find in the workplace dynamic), rather than create a false equality by virtue of law or legislation, that changes nothing except the facade. If it’s imposed from the outside, rather than developed from the core, than it’s subject to being taken away, corrupted, and used against women according to cultural fancy. Ask women who feel they HAVE to just to eat how empowering that feeling is. I don’t see that as empowerment, but rather trading one sort of oppression for another. Just me.

  50. Dana says:

    This isn’t on point with what Hirshman was talking about, but it strikes me every time this sort of conversation arises. I think you all are right (from feminist and non-feminist perspectives alike) to note that a woman’s work at home is devalued, so of course those of you who give your life to it are going to defend its value fiercely. But I think “careers” are in a sense devalued in our society as well, in a way that skews the conversation. What I mean is, education and “jobs” are viewed almost entirely as a means to make money. My husband and I are both academics in the humanities; it is almost axiomatic among college students that they only want to study things that are “practical” i.e. valuable for money making. So when a career is just a way to make money and curry favor, then the debate is framed (as one commenter at least has done in this conversation) as a choice between investing in people who care about you or making money and pleasing the boss. Obviously, people are more important. And clearly, we all need to have some money and many people will find themselves working menial jobs just to pay the bills. Sorry, I’m starting to ramble a little bit and I’m not sure I’m getting my point across. Since I’m not a mother yet, I suppose this is my personal stake in the argument: I don’t work because I have to, or because I want more stuff, or because I think I would be bored at home, or because I need fame and power, but simply because I love what I do and see it as my calling, my vocation, my ever-so-small contribution. I’m not a classicist/ancient historian to be famous or make money, that’s for sure! 🙂 And I deeply respect both women and men who have gone into the public sphere to fight for social justice, or who work in healing professions, or any number of other things which are valuable and important, which may or may not make money or win fame, and which don’t lose their value just because the home is also important. I realize that Hirshman is framing the debate in terms of power (and logically from her perspective, as Elizabeth said above); but I’ve heard so many sahms frame it from the other side in terms of money and selfishness, and I don’t think that is a completely fair approach to the question.

  51. Elizabeth says:

    I wanted to address a couple of interesting comments in this thread.

    First Rachel says: “It has nothing to do with women’s rights, but POWER for women.” I think this is a false distinction because I don’t think you have one without the other. Most importantly, you need to have power in order to protect your rights. If not, you just have to hope that the menfolk will LET you have rights — and we all know how well that works. Just look at women in Saudi or under the Taliban. Their “power” in the home really hasn’t helped them too much, has it?

    And I thought this was interesting from Lisa:

    “Am I saying you don’t love your kids if you go chase a career? NO. But, are you loving them the very best you can? Are you putting everything you have into them?”

    See, that’s a standard that I think is unfair. I think there ARE solutions by which EVERYONE’S needs can be met, INCLUDING Mom’s. I don’t think it is selfish or “me me me” to say that a balance can be struck rather than requiring Mom to completely subordinate herself to her family’s needs.

    I also don’t think it is fair to say that working women are all “me me me.” Obviously, someone is paying them to work because they are doing something for someone else. The medical doctor is helping you with your medical needs. The clerk at the grocery store is helping the operations of the grocery store to meet the needs of its customers. Those are just two examples. Most work is honorable in some way.

    I think it is crazy to hold women to a standard whereby they are selfish harridans if they get compensated for their work, something that is pretty standard for regular human beings (i.e. men).

  52. Kelly L says:

    It is so sad that women are forced to be something they are not supposed to. And sadder still that God’s creation has bought into that lie. It reminds me of the book “Pigs can’t fly.” The pig wants what everyone else has, goes around trying to be them, fails, and finds true happiness being what he is supposed to be. If someone says I am comparing us to pigs, I might rip my hair out. Which would be a shame-I just got it highlighted. ;}
    In response to the person who said the religious want the women to serve their man hand and foot. I guess she is right. That is what the religious want. But the true Christ followers, who are interested in God’s commandments and not manmade rules, want both parties in a marriage to act like Christ to each other. Sometimes that is my husband telling me to sit down while he does dishes at night (maybe that is bad…he told me to SIT …heehee) sometimes that is me greeting him with a cold drink at the door when he arrives home. *Gasp* it is even a martini…how’s that for a throwback to the 50s? I have never ever heard Kelly (WW) instruct women to be walked on by an indifferent, abusive, demanding husband. I have heard her sing the praises of her husband because he is a model of Christ, serving her in the home and out. As I am sure her husband would praise her for being a model of Christ to him, serving him.
    If you are a Christian you must be a human rights protector…all equally. Feminism isn’t interested in equality, and you cannot claim it is. It is interested in dominence and power.

  53. Kelly L says:

    Not like my post wan’t long enough…but I just went to start the dishes and my husband tried to kick me out so he could clean for me. Had to laugh. He is an amazing Christ follower who believes everything in the Bible…

  54. Elizabeth says:

    Cottage Child,

    I TOTALLY agree with the idea of developing an ethic of equality from the inside. Legislative equality is not enough by itself. We need to develop a culture of equality, a process of influencing hearts and minds to value and respect women and men equally. I think that is where the real challenge is right now — because attitudes of contempt for women didn’t just disappear in 1975. The sexism is still alive and well.

    And you are correct that that process occurs by influence rather than direct power, though direct power helps to increase women’s influence. Influencing family members, including one’s children, helps. (I also once read an interesting study where fathers who had daughters were far more likely to adopt feminist viewpoints. I am proud to say that I have persuaded my own father to adopt many feminist views he didn’t understand at first.) It also means cultural influence — which includes seeing women perform in a wide variety of roles, and criticzing manners, mores, books, TV, media, etc. from a feminist perspective.

  55. Word Warrior says:

    I want to just pop in here and commend ALL of you for what I think has been a respectful discussion on a very hot topic. We are all passionate about what we believe and it is easy to let that passion cause rude or disrespectful comments–I’ve been so pleased that this thread has maintained integrity from both sides, and I hope it continues 😉

  56. Dose of Joy says:

    Kelly, I’d be careful saying that public schools “openly hate God.” I just finished up my student teaching in a district in which have a moment of silence each morning for prayer, we post signs about God in our classrooms, and have prayer clubs (voluntary, not forced) in the morning. True, not all schools are like this. But mine was, and I am thankful for that. And teach the antithesis of his commands? How so? I never encountered a teacher who openly encouraged malicious behavior, and I certainly never intend to myself.

    It’s hard for me to understand how you can use such blanket condemnation. We all, only being one person, have such a limited view of the world, and I don’t see how you can speak about public education in such a widespread way. Many schools do not offer a nurturing environment, but you know, some do. Many homes do not offer a nurturing environment, but some do. As someone who is beginning a career in teaching this Fall, I am just frustrated with the desire to condemn public schooling all together that I’ve witnessed in some blogs.

    Absolutely, we should “Flee from the appearance of evil.” However, we can’t stay in our house all day long, so why should we expect that our children won’t encounter “evil” in their lives as well? We strive to educate and build up our children in their faith so that they can handle the challenges of the world. I see no merit in shielding them only to find out later on that not everyone sees things the way their family does. Life exists inside and outside the home, and if you are indeed setting an example for your children in the way you minister to other people in service, study the Bible together, address nonbelievers, avoid sinful behavior, and love one another, what a blessing for children who may not have those examples at home to befriend your children.

    I hope none of this comment was disrespectful, this just strikes a hot nerve for me, as I was raised by two teachers, am becoming a teacher, and certainly feel that God will use me to teach through word and deed in my class.

    Prayers,
    C

  57. Word Warrior says:

    Dose of Joy,

    Frustration understood…I’ve written extensively about my conclusions regarding public school, and can’t espouse them adequately here in this thread. I would also challenge you to be open-minded enough to read outside of the teaching propaganda used to educate teachers.

    Let me say I don’t condemn your desire to be used by God in the system–not at all. But sometimes being in the system places one too close to see the whole picture.

    Regarding “the antithesis” being taught…you have to realize that even though not every school is there yet, besides the fact that education is not taught from a biblical perspective (the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge), and even besides the obvious like evolution, etc., there are many more anti-Christian teachings creeping into the curriculum and into the education of teachers. A little research reveals some shocking truth (or at least should be to the Christian).

    Great attempts are being made to erase any and all forms of traditional family ideals and roles–i.e. textbooks re-written so as not to even include the words “Mom and Dad” because it is “offensive”. Conversely though, we have Kindergarten reading including lesbian parents. (“Heather Has Two Mommies”) The push is to erase all pre-conceived, “outdated” notions of family and “prejudice” towards homosexuality. This may sound wonderfully, politically correct, but a Christian parent should recognize this is anti-God teaching.

    Humanism is taught largely through every subject, sometimes subtly and other times not so much. Humanism is a false religion masked in “political correctness” as well.

    Socialism is taught, etc.

    Regarding sheltering…we must make a distinction from “keeping our children away from evil” and allowing them to companions of fools all day. I don’t shelter my children from sin just because I homeschool them. They know, I’m afraid, almost all there is to know about evil and sin, just through the lens of truth.

    But if my companions of 8 hours a day are my “teachers” and they are not teaching me the truth of God’s Word, what will my worldview be? Are parents really able in the few strained hours at night (remember homework and sports, etc.) to undo the teaching of the day? My parents weren’t able, and I’ve seen that repeated over and over.

    We’re not talking about hiding them away and pretending evil doesn’t exist! But how absurd to think they can become immersed in a largely “wicked” crowd all day (let’s call it what the Bible calls it) and keep their faith in tact.

    This is one of the biggest misconceptions I see Christian parents have, and it is having detrimental effects on their children.

    I think that children aren’t ready to be evangelists apart from the presence of their parents until they are fully grounded in their faith–at an older age.

    The pressures most children face at school are incomparable to anything adults would place themselves in and try to remain faithful.

    There is so much more to this debate, but I stop for time. Just asking you to consider, and read, and pray about the reality of the system. And remember I’m talking from the perspective of our children, not teaching.

  58. Word Warrior says:

    Dose of Joy,

    One humanist leader spoke this:

    “I am convinced that the battle for humankind’s future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith: a religion of humanity that recognizes and respects the spark of what theologians call divinity in every human being. These teachers must embody the same selfless dedication as the most rabid fundamentalist preachers, for they will be ministers of another sort, utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to convey humanist values in whatever subject they teach, regardless of the educational level – preschool day care or large state university. The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old and the new – the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with all its adjacent evils and misery, and the new faith of humanism…

    It will undoubtedly be a long, arduous, painful struggle replete with much sorrow and many tears, but humanism will emerge triumphant. It must if the family of humankind is to survive.”

    Here are a few articles I would challenge you to consider…

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/yates/yates100.html

    http://www.exodusmandate.org/art_dobson_again_calls_for_parents_to_pull_kids_out.htm

    There are so many, but I don’t have time…just asking you to consider.

    And I love what Voddie Baucham says:
    “Whoever is teaching our children (i.e.textbooks, companions, etc.) is discipling them”.

  59. Elizabeth says:

    Kelly at 1:27 p.m.

    That’s nice to hear because I was actually worried that I was being obnoxious. That’s certainly not the intent.

    To me, the basic rightness of feminism seem so blindingly self-evident. I am just fascinated to communicate with people who think that the wrongness of feminism is blindingly self-evident! I have to admit I can’t really wrap my mind around it, but it is fun to try and reach across the aisle with nice people who just happen to disagree with me.

  60. Mrs W says:

    I just don’t understand why home schoolers tend to ignore private and Christian schools when talking about school. There is more available than home or public. We’d love to be able to send our kids to a Christian school, but if we can’t then we’ll have to home school.

    We MIGHT put them in public school for high school when they are grounded enough to handle it. But they’d go to the public school my husband works at, which at this stage, still has many Christian teachers and even has some modesty standards etc.

  61. Dana says:

    And I forgot to say that I really like what Elizabeth said about most work being honorable. That is a big part of what I was trying to get at even though I talked more about the more obviously humane types of jobs. The humanities are a sore spot for me because that’s my field and I always get “what can you do with THAT kind of degree?” which means really “how can you make money?” And then I feel that one side (if we have to talk about sides) devalues women’s work that doesn’t make money, and the other side devalues women’s work that does (as Elizabeth also alluded to), but I think it all in a strange sort of way comes back to associating valuable work with money-making work, and that is a problem — the devaluation of work as truly vocational — that affects far more us than just at-home moms. And I hope I’m not so much of an idealist as to suggest that money isn’t important, especially when fairness of wages is concerned. Anyway I go around in circles when I think about this, as you see. 🙂

  62. Dose of Joy says:

    Kelly,

    Thank you for the measured response. I am actually in agreement with you that some of the ideals and concepts taught/used in any school other than homeschooling may very well be Anti-Christian. I am definitely aware of that, and do not plan to put my own children in public school. Is that hypocritical because I am teaching public school? Maybe, but they’ll be my kids, so hmph (just kidding). I do not feel that I am advocating for such teachings, as I am teaching orchestra classes, and that’s it. Narrow-minded of me? Maybe. If I were teaching Science, I doubt I could ever do so in a public school. I think I’ve mentioned that I plan to stop working when we have children, so perhaps I am taking Mr. Dobson’s advice 😉

    Also, I just want to clear the air that I am totally in agreement about humanism. I am sickened by that movement, excuse my strong language. I’ve heard classmates speak about it positively in classes I’ve been in, and I’ve absolutely spoken my mind about it.

    I will look more at those articles. I suppose I am in agreement with you on many of the points the first article raises, however my intention was to ask that not every school and teacher be lumped into that assumption. I do not advocate humanism, secularism, or the kinds of ridiculous “politically correct” things that children are taught to say (ie “Mom and Dad” being offensive).

    Anyway, I appreciate having this conversation with you. Pray for me as I begin teaching this fall…I will keep you updated, for sure! Who knows, if the Lord blesses us with children very soon, this might all be water under the bridge 🙂

    Prayers to you…oh my, you must be so ready to meet your new little one!

    C

    Prayers,
    C

  63. Word Warrior says:

    Dose of Joy,

    I will pray for your journey…may the Lord be pleased to use you and guide you.

  64. Word Warrior says:

    Mrs. W.,

    I guess I ignore Christian/private school because that’s where I was a teacher, and besides a little difference in curriculum and some of the teachers being Christians (some were not), there was not much else. We can’t answer for other parents as I know sometimes Christian school provides a needed alternative and I don’t want to condemn that, but personally, we feel that the only way to disciple our children is to be with them for the largest part of the day. (How did Jesus disciple?)

    Conversely, if they are daily inundated with the very things we are trying to teach against, we believe there’s a slim chance of their standing against all their peers and embracing their faith in the face of outnumbered persecution. Strong, I know, but I think realistic.

    (Besides that, it all started because we didn’t want our children to follow the typical route of dating, a feat nearly impossible to practice if they are with mainstream peers who practice dating.)

  65. Lisa says:

    While Christian school would be the alternative for us in some extreme situation where we couldn’t homeschool anymore, my problem with them is that they also have bought into a lot of the world views that undermine the very Word of God. That’s why there are so many parents who send their kids to Christian school and go to church one or more times a week, are shocked when their kids leave the church. Even when I went to Christian school, the very foundation of the bible and the Christian faith, Genesis namely (among others), was passed off as a “fairy tale” and was told “we can’t be sure that that’s actually true.” They buy into evolution, millions of years, the big bang like most public schools do. Then the kids come home and see mom going off to work, and when she is home, they see their parents not running the family according to how the bible dictates. “Oh, we don’t listen to that part, times have changed.” So, they are fed that part of the bible is a fairy tale, and most of the rest is “outdated.” Is it any wonder they question the rest?

    Even growing up in a Christian home and school, I lost the faith and was lost until my mid-twenties. Why? Because I went to school and was basically taught that the bible wasn’t true through their teaching of how our world came about, and my church and my parents did not set me straight! They assumed I was getting a good education, and they also bought into this world view! Many homeschoolers are coming to the right conclusion that if you want your kids NOT being taught these things as truth, you’ve got to teach them yourself. When you send your kids off to school, they are trusting that YOU trust that the school is going teach them the right things. If they come home from school and you have to un-teach them half of what they learned as truth, they are going to start wondering why you even send them to this place that teaches all these wrong things. And if you don’t un-teach it, they are going to assume that all is well and what they are learning is true. And there goes the very foundation of the bible. If we can’t trust that one part of the bible is true, it opens the door to questioning the rest.

  66. Mrs W says:

    That’s cool Mrs Kelly. When I say “Christian School” I’m talking about a local church Christian school where all the teachers GO to that church and have a good testimony and standing. I’m not talking about a generic Christian school.

    Anyhow I did not mean to turn this to the topic of schooling, since I was VERY interested in getting some kind of answer to my questions and so far have gotten none.

  67. Word Warrior says:

    Mrs. W.,

    I’m sorry to have eluded your question…I think you asked two–one about serving your husband when he gets home and the other about female midwives, etc.?

    I first would say that I don’t believe biblical womanhood (at least not my definition) defines a woman “doing all the work at home”. The balance I see is when a wife recognizes the home is her main sphere, and obviously does most of the work there, simply because she is present more of the time. But a loving husband definitely plays a big role–whether it’s tangible help when needed or help with the children, and especially assessing from his wife specifically what she needs.

    As I see it, a husband who understands his role is responsible for overseeing everything–including his wife’s level of emotional/physical strain, and doing what is necessary to help relieve her. (It may even involve hiring help for a season, etc.) I should delight in “waiting on him” but not feel it a duty in the sense of being bitter about it, if that makes sense. I think when a wife serves graciously, she is usually met with the help and love she needs in return. But if it’s done with a begrudging spirit, the husband knows that and does not always reciprocate.

    To answer about our support of women in the work force…I’ve talked before about the trickiness of that–and I’m not prepared to say we should never purchase anything that supports a working woman–mainly because that would be impossible. The debate isn’t so much about “is it ever wrong for a woman to work outside the ho me” so the question of using services is a peripheral and less important one.

    I personally think a woman can be a midwife and other things and balance her family with that–she’s in control of how many patients she has, she’s not working under the authority of another man, which can cause problems, etc.

    I’m more concerned simply with our attitude, as Christians, toward our role in the home versus an “entitlement” attitude about career.

    Did that help at all?

  68. Dose of Joy says:

    Kelly,

    I love how you worded the idea of “serving graciously.” It really is a calling that requires prayer and devotion in order to keep doing so “graciously” and lovingly. If you don’t mind, I’d like to add a link to a review I wrote of a book last year that discusses this concept at length called “The Joy of a Promise Kept.” It’s edited by Max Lucado’s wife, and sounds like it might be of interest to some of the ladies who pass by your blog.

    http://doseofjoy.blogspot.com/2009/01/joy-of-promise-kept.html

  69. Mrs W says:

    Yes thank-you. I do do most of the work around the house, but I am in my third trimester, it’s the middle of summer in the deep south (been over 100 degrees every day this week) and I suffer from chronic pain. Yet the ladies at church tell me that I am still supposed to do EVERYTHING around the house and that is is wrong to have my husband do it because he “works” (although he is off ALL summer). Glad not everyone with beliefs similar to yours believe that.

  70. alix cardos says:

    Rachel,
    I’d rather be a victim of the “crime” of being sweared at than lose all rights of acces to my children in case of a divorce, or lose all my property to my husband when I marry. This is what happened to women in the UK in the past centuries, before this awful thing called feminism fought to give women rights…sorry, POWER. Abortion and shunning family are not basic tenets of feminism. As I’ve said before, you don’t want to understand that there are many types of feminism. A basic tenet of feminism is that women must have equal rights and enjoy equality with men. I’ve never denied that Jesus died for my sins or that he resurected from the dead. There are huge differences between Christian denominations,and the same is the case with feminism. I’m Eastern Orthodox. I do share basic tenets with other Christian denominations, like our common belief in Jesus as our Saviour, but we disagree on many other things. As an Orthodox, I consider the protestant doctrine, especially Calvinism, heresy. I also think that Calvin and Knox were dangerous heretics with no real understanding of Christ’s teachings. Their doctrine, for me, is a terrible abomination. On the other hand, these two are heroes of the faith for protestants. What I mean is, we as Christians have many conflicting positions, just as feminists can have different opinions on many aspects of women’s lives. Personally, I don’t agree with abortion, homosexual marriage and homosexuals adopting children. Also on a personal level, I wpuld go insane if I were forced to stay at home and not have a job. I adore children, but I’m not meant to be a housewife and I think I’d take any job, no matter how menial, than be locked up in the house. I also don’t believe in homeschooling and I’m convinced that no matter how well educated a mother is, she can’t in a million years give her children a high-level education. I have a strong belief that as Christians we must not hide from the world, bt reach out to it. Those who are afraid of the effect of the world on their faith don’t have a strong faith to begin with. These are my personal opinions, but I wouldn ‘t try to force them on someone else. Believe it or not, a basic tenet of fminism is that women must have the right to choose how to live their life. So enjoy beig submissive wives and stay at home and bake cookies, but stop telling us who believe otherwise that Christianity and feminism, or family and career are incompatible, that we are bad mothers if we go to work and sinners if we love our job.

  71. Lisa says:

    Mrs W said: “And I am supposed to serve him hand and foot when he gets home (according to others, not him), and make sure he doesn’t have to do ANY work in the house or with the kids, simply because he worked for a mere 7 hours that day.”

    Mrs W,
    When I see quotes like this, I see a struggle where there really shouldn’t be one. If you are a stay at home mom, no, you shouldn’t *expect* your hubby to help you out. No tomatoes, please, I’m going to elaborate in a minute. As someone who stays home, your job is to take care of your home and kids while your hubby is working outside of the home. Does your hubby expect you to help him with his job? I don’t understand comparing time, because to me, that sounds like your drawing a line between you and saying “here’s yours and here’s mine,” you know what I mean? So yes, do your work at home and with the kids and don’t expect him to do it. Now, that being said, the way I’ve found it to work is, don’t expect help, and you’ll never have to ask for it. Change the way you think. Do your housework and train your kids with joy, look at it as something you get to do, not something you have to do. Yes, try and make things as easy for your hubby as you can. DON’T nag or complain, keep a good attitude about it. Give it some time and see if your hubby doesn’t start *offering* to do things for you. I’m not saying do this with the expectation that he WILL.

    My hubby has a high-stress job and he’s been working a lot lately. He constantly tells me that he would never be able to do what he does if I didn’t do what I do. The state of our homes either makes or breaks us. Just because your hubby’s not at work doesn’t mean he’s not stressed out…the environment they come home to can either seriously stress them out, or it can be a sanctuary to them. If they’re stressed out at home, it’s going to make their jobs even harder than they really are. If their home is a sanctuary and a place to relax, that threshold where they start getting stressed out goes way up, and they can be way more effective at their jobs, and work more, if need be financially. And yes, I’m probably working more *hours* than my hubby, but a lot of those hours are relaxed and peaceful, stress free, because I have worked to make my home the way I want (with what I have to work with, b/c we’re definitely not rich!), I know the inner workings of how our routines and schedules and cleaning and everything else goes, and I am training my kids to behave and help out, too. Yes, we have our moments, and YES it’s very hard work, but the fruits of that work are so rewarding and it makes things run so much smoother. My family is noticeably happier and less stressed out than when I used to nag, nag, nag, and when I *expected* my hubby to help out around here. People have actually commented on how much happier and more relaxed our family is now, and they had no idea what was going on. 🙂 AND, I will tell you, my hubby helps out way more *voluntarily* than he did when it was assumed he “should.” 😉

  72. Lisa says:

    Kelly said: “As I see it, a husband who understands his role is responsible for overseeing everything–including his wife’s level of emotional/physical strain, and doing what is necessary to help relieve her. (It may even involve hiring help for a season, etc.) I should delight in “waiting on him” but not feel it a duty in the sense of being bitter about it, if that makes sense. I think when a wife serves graciously, she is usually met with the help and love she needs in return. But if it’s done with a begrudging spirit, the husband knows that and does not always reciprocate.”

    Yes, that is what I was trying to say, you just said it in fewer words. 🙂

  73. Lisa says:

    Mrs W said: “Yet the ladies at church tell me that I am still supposed to do EVERYTHING around the house and that is is wrong to have my husband do it because he “works” (although he is off ALL summer).”

    Yeah, this I disagree with, too. If your hubby sees that you need help, there is NOTHING wrong with accepting it. 😉

  74. Word Warrior says:

    Alix,

    Interesting. While I understand your point that not all feminists believe the same thing, I still hold that true feminism (not “human rights advocates) is forced to belittle the family and the role of motherhood because it conflicts with their main agenda-Linda HIrshman is one of the few willing to be honest about this fact.

    But to address your “scolding”…

    “but stop telling us who believe otherwise that Christianity and feminism, or family and career are incompatible, that we are bad mothers if we go to work and sinners if we love our job.”

    As a Christian, you should know our command to teach the younger women ” [To be] discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.”

    If we believe the literal Word of God then we take this command very seriously and therefore can’t stop telling other women about the importance of their full-time job in the home 😉

  75. Lisa says:

    Alix said: “A basic tenet of feminism is that women must have equal rights and enjoy equality with men. ”

    I don’t see this as feminist, I see this as biblical.

    “I also don’t believe in homeschooling and I’m convinced that no matter how well educated a mother is, she can’t in a million years give her children a high-level education.”

    Why not?

    “I have a strong belief that as Christians we must not hide from the world, bt reach out to it.”

    You seem to think that us stay-at-home homeschooling moms keep ourselves and our children locked in the house and away from the world. It is quite the opposite. Most kids are locked in a classroom 6-8 hours a day with kids the same age as themselves. As homeschoolers, we are free to go out into the world and learn in many different ways, and learn to interact with different people of all different ages. When the children are exposed to sin or views that are different from ours, we are right there to guide them in the way we see fit. I want to laugh at the cliche that homeschoolers are locked away from the world, when their “building-schooled” counterparts are way closer to that cliche than we are.

    “Those who are afraid of the effect of the world on their faith don’t have a strong faith to begin with.”

    This is where I agree with you. And most kids DON’T have a strong enough faith to defend it until they’re older.

  76. Word Warrior says:

    Alix,

    I also had to address this rather humorous comment you made…

    “I also don’t believe in homeschooling and I’m convinced that no matter how well educated a mother is, she can’t in a million years give her children a high-level education.”

    Saying this is no different than saying, “I don’t believe in math”…trying not to be rude because this statement is so, well, wrong, you can’t deny facts that already exist.

    Thousands of home-educated students have already received a “high-level education”; much higher, in fact, than many of their schooled counter-parts. ANd it’s all documented so how do reason that you don’t believe in something that is established?

    Even if it wasn’t, the logic is so clear that an education is not achieved through someone feeding a student information; the intellectual greats of the past were largely self-educated (which IMO is the goal of homeschooling)…what are you going to do with your “disbelief” in their case?

    Homeschooling is merely the opportunity to expose our children to an ocean of knowledge and teach them how to learn–really learn, not memorize facts to pass a test. Sorry if I sound too blunt, but this is one statement that is clearly wrong and can be proven with facts.

  77. Word Warrior says:

    Alix,

    Oh and I forgot to ask…what of your disbelief of homeschooling as it relates to several of our closest friends–right here, right now–whose sons are in their 3rd year of Engineering in college and maintaining a 4.0, while their professors are bragging about their disciplined study habits, character and perseverance that they say is so rare to see? (Did I mentioned the college recruiter told our friends that they *secretly* prefer homeschooled students because they do so much better?)

    What of our other friends whose children are flourishing in college–isn’t that what you would call upper-level education? If I know so many of those examples right here in the tiny confines of my neighborhood, how do you justify that “homeschooling doesn’t work in a million years”?

  78. Lisa says:

    I totally agree, Kelly! And here’s an article with facts about homeschoolers from some of the nation’s top colleges.
    http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000000/00000017.asp

  79. Kelly L says:

    Alix,
    Regarding the “I also don’t believe in homeschooling and I’m convinced that no matter how well educated a mother is, she can’t in a million years give her children a high-level education.” comment.
    When I got my HS daughter tested with a national standardized test company, they would not compare her test scores with public schools, only private. The scores would have been too inflated to chart, in their opinion. Not mine. That cannot be a result of her (and other HSers that are subjected to this same requirement) poor education. If the testing companies know this and follow this guidline, surely it must be based on much evidence.

    Mrs. W,
    I am sorry that you are part of a church that has perverted the Word of God. If God has not allowed you to leave yet, start praying for an outbreak of His Spirit and Truth to overtake the members and you. No matter how clever any of us can be with words, the Bible says the Holy Spirit is here (in part) to “convict the world of sin.” Any tenant in our lives we hold to which is based on manmade rules or twists of the Bible is sin. God is the redeemer of all hearts that are not 100% His.
    Kelly (WW), thanks for your post on this…I was unaware of all that the feminist platform had. I wasn’t really all that interested in looking into *wink* but it has helped me identify some sources of discontent in some friends. It is nice to have specifics when they come to me for help instead of just how it should be in Christ. The old junk needs to be uprooted first. Thanks.

  80. Sara says:

    I’ve been thinking about the comments that discussed the different time-wasting hobbies that stay at home moms might indulge in. I don’t have the time right now to go back and quote specifics, but I believe scrap-booking was mentioned.
    This has been bothering me. I don’t scrapbook, but I do put together photo albums, one for each child, and one corporate family album. If I was talented enough to scrapbook I would do it with my whole heart, so that my children could some day have a beautiful book of memories from their childhood. I do garden, and while I enjoy it, it’s beneficial to my family on several levels. I also knit, crochet, paint, draw, and do lots of crafting. I do these things for my own enjoyment, but also for the beautifying of our home, and to make something that I can pass on to my children, whether it is the physical object (like a beauitful handmade blanket) or the lesson in drawing they received.
    These things may seem like a waste because they consume resources and time without generating income, but I’m completely confident in their value to myself, my family, and my physical home. I once felt the pressing drive to turn these things into a business just for the sake of having something to “show” for my work. But I’ve gotten past that insecurity, and I think it’s unfortunate that the ART of homemaking has kind of been lost somewhere along the way (btw-Edith Schaeffer has a very good book on this subject).
    My father raised me and my siblings basically alone, and I can only wish that I had a mother to infuse regular everyday things with meaning, to teach me how to create memories, and I cherish the few physical object that I have that I know were her actual handiwork.

  81. Word Warrior says:

    Sara,

    So true…I think when people hear us talking of being home they’re so prone to picture that role as mundane and menial–only attending to the physical demands of children and home, that they use images like “piddling doing scrapbooks” to shame us into thinking we’re no different than the working mother.

    When in reality, the whole point is that being at home allows freedoms to do all sorts of things. Having hobbies, or side businesses, while they CAN become consuming, more often are beautiful additions to the culture of the family and like you said, teach our children the *art* of homemaking and enrich their lives.

    I’ve been trying to make this point for years and it still gets misunderstood. Home is FOR activity–some just plain work, and some fun, rewarding “extras”. Thank you for that point!

  82. Mrs W says:

    Lisa, a man who has only worked seven hours a day when I’ve already been a awake and working for roughly double that certainly CAN bathe the children and put them to bed. And I believe if he is a decent man he SHOULD. My husband, ironically, believes that too.

    To add to the mix, I have a chronic illness where I am in great pain every day of my life. I can not do as much as “regular” women. My husband knew of this BEFORE we were married. I told him right when we started dating with the intention of marriage, so that he could figure out if it was still worth it for him to marry me.

    According to some, I should never have gotten married if I could not “properly and completely fullfil the role of home maker”. Thankfully my husband thought differently. I have also had people tell me to my face that there is nothing wrong with me and I am just lazy.

    But, unlike my husband, they are not there when I’m lying on a bed crying in pain, when I can’t get out of that bed because my body is so stiff it WON’T move, etc.

    The way my husband and I see it, God allowed me to live with chronic illness for a reason. I’m only 24, and I feel like an old woman. Sometimes I struggle with this though when others don’t think I’m “doing my job properly” (they see us going through a drive thru for dinner because I can’t stand anymore that day to cook after the other work I’ve done). I struggle with wondering why on earth God would give me a job to do (wife, mother, home maker) and then make it as hard as possible to do that job. I still don’t understand it, I just try to accept it.

    Basically, in our house, my husband has to help. He expects to help. But I’ve been called a wicked feminist for “making” him help, even though he says that he or any man would be a jerk not to help a woman in pain. But, I do know men that wouldn’t help.

    I know men who will not change a diaper, even if their wife has been run ragged and they have been off that day, simply because diaper changing is “woman’s work”. That’s just pride and arrogance oozing out.

  83. madge says:

    If you read my post, you’d see that I too keep photo albums–I cook too, and put the laundry away and keep a relatively neat and orderly home. I even occasionally do other crafts 😉

    But, instead of devoting several hours a day to hobbies, I have a job too, one I trained for many years to do. When I work a long day, my husband tends to the kids and house. Typically, though, I’m the one with the clean laundry, happy kids, and nice dinner waiting when he gets home.

    I’m reading these comments and wondering, if God’s will is that you devote your time and energy pretty much exclusively to your home, why you feel the need to defend this against the world? The defensiveness in the responses is interesting, and a divergent opinion isn’t something to feel “shamed” by.

  84. Lisa says:

    Mrs W,
    I definitely understand…a few years ago I was diagnosed with MS. So while I have lots of good days, there are those times when I, too, literally cannot get out of bed. I’ve been accused by my own MIL of basically being lazy. It’s not fun having any disability, but when it’s an “invisible” disability, it just makes it that much harder. It sounds like we both have awesome hubby’s who step up to the plate, as they should. I guess I just don’t like the word “expect.” I just *know* that my hubby’s there to help out when needed. Maybe I’m getting “expect” confused with “demand.” 🙂 I thank God every day for giving me my husband, because I’m definitely aware there are many men out there who would have said “See ya!” when I was diagnosed, and that is just so sad.

  85. Dose of Joy says:

    Kelly,

    A friend just forwarded this article to me and it just was too unbelievable not to share. I thought the comment about the feminist experiment with her child in the second paragraph was interesting. Anyhow, I just wanted to pass this along because it reminded me of your articles on feminism.

    http://www.doublex.com/blog/xxfactor/swedes-raise-gender-free-child

    To me, that sounds like taking God’s creation and making a science experiment with it. I don’t see how people can abuse their child in that way. Whew.

    C

  86. Word Warrior says:

    Dose of Joy,

    Oh my word…unbelievable. A “reprobate mind” at its best, would you say? Thanks for sending that link. I had no idea anyone was quite there yet. I’m sure now law suits will ensue when their “genderless” child is forced to choose which public restroom to use, etc…although many places are now doing away with those–did you know that?

  87. Dose of Joy says:

    Kelly,

    You know, I have spoken highly of my liberal arts education in previous posts, but it the first place I’ve encountered “gender neutral” restrooms. There were bathrooms for both men and women, but there are always gender neutral restrooms for people who don’t feel comfortable with either. You know, I feel convicted NOT to pass judgement on the people who feel that they fall into that category. I don’t know that kind of confusion in my life, and oh my, it must be difficult. It just makes me want to pray for them.

    Anyway, it’s a strange article. To me, it just shows a lake of foresight on the parents’ part. Do they really not realize the implications this lifestyle will have for their child? How sad not to let your child have an identity in that way. Hmm.

    Prayers,
    C

  88. Hey, Madge! Nothing at all wrong with scrapbooking, love. Whatever floats one’s boat. 😉
    Tracy

  89. I find some of the comments in the article to be, quite frankly, laughable!

    How many paid occupations, anywhere, truly allow one to exercise “social power”? How many paid occupations are not “repetitious”?

    The article is based on a very false and ridiculous premise that all work outside the home is satisfying and fulfilling. HECK – my husband is an emergency physical and even HE says that his work is now unrewarding and repetitious!

    Tracy (Australia)

  90. PHYSICIAN not physical!

    Tracy (Australia)

  91. wordwarrior says:

    Tracy,

    I thought the same thing! Somehow feminist have painted this rose-colored picture of work outside the home when most of it is just laborious. Which is why I’ve always asked, why would a woman want to bear her husband’s curse?

  92. madge says:

    This is true. I have a friend who has moments of despair and resentment that her husband has a successful, intellectually stimulating career, but I always remind her (and myself) that in the best paid job most of it is drugery, boredom, frustration, and putting up with stuff that you have a whole lot less control of than at home.

    I’ve never heard of this speaker–she seems sort of extreme, a “good” talking head and all that–but she doesn’t seem to typify the lived experience of most women I know, “feminist” or otherwise. I personally don’t mind that word, but if this lady is all one knows of it I can understand why it is upsetting.

  93. Jennifer says:

    Original feminism was about choice and was created primarily by homemakers. It is modern branches of feminism that are harmful, not the reverse; weird how the article did that.

  94. Erin says:

    I too, haven’t read through all the comments, so forgive me if I am redundant – but my issue with feminists (I attended a women’s college, so I have had a good deal of exposure to them) is that they are NOT looking for acceptance of women as WOMEN – in order to be valued, they argue, women have to become men – They will never admit this, but I have personally never encountered a feminine feminist – they have all looked and acted like Linda H – short hair, manly clothing, and the opinion that the only way a woman has any value is if she does the same things men do – works the same jobs, holds the same social and political positions and serves the same roles in the family.

    This is NOT feminism. This is simply the eradication of an entire gender of our population. Where are the feminists who are fighting for our respect and equality as WOMEN? I agree staying at home means giving up some “respect” in the professional world (which I gladly did) – but THIS is what we should be combating and refusing to buy into – we should be valued as highly as any working mom or dad. Other countries give stipends to mothers (or fathers) who stay home to raise their children. Why not fight for this in our country?

    Within the workplace, I should be able to be fully female and still fully valued – I shouldn’t have to don the power suit, hair in bun or cut short, and be an aggressive, power-hungry masculine version of myself to be successful.

    As long as feminism is about the eradication of femininity, I am not interested. The minute we start fighting for equal respect while EMBRACING our gender differences, I will be completely on board. We still have a long way to go, in my opinion.

  95. Jennifer says:

    You’re my kinda woman, Erin

  96. Lucy says:

    I enjoyed this post and the comments, but it seems to me that some of the commenters are confusing the freedom and liberty of the individual with feminism. When black people achieved the power to sit anywhere in the bus they liked, was that feminism? When our ancestors broke with the king, and forever (hopefully) left behind subjugation and feudalism, was that feminism?

    Women “made” it in the workplace because of war. Is war feminism?

    Human beings have only known true freedom and liberty since the invention of personal firearms. That’s the point where even the weakest serf got the capability to defend his rights. Are guns feminist?

    Even with the advent of guns, people still crave power, fight for it and exercise it against any weak being they can find. When the power hungry organize into governments, they always try to control the guns so they can be assured of weak people to exercise their power over.

    You may call it “feminism” if you like, but the freedom and liberty that women in this country enjoy today won’t last a split second longer than it takes for the government they trust with ‘guaranteeing’ their equal rights to gain the upper hand over all citizens.

    Feminism is a false ideal. Only individual freedom and liberty will maintain the ability for any man or woman, of any race or color, to pursue whatever dream he wishes.

  97. Jennifer says:

    Dang; well-said, Lucy!

  98. Millie says:

    I’m a very very feminine looking feminist. So there. 🙂

  99. Word Warrior says:

    Millie,

    “Looking feminine” has very little to do with feminism and especially what this article reveals. Most of the feminist agenda slaps the face of the Creator, telling Him His plan is flawed and His design is insufficient. A Christian woman (to whom my blog is mainly directed)cares only for what God reveals in His Word about His plan for her…nothing more, nothing less.

  100. @Leeannewao says:

    So does everybody else squander too much time on the web.

Leave a Reply

Dissenting comments are welcome only in the spirit of "iron sharpening iron"; hateful or angry responses will be removed at my discretion. You may add your gravatar (image) at Gravatar

WordPress Themes