Leave it to a Republican lacking the courage of his convictions (sorry if that is redundant) and to miss an opportunity to have a real debate.
Virginia gubernatorial candidate Bob McDonnell is in hot water over his 1989 thesis in which he “wrote in the thesis that working women and feminists had been ‘detrimental’ to the traditional family and criticized federal tax credits for child care because they made it easier for women to be employed outside the home.(Newsbusters)”
McDonnell says that his views have changed. Maybe they have and maybe they haven’t, but running from your previous views on this topic makes you a sissy. This is not a debate about the capabilities of women, but rather a debate about whether, as a whole, the society is better off for having encouraged women to enter the workforce. That, I think is a legitimate question that in no way denigrates the capabilities of women.
R.S. McCain also derides McDonell for running away from it.
And the problem with that is . . .? Man up, Bob. Own it. If you’re going to run away from a perfectly defensible thesis like that, you don’t have enough testosterone. I got your new slogan:
Look, even if his views have changed why run away from the question? It is a perfectly legitimate one.
We here at CMR will not run away. I think think that it is quite clear that as whole society has been severely damaged by encouraging and ultimately forcing the large majority of women out of the home and into the workforce.
If you disagree with this premise (not some other straw man premise) please let me know why. Not why you think women are just as capable as men and not how some women have contributed individually in some great way. The question up for discussion here is whether society is better off for having encouraged and ultimately forcing the large majority of women out of the home and into the workforce.
I am particularly interested in the opinions of Catholic women on this question. So let’s rush in where fools and Republicans (sorry, redundant again) fear to tread!
P.S. I will be very disappointed if we don’t get at least 30 comments on this post.
September 3, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Saying that women should stay home with the kids does NOT mean they shouldn't be educated or work before they have kids (or after the kids are big enough not to need them at home all day!)
For one, educated men should have educated wives–it makes for better dinner table conversation! (And better educated kids!)
And it's good to have the OPTION of going back to work–for instance, when one parent is out of work, the other one can get a job!
Frankly, I don't think it HAS to be the woman staying home with the kids— after they're weaned, they like Daddy just as much! (Ok. I'll be honest. They actually like him more. A lot more. But I like him too–that's why I married him!)
So really, individual couples need to figure out what works for them. (I've met some where the best financial option is for both to work 1/2 time….) BUT the big thing is that when we're figuring out how a couple ought to earn money to live, we need to think about what is best for their kids. Daycare is not a good option. Kids need parents.
I'd also argue that men with 80-hour-a-week jobs who never see their wife or kids ALSO might want to take a step back and examine the best way to balance finances and vocation…..
Anyway, really I'm just helping get you guys to 30–now I need to get back to work! (On laundry. We're trying to sell the house, and I have a feeling that the giant piles of soiled clothing does not constitute 'good staging'….)
September 3, 2009 at 5:21 pm
In response to Lavona's comment, I think you have touched on another important point. There's no guarantee that staying home will be more fulfilling for a women.
First, I think it has to be a decision that a woman makes for herself, and not something that she is forced to do by her husband. You FORCE a woman to do anything and she's not going to like it.
Secondly, I think the woman has to view staying-at-home as the true vocation that it is. You're not just the slave that cooks and cleans, you are the heart of the home, and you do what you do out of loving service to your family and in response to a discernible call from the Lord.
Finally, we men have to make our women feel appreciated for the choice that they have made to devote themselves to the family in that way. We have to remain emotionally engaged, even after a long day's work. We have to do our own part to raise the children, not simply leaving all the caring up to the mother. We have to thank our wives every day for what they are striving to do.
When all of those things happen, then a woman CAN feel fulfilled at home, and she can bust the stereotype that a woman's worth is measured by how much money she makes.
September 3, 2009 at 5:27 pm
Why give women who choose to stay home the same encouragement that women who work get? Why not give THEM a tax break or some sort of compensation for all their work? Just a thought…(from a stay at home mom).
September 3, 2009 at 6:06 pm
I'm a Catholic mom now at home with my 5 young kids after spending a decade in a successful professional career.
From my perspective, working women are VICTIMS of society's push to "enable" them to claim their "equality." And many aspects of our society–from the quality of our kids' childhoods to the success of American businesses–are out of whack as a result.
September 3, 2009 at 6:23 pm
I'm a faithful Catholic working mother of 5 children, ages 9, 7, 5, 4, and 5 mos, and I have a fantastic working husband. As with other mothers, I pray daily that my decisions support God's will for me.
I don't think that the problems with society and working versus stay-at-home moms is the right question. I think that encouraging women, even family women, into the work force on a society level is *neutral*. *Society* may be worse off because women may not know what it looks like to be a faithful Catholic working mom, and there may not be enough support and examples of what that may be. The fact that there are so many women in the workforce, I think that we should be giving encouragement to moms who work to prayfully raise their children to be heaven-bound, just as stay-at-home moms do. We all need to listen to God's guidance, no matter what the setting is. Society's problem may be that the *focus* has not been God, but other earthly things. This is not to say that you can't be a working Mom *and* also focusing your life and family on God. It may be easier to understand and identify the stay-at-home mom as focusing her life and family on God, but let's recognize the faithfulness of all women!
September 3, 2009 at 6:33 pm
I'm always happy to see someone bravely wade in to this topic. When I had children in the late 80's, I would never have thought I would have been able to stay home until they left the nest! God is Good! Every time I tried, at great pains, to readjust our household so that I could take on freelance work, the money was definitely not worth it for the toll it took on peace in our home. In the mid 90's I decided to abandon my attempt to "contribute" financially to our household, and put all my energy instead to supporting my husband's career, making sure that work was all he needed to think about. The first year I did that he got a tremendous raise, three times what I had been able to "contribute" as a freelance writer.
Now that my children are gone: I won't tell you that Mom in the home is a guarantee that you will raise perfect angels. But I believe that a woman brings a peace and grace to a home, as a refuge from the world, that simply doesn't come naturally to a man. Women are more biologically suited to mothering and homemaking. Just look at how "nurturing" the workplace has become–cupcakes everywhere, trick or treat parties, gimme a break. There are, of course, lots of things men are better suited to, as well — say, how many women firefighters have you seen on the news this week putting themselves on the line in California???–
Now I'm beginning to see a new trend that troubles me greatly. Our sons & daughters, I notice, are arranging their households more and more with Dad as primary nurturer. While I have seen this model work in rare, exceptional cases, for most of us, on the whole, this is an unbalanced arrangement. I just don't see that men have the natural civilizing effect on children that women do. But I am seeing this become a new cultural norm. Our kids, I'm afraid, are confused about sexual roles, and have overwhelmingly bought the lie that there are no innate differences between the sexes. Our society ignores this at its peril. Things will look dire indeed when we arrive at the point where the roles are exactly flipped, and women predominate in the workplace, and men predominate in the home. I think men have a real need & gift for "going out into the world," and when that's missing from their lives, they feel diminished. Just as women feel diminished when they miss out on childrearing.
September 3, 2009 at 6:55 pm
This is a tough topic. I can possibly see myself as staying at home with kids someday – but would definitely want to be involved in SOMETHING that would provide me with regular adult contact. I say this after my experience with my stay at home mom. She was severely depressed for years to the point that it wasn't like her being home was beneficial for us. I think part of it was being at home and NOT having regular adult contact. She works now and has more friends and happy. I would have preferred a happy working mom to a depressed stay at home one.
September 3, 2009 at 6:59 pm
Not to criticize you Winnie, for I too may be in your boat after the upcoming birth of my first child, but who takes care of your children during the day? How do you balance work and home life schedules with your husband in order to have at least one of you fully available to your children at all times? Do you work days and he nights?
The reason I'm asking this is because my job in particular requires me to be away from the home for at least 11 hours out of my day (one hour commute each way, 9hr work day). During your *minimum* amount of time away from home of, say 9hrs (8hr work day with half hour commute), who is spending that long bulk of time with your children? Who is caring for them while you are gone?
Also, if your youngest (5mos) is at daycare, how do you protect them from all the germs and illnesses they're exposed to during the day? Do you at least pump milk for your child so he/she can receive your antibodies?
Again, I'm not trying to criticize, I'm genuinely curious about how you make this work since I'm approaching motherhood myself.
September 3, 2009 at 7:13 pm
i'm just some twenty-something, recent college grad who moved from pittsburgh, pa to southern california who is, at best, naive, and at worst, ignorant, but these are my thoughts…
i, eventually, want to be a dread-locked housewife raising my kids (i'd like a soccer team or baseball team's worth). right now, i'm undread-locked and dateless, living off my small savings until i can find employment…which has proved to be frustrating.
something i've always struggled with is working and being a mom. i've just never felt the two were truly compatible…you really have to work to make them work. it's kinda like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole (i know, i'm so incredibly creative and original). if the square peg is smaller in diameter than the round hole, eventually you'll get it to go in, but it's not the best fit. the best fit for a square peg is a square hole. i feel that's the same for women/wives/mothers.
i think that society is worse off with women who work, both for financial reasons and for "fulfillment". i think that all too often all of us, men and women, buy into this "live to work" mentality or the cog in the machine mindset. if you don't work, you are perceived as ignorant, a bum, and a drain on society. work for your keep! i don't buy that. the mentality that is true and compatible with our worth as beings is work to live. work is a necessity to be able to live. i want a man who can provide for me–financially, emotionally, mentally, physically, spiritually. in some families it is necessary for the wife to work, but government/employers should be providing family-friendly environments and benefits so that doesn't have to be the norm. but we all know how family-friendly our society is…
something my mom (God rest her soul) once told me was that to be married, you have to bring something to the table– an interest in something outside the home, but that doesn't contradict the home. like books, so you can join a book club. or painting. or something. so often housewives are perceived and perceive themselves as deprived because they have left everything by the wayside for this obligation they now have. yes, family becomes an obligation, but it is first a gift and a joy, and just as the husband has interests outside the home (like going out for a beer with the guys after work or something less stereotypical), so should the wife.
as for me, i'm praying to st. cajetan for a job so i don't have to start selling my possessions to eat and dreaming of the days when i will be working at home, raising my family.
September 3, 2009 at 7:19 pm
Catholic woman here, with an opinion. I have been blessed to be in circumstances where I can stay home and be just a mom and a housewife and I am so incredibly grateful. I love my job and I truly believe our children are better for it. Happy housewives do exist, not only am I an example, but the vast majority of my close friends are also happy stay at home wives and mothers.
I do have to admit, this was all I ever dreamed of as a child. I have a bachelors degree in Sociology and I was accepted into a doctoral program in education, but that life was not what I was called to.
Can I speak for all women, wives and mothers? I don't think I can. Not every family is in the same financial position as we are. I know so many families that juggle work and home and do it for the betterment of their families. Has our culture pushed women into the workforce? I believe so and I do not believe society is better for it.
September 3, 2009 at 7:36 pm
Undeniably, the family unit is stronger if one of the parents can stay home to raise the children. But I reject the premise that tax credits for daycare forced women out of the home. Those tax credits were created BECAUSE women were forced out of the home to work due to wage stagnation.
September 3, 2009 at 8:17 pm
Well, I left work last year and am now home with my kids. I know I'm about to be slapped for this, but staying at home is no picnic. You work twice as hard, you get three (now four) times as dirty, you don't have a paycheck to affirm you every week, you don't have a lunchbreak (naptime is a fluke), and you don't have any benefits like social security or a 401k. I found fulfillment in my job, I was successful, I was liked, I was social, I got to shower every day.
But I'm done whining now, because I know that I will look back and realize I made the right decision. Getting my head to shrink back to its original size has been a painful process, but in the end my boys need to see a humble woman more than a successful one. And maybe, just maybe in the end, that might be the same thing…
September 3, 2009 at 8:58 pm
32 Comments! We did it! 😀
September 3, 2009 at 9:19 pm
No slaps for you, Patty. That's just reality. Staying home with children can be frustrating, exhausting, and messy and still be meaningful and — most importantly — the best thing for the kids.
September 3, 2009 at 9:54 pm
Craig– I think it's a bit of both/and. One area that has impacted is housing prices. Once you have a critical mass of two-income families with young children, it becomes increasingly difficult for the one-income families to compete for the same stock of houses. On paper, the dual-incomes are making twice as much money. All of that second income may be going straight into daycare costs, but that doesn't matter on a mortgage application. So unless the one-income family is lucking to be pulling down "professional" wages, they will consistently qualify for far less mortgage (hence far less house) than the double-income family. DH & I faced this for years here in over-inflated Silicon Valley.
September 3, 2009 at 10:34 pm
Patty,
Take heart! It took me a long time to adjust to being home after working for many years! Yes, everything you said is true! It is hard work to be with the kids all day long. I think the hardest part was not having a list tangible accomplishments for the day (such as having seen a certain number of patients). I would give my husband a play by play of the entire day, because I felt I needed to prove that I had actually done something. He listened patiently, bless his heart. But, it's an adjustment that takes time. It takes time to realize that the accomplishments at home are longer brewing and sometimes less apparent than getting through a certain number of hours or procedures at work. There is nothing like full-time, at-home motherhood to teach a person self-donation.
September 3, 2009 at 10:51 pm
Can we define "society" please? I'm mostly joking, but not entirely. I'm a SAHM and the transition from a satisfying (but not lucrative) profession was very difficult. Is "society" served by having me out of the profession? I don't think so. I think of it more as choosing the good of my children over the good done (to far more people!) of my job.
On the other hand, my own mother was a SAHM and suffered mental illness. (No, not caused by being home; it almost certainly developed before I was born.)Had she worked outside the home during my childhood, I think she would have gotten a diagnosis and help long before she did–which certainly would have been better for me. I don't think "society" is served by having women stay home to raise the kids who aren't equipped to do so–whether that's a matter of mental health, emotional maturity, or whatever.
The plural of anecdote isn't data, of course. But even though I think I'm doing the best thing for the family by being a SAHM, there are enough situations where that's not true to make me unwilling to generalize so broadly.
September 3, 2009 at 11:04 pm
Anon,
I don't think it's an either/or situation. I think society is greatly served by parents staying at home and raising children to be wonderful adults.
I don't think by staying at home you're cutting society, you're simply enriching society in a different way.
September 4, 2009 at 12:39 am
Before I married, I went to college because I wanted to be able to support myself–whether I eventually married or not–and also help my parents as they got older. I did marry and ended up moving from Oregon to Minnesota. Our first baby was born nine months later, and my husband and I had already agreed that, when the baby was born, I would stay home with him–even if I managed to find a job before he was born (which I didn't). Now, our youngest (of 3 kids) is almost three, and I've been looking for a part-time job just to help pay the bills. Since I haven't had a job since 2001, however, it's been difficult to find a job that dovetails with my husband's (full-time) job schedule. The idea is for one of us to be at home with the kids, since, even if I worked full-time, most of my income would go toward day-care expenses and commuting (to say nothing of work clothes, lunches, etc.), and it'd be a wash (or
worse).
I still haven't found a job, but I write articles (have sold a couple so far) and make up stories for my kids (for daily story time). I love being a stay-at-home mom, though I have been feeling a greater need lately for social time with other moms. I've met some real winners and their company is medicine.
Thanks for bringing this up. I would agree that forcing women out of the home has been detrimental to families. All the women I know who work outside the home work only because they have to–to pay the bills. I may yet find an early morning part-time job (maybe at a coffee shop; you can't argue free coffee!), but while I continue looking and applying for jobs that would work for our family, I believe I'm right where God wants me to be.
September 4, 2009 at 3:16 am
I think it's great that you've brought this up. I wish that more people would engage in conversations about topics such as this. I'm a Catholic, stay at home mom. Our children are 7,3 and 4 mos., and I homeschool them. I love staying at home and raising my children. I honestly cannot imagine it any other way.
I'm grateful to my husband for working as hard as he does so that I can stay at home. We know that it is the best thing we can do for our children and our family. However this does come with some sacrifices. We only have one cell phone, for emergencies. We don't have cable TV, we wear hand me down clothes, and I can't tell you the last time we went to the movies, let alone rented one. (We fortunately have great libraries.) The fact is that we make it work. My husband is a teacher, and we aren't rolling in the dough. But I often think about all of the money that we save because I have the time to make it work. Because the kids aren't in daycare, there's one less bill to pay. And I don't have to spend our money on a glamorous wardrobe. In the last two years, the book rental fees for our local school district were equal to or more than what I paid for in homeschooling materials. We rarely eat out, and I'm able to cook meals from scratch which are a lot cheaper than prepackaged meals. Sometimes I don't think that people realize just how much money you can actually save by having someone home to manage things. And you really can't put a price on the value of raising your own children. Generally, I believe that there is no one else who is better at raising a child than that child's parents.
I've really enjoyed reading everyone's comments! Thanks!