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 4, 2009 at 4:01 am
Thanks annef!
You know, I guess I don't need to look for affirmation further than in the reactions to my children. I see them at home climbing off the walls and trying to do science experiments on the family cat (he's one brave kitty), but when they're in public I often receive compliment upon compliment about them. These alone tell me I'm doing something right. It's just hard when you can't gague your work ethic by instant rewards, you know?
So my hat's off to stay at home moms, and not just because I am one. They're right up there with policemen, firemen, paramedics – they sacrifice it all for the good of society!
September 4, 2009 at 6:18 am
On another side of things, I'd say I don't like that work has become more of a "family" atmosphere in part, I think, because with both parents working, people need to feel "a part of something" at their jobs much more than they used to.
I wish we could just work at our jobs and then go home to are real lives, but maybe that's just the manager in me.
September 4, 2009 at 11:45 am
Anonymous 9/3 3.14 am. Thank you.
September 4, 2009 at 4:50 pm
I can't believe you've started another round of the Mommy wars on CMR. Women have enough on their shoulders without having to defend working to others who are blessed to have the luxury of staying at home. (And yes, I know it's not easy and God bless the SAHMs!) Bringing up children with God, faith, values and love is more important than headcount, and it CAN be done in a dual income family, although it's hard and requires a lot of sacrifice. I've often thought that all of those feminists touting that "we can have it all" oughtta be lined up and shot. The bottom line is that nothing is easy in today's culture, but if we keep Jesus and His Church front and center, no matter what our employment status, with His help we will survive and thrive.
September 7, 2009 at 3:17 am
Yes, the larger socioeconomic implications, blah, blah, blah. It's probably true that there've been unintended consequences of women joining the workforce in larger numbers; but there's also been good consequences, in opportunities, and in terms of perspectives — more men have come to see women as adults than ever did before. And you couldn't have SAHDs without working Moms! God bless 'em both.
Siobhan's right – there're are as many different right ways to be a woman as there are women.
Now, I don't think the man should be barred from public office over some old academic thinking out loud, or even for pointing out those unintended bad consequences — unless he turned out to be think he was on a mission from Osama to keep women under guard or hidden in Jawa costumes – which I somehow doubt is the case.
September 7, 2009 at 4:31 pm
Now I doubt if my opinion is of major importance, but I was a stay at home mom until my husband's death at 50. I must say that I loved it, and now that I have been working for the past 14 years I can say I don't care for it. I also can say there are those I work with that would prefer being at home. Those that give birth are back in the work force in about 6 weeks in order to keep the job. I think the losers are the the children—they want their moms and all the attention they can get. Mom goes home to make dinner, clean the house and say "goodnight" My grandaughter complains that she doesn't see her mom as much because she is in school now. In fact all my grandchildren have voiced complaints when mom is absent for any reason. When I was a teen my mother had to go to work, and I did not like it then. Mothers are the ones that are the center point, but sadly times have changed…
If it is possible to be home, then it is (to me) the best choice,