What is sad is how the Left has demonized women who choose to stay home with
their children and fill those traditional roles. My wife and I decided together
- as equals - that she would stay home after the business she worked at closed.
I know this is something that the left cannot get their minds around
- A woman actually shoosing to be with her kids, and a man actually treating his
wife that is at home with respect, love, and dedication.Sorry, but
it does actually happen. And your world isn't destroyed by it...
pragmatistferlife "My wife and I were discussing this letter and
the responses last night and she pointed out again that the idea that a women
has a role is the height of objectification, and when that role includes wife it
implicitly is sexual objectification."So when she expects you to
play your role of husband, protector, breadwinner and lover; is she sexually
objectifying you? Or is this just another example of someone unquestioningly
buying into feminist passive/aggression that divides the world into three
genders; men, victims and "its".
@KallyWhile you make great points, your post also exposes
naivete' in assuming that one cannot hate in the name of feminism just as
effectively as is done in the name of motherhood. Underlying
feminist beliefs that an ideal woman neuters her reproductive system, terminates
inconvenient children and behaves like a man represent the ultimate in
politically correct misogyny. The belief that traditional roles such as full
time motherhood are problems to be cured with quotas and social programs may be
fashionably intolerant; but they are still intolerant. Feminist fundamentalism relies on an incredible amount of intellectual
dishonesty and passive/aggression; screaming sexist, every time someone
questions rigid dogma, in much the same way myopic Obama supporters screech
"racist" every time someone notices the reality of his inadequacy for
the job. The newest cause celeb, transgender rights; is directly in
conflict with the allegation that no one is proposing a bunch of "its".
There truly is an extremist constituency that hates gender and wants to devalue
it (complete with self identifying bathrooms). Men and women are
equally important but they are not the same thing; a reality that gender bullies
and many DN posters simply cannot comprehend.
To "Furry1993" I hate to break it to you, but a man and woman will never
parent a child "equally". That is why a child needs both a mother and a
father. Just go to your local swimming pool. The men will let the kids find
their limits while the women watch over their children to ensure no harm.How can you be both full time parents and have full time careers? You
may not think you neglect one or the other, but you do. If you are at home
working, are you interacting with your child? If you are interacting with your
child while working, are you giving your client the attention that they are
paying you for? You see, the fallacy you have sucked into is that you can have
a full time job and be a full time parent, when the truth is that you will end
up neglecting parent responsibilities or your job.Look at it this
way. You are at home writing a deposition, and your children want you to read
and play with thim, your deadline is tomorrow. What do you sacrifice to meet
your career goals? Just being home is not parenting.
@Redshirt1701 8:34 a.m. June 18, 2014Yes our children are people,
and they were cared for as people by a parenting unit composed of EQUAL
parenting by both of their parents, while both of their parents also had the
opportunity for personal fulfillment in much-enjoyed careers. The best of all
worlds, in other words -- because of the way we were able to schecdule our time,
we both were able to be full-time parents and also have full-time careers.But, getting to the issues you raised -- which parent do you think
should have to give up a career to tend a child? Why choose one parent over the
other? Why not the other parent?And, by the way, gender roles are
indeed arbitrary. Each person is different, and has different attributes. None
are inherently male or inherently female, although a lot of training goes into
how people "assume" the roles in adulthood that they are expected to
take. Because of the way my husband and I were raised, we came into our
marriage tabla rasa as far as gender roles are concerned, and we both ended up
directly the opposite of the roles you suggest for each gender.
My mother, grandmother, great grandmother were all wonderful strong women who
loved staying at home and being Mom. I have a sister who had no choice, she had
to work to support her kids! So, do you think she should be treated the same as
a man when it comes to her work? Of course, everything isn't going to be
exactly equal. It isn't equal between men either! The idea is to treat
people as fairly as we can, and because of people who think like you do, women
are often treated less than what they should be! Just because men feel that
women should be content as a housewife all her life, doesn't mean that she
has to accept it. As a man. I have worked with many women. I have had women
supervisors. It, almost always, has been a good experience for me. Men should
get past their big egos and treat women like they should, and yes, in many
cases, they can do as well or better than a man!
To "Furry1993" if you feel forced to stay home with your own children,
maybe you shouldn't be having children. Children are not pets or
livestock, you shouldn't feel "forced" to do anything with them or
for them. They are people that have needs and guidance as they grow into
adulthood.Lets look at being a parent like a job. Tell us, who is
able to accomplish more, a part time lawyer or a full time lawyer? Now, tell
us, who is able to give a child all the love and care they need, a part time
parent or a full time parent?Gender roles are not arbitrary. Women
are naturally more loving, caring, and nurturing than men are. Men are
naturally more strict and provide boundaries for thier children.You
may reject the idea of gender roles, but there is a natural predisposition for
gender roles.Tell me what is more noble, a parent that sacrifices
their career aspirations to care for their children or the parent that persues a
career and is only a part-time parent?
@Redshirt1701 1:31 p.m. June 17, 2014One more thing to add. You
apparently assign a lot of importance to gender roles but don't really
realize the problems that arbitrary gender roles cause. Gender rolls are
arbitrary assignments of supposed characteristics and interests to men and women
without really understanding how inaccurate those assignments can be. In
effect, gender rolls do the job of forcing square pegs into round holes. In fact there is more difference within each gender than there is
between the two genders. Assigning characteristics and interests based on
gender works a severe disservice to members of both genders. For that reason my
husband and I strongly reject the idea of gender roles and just live our lives
as we really are. More people should do the same.
@Redshirt1701 1:31 p.m. June 17, 2014So which parent would you want
to force to stay home frustrated because s/he had been turned into a house slave
unable to reach personal fulfillment in a much-loved career just to tend
children? My husband and solved the issue in a different manner.
We did a good part of our work at home, I as a lawyer and my husband as a tax
accountant, and we scheduled our out-of-home-office work around each
other's schedule. Each of us was able to find personal fulfillment in a
career while we also raised our children ourselves. We also share equal
parenting and child-raising time. With more working from home through the
internet being possible now it looks like this problem will hopefully soon be
There is a big difference between how people think things should be and how the
are. I think people should face reality about men and women. Some of them are
traditional, but more and more of them are not. That doesn't mean that all
the people that don't live like you are lesser than you. So, lets try and
all face the realities of the world and be happy. Let's try and accept
others and let them be happy too.
To "Furry1993" tell me, what is better for children. Is it better for
them to be dropped off at a daycare and raised by strangers for 10 hours per
day, and have 6 waking hours with their parents or should are children better
off being with their mother or father for 16 waking hours per day? According to
the article "The village can help, but children raised by a mum and dad do
best" in the UK telegraph, "The Effects of Daycare on the
Socio-Emotional Development of Children" at FamilyFacts, "Does Day Care
Damage Your Child?" at CBS news, and countless other studies show that when
a child is raised primarily in a daycare environment they end up with problems
that are greater than the kids who spend their waking time with their
mothers.To "Frozen Fractals" go and study LDS doctrine,and
what is taught about the role of a mother and father, then we can continue this
discussion. Right now you demonstrate that you do not understand LDS doctrine
with regards to the role of men and women within a family unit.
When I was a kid I would often go up to my grandma's attic and read the old
magazines she had stored there. They were from the 40's and 50's and
reading them was like being transported back to that era. I got this same
feeling from some of the comments here. Don't get me wrong, it was a great
era in many ways. But it isn't the era of today and today is what is in
front of us.I am grateful to those that fought to give women more
choice in their lives. A happy by-product is that men were also freed from
their strict roles. Freedom is messier and less predictable than rigidity, but
that's what comes with more room for growth.
@Redshirt"nothing would happen to an LDS girl who wants a career in
engineering."Okay." If she is married to an able
bodied man who has a decent job capable of supporting their family, yes, she and
her husband should both feel guilty"That literally would be
something different in treatment for a girl who wants a career in engineering
than a guy who wants a career in engineering. You say both would be criticized
but the criticism is "why aren't you staying at home" to the wife
and "why is she not staying at home" to the husband.
@Redshirt 8:09 a.m. June 17, 2014. . . in today's society,
nothing would happen to an LDS girl who wants a career in engineering. If she is
married to an able bodied man who has a decent job capable of supporting their
family, yes, she and her husband should both feel guilty because they are not
providing the ideal environment for their children.----------------I see nothing in that scenario to indicate that
the woman engineer and her husband who is an "able bodied man who has a
decent job capable of supporting their family" aren't providing an
ideal environment for their children and family.
@marxist,I know many LDS women who are engineers, accountants, CEOs,
Doctors, etc. Sheri Dew is a good example. CEO of Deseret Book Company,
never married, didn't have children, and never censure or harassed by the
LDS Church or the LDS community for doing such. I have two nieces
who are doctors, and one who's a successful accountant. Nobody harasses
them.You're comments seem based on presumptions about these
people you evidently know little about (besides your stereotypes of Mormons).We should be careful not to believe our stereotypes of people too
much... or let those stereotypes become our "reality" in our own
minds.Same goes for stereotyping people based on their religion,
political party or political philosophy, or what economic system you think works
To "The Wraith" it is a myth that women are paid less than men for the
same job (except in the White House). In business, a female doctor with 10
years experience is paid as much as a male doctor with 10 years of experience,
the same with male and female lawyers, engineers, managers, chefs, and so
forth.To "Utefan60" where do you get that quote from N.
Eldon Tanner. The cosest I can find is a First Presidency statement from 1969
that states that the Blacks will get the Priesthood someday. N. Eldon Tanner
was part of the First Presidency at that time. Even the Anti-mormon web sites
don't have that quote. So, unless you made it up, provide a source.To "marxist" in today's society, nothing would happen to an
LDS girl who wants a career in engineering. If she is married to an able bodied
man who has a decent job capable of supporting their family, yes, she and her
husband should both feel guilty because they are not providing the ideal
environment for their children.
My wife and I were discussing this letter and the responses last night and she
pointed out again that the idea that a women has a role is the height of
objectification, and when that role includes wife it implicitly is sexual
objectification. The religious culture cringes and becomes very
loud when the topic of female objectification comes up but the hypocrisy of that
culture who assigns women roles is maddening. To be thankful for
the women in your life is one thing and a good thing. Even to be grateful for
the roles they played in your life strikes me as simply being grateful. However
to be thankful they fulfilled their assigned roles is degrading.
Ok, two of my recent posts on this blog have been censored, so let's give
it another shot. Let's say an LDS girl wants a career in engineering.
Will she face censure or harassment in the LDS community for doing such? Should
she feel guilt? Should she believe she is not filling here appropriate role
(assume she marries and has kids)?
The Wraith:"Which is why women still make less than men despite equal
ability, experience, and talent."The calculation that women make
less than men is somewhat in error since women are on the job less, on average,
than men. Wages are adjusted based on time on the job. A vast majority of
women take time off from work to have and raise families. Men don't.
Mike Richards has the idea that The proclamation of the Family is scripture? It
has never been scripture or prophetic statement, just as N. Eldon Tanners
comments in General Conference years ago saying that "Blacks will never hold
the priesthood" are not scripture either.
Kally:"No one is suggesting anyone is an 'it' - we are
merely suggesting that women and men are equal in value and worth."Women are moving toward more equality with men. And when they get there, it
will suddenly be discovered that they are superior to men simply because of
their sexual power.
I noticed a lot of people who responded to Kally's post by saying that we
do treat men and women differently. Fair enough but that does not negate what
she said. If anyone here thinks that men and women are treated equally by
society you are living in a dream world. No one is talking about women and men
not being different we are talking about the fact that society as a whole still
feels that men are more valuable than women. Which is why women still make less
than men despite equal ability, experience, and talent. That is what the
equality movement is about. Treating women just as valuable as men.
@2bits"Where in the proclamation on the family... does it say that a
woman's worth is based on having children?"I don't
claim that the Proclamation says that... I'm just saying others who put
value into and invoke the Proclamation seem to believe it says that (that's
why I noted part of a comment that appears to connect one to the other).
@Maverick,Re "It used to be shameful to lie and slander the
President"...When was that? It must have been before Democrats
falsely accused Bush of "Stealing" their election. And before they
wanted him impeached. And before they wanted him tried for war crimes. Remember that?Bush was our President not long ago, just as
Barack Obama is our President today, and Republicans wanted people to support
him, and not try constantly to undermine him (As Democrats did during the Bush
Administration). It's the same today. It happens in politics.No... questioning the President didn't start with Barack Obama. Just
Democrat sensitivity to questioning our President started with Barack Obama.=========@Schnee,Where in the proclamation on
the family... does it say that a woman's worth is based on having
children?It may help if you guys didn't just make stuff up
(which people didn't say) to fight against and cause contention.That's why I bring up the proclamation.. it says it all much better than
any poster can.
@2bits"The prophet is just saying that there are gender differences,
but both genders deserve the same respect and both have the same value (to him).
I don't see why that would upset you, or anybody."The issue
is when the worth of a woman is measured in whether or not she's having
children which has turned up in comments like...@Mike Richards"He wrote about women who made a difference to their families and to
people around them by fulfilling the role appointed to them because of their
gender. They were mothers. They were role models to their sons and daughters.
They were not diminished because they fulfilled their role. "...and when such comments are claimed to be derived from Prophetic statements,
that's where the criticism comes from.
@RanchHand,The proclamation on the family is what it is... To some
it's important, to others it's nothing.Nobody's
telling you to accept it, or forcing you to accept it (those who don't
believe in Prophets). But for people who claim to accept the source of the
proclamation... it's an important thing. So don't belittle it.
Nobody's saying you have to accept it. But it's worth bringing up...
since many people reading these pages respect what the prophet says more than
what WE say.===I think it's valid to bring up what
the Prophet has said on the topic (same as what prophets since the begining have
said). But don't mistake that for me saying you have to believe like I
believe. I'm sharing it with other believers.====The prophet is just saying that there are gender differences, but both genders
deserve the same respect and both have the same value (to him). I don't
see why that would upset you, or anybody.They may have different
roles in the family... but both have the same "worth" to him...
@ RedshirtIt used to be shameful to shut down the government. It
used to be shameful to lie and slander the President. It used to be shameful to
use American deaths to attack the other party. It used to be shameful to
obstruct government and use obstructionism not governance as a measuring stick
for success. It used to be shameful to trust in big industry rather than
scientists. It used to be shameful to put rich people ahead of the American
middle class.Many things have changed in this country.
Unfortunately, while I've never leaves the Republican Party, sadly, the
Republican Party has left me.
Being masculine or feminine isn't gender specific. Most people that are
one or the other prefer the opposite. Most masculine people are fulfilled most
when paired with a someone whose feminine qualities complement theirs.
It's the human way. To me it seems like somewhere along the line the
political correct people have been frowning on those who are too feminine or too
masculine. That is a mistake. Learn, know, and then decide.
@MikeRichards;Prove that the "proclamation" is the word of
god and not just the "opinion" of your current leadership (I'm
betting that in not that far a future, we're going to see an
"essay" indicating that it was only the "opinion/policy" of your
church, just as was done for the "Blacks and the Priesthood" issue. In
any case, all we have is your word that it is the word of god, the LDS
leadership NEVER came out and wrote "God Says:" when they issued their
To "GZE" I am talking the type of respect that and expectations that
society had prior to the 1970's and 1980's. Not the attitudes of 1100
Thank you Kally, no work performed will ever be as enduring as that of mothers
and fathers, husbands and wives, dedicating their lives towards the greater good
of their posterity. Generations will always look back with thankful hearts for
those parents that left legacies of service and sacrifice for their posterity.
Our communities should do all that it can to encourage commitment, love, and
responsibility is fostered in the family, that they may be passed on to our
Red Shirt, "It used to be shameful if a man couldn't earn enough to
support his family."And that was all he was expected to do. A
father was not expected to spend time with his children; they were fed and put
to bed before he returned from his job. A man could treat his wife however he
wanted; legally she was his property.Acknowledging that women have
equal worth to men actually requires men to respect women as people.
To "Kally" but we do treat men and women differently. Men and women act
differently too, FYI.They both have the same protections under the
law, but that is not what the letter was addressing.The problem is
that because of the push for equality, we have destroyed the respect that women
once received simply because they were women.For example, it used to
be shameful if a man couldn't earn enough to support his family. Now,
women are expected to have careers outside the home. Men used to feel obligated
to pay for dates, and to show his date respect. Now, men are expected to pay
for a date or two, then the cost of dates are shared, and respect is shown for
the first couple of dates or until the girl sleeps with the guy. Men used to
persue women, now it is a free-for-all, where women are just as agressive as
men.As a society we have traded respect for women into competition
with women. That isn't realy a good thing when you step back and look at
what it is doing.
@Kally,Re: "women and men are equal in value and worth."Nobody's contending the contrary. So you are arguing a strawman argument
nobody's trying to make, and creating contention where none exists.God loves every child the same (as a good parent would, regardless of
gender).Mormons love every person the same (regardless of gender) as
God has taught us.That doesn't mean we must reject what God has
taught about the family, gender roles, the family, how he designed us, and what
he has taught us from the beginning of time (because today we are so modern and
sophisticated... his advice teachings no longer fit).Google "The
family: A Proclamation to the world"...You will see
re-affirmations of what we has been taught since Adam. Things like..."We solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained
of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the
eternal destiny of His children""Gender is an essential
characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and
purpose""HUSBAND AND WIFE have a solemn responsibility to
love and care for each other and for their children."Etc...
We just celebrated Father's Day yesterday. We gave honor to those men who
sacrificed so that we could enjoy life. I know that my father stopped trying to
"please himself" when he married. His goal was to provide for his wife
an honorable husband, to care for her needs, to do his part in society and to
welcome into his home all the children that God sent. Before marrying, he had
dreams of being great in business, but he put those dreams aside so that he
could provide a stable household for his family.The result is that
at the end of his life, he looked back and realized that raising a family and
teaching that family correct principles was life's greatest reward. He
knew that he had spared no effort to fulfill his role as father and that he had
not acted selfishly while fulfilling that role.Some scoff at
"fulling roles", especially the roles that God, our Father, gave us. I
appreciate God's concern for his children and his directions to us. I
don't look for gods who agree with me.
Kally I would like to commend you on that post. It was incredibly well written
and expressed my own thoughts better than I could have hoped to express them.
Thank you for being an oasis of rationality and truthfulness in a place usually
devoid of both - or even an understanding of them.
I am sure both your mother and your wife were wonderful women, wives, and
mothers. Did you ever ask them if they found their lives fulfilling? Did you
ever wonder if there was something your mother would have liked to do that was
denied her because she was busy with what had to be done? It is ingenious to
assume that someone who does not complain about their lot in life - who in fact
may be satisfied 99 percent of the time - did not sometimes resent the rules
society imposed upon her.
"They were not diminished because they fulfilled their role."And while many engage you for various reason here is why none respect you.
George Orwell wrote: "The further a society drifts from the
truth, the more it will hate those that speak it."
@ Mike: Women have value because they are human beings - if you and your God
are unable to see that, then I feel very sorry for the both of you.
The letter writer pointed out that our VALUE in society is related to our ROLE
in society. He wrote about women who made a difference to their families and to
people around them by fulfilling the role appointed to them because of their
gender. They were mothers. They were role models to their sons and daughters.
They were not diminished because they fulfilled their role. They were magnified
by being what God had intended them to be.As modern prophets have
told us in "The Family: A Proclamation to the World":"All human beings—male and female—are created in the image of
God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such,
each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of
individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose. . . We further
declare that God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be
employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and
wife."Those are the words of God given to us through His
prophets. Arguments to the contrary notwithstanding, when God speaks the issue
The letter writer here is a perfect example of what is driving much of the
discord in America today. My world is the way the world should be. It
made/makes me happy so therefore it's the way. The view is affectionately
called living in a bubble, but it's simply in most cases not being
conversant or familiar with other circumstances except as aberrations of the way
things should be. It takes a great deal of humility to look at
others without the shield of your own convictions. It's dangerous to those
convictions and the very reason institutions discourage members from doing so.
However it's also very liberating. If you develop the ability
to engage the world in such a way you find that sometimes your convictions are
confirmed and sometimes they aren't. However the new idea changes your
world for the better.
In the 1970's women players made up about 10% of major American orchestras.
Everyone knew that women didn't have the stamina for the strings, and
lacked the lung capacity to power the piccolos.But after screens
were set up to facilitate "blind auditions" the number of women in
orchestras started to rise, and by the 1990's women made up about 35% of
orchestras!Studies have shown that blind auditions increase the odds
of women being selected by about 50%!Sometimes its good to erase
The LTE writer is lucky to have had a good marriage, and good role models.However, he confuses gender role models from gender role compulsion.
Not all woman wish to be mothers. Not all woman wish to be stay at home moms.
In fact, some woman can not be stay at home moms due to economic problems. To
compel any human being into a strict gender role as identified by this
person's obvious faith tradition is cruel. Nobody really wins in the long
run.If strong families are the goal, then efforts should be made by
all levels of society to support those families in whatever from they may take.
Be it the more "traditional" mom at home, dad the bread winner model, or
the more recent iterations which includes same sex households with kids, all
should be supported by government, churches, schools, and all our common
No one is suggesting anyone is an "it" - we are merely suggesting that
women and men are equal in value and worth.No one is trying to erase
gender or the differences between the genders - we are simply trying to erase
the inequality with which those differences are treated.You extol
the virtues of the many great women you have known in your life - but at the
same time imply that women who behave differently from those you revere are
somehow less than real women.All humans, regardless of their
genders, have value. All humans, regardless of the role they play in their
families, have worth. Women can fulfill the roles you extol or they can fulfill
other roles - which roles they fill does not lessen their value or worth. Those who seek to force women to act in certain manner by denying them
value for not acting in that manner, are the ones who are degrading women and