|
Post by jules on Jan 9, 2008 13:30:25 GMT -5
And, as history has always shown, women are vulnerable. They become lured by the greener pasture, the happier life, the fruit that they should not eat. And men don't? My wife is going to tend the home and raise the kids and i'm going be the sole breadwinner. And if that works for you and your hypothetical wife, great. And I will live this way because it is the only way that works. It is the only way that has ever worked for a society. When the mother left the home, and the husband went along with it, the family broke down. And it will continue to break down and deteriorate. I understand that this is your hypothesis, and I'll just simply say that I respectfully disagree. Strongly. This isn't an issue of women being intelligent or not. Of course women are intelligent. Some. Not all. Just like some men are intelligent. Not all. She will be happy as a mother and a wife. Period. And that is the message that my children will receive because that is what I believe. That doesn't mean your children will agree with you... Essentially, I find it really hard to wrap my brain around the fact that you think it is ok to determine one's role in life based ONLY on gender. Gender is just one aspect of an individual -- it is not the be all, end all. Each person is unique and is blessed with his or her own gifts and talents. Why would a person possess these gifts only to ignore them?
|
|
|
Post by JimB on Jan 9, 2008 13:46:53 GMT -5
Blazin' has his broad brush out again for some paintin'... I don't disagree that the value of traditional roles has gone by the boards a little bit. I think it's possible that as a society, the negative reaction to these roles has gone a bit too far - the pendulum may be due to swing back. But it's pretty silly to suggest that just because traditional roles may sound good to you, everyone should subscribe to them. And I agree with Jules that gender alone isn't enough to make such determinations. Couples should define their roles as they see fit, in such a manner as works with their lives. The problem I see is when the roles aren't defined at all. Kids and spouses alike need stability in the household, and a big part of that is knowing who they can depend on for what.
|
|
|
Post by sheyd on Jan 9, 2008 14:12:12 GMT -5
Blazin' has his broad brush out again for some paintin'... I don't disagree that the value of traditional roles has gone by the boards a little bit. I think it's possible that as a society, the negative reaction to these roles has gone a bit too far - the pendulum may be due to swing back. But it's pretty silly to suggest that just because traditional roles may sound good to you, everyone should subscribe to them. And I agree with Jules that gender alone isn't enough to make such determinations. Couples should define their roles as they see fit, in such a manner as works with their lives. The problem I see is when the roles aren't defined at all. Kids and spouses alike need stability in the household, and a big part of that is knowing who they can depend on for what. Dang, Jim, you are always so right on target! However, although I think it is true roles need to be defined, I also think it is helpful to realize those roles may change. This will also give the kids the flexibility to change those roles in their future based on their own (and their partner's) strengths and weaknesses. Blazin - part of the reason some of the "new" things don't work is because of how resistant some people are to change. A guy may be perfectly happy and raising fantastic kids as a stay at home dad, but his happiness (and thereafter the kids') will eventually be destroyed if enough strangers and friends make nasty comments or give him strange looks. Each person is individual and different, and if only people would allow those differences we would all be happier. I don't like your model of mommy staying home and raising the kids for the breadwinner daddy - but if that works for you and your partner - it will work for your kids too as they are growing up. (Of course, as Jules says, the kids may not follow suit as adults - and I hope you would still love them!) I think that model is great if the mommy and daddy both agree that is how it should be, and that is what makes them happy. We just all aren't like that. Shey
|
|
|
Post by rocko on Jan 9, 2008 14:40:22 GMT -5
I wish I could still be the stay at home Mommy for my kids. For me, I need more. I am still the primary parent in our relationship. If they are sick...I keep them. If they have an appt I take them. He will if I ask or if it is needed, but the standard is that I do.
People just need to learn to work with whatever works and not try to set guidelines for everyone else.
|
|
midge
Junior Member
Posts: 99
|
Post by midge on Jan 9, 2008 17:18:30 GMT -5
[quote author=blazinheart board=dating thread=1199754243 post=1199898189
My daughter will never be happy and fulfilled as a rocket scientist. No woman is truly happy and fulfilled without children, without a home, without a man that gives them a certain sense of security. It is natural for women to have children, it is what their bodies were designed to do. She will be happy as a mother and a wife. Period. And that is the message that my children will receive because that is what I believe.
[/quote]
are you serious? really. are you serious or are you just going off and trying to start stuff? no woman is happy or fulfilled without children?
sure, security is great, but when your husband leaves you (or kicks you out) when you are a stay at home wife who has given up a successful career for his, what are you left with? personally, i was left struggling to reenter the workforce and had greatly reduced my income in the process. even with a college degree, a patent on a product that that nearly everyone with a baby has, i was left living with my mommy for months when the leave it to beaver lifestyle blew up in my face. in addition, i was an empty human being- i thought i should want to stay at home and tend the home and have lunch with shut-in neighbors and cultivate my baby-lust. my husband was an EXCELLENT financial provider. too bad he couldn't provide for me emotionally.
turns out, my divorce was a blessing in disguise. i love my career again, i am great at it. i can provide for myself. i am glad i didn't have kids and i don't think i really wanted kids anyway- i was programmed to want the cliche.
sometimes i would love to have that really cushy and comfy life back. then i remember for unhappy i was in it. and i remember how easily my husband (the rocket scientist!) left me/expelled me.
|
|
|
Post by Phoenixx on Jan 9, 2008 18:15:00 GMT -5
Happy only as a mother and a wife?
HAHAHAHAAHAH HEHEHEHEHEH AHAHAHAHAHAH
Dont make me laugh.
|
|
|
Post by RO on Jan 9, 2008 18:18:26 GMT -5
Happy only as a mother and a wife? HAHAHAHAAHAH HEHEHEHEHEH AHAHAHAHAHAH Dont make me laugh. Thank you Phoenixx..I soo agree! What about those women who can't through no fault of their own conceive???
|
|
Sass
Full Member
Posts: 191
|
Post by Sass on Jan 9, 2008 18:45:53 GMT -5
Happy only as a mother and a wife? HAHAHAHAAHAH HEHEHEHEHEH AHAHAHAHAHAH Dont make me laugh. Thank you Phoenixx..I soo agree! What about those women who can't through no fault of their own conceive??? I think this is a whole new ball of wax..............Blazin?
|
|
|
Post by blazinheart on Jan 9, 2008 18:50:52 GMT -5
Happy only as a mother and a wife? And this is the dissappointing viewpoint that I see in our society today. The fact that women see motherhood and homemaking as some sub-standard relegation rather than the most fullfilling career and lifestyle a woman could ever hope to have makes me sad. Being a mother and a homemaker is a fulltime job, and those women that do not undertake it as such neglect their children and their home. This is truth, to me. And when it comes to truth I am unwavering. People can do what they want and live how they want, but I will never accept into my home that which I don't believe to be true. And I will never teach my children anything that I don't believe to be true.
|
|
|
Post by lumpy on Jan 9, 2008 19:03:59 GMT -5
Happy only as a mother and a wife? And this is the dissappointing viewpoint that I see in our society today. The fact that women see motherhood and homemaking as some sub-standard relegation rather than the most fullfilling career and lifestyle a woman could ever hope to have makes me sad. I think you're taking it to an extreme. I don't believe any of the ladies said that they felt motherhood was a substandard relegation. They're just saying that it's not a necessary facet of achieving happiness.
|
|
|
Post by lumpy on Jan 9, 2008 19:05:39 GMT -5
[ Being a mother and a homemaker is a fulltime job, and those women that do not undertake it as such neglect their children and their home. So, what are single mothers to do? Live off the state?
|
|
|
Post by blazinheart on Jan 9, 2008 19:18:17 GMT -5
[ Being a mother and a homemaker is a fulltime job, and those women that do not undertake it as such neglect their children and their home. So, what are single mothers to do? Live off the state? Hell yes if it means being there for their children. Swallowing your pride in order to fulfill your obligation and responsiblity to your children is necessary for every mother. I dont' care if they have to get welfare or move back in with the parents. The most important factor in this equation is the children, period.
|
|
|
Post by finding on Jan 9, 2008 19:20:04 GMT -5
I was a stay at home mom for many years. I love my children and would do anything for them, but I will never put myself into the position of being dependant on another person again.
|
|
|
Post by lumpy on Jan 9, 2008 19:20:17 GMT -5
So, what are single mothers to do? Live off the state? Hell yes if it means being there for their children. Swallowing your pride in order to fulfill your obligation and responsiblity to your children is necessary for every mother. I dont' care if they have to get welfare or move back in with the parents. The most important factor in this equation is the children, period. Not sure if that's necessarily "better for the children" though. It's a bit of a slippery slope providing them with that example, doncha think?
|
|
|
Post by Phoenixx on Jan 9, 2008 19:23:29 GMT -5
Lumpy - thank you. I dont believe any of us ladies said being a stay-at-home mom was less than anything. But - it is not the only way to live a fulfilled life and completely happy.
Blazing - you didnt't answer R.O's queston: What of women who cant conceive?
|
|