Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The women make their own decisions. Obviously, if they are working, they are doing so out of their own individual choice. Unless they're on unemployment (laid off, possibly?), not working can be their own personal choice too...or it could just be a matter of ability. I know of at least one woman on disability that would love to be able to go back to work for pay, but she can't. So I guess in her case, it isn't her choice, but an inability to work. But most people that want to work will work, and those who don't want to work...shouldn't work.
I'm all for it if it really benefits the civilization, and that families can maintain strong bonds between each other (despite two overworked parents); but I have yet to see any macro level evidence that it does so.
I don't see any "macro level evidence" how one parent basically living in the city and being absent from the family most of the time due to work, while the other is maintaining a bed-and-breakfast for him to occasionally stop in benefits civilization.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morphous01
So my point is, people need to examine if the millions of women who have entered the workforce (and continue to do so) have actually elevated humanity. You know, because we all could just be robbing Peter to pay Paul.
"People" need to examine women? By "people" you mean "men"? Why is it that only women who need to be examined? Why is it that men can enter the workforce by default, but women's liberty is somehow contingent on benefits to "civilization"? Let's examine everybody -- men too. And whatever men don't benefit civilization by being in the workforce, let's make them scrub toilets and make dinner for their wives. Are you so sure that you benefit civilization more by what you do than by doing laundry and scrubbing floors?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morphous01
Seriously,I don't give a dam how accomplished/ambitious anybody is if their own home is a mess and they have crazy children on drugs running the streets!
For someone who is worried about the state of civilization, that's really short-sighted. If someone invents a cure for cancer, I don't care how messy their home is. I don't care if her husband doesn't come home to a 5-course meal made from scratch, if what she does outside the home saves thousands of lives. Nor is there any evidence -- macro or otherwise -- that women being in the workforce leads to "crazy children on drugs running the streets". If you examine the neighborhoods of which this is true, you'll find very few of their mothers working.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morphous01
Many people today have MAJOR issues simply because their parents were to busy maintaining a business (aka "a career") that was not even owned by the family. Sad.
There is absolutely no evidence of any causal link between "major issues" and working parents.
I Was just reading about married women in the 50's. I am one of those mothers. Married at 19, had 3 children in 3 years another 2years later, another 4 years later. Yes we were pretty happy. We had other mother home with their children also, and if we got depressed we could always call one of our neighbors for support. Now if someone gets sick or depressed there is no other woman neighbor in the block because they all gone to work. I wouldn't trade those years or my children for anything. My Husband and I were married in 1956, and yes we are still married.
My mother was married in 1949. By the time I was born in 1958--her fourth child, she was terribly depressed. She was thirty years old and felt that there was nothing to look forward to. She had three more kids after me. Not until later in life did she find some sense of belonging and self-esteem.
There is no one "right" way. My mother was born in the wrong generation. She would have made a great businesswoman rather than a SAHM.
In many workplaces, women don't have all that many decisions to make, they put up with supervisors who might be far worse than the husbands of some of those 50's housewives. At least those 50's women got to run their household, but in today's workplace they may just be taking orders all day long and have little say in how the company is run. In big corporations also, the managers are often just taking orders from some central office and have very little actual say in staffing levels, finances.
Today women face more stress and in some ways fewer choices. They may have a rough day at work but still have to run out and shop for groceries, are forced to cook something quickly even if they happen to enjoy cooking.
Back in the 50's, it was common for a family to live and grow on one income, they lived the standard middle class life with just one working member but the stress today is also much higher that way because if the mother loses a job, the family may go under, lose the home.
Today it's run run run, everyone in a big hurry and that contributes to stress and physical problems.
"People" need to examine women? By "people" you mean "men"? Why is it that only women who need to be examined? Why is it that men can enter the workforce by default, but women's liberty is somehow contingent on benefits to "civilization"? Let's examine everybody -- men too. And whatever men don't benefit civilization by being in the workforce, let's make them scrub toilets and make dinner for their wives. Are you so sure that you benefit civilization more by what you do than by doing laundry and scrubbing floors?.
Yes Redisca, I agree. I just focus on women because men have not demonstrated to me that they can raise children as well as a woman can.
That's all I'm going to say on this thread. It's just my opinion, take it or leave it.
In many workplaces, women don't have all that many decisions to make, they put up with supervisors who might be far worse than the husbands of some of those 50's housewives.
You could say the same for many men. Its not about have many decisions to make its about having many choices.
Quote:
At least those 50's women got to run their household, but in today's workplace they may just be taking orders all day long and have little say in how the company is run. In big corporations also, the managers are often just taking orders from some central office and have very little actual say in staffing levels, finances.
Some did, some didnt. If you mean by running the hh, cooking, cleaning, grocery shopping, childcare, yes. Some hh were controlled by the men. My mom had no access to the checking account, got only what money dad gave her for gro. etc. Dad made all the decisions from what was watched on TV to what color to paint the house to where we went on vacation. On the job women may take orders same as men, but they have they have say in their private life.
Quote:
Today women face more stress and in some ways fewer choices. They may have a rough day at work but still have to run out and shop for groceries, are forced to cook something quickly even if they happen to enjoy cooking.
More stress, sure, fewer choices, I dont think so. Working women are not forced to cook quickly or cook at all. In many homes the chores are shared, meals are more convienent and there is always take out.
Quote:
Back in the 50's, it was common for a family to live and grow on one income, they lived the standard middle class life with just one working member but the stress today is also much higher that way because if the mother loses a job, the family may go under, lose the home.
Or, how about this: my mother, back in the 50's, had to see a doctor because she was on the verge of a nervous breakdown because she couldnt keep her house as spotless as was expected after my aunt and 5 kids came to stay with them after her husband abandoned her.
You could say the same for many men. Its not about have many decisions to make its about having many choices.
Some did, some didnt. If you mean by running the hh, cooking, cleaning, grocery shopping, childcare, yes. Some hh were controlled by the men. My mom had no access to the checking account, got only what money dad gave her for gro. etc. Dad made all the decisions from what was watched on TV to what color to paint the house to where we went on vacation. On the job women may take orders same as men, but they have they have say in their private life.
More stress, sure, fewer choices, I dont think so. Working women are not forced to cook quickly or cook at all. In many homes the chores are shared, meals are more convienent and there is always take out.
Or, how about this: my mother, back in the 50's, had to see a doctor because she was on the verge of a nervous breakdown because she couldnt keep her house as spotless as was expected after my aunt and 5 kids came to stay with them after her husband abandoned her.
I have a few old magazines from the 1950's. The basis of many of the ads and even some of the articles is shaming a woman for not having the cleanest curtains or floors to please her husband or berating her for her husband being late to work because she didn't have his breakfast on the table in time.
Thank goodness for feminism ....although I don't believe all housewives of the 50s were depressed or unhappy, some of them enjoyed their roles. A lot depends on the beliefs held by spouses.
Thank goodness for feminism ....although I don't believe all housewives of the 50s were depressed or unhappy, some of them enjoyed their roles. A lot depends on the beliefs held by spouses.
No, I don't think they all were, either, any more than some homemakers/SAHMS are unhappy now.
Feminism opened up the choices for those who were not or could not be cut out for that life.
My aunt loved washing down the walls every week, having a perfect home, making the perfect molded jello salad with the fruit in it, and waiting on my uncle hand and foot.
My mother tortured herself because she constantly compared herself to my aunt. We were adults before she finally admitted she hated housework and could give a hang what the living room furniture looked like as long as it was serviceable.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
