The subtle lie: Women must be powerful but not fruitful

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Nothing wrong with being a housewife if that is the individual’s choice but to pressure others is wrong
Yes, but for the past 40 years the pressure on women has been predominantly the opposite of what you describe. Getting better these days. My wife, in the early 90s when she decided to stay at home with the kids was practically persecuted. And then on her 3rd, 4th, and 5th child? Was treated very poorly by women all over the place. It got much better with later children.
 
Is there a law that prohibits women from being stay at home moms?

There are other limitations that can force women to work such as financial pressures but that has always been the case.

Historically, the role of stay at home mom was for middle and upper class women.

Working class women have always had to work.

If you don’t believe me, go to any developing country where feminism isn’t a thing. There you will see working class women working as household help, laundress, clerks, etc.
 
I think her point is, what if some women are called to do more? Sometimes (at least in our parish), that thought is not even entertained. I am a professor online so that I can homeschool my children and my husband happens to be breadwinner. Before kids and married life I was a practicing a psychologist. When I was single and seeing children and families who are at risk, I was seen as a feminist. I was single/no kids…this was my vocation! I wasn’t about to marry for the sake of marrying the wrong person just because i was in my 20’s and “it’s time” according to everyone else. The point is, we don’t know a women’s situation. We should not be quick to judge because we don’t always realize God may have her where He wants her. The pressure is from the conservative Catholics as well as society.
 
Last edited:
I think her point is, what if some women are called to do more?
That is the exact problem. Why is being a mother not enough? I’m not talking about the poor family that needs the mother to work to survive, I’m talking about the families where it is a choice.
 
That is the exact problem. Why is being a mother not enough? I’m not talking about the poor family that needs the mother to work to survive, I’m talking about the families where it is a choice.
It may be better for the family for the father to be the primary parent.

I would strongly recommend at least part time work for everyone. Circumstances change and having an extra source of income to fall back on is something I consider prudent.
 
The thing is that it is possible for women to be powerful and fruitful.
Some people just do not understand that.
 
40.png
AlruwhAlquds:
I think her point is, what if some women are called to do more?
That is the exact problem. Why is being a mother not enough? I’m not talking about the poor family that needs the mother to work to survive, I’m talking about the families where it is a choice.
Why is it usually not considered enough for a man to simply be a father? There is a whole word full of interesting and meaningful things out there to do and be, for women as well as men. Parenthood is a very important one, but not the only one.

Look at St Thomas More. He was called to be a husband and father, and he was very devoted to his family. But God called him to be a scholar, lawyer and politician as well, and he contributed greatly to the world, and was sanctified greatly in himself, in those capacities.

Then look at the ideal woman as described in Proverbs. She is a wife and mother yes, but she is a shrewd businesswoman and property owner as wel, devoting plenty of time and energy to those pursuits.
 
Last edited:
Is there a law that prohibits women from being stay at home moms?
No, just a social stigma. I still get to hear, "So are you working right now or just . . . " Um, excuse me? “Just?” Stay at home motherhood is unpaid labor, including being on call round-the-clock, for extremely demanding bosses under 5-feet tall. “Just,” indeed.

I’m not trying to portray any kind of poor-me syndrome. On the contrary, I’ve fiercely gone to bat on CAF for women who work outside the home, (no, I’m not going to go dig around for the posts). In fact, I’ve been polishing my resume just in case the right job with the right hours pops up.

You’re right about the working class distinction, although that dynamic is shifting. I stay at home because childcare will cost 3/4 of what I would earn. I do wish that women had more of a free choice in the matter.
I would strongly recommend at least part time work for everyone. Circumstances change and having an extra source of income to fall back on is something I consider prudent.
Sociologists call it the “Mommy Track.” We leave the workforce to stay home with the kids, which is certainly noble and all, but it leaves us professionally crippled. If something happens to our husbands, we suddenly find ourselves rusty on skills and with prospective employers wanting to pay us entry-level wages.
 
Last edited:
AlruwhAlquds’s point was that maybe God has a secondary vocation in mind for that person. Should a person ignore a calling from God to fit the expectations that people place on then? Is living the vocation of motherhood in a particular way more important than what God is calling a person to do?
 
We made the intentional choice for my wife to stay at home for about 18 years while we raised children. She did some playground duty at our Catholic School and volunteered on a variety of ministries and school projects. She gave up a carreer in print journalism (thank God) to be a stay at home parent. But the reality is, a good stay at home parent is not really staying at home. He/she is taking the kids out into the community in a variety of ways. And my wife included the kids in many of those ventures.

This cost us big time financially. We are short probably half a million dollars in my wife’s earnings potential, which would be our “retirement” account. We made this choice to leave behind financial prosperity and would do it again.
We gave up:
Traveling vacations
cable tv (no I’m not kidding…we’ve gone without cable tv for about 30 years now. )
We’ve owned two pickup trucks that each ended life at 17 years apiece and have had the third for 5 years and I will probably die with it.
We’ve owned three cars, all bought used. One went 16 years and the other went 12 years.

The idea that a stay at home parent must throw the family into poverty is not true. Our culture uses materialism to scare people into working to get “stuff”.
 
Last edited:
There are many reasons why women are working outside the home more. As someone up thread already mentioned, many women always worked outside the home. Before industrialization many families earned extra income in various ways based at home: weaving, spinning, brewing, making dairy products, making clothes etc. etc. Rural life was very seasonal, when there was a lull before harvest for example people did other kinds of work; men and women. Don’t forget the enormous amount of people who were servants too.

With industrialization work was moved permanently away from the home/farm/homestead/village. People had to move into cities for work and family life was now on a rigid schedule according to an employers working week. So the idea of a woman being in a home, caring for her children and not being more integrated in the community doing other kinds of work is a relatively recent historic development.

The majority of women love their children, but also in our modern world can feel quite isolated in an American neighborhood of single family homes. The more organic development of homes being close to work, church and community (all within walking distance) kept women integrated and connected to everyone around them.

I think the built environment of the USA with the advent of the car created communities less suited to the human need for community. Being a stay at home parent if you are not in the middle of a city can be isolating and lonely with a lack of adult company. When I had my first child I joined a mothers group at church and we started a program designed by a nun. In the book’s introduction the nun explained when she started working with stay at home parents the first thing she discovered was how isolated and lonely they felt, and so she designed a program to help them build community with other mothers.

In the past, without the physical separation of home and work women could be caring for children while embedded in a community.

There can be a romantic idea of what staying at home full time for years is like. Many people need more involvement in their community in various ways - including paid work outside the home. That doesn’t make them less motherly or feminist, it means they are human and would like human interaction with others over a long day. Noone would think it strange if a man found it hard it be in a suburban house with children all day. They would understand his need to balance his children’s needs with his own needs as an adult. Women are no different.
 
We both work and we don’t take traveling vacations or have cable tv. We drive cars until they die or are totaled.

The idea that families with both parents working are doing so for stuff is also not true.
 
I’ve read the article and there is no reference to secular universities as opposed to religious universities, nor to liberal arts programs at all, let alone in comparison to stem programs.
There is a reference to Kate Millet as " the mastermind of women’s studies in our universities," but Our universities is an inclusive category. Where are you finding the basis for your critique?
 
Last edited:
Indeed

I wouldn’t choose the word power but self-agency. I mean the ability and the means to chart your own way in life and not live life as a permanent minor but as an adult.

Fruitfulness in this context has been reduced to fertility. There are other ways to be fruitful without ever giving birth.

Fruitfulness and power are not mutually exclusive.
 
True - we don’t want to create a false dichotomy. Also, perhaps we need to critique the ways in which power is defined in our society (economics/politics) just as the author of the article was examining fruitfullness. To some fruitfullness is strictly about fertility, but she broadens the concept to involve spiritual parenthood and community. If we broaden our notions of power to take into consideration the forming of children at home, at school, in the broader communitiy, or to include community building efforts and the strengthening of our bonds as fellow children of God a different view of society and opportunity, and the good may emerge.
 
Before industrialization many families earned extra income in various ways based at home: weaving, spinning, brewing, making dairy products, making clothes etc. etc.
Before industrialization most production took place close to home hence the term “cottage industry “.
 
I mean the ability and the means to chart your own way in life and not live life as a permanent minor but as an adult.
Are you implying that stay at home mothers are some kind of “permanent minor”?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top