Traditional roles for men and women

[Xantippe]

Also, good schools expect more of families than they ever have. Anybody who has children in a good public or private school can expect an ongoing barrage of demands for volunteering, donations, fundraising, daily homework supervision, parent teacher meetings, evening parent meetings, history fair, science fair, projects, etc. It’s nothing like it was when we were kids.

Bad schools will probably mostly leave you alone, but that’s not ideal, either.

 

[on_the_hill]

There is historically a lot of flux in domestic duties. To give just one example, when I was a kid, ironing occupied vast amounts of my mom’s time (as well as mine and my sister’s). Nowadays, I buy no-iron dress shirts for my husband and no-iron dress shirts for my kids for school and can go years without touching an iron. However, my mother (God bless her) didn’t do a fraction of the kid-driving that I do. She had the school bus to ferry us back and forth, whereas I’m driving kids back and forth to school, camp, therapy, music lessons, etc–stuff that just didn’t exist in the world of my childhood. She also spent maybe 1/10 as much time and energy on children’s school work as my husband and I do.

Similarly, in times past, laundry was not part of the sphere of responsibility of the mother of a prosperous family. Modern progress (the washer and dryer) have saddled the middle class mother with a major job that in times past was the responsibility of…the washerwoman or laundress.

There was a reality series on PBS some years ago where an English family was put into a Victorian middle class lifestyle. One of the most interesting parts was how the father not only worked outside the home (in this family’s case, the father was an officer in the British Army) but when he got home from work his evening was filled with household chores.

To maintain a clean, pleasant lifestyle in Victorian England took enormous efforts on the parts of both husband and wife. There was no way they would’ve managed with the wife taking care of the house without the husband’s help.

 

[Xantippe]

I have a few quotes to share from one of my favorite bloggers, the Practical Conservative. She’s very interested in what traditional family life actually looked like, and what positive aspects of traditional family life we’ve lost without realizing that we’ve lost them. She writes very eloquently against the current religious conservative ideal of isolated mothers of large families doing everything by themselves, with only the help of children. This ideal, obviously, leaves mothers of small closely-spaced children high and dry.

Here are some quotes:

“SAHMs should have household help because it’s natural and normal for women to help each other along with the rearing of children and keeping of the home.”

Amen! It is normal and healthy for women to help each other. It’s traditional, it’s good for our morale, and it works.

“The outlier is the woman with perfectly pliant children and easy pregnancies and labors. And hey, even she needs household help and a little childcare too.”

“That’s why SAHMs need household help, especially childcare. There is nothing unloving, abnormal or unnatural about having a periodic break from the hard work of bearing and raising children and keeping house. What is unloving, abnormal and unnatural is the American conservative belief that technology can replace human relationships and that women don’t really have social, spiritual, intellectual or emotional needs that cannot be met in their totality by mothering, no matter how intensively.”

That last one is very important.

thepracticalconservative.wordpress.com/what-is-this-all-about/a-sahm-is-home-all-day-why-would-she-need-household-help-especially-childcare/

 

[Regina7]

I have a few quotes to share from one of my favorite bloggers, the Practical Conservative. She’s very interested in what traditional family life actually looked like, and what positive aspects of traditional family life we’ve lost without realizing that we’ve lost them. She writes very eloquently against the current religious conservative ideal of isolated mothers of large families doing everything by themselves, with only the help of children. This ideal, obviously, leaves mothers of small closely-spaced children high and dry.

Here are some quotes:

“SAHMs should have household help because it’s natural and normal for women to help each other along with the rearing of children and keeping of the home.”

Amen! It is normal and healthy for women to help each other. It’s traditional, it’s good for our morale, and it works.

“The outlier is the woman with perfectly pliant children and easy pregnancies and labors. And hey, even she needs household help and a little childcare too.”

“That’s why SAHMs need household help, especially childcare. There is nothing unloving, abnormal or unnatural about having a periodic break from the hard work of bearing and raising children and keeping house. What is unloving, abnormal and unnatural is the American conservative belief that technology can replace human relationships and that women don’t really have social, spiritual, intellectual or emotional needs that cannot be met in their totality by mothering, no matter how intensively.”

That last one is very important.

thepracticalconservative.wordpress.com/what-is-this-all-about/a-sahm-is-home-all-day-why-would-she-need-household-help-especially-childcare/

Great quotes. How many of us live within walking distance of family? I can’t send my kids next door (or have parents living in) to help if I need 20 min. or if I just want a pep talk during lunch. Despite technology, or perhaps because of it, we are more isolated than ever before. And despite what young people say, a text or even phone call is not the same as speaking to someone in person.

 

[Xantippe]

Here’s an example of a change in work for parents and how technological advances can increase productivity but also increase the work load.

Back in the good old days (i.e. when I was a kid) my parents were mostly in the dark about grades. Occasionally, a bad report card would come home, but up until then, they had no idea. Furthermore, one of my siblings apparently figured out how to intercept bad report cards and got away with it for a very long time–my parents being very distracted with their business at the time. If my parents had monitored things more closely, it would have involved a lot of hassle with regard to communications (there being no email or texting at the time and certainly no online grades) and I suspect that from 7th-12th grade it would have been a hassle even tracking down the names and phone numbers of teachers. I don’t think I can recall my parents ever communicating with any of my teachers between 7th-12 grade, although there were parent teacher conferences in elementary school. Communications between home and school in elementary school were 90% limited to notes traveling back and forth–an obviously flawed system if the child is struggling at school.

Fast forward to the present and I just checked my 8th grader’s grades from the comfort of my breakfast table. She’s got a bad grade in one class and I was emailing yesterday with her teacher for that class about how to improve her performance. They also have homework assignments listed online, so “I don’t have any homework tonight” can be checked up on if a parent has doubts.

So, as a parent you can now get a lot more done with less effort than the same tasks would have taken in the past–but a lot of new tasks (check grades, check list of homework assignments, email with teacher) have been loaded onto the parental plate.

 

[TeachCatechism]

Actually the mother as homemaker is a recent role. Traditionally she helped on farms or in factories. i’m glad we’ve moved past that to the idea that it’s best to do what works best for the couple, whether it’s a stay at home parents (of either gender), both work or something else. I’m definitely not cut out to be a homemaker and glad I have a choice.

 

[Xantippe]

Actually the mother as homemaker is a recent role. Traditionally she helped on farms or in factories. i’m glad we’ve moved past that to the idea that it’s best to do what works best for the couple, whether it’s a stay at home parents (of either gender), both work or something else. I’m definitely not cut out to be a homemaker and glad I have a choice.

And even in fairly well-off families of the past where the women were primarily homemakers (see, for example, Jane Austen’s heroines’ mothers), girls and women had a lot of responsibilities involving the home production of clothing and other textiles items, even just for home use or charitable giving, even if the family could occasionally order a dress or suit from a seamstress or tailor. Each item of clothing was much more valuable than today, as so many items were handmade for particular individuals.

With our expensive fabric and cheap finished clothes (it’s easy to find a new child’s garment for $5 that would take literally hours to make oneself), home production of clothing is now more a hobby rather than an economic necessity, but women of the past contributed substantially to family economic welfare through textile work. (See, for example the Proverbs 31 woman, who runs what seems to be a weaving workshop out of her home among her many other endeavors. She wasn’t “helping” in a workshop–it was her workshop.)

 

[TeachCatechism]

And even in fairly well-off families of the past where the women were primarily homemakers (see, for example, Jane Austen’s heroines’ mothers), girls and women had a lot of responsibilities involving the home production of clothing and other textiles items, even just for home use or charitable giving, even if the family could occasionally order a dress or suit from a seamstress or tailor. Each item of clothing was much more valuable than today, as so many items were handmade for particular individuals.

With our expensive fabric and cheap finished clothes (it’s easy to find a new child’s garment for $5 that would take literally hours to make oneself), home production of clothing is now more a hobby rather than an economic necessity, but women of the past contributed substantially to family economic welfare through textile work. (See, for example the Proverbs 31 woman, who runs what seems to be a weaving workshop out of her home among her many other endeavors. She wasn’t “helping” in a workshop–it was her workshop.)

Very true. I often read Laura Ingalls Wilder’s books and think about having to make clothes. In their cases they made it for themselves but many others did to raise money, along with other things like open stores.

 

[EasterJoy]

Very true. I often read Laura Ingalls Wilder’s books and think about having to make clothes. In their cases they made it for themselves but many others did to raise money, along with other things like open stores.

Keep in mind, though, that the *Little House on the Prairie *books describe living conditions that were pretty primitive even for the 1870s and 1880s. Many settlers found homesteading so much more difficult than the typical American life that they decided to quit or had to admit failure. Only 40% “proved up” their claims and earned the deed to the properties they chose to settle. Whatever “traditional” divisions of labor were, the work and the life of people back then wasn’t always that hard.

Historians also say that the spheres of “men’s” and “women’s” work were not nearly so separate before the Industrial Revolution as afterward, while the amount of work done to “keep” a house actually increased. (For instance, carpets that had to be regularly vacuumed after the invention of the vacuum cleaner were only taken out to be beaten a few times a year before that. The house was a lot cleaner, but the work load had gone up.)

 

[TeachCatechism]

Keep in mind, though, that the *Little House on the Prairie *books describe living conditions that were pretty primitive even for the 1870s and 1880s. Many settlers found homesteading so much more difficult than the typical American life that they decided to quit or had to admit failure. Only 40% “proved up” their claims and earned the deed to the properties they chose to settle. Whatever “traditional” divisions of labor were, the work and the life of people back then wasn’t always that hard.

Historians also say that the spheres of “men’s” and “women’s” work were not nearly so separate before the Industrial Revolution as afterward, while the amount of work done to “keep” a house actually increased. (For instance, carpets that had to be regularly vacuumed after the invention of the vacuum cleaner were only taken out to be beaten a few times a year before that. The house was a lot cleaner, but the work load had gone up.)

I also know Wilder changed a lot to make it seem more authentic but so much of it seems cool, like the neighbors doing things together.

 

[EasterJoy]

I also know Wilder changed a lot to make it seem more authentic but so much of it seems cool, like the neighbors doing things together.

I grew up in a very small place. It is cool, you are right, and yet you have to be careful around people who are all you are going to get for the next 50 years. You don’t want to get any grudges going!

The main problem, though, was the isolation. The Little House books told the story as any of us would, without describing the tedious parts in all their detail. It was both tedious and dangerous how isolated settlers trying to prove a claim were. Now we can be very isolated while packed with neighbors on both sides of us, because everyone is so “busy.” We aren’t so far from medical help that we essentially don’t have any, liable to die of an infection or have ourselves killed outright by a farm accident. I would not trade now for then, no matter what role I got, not even if I were made a queen. I would have almost certainly died in childbirth, and if I’d have survived it I’d be as blind as a bat without my progressive lenses!

 

[TeachCatechism]

I grew up in a very small place. It is cool, you are right, and yet you have to be careful around people who are all you are going to get for the next 50 years. You don’t want to get any grudges going!

The main problem, though, was the isolation. The Little House books told the story as any of us would, without describing the tedious parts in all their detail. It was both tedious and dangerous how isolated settlers trying to prove a claim were. Now we can be very isolated while packed with neighbors on both sides of us, because everyone is so “busy.” We aren’t so far from medical help that we essentially don’t have any, liable to die of an infection or have ourselves killed outright by a farm accident. I would not trade now for then, no matter what role I got, not even if I were made a queen. I would have almost certainly died in childbirth, and if I’d have survived it I’d be as blind as a bat without my progressive lenses!

Exactly. While it seems glamorous to some extent the idea of things like childbirth would scare me. I’m glad we have more medical advances.

 

[Xantippe]

I grew up in a very small place. It is cool, you are right, and yet you have to be careful around people who are all you are going to get for the next 50 years. You don’t want to get any grudges going!

The main problem, though, was the isolation. The Little House books told the story as any of us would, without describing the tedious parts in all their detail. It was both tedious and dangerous how isolated settlers trying to prove a claim were. Now we can be very isolated while packed with neighbors on both sides of us, because everyone is so “busy.” We aren’t so far from medical help that we essentially don’t have any, liable to die of an infection or have ourselves killed outright by a farm accident. I would not trade now for then, no matter what role I got, not even if I were made a queen. I would have almost certainly died in childbirth, and if I’d have survived it I’d be as blind as a bat without my progressive lenses!

The other issue is that the Little House Books show the situation from the point of view of a child, to whom everything is fresh and new and fun. Mom might have a very different view.

In real life, Charles and Caroline eventually moved into town.

“In 1879 they settled on a homestead near De Smet. When Charles and Caroline Ingalls decided to sell their farm because of the persistent pattern of dry years of weather, combined with Charles Ingalls’ advancing age and inability to take care of his large acreage, he built the family a home on Third Street in the town of De Smet in Dakota Territory. He made his living primarily as a carpenter from that time onward until his death of heart disease at age 66.”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caroline_Ingalls

Failure at farming also afflicted Laura Ingalls Wilder herself and her husband.

“Their first few years of marriage for the Wilders were frequently difficult. Complications from a life-threatening bout of diphtheria left Wilder’s husband partially paralyzed. While he eventually regained nearly full use of his legs, he needed a cane to walk for the remainder of his life. This setback, among many others, began a series of disastrous events that included the death of their newborn son; the destruction of their barn along with its hay and grain by a mysterious fire; the total loss of their home from a fire accidentally set by their daughter; and several years of severe drought that left them in debt, physically ill, and unable to earn a living from their 320 acres (129.5 hectares) of prairie land. These trials were documented Ingalls Wilder’s book The First Four Years. Around 1890, the couple left De Smet and spent about a year resting at the home of her husband’s parents in Spring Valley, Minnesota farm before moving briefly to Westville, Florida. In search of a climate to improve her husband’s health, the pair relocated to Florida.”

“In 1894, the Wilder family moved to Mansfield, Missouri, and used their savings to make the down payment on an undeveloped property just outside town. They named the place Rocky Ridge Farm and moved into a ramshackle log cabin. At first, Wilder and her husband earned income only from wagon loads of fire wood they would sell in town for fifty cents. Financial security came slowly. Apple trees they planted did not bear fruit for seven years. Wilder’s parents-in-law visited around that time and gave them the deed to the house they had been renting in Mansfield, which was the economic jump start they needed.”

“An invitation to submit an article to the Missouri Ruralist in 1911 led to Wilder’s [that’s Laura from Little House on the Prairie] permanent position as a columnist and editor with that publication, which she held until the mid-1920s. She also took a paid position with the local Farm Loan Association, dispensing small loans to local farmers.”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_Ingalls_Wilder

It’s very ironic that Laura Ingalls Wilder’s books have done more than anything to glorify the American homesteader lifestyle and yet her family (hard-working as they were) couldn’t hack farming, or at least couldn’t survive just on farming income.

 

[pensmama87]

It’s very ironic that Laura Ingalls Wilder’s books have done more than anything to glorify the American homesteader lifestyle and yet her family (hard-working as they were) couldn’t hack farming, or at least couldn’t survive just on farming income.

I think that later books were much more upfront about this, which makes sense because Laura got older and began to understand things that she wouldn’t have understood as a child. One line in particular that always stuck out to me in the second-to-last book was when her father said he was going to give up growing crops and raise cattle instead. Shortly after that she married and the crops failed year after year for one reason or another.

(No offense to the good people of the Dakotas, but one lesson I learned even reading through those books at 8-9 years old was that the weather there is absolutely brutal. No thanks.)

IIRC the family ended up being much more prosperous in Missouri, though yes even then they brought in supplemental income from writing and other activities.

 

[Xantippe]

I think that later books were much more upfront about this, which makes sense because Laura got older and began to understand things that she wouldn’t have understood as a child. One line in particular that always stuck out to me in the second-to-last book was when her father said he was going to give up growing crops and raise cattle instead. Shortly after that she married and the crops failed year after year for one reason or another.

(No offense to the good people of the Dakotas, but one lesson I learned even reading through those books at 8-9 years old was that the weather there is absolutely brutal. No thanks.)

IIRC the family ended up being much more prosperous in Missouri, though yes even then they brought in supplemental income from writing and other activities.

Yes. Lots of good points.

It’s one thing to make do as a child for whom it’s all an exciting adventure!!! It’s another to make do as an adult who has seen better and is responsible for making what little there is go around.

 

[TeachCatechism]

The other issue is that the Little House Books show the situation from the point of view of a child, to whom everything is fresh and new and fun. Mom might have a very different view.

In real life, Charles and Caroline eventually moved into town.

“In 1879 they settled on a homestead near De Smet. When Charles and Caroline Ingalls decided to sell their farm because of the persistent pattern of dry years of weather, combined with Charles Ingalls’ advancing age and inability to take care of his large acreage, he built the family a home on Third Street in the town of De Smet in Dakota Territory. He made his living primarily as a carpenter from that time onward until his death of heart disease at age 66.”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caroline_Ingalls

Failure at farming also afflicted Laura Ingalls Wilder herself and her husband.

“Their first few years of marriage for the Wilders were frequently difficult. Complications from a life-threatening bout of diphtheria left Wilder’s husband partially paralyzed. While he eventually regained nearly full use of his legs, he needed a cane to walk for the remainder of his life. This setback, among many others, began a series of disastrous events that included the death of their newborn son; the destruction of their barn along with its hay and grain by a mysterious fire; the total loss of their home from a fire accidentally set by their daughter; and several years of severe drought that left them in debt, physically ill, and unable to earn a living from their 320 acres (129.5 hectares) of prairie land. These trials were documented Ingalls Wilder’s book The First Four Years. Around 1890, the couple left De Smet and spent about a year resting at the home of her husband’s parents in Spring Valley, Minnesota farm before moving briefly to Westville, Florida. In search of a climate to improve her husband’s health, the pair relocated to Florida.”

“In 1894, the Wilder family moved to Mansfield, Missouri, and used their savings to make the down payment on an undeveloped property just outside town. They named the place Rocky Ridge Farm and moved into a ramshackle log cabin. At first, Wilder and her husband earned income only from wagon loads of fire wood they would sell in town for fifty cents. Financial security came slowly. Apple trees they planted did not bear fruit for seven years. Wilder’s parents-in-law visited around that time and gave them the deed to the house they had been renting in Mansfield, which was the economic jump start they needed.”

“An invitation to submit an article to the Missouri Ruralist in 1911 led to Wilder’s [that’s Laura from Little House on the Prairie] permanent position as a columnist and editor with that publication, which she held until the mid-1920s. She also took a paid position with the local Farm Loan Association, dispensing small loans to local farmers.”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_Ingalls_Wilder

It’s very ironic that Laura Ingalls Wilder’s books have done more than anything to glorify the American homesteader lifestyle and yet her family (hard-working as they were) couldn’t hack farming, or at least couldn’t survive just on farming income.

Speaking of Wilder, her real autobiography was recently published and considerably different and adult. In fact this is what she was trying to get published originally but no one wanted this book so she made her stories for child and toned them down. It really goes into a few things that were very adult, like alcoholics and a guy who tried to sexually assault her.

 

[Xantippe]

Speaking of Wilder, her real autobiography was recently published and considerably different and adult. In fact this is what she was trying to get published originally but no one wanted this book so she made her stories for child and toned them down. It really goes into a few things that were very adult, like alcoholics and a guy who tried to sexually assault her.

That’s in my Amazon cart.

I’m also planning to read some 19th century female authors’ biographies–Harriet Beecher Stowe, Jane Austen, Louisa May Alcott.

I read LMA’s short memoir about her father’s utopian community a couple years ago, and it was absolutely HARROWING.

womenshistory.about.com/od/alcottlouisamay/a/lma_transcend.htm

 

[ToeInTheWater]

Speaking of Wilder, her real autobiography was recently published and considerably different and adult. In fact this is what she was trying to get published originally but no one wanted this book so she made her stories for child and toned them down. It really goes into a few things that were very adult, like alcoholics and a guy who tried to sexually assault her.

I loved the Little House books, but I also understood fairly early on that they were based on the author’s life, not meant to be a completely accurate depiction of what really happened – especially the Little House in the Big Woods and Little House on The Prairie books, that took place when Laura was 5 and 7 years old, respectively. I myself have only hazy memories of my early childhood. I wasn’t surprised at all to eventually find out that the Ingalls actually lived on the Prairie BEFORE living in the Big Woods.

I also always wondered why there is a big chronological gap between On the Banks of Plum Creek and On the Shores of Silver Lake, and apparently this gap contained a lot of very painful memories for Wilder, that she couldn’t manage to sanitize at all.

However, while the Little House books were certainly deliberately child-friendly, from what I understand, they were still advanced compared to other “children’s books” of that time period. The grittier realities aren’t completely erased, either, just alluded to subtly enough that younger kids wouldn’t notice.

But, as soon as I understood the concept of sexual assault, it seemed obvious to me this was one of the real fears Laura had when she set out, as a 16 year old, to teach students that included tough older boys. And while I might be influenced by the TV show, which made it very obvious, or even by (unfortunately) my own childhood, I also recall thinking that Mr. Edwards probably had a drinking problem.

But even without bringing up “adult” issues, note that even Laura being jealous of Mary earlier in life, and later resentful of being expected to work to help support her, yet guilty for that resentment knowing it was directed against a blind girl, which were obviously very human responses, were not “normal” for children’s books at the time aimed at the same target demographic. Many other children’s books of the time were meant to teach black and white moral lessons, and depicted children as either perfect angels who reaped the rewards of goodness, or “naughty” and deserving of whatever punishment doled out to them at the end.

Now, granted, Little Women was written even earlier and also shows sibling rivalries, but that was meant for a slightly older demographic than that of the Little House books.

Though I guess this really moves the topic away from the “traditional roles” discussion.