This thread in the Livejournal Feminist community is not really about the cost of daycare and who bears it when both parents work outside the home, and neither is this comment. However, the writer reminded me of something that burns me up whenever I think about it.
It also works because good daycare in my county runs $1500+ a month. When you add up that, gasoline, lunches, work clothes, and other expenses related to full-time employment, I might clear $200-$300 a month. That's not empowering in the slightest. That gives me no power. My power has to come from other places (and fortunately, it does).
This, of course, is the hoary, outdated, insulting and sexist expectation that if the wife works outside the home, her salary should go towards paying the childcare.
That is patently ridiculous. If both parents work, the husband should contribute at least half the cost of daycare out of his check. If he earns more than his wife (which is still the case a great deal of the time) he should contribute proportionately more. Either way, the wife should not pay for daycare completely on her own. It seems to me this is a subtle form of punishment: dare to be anything but a mother, suffer the consequences.
I think issues like this (and at the heart of it, we're really talking about the division of power within the home) should be worked out long before children enter the picture. As in: If you don't help out, there won't be any children, ever. I think some things are worth issuing ultimatums on, and this might be one of them.
----------------
Now playing: Donna Summer - She Works Hard For The Money
via FoxyTunes
Showing posts with label marriage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label marriage. Show all posts
August 8, 2007
July 25, 2007
No Jackasses Allowed
Since I'm still caught up in the previous post's rampant jackassery, I thought for comparision purposes I would write out my idea of a true Christian husband.
A TRUE CHRISTIAN HUSBAND...
...is humble, respectful, approachable, and kind.
...is never domineering, bossy or tyrannical.
...realizes his position of greater spiritual responsibility in the household does not entitle him to demand anything.
...views his wife as an equal partner, not a subordinate.
...looks at his home not as "mine," but "ours," whether or not his wife works outside the house.
...does not demand that his wife work or not work. She is an adult, and that decision must be hers.
...asks or suggests, never dictates.
...knows that in today's world, most of the time one person cannot provide the entire support for a household. If his wife earns more than him, he will rejoice in her competence and ability and will not get snippy or jealous. Her earning power has nothing to do with his masculinity.
...does not require his wife to sacrifice her dreams for the children.
...always consults his wife before a major decision.
...does not try to make his wife do anything she does not want to do.
...never forces his wife to have sex. Neither does he nag or bully her. Her honest "no" is always respected.
...realizes the best way to have a good sex life is to work on the other aspects of the marriage--affection, consideration, communication, mutual respect.
...does not divide the housework into Men's Work and Women's Work. It's all work, and somebody has to do it.
...does not hold to rigid gender roles. If his wife does not like to cook, and he does, or if she likes to keep up the yard (or the car) and he does not, he will let each of them follow his/her natural path.
...will not sit on his ass in front of the TV and wait for his wife to cook and clean. If he sees a chore needs to be done, he will do it.
...will not demand that his wife have children. Some women are not cut out to be mothers. (I know; I'm one of them, and a kid would, frankly, make me miserable.) He will also not attempt to sabotage whatever method of birth control he and his wife have decided on.
...does not "babysit" his own child.
...seeks to be a parent, not a "helper." Perhaps he could take paternity leave after his wife is finished with her maternity leave.
...is not so caught up in the role of "provider" (though that is necessary, and Scriptural) that his family never sees him. A forty-hour week is plenty. If the job requires more, perhaps the job should be re-evaluated.
...works with his wife so she can have a successful career along with motherhood, if this is what she wants to do.
...does not let his sons boss or bully their sisters.
...does not clamp down on his daughters while his sons get away with murder.
..makes sure even if/after children come along, his wife is his priority.
I'm sure I could, and will, think of more. But I cannot stand the notion--which I see far too often--that being a Christian husband means becoming some kind of headship-obsessed despot. That is not the way it should work, and if a man claims to be following Christ, he will not approach his marriage in such a manner.
A TRUE CHRISTIAN HUSBAND...
...is humble, respectful, approachable, and kind.
...is never domineering, bossy or tyrannical.
...realizes his position of greater spiritual responsibility in the household does not entitle him to demand anything.
...views his wife as an equal partner, not a subordinate.
...looks at his home not as "mine," but "ours," whether or not his wife works outside the house.
...does not demand that his wife work or not work. She is an adult, and that decision must be hers.
...asks or suggests, never dictates.
...knows that in today's world, most of the time one person cannot provide the entire support for a household. If his wife earns more than him, he will rejoice in her competence and ability and will not get snippy or jealous. Her earning power has nothing to do with his masculinity.
...does not require his wife to sacrifice her dreams for the children.
...always consults his wife before a major decision.
...does not try to make his wife do anything she does not want to do.
...never forces his wife to have sex. Neither does he nag or bully her. Her honest "no" is always respected.
...realizes the best way to have a good sex life is to work on the other aspects of the marriage--affection, consideration, communication, mutual respect.
...does not divide the housework into Men's Work and Women's Work. It's all work, and somebody has to do it.
...does not hold to rigid gender roles. If his wife does not like to cook, and he does, or if she likes to keep up the yard (or the car) and he does not, he will let each of them follow his/her natural path.
...will not sit on his ass in front of the TV and wait for his wife to cook and clean. If he sees a chore needs to be done, he will do it.
...will not demand that his wife have children. Some women are not cut out to be mothers. (I know; I'm one of them, and a kid would, frankly, make me miserable.) He will also not attempt to sabotage whatever method of birth control he and his wife have decided on.
...does not "babysit" his own child.
...seeks to be a parent, not a "helper." Perhaps he could take paternity leave after his wife is finished with her maternity leave.
...is not so caught up in the role of "provider" (though that is necessary, and Scriptural) that his family never sees him. A forty-hour week is plenty. If the job requires more, perhaps the job should be re-evaluated.
...works with his wife so she can have a successful career along with motherhood, if this is what she wants to do.
...does not let his sons boss or bully their sisters.
...does not clamp down on his daughters while his sons get away with murder.
..makes sure even if/after children come along, his wife is his priority.
I'm sure I could, and will, think of more. But I cannot stand the notion--which I see far too often--that being a Christian husband means becoming some kind of headship-obsessed despot. That is not the way it should work, and if a man claims to be following Christ, he will not approach his marriage in such a manner.
July 6, 2007
Marriage, Continued
A commenter on the previous post asked what I thought the raison d'etre of marriage is.
After I found out what that meant (sorry, I don't speak any other language but English, and sometimes I wonder about that) my thoughts are as follows.
The reason and/or justification of marriage is, or should be, the happiness and well-being of the two adults who enter into it. I know this is not the historical definition: for much of Western civilization, economic, inheritance and/or property issues were the main reasons for marriage, and love did not (usually) enter into it. (In other words, wives were viewed as walking inheritance machines, owned by the husband for the express purpose of procreation. That must have been a heck of a realization for the children, to know you were conceived for the sole reason of preserving the property. Still, that's the way they were raised, so they wouldn't have thought much about it.)
It's not that way anymore, thank God. In our day and age, most of us don't expect to inherit money or property; we expect to work for it. With marriage divorced (pardon the pun) from inheritance issues, it becomes instead a vehicle for long-term commitment, and the welfare of those who so commit. As such, children don't even have to enter into it, except if and when the adults involved wish it.
That's as it should be, in my opinion. I'm sure some will construe such a definition as "selfish," but then the question becomes why? What does selfishness or unselfishness have to do with the begetting and raising of children? I'm sure we've all seen non-parents who spend their lives in the service of others (think Mother Teresa) and parents who are the nastiest, most self-absorbed people you can imagine, to the detriment of their children.
In other words, childbearing and marriage should be two entirely separate issues, neither one contingent on the other.
Of course, to carry such an idea out requires universal sex education and birth control, and (frankly) women being encouraged to put themselves first, instead of the current ridiculous emphasis on "motherly sacrifice."
After I found out what that meant (sorry, I don't speak any other language but English, and sometimes I wonder about that) my thoughts are as follows.
The reason and/or justification of marriage is, or should be, the happiness and well-being of the two adults who enter into it. I know this is not the historical definition: for much of Western civilization, economic, inheritance and/or property issues were the main reasons for marriage, and love did not (usually) enter into it. (In other words, wives were viewed as walking inheritance machines, owned by the husband for the express purpose of procreation. That must have been a heck of a realization for the children, to know you were conceived for the sole reason of preserving the property. Still, that's the way they were raised, so they wouldn't have thought much about it.)
It's not that way anymore, thank God. In our day and age, most of us don't expect to inherit money or property; we expect to work for it. With marriage divorced (pardon the pun) from inheritance issues, it becomes instead a vehicle for long-term commitment, and the welfare of those who so commit. As such, children don't even have to enter into it, except if and when the adults involved wish it.
That's as it should be, in my opinion. I'm sure some will construe such a definition as "selfish," but then the question becomes why? What does selfishness or unselfishness have to do with the begetting and raising of children? I'm sure we've all seen non-parents who spend their lives in the service of others (think Mother Teresa) and parents who are the nastiest, most self-absorbed people you can imagine, to the detriment of their children.
In other words, childbearing and marriage should be two entirely separate issues, neither one contingent on the other.
Of course, to carry such an idea out requires universal sex education and birth control, and (frankly) women being encouraged to put themselves first, instead of the current ridiculous emphasis on "motherly sacrifice."
July 1, 2007
2007 Marriage Survey
This survey gives some interesting (and to me, encouraging) results.
Chores Outrank Kids in Today's Marriages
(I tried to find the same graphic that was printed in my paper, but I don't seem to know where to look. So, via some tedious hand-coding--go me!--here is my tally of the results.)
Marriage views/factors associated with a successful marriage
Faithfulness--93% (2007)
95% (1990)
Happy sexual relationship--70% (2007)
67% (1990)
Sharing household chores--62% (2007)
47% (1990)
Adequate income--53% (2007)
46% (1990)
Good housing--51% (2007)
42% (1990)
Shared religious beliefs--49% (2007)
45% (1990)
Shared tastes and interests--46% (2007)
44% (1990)
Children--41% (2007)
65% (1990)
Agreement on politics--12% (2007)
11% (1990)
Source: Pew Research Center (although for the life of me I couldn't find this survey on the site. I guess I wasn't entering the right search terms).
Of course, the two biggest differences in seventeen years are "shared household chores" rising, and "children" plummeting. This encourages me because it shows more women are demanding that their husbands/boyfriends do their fair share around the house (and not just the typical male "outside" stuff). This business of locked-in gender roles (male: provider and female: homemaker) is stale and stultifying, and long past due to be demolished. Frankly, the "second shift" for a working wife is nonsense, and more women need to insist that their husbands step up to the plate.
(How to do that? I would say--not being the passive-aggressive sort--nag, scream, yell, throw a complete foot-stomping fit if need be. If he won't get off his butt then, tell him to get the hell out. If I have to work and do all the household chores myself, you're not a husband; you're a leech.)
The status of "children" being so far down as a predictor of satisfaction confirms what I have thought for some time: kids are not, and should not, be the be-all and end-all of marriage. The two adults came first, after all. (Of course, I'm not one to sacrifice my "me-time" for anything, which is why I am quite happily childless.) Naturally, this development rings all kinds of alarm bells among family-policy experts, which is why this pithy quote from Barbara Dafoe Whitehead is included:
"The popular culture is increasingly oriented to fulfilling the X-rated fantasies and desires of adults," she wrote in a recent report. "Child-rearing values - sacrifice, stability, dependability, maturity - seem stale and musty by comparison."
Funny, I didn't think anything on that list was X-rated (unless you're an atheist talking about "shared religious beliefs") and I personally have never connected sacrifice, stability, dependability, and maturity exclusively to child-rearing. Those qualities would seem to come in just as handy to building a good career (and a good marriage, for that matter).
Besides which, the 800-pound gorilla in the room nobody wants to talk about is the fact that we've got too many frakking people on the planet already. If today's educated, First World masses have realized this (and apparently they have, judging from the plummeting birth rates) this can only be a good thing. Now, of course, we need to have the Third Worlders take control of themselves, their economies, and their countries--and one great way of doing this is to have women take control of their reproduction.
To do that, we have to get past the mind-set that marriage exists solely in reproductive terms. It does not and should not. The survey recognizes this: by an almost 3-to-1 margin, "Americans say the main purpose of marriage is the 'mutual happiness and fulfillment' of adults rather than the 'bearing and raising of children.' "
Amen to that, sista. When that attitude spreads worldwide--and with it, the level of stability and technology to make it possible--I think the world will be a better place.
Chores Outrank Kids in Today's Marriages
(I tried to find the same graphic that was printed in my paper, but I don't seem to know where to look. So, via some tedious hand-coding--go me!--here is my tally of the results.)
Marriage views/factors associated with a successful marriage
Faithfulness--93% (2007)
95% (1990)
Happy sexual relationship--70% (2007)
67% (1990)
Sharing household chores--62% (2007)
47% (1990)
Adequate income--53% (2007)
46% (1990)
Good housing--51% (2007)
42% (1990)
Shared religious beliefs--49% (2007)
45% (1990)
Shared tastes and interests--46% (2007)
44% (1990)
Children--41% (2007)
65% (1990)
Agreement on politics--12% (2007)
11% (1990)
Source: Pew Research Center (although for the life of me I couldn't find this survey on the site. I guess I wasn't entering the right search terms).
Of course, the two biggest differences in seventeen years are "shared household chores" rising, and "children" plummeting. This encourages me because it shows more women are demanding that their husbands/boyfriends do their fair share around the house (and not just the typical male "outside" stuff). This business of locked-in gender roles (male: provider and female: homemaker) is stale and stultifying, and long past due to be demolished. Frankly, the "second shift" for a working wife is nonsense, and more women need to insist that their husbands step up to the plate.
(How to do that? I would say--not being the passive-aggressive sort--nag, scream, yell, throw a complete foot-stomping fit if need be. If he won't get off his butt then, tell him to get the hell out. If I have to work and do all the household chores myself, you're not a husband; you're a leech.)
The status of "children" being so far down as a predictor of satisfaction confirms what I have thought for some time: kids are not, and should not, be the be-all and end-all of marriage. The two adults came first, after all. (Of course, I'm not one to sacrifice my "me-time" for anything, which is why I am quite happily childless.) Naturally, this development rings all kinds of alarm bells among family-policy experts, which is why this pithy quote from Barbara Dafoe Whitehead is included:
"The popular culture is increasingly oriented to fulfilling the X-rated fantasies and desires of adults," she wrote in a recent report. "Child-rearing values - sacrifice, stability, dependability, maturity - seem stale and musty by comparison."
Funny, I didn't think anything on that list was X-rated (unless you're an atheist talking about "shared religious beliefs") and I personally have never connected sacrifice, stability, dependability, and maturity exclusively to child-rearing. Those qualities would seem to come in just as handy to building a good career (and a good marriage, for that matter).
Besides which, the 800-pound gorilla in the room nobody wants to talk about is the fact that we've got too many frakking people on the planet already. If today's educated, First World masses have realized this (and apparently they have, judging from the plummeting birth rates) this can only be a good thing. Now, of course, we need to have the Third Worlders take control of themselves, their economies, and their countries--and one great way of doing this is to have women take control of their reproduction.
To do that, we have to get past the mind-set that marriage exists solely in reproductive terms. It does not and should not. The survey recognizes this: by an almost 3-to-1 margin, "Americans say the main purpose of marriage is the 'mutual happiness and fulfillment' of adults rather than the 'bearing and raising of children.' "
Amen to that, sista. When that attitude spreads worldwide--and with it, the level of stability and technology to make it possible--I think the world will be a better place.
May 7, 2006
The Marriage Trap
This is a very interesting article about a woman's need to protect financial assets during and after marriage.
I think it's something every woman should consider, whether or not she calls herself a Christian. We've all heard the exhortations about marriage from the platform, and read them in our Bibles. God does intend, and expects, marriage to last forever, and you should enter into it with that viewpoint. This is why, in my congregation, young people are urged to wait until they marry. They are told to know themselves first, to live as single adults for a few years, and gain some maturity before undertaking this permanent relationship.
Most people, secular or religious, don't get married with the idea that it might someday fail. To do so is considered unromantic and cynical, and even counter-productive. "How can you make a go of your marriage if you're already planning for divorce?" is considered a pertinent question by many. The end result of this societal pressure is a lot of people bind themselves to another person with no more forethought than what they're going to have for dinner that night.
But divorce statistics tell another story. The facts are that nearly fifty percent of first marriages end in divorce, with an even higher percentage for second marriages. The stats for committed Christians are likely lower, but the fact remains that a Christian woman's marriage might end in divorce, no matter how hard she tries. This was true even in Bible times, as Paul wrote.
"But if the husband or wife who isn't a Christian is eager to leave, it is permitted. In such cases the Christian husband or wife should not insist that the other stay, for God wants his children to live in peace and harmony." (1 Corinthians 7:15)
This is referring to a Christian married to a non-Christian, but the principle applies in Christian marriages also. If your spouse really wants to leave, you can't hog-tie him or her into staying. Sometimes one person isn't as committed to God and partner as the other, and a Christian wife should recognize that this might take place.
Therefore, I believe all Christian women, before entering into marriage, should take steps to ensure their assets are protected.
If this sounds like a lack of trust, so be it. In my case, my future husband's refusal to sign a prenuptial agreement would be a deal-breaker. People do change throughout life, sometimes not for the better, and I'm not about to risk the money and property I've worked hard for two decades to acquire. (Obviously, this would have to be discussed long before the marriage took place. A man's chronic inability to handle money, as opposed to a genuine bad break, is such a red flag for me it's highly unlikely the relationship would ever make it to that point.) I would be happy to sign a dual prenuptial agreement--each spouse, in the event of divorce, keeps assets acquired before the marriage, and only money and property acquired during marriage is divided. (In a community property state like mine, I'm sure there would have to be a lot of legalese accompanying this, as well as things like separate checking accounts to make sure the assets aren't co-mingled.)
I don't believe it's sinful or un-Christian to insist on this. Since it's an established fact that women fare worse after divorce than men, especially women with children, a woman should think ahead and make sure she is protected. A good credit rating is worth more than gold or diamonds nowadays--everyone checks on it, from employers to insurance companies. If I think a prospective husband is going to drag me down, he's not going to be around, and it's as simple as that.
I think it's something every woman should consider, whether or not she calls herself a Christian. We've all heard the exhortations about marriage from the platform, and read them in our Bibles. God does intend, and expects, marriage to last forever, and you should enter into it with that viewpoint. This is why, in my congregation, young people are urged to wait until they marry. They are told to know themselves first, to live as single adults for a few years, and gain some maturity before undertaking this permanent relationship.
Most people, secular or religious, don't get married with the idea that it might someday fail. To do so is considered unromantic and cynical, and even counter-productive. "How can you make a go of your marriage if you're already planning for divorce?" is considered a pertinent question by many. The end result of this societal pressure is a lot of people bind themselves to another person with no more forethought than what they're going to have for dinner that night.
But divorce statistics tell another story. The facts are that nearly fifty percent of first marriages end in divorce, with an even higher percentage for second marriages. The stats for committed Christians are likely lower, but the fact remains that a Christian woman's marriage might end in divorce, no matter how hard she tries. This was true even in Bible times, as Paul wrote.
"But if the husband or wife who isn't a Christian is eager to leave, it is permitted. In such cases the Christian husband or wife should not insist that the other stay, for God wants his children to live in peace and harmony." (1 Corinthians 7:15)
This is referring to a Christian married to a non-Christian, but the principle applies in Christian marriages also. If your spouse really wants to leave, you can't hog-tie him or her into staying. Sometimes one person isn't as committed to God and partner as the other, and a Christian wife should recognize that this might take place.
Therefore, I believe all Christian women, before entering into marriage, should take steps to ensure their assets are protected.
If this sounds like a lack of trust, so be it. In my case, my future husband's refusal to sign a prenuptial agreement would be a deal-breaker. People do change throughout life, sometimes not for the better, and I'm not about to risk the money and property I've worked hard for two decades to acquire. (Obviously, this would have to be discussed long before the marriage took place. A man's chronic inability to handle money, as opposed to a genuine bad break, is such a red flag for me it's highly unlikely the relationship would ever make it to that point.) I would be happy to sign a dual prenuptial agreement--each spouse, in the event of divorce, keeps assets acquired before the marriage, and only money and property acquired during marriage is divided. (In a community property state like mine, I'm sure there would have to be a lot of legalese accompanying this, as well as things like separate checking accounts to make sure the assets aren't co-mingled.)
I don't believe it's sinful or un-Christian to insist on this. Since it's an established fact that women fare worse after divorce than men, especially women with children, a woman should think ahead and make sure she is protected. A good credit rating is worth more than gold or diamonds nowadays--everyone checks on it, from employers to insurance companies. If I think a prospective husband is going to drag me down, he's not going to be around, and it's as simple as that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)