Women should stay out of workforce (Letter to Editor)

Washington Observer-Reporter ^ | August 14, 2012 | Donn C. Drummond

[rightwingintelligentsia]

Prior to World War II and immediately thereafter, most married women in this country worked in their homes raising their children and keeping house. Then during the late 1960s, radical feminists encouraged young women to set aside their traditional family roles as homemakers, helpmates, child nurturers and husband civilizers for something trumpted as much more rewarding.

Women were told that being a stay-at-home mom was nothing more than enslavement perpetrated by their male chauvinist husbands. Forget family life and children. Women could be happy and achieve fulfillment by capably competing with men in the workplace for equal jobs with equal pay.

--snip--

What would happen today if most married women remained in the home fulfilling their traditional family roles? Think about how salaries and wages for men would move upward if a shortage of labor prevailed in this country.

[samiam1972]

I think this is spot on. I’d go even further. I think men should be the head of the household and women should do everything in their power to use the husband’s money as frugally as possible so that the man doesn’t feel like he has to be a slave to his job in order to pay for the wife’s laziness at home or her wish list for unnecessary desires like fancy hair and nails. Before you yell at me, I am a SAHM, not a man.

I also think that sending my husband off to work every day to hang out with a bunch of single or divorced women is awful. I hate it! I trust him completely but with so much smut in the world, it is always going to be a challenge. How many affairs start in the office place? It’s just asking for trouble.

A mother can only make a living on her own without a man if she is neglecting her duties at home. We absolutely need stronger men, not these wimpy effeminate girly men I see so much of today. I’m not talking gay, just men who let or expect women to make all the decisions. Ugh! We all need to start fulfilling our roles as God intended.

Go ahead. Yell at me. I can take it. I think.

[Sherman Logan]

divorce statistics show that the standard of living for men goes up and for women goes way down when they divorce.

Feminist myth. For most men, standard of living drops by 10% to 40% in the years after a divorce.

http://divorce.usu.edu/files/uploads/Lesson7.pdf

[ScottinVA]

I work out with some 2nd generation muslims and we talk about this all the time. The younger ones love their western freedoms.

Of course they do... now. When in Germany in 1989-91, I regularly talked to muslims on the block where I lived... they liked living in a modern, western country as well. Fast forward to now, in which many small-town churches are being converted to mosques as the Muslim population -- the fastest growing in Germany -- comprises currently 3% of that population and many refuse to assimilate. The city of Dortmund has been hit especially hard by the influx of Turks and other muslims, and have engaged in open harassment of "infidel" women.

It won't happen in the near future, because of the sheer numbers of non-muslims in this country, but they bear watching by future generations.

[yldstrk]

“After correcting the data file, Peterson arrived at figures more in line with national studies, with women’s standard of living decreasing by 27 percent in the first year after divorce and men’s standard of living increasing by 10 percent. “

http://www.acbr.com/biglie.htm

[yldstrk]

I am with you except I am not opposed to nails and hair done lol, doesn’t add that much and makes a whole lot of difference in how I feel about myself. Every 6 weeks hair, every two weeks or three weeks nails.

[wardaddy]

I will say one observance I have found about girls...workforce and education...especially graduate level.

Our colleges and grad programs are geared to take minorities and women over white men.

It's done by every school I have seen whether public or private.

And employers are frequently looking for women and minorities to fill slots...protection from tort claim slots...

It's become ridiculous ..especially in government and large businesses and law schools and medical schools

no matter how hard they try they simply cannot force women into natural sciences, engineering and architecture fields

but...aside form the fact this is simply wrong

I myself for over 20 years now have watched women get these degrees and by age 35 they either quit or go part time

and they are allowed to because their employers fear the lawyers

i know several women with medical degrees...doctors...who have a baby and simply decide not to practice or practice a light schedule...which is fine on one hand

but since they often marry well employed men, they can quit easily

lawyers...same thing

teachers...very often...in my kids schools we see pretty under 30 girls and know they will bow out in time...now they may come back in 10-20 years

I sure don't fault women for being moms...I bow at that altar

but I think that if PREFERENCE caused them to beat out a future husband sole provider just so they could go to medical or law etc school and then quit early in their career (it's always career for gals..not job) and thereby it causes several things bad for our culture

1) future husband loses out for political reason and we lose his LIFETIME work input

2) we spent that capital and time to educate someone and get little return...this is also an issue in the military too

hence...my view...women should think about where their priorities lie before degrees...identity preference should end...that would cure a lot

this is a serious problem...I am pals with a number of male docs and a few retired as I stated former female docs and this is a fairly steady refrain

well trained women who are attractive and marry are simply less likely to use their training even half what a man/father/husband would

unforeseen blowback from feminism...wrought by women who never married or had kids anyhow

[Sherman Logan]

Prior to the late 19th century, women worked as much and as hard as men, as did children, although in an agrarian culture, the wife’s work did consist of more of the “household” chores, but that was due to the work being more suitable to her than farming the fields or operating the mill (not that some did not do that).

All very true.

However, throughout this period the wife not working was very much an ideal, and was the norm in upper middle class and wealthy families.

So when a man could afford to support his wife without her working it was a move upward in status for both of them. Working class to middle class. Conspicuous idleness, if you will, as opposed to conspicuous consumption.

As others have pointed out, this is not a Biblical notion. The virtuous wife of Proverbs may not have worked in the fields as such, but she was industrious, did handicrafts, planted gardens and vineyards, and was an entrepeneur.

No sitting around. She quite literally burned the midnight oil.

In fact, the biblical account focuses much more on her economic activity than any other aspect of her virtue.

See Proverbs 31.

[Hildy]

Years ago, 1994 to be exact, I was on the Oprah Winfrey Show. The show was about Baby Boomers vs. Baby Busters and if the new generation were slackers. The economy was in the toilet and the show became about that.

A black woman in the audience got up and suggested that women should stay out of the workforce. I will never forget the look on Oprah’s face!!! The audience moaned and the was no discussion.

Thanks for bringing back an interesting memory for me!

[Hildy]

Years ago, 1994 to be exact, I was on the Oprah Winfrey Show. The show was about Baby Boomers vs. Baby Busters and if the new generation were slackers. The economy was in the toilet and the show became about that.

A black woman in the audience got up and suggested that women should stay out of the workforce. I will never forget the look on Oprah’s face!!! The audience moaned and the was no discussion.

Thanks for bringing back an interesting memory for me!

[Blue Ink]

A man isn’t more “entitled” to a slot in medical school just because a woman might decide to bow out for a while or forever to have kids.

And if it’s your view that everything should be organized for the maximum “lifetime benefit” to society rather than individuals pursuing happiness — why don’t you follow that line of reasoning to its natural conclusion?

Male doctors shouldn’t be allowed to marry at all or have children. It’s a distraction.

And they should have to live in dorms. On site. At the hospital. So they can work more hours.

Why should male doctors who aren’t willing to live this way “beat out” the ones who are?

Wouldn’t that be the most beneficial to society?

[samiam1972]

They are insignificant to me so it was the first example that popped into my head. Not against a woman feeling good about themselves! :0)

[wardaddy]

Preference slots in grad schools favor women over men

Then many of those women quit when babies come.

Depriving a future husband father who would have worked because the girl got a girl slot in medical school is wrong and a waste of resources

I will stand by that view

[trailhkr1]

Stay in shape, wear proper clothes and makeup and not be a bitch. Prevention is always better than the cure.

Not to be a "White Knight" here but that is a two way street.

A woman in my gym really keeps herself in good shape. She is in her early 50's and has a incredible hot bod and still very attractive facially for her age. A true MILF. Saw her hubby with her one day...280 lbs ish-just plain obese...unkempt..just a plain hideous slob. She has been complaining more and more about his weight and his slothiness to my GF and starting to really resent his not taking care of himself.

Combination of fit men eyeing her up all the time and outright flirting with her(and her returning it) and her growing displeasure about her hubby...we can see a divorce coming....My gf and I are taking bets for when it happens.

Quick summary to women AND men..don't let yourself go....because if your spouse is remotely attractive others will give them attention...at any age.

[LurkLongley]

You are correct, I would only differ in one respect, and that is that, while proverbs extols the virtues of the industrious wife, it is in the overall context of the woman being the primary caregiver to the children until they were old enough to begin becoming industrious themselves, a trait learned in the laps of their mothers.

I would suspect that most housewives of the fifties and prior were not so conspicuously idle as you seem to suggest. Being a wealthy, or even of moderate means, in prior gererations meant employing a number of people to “run your household”. The wives and mothers who had the ability in this country to stay home often did the work that would have been required of several others only 100 years earlier.

I dare anyone to suggest to my mother that she didn’t work as hard as anyone in the workforce (as good a Christian woman as ever walked this earth) ‘cause she’d show you what a switch was for!

[Sherman Logan]

I think it’s fairly obvious I meant idleness as in idle in the job market, not idle as in sitting around.

It is interesting, though, that in UK, till fairly recently the social ideal was the landed gentleman, who was essentially idle, not having a “job” of any type. Either because he inherited the position (preferable) or because he made a pile in business, and then retired and tried to become respectable by investing in land and not working.

Think Bertie Wooster and the rest of the boys from the Drones Club.

Very odd notion, and I don’t think it ever took real hold here for men, but I wonder if there wasn’t for a period an analogous POV towards middle and upper class women in this country. That “working” caused a drop in status.

BTW, this attitude is really quite recent in history. During the Middle Ages wives, even nobility, managed their households. With large households this was a true executive position and a great deal of work.

I don’t think it was till the 18th and 19th centuries that butlers took over much of this management in upper class households, leaving the women with little real function.

[BrandtMichaels]

If you understood what happened in the past you would clearly see that capitalism is slowly being killed with the devaluation of the dollar thru the Federal Reserve.

IOW when our dollars get devalued then more folks go to work for less and less real buying power. Less savings and less retirement but the flip side is the Federal gov is almost strong enough to provide your needs cradle to grave and as their greed increases the timespan from cradle to grave will be shortened dramatically.

[Nepeta]

When I hatched out of Ohio State, paying women less for the same work was still legal. Asking me when I expected to make babies was still legal.

This was not a golden age. I became employable in my field when I got divorced (he took off with his boyfriends). This wasn't about acquiring luxuries--I got no alimony--but I worked to survive.

Enjoy your fantasies about grasping women wanting 6000 square foot houses, but a lot of us work to keep the lights on.

[Vigilanteman]

Think about how salaries and wages for men would move upward if a shortage of labor prevailed in this country.

At one time, that might have been true. The CEO class which emerged from the World War II generation had a shared experience with the proles and would have bid up the wages and salaries of men.

Now, they have no loyalty to their country, their society or anything except the bottom line. They will simply import H1b workers (if available) or illegal aliens (if not) in order to hold the line on wages. And the gubmint will encourage it because we need more diversity or more clients to support the growing welfare state and army of wealth redistributors.