I read a book review in the National Review a few weeks ago that got me thinking. The book was about the many men in our society who refuse to grow up and take responsibility for their lives (and no, I can't remember what the title of this book was), but that's not actually what I want to write about here. The review briefly mentioned how men and women's roles within the family changed with the industrial revolution. Not to draw too much attention to my own ignorance here, but this was something I'd never thought about before. Usually we hear so much about how women's roles changed with WWII and with the feminist revolution and the impact that this has had on the family. But we rarely hear about men's changing roles, and we hear even less about how men have changed our families.
So let's look at this for a moment: before the industrial revolution, when the majority of families farmed to survive, they would have functioned completely differently. Men would have been with their families all day long, just like the women. Sure, they would go out into the fields to labor, but the sons would be out there laboring with their fathers as soon as they were old enough. And everyone would share most of their meals together-- not just dinner! So daughters would be with their mothers and sons with their fathers, all learning their trade side by side. So parenting was truly both parents' job. (Not that it isn't still, but in Mormon culture it certainly falls on the Mom's shoulders for most of the day. In the rest of the world, it mostly goes to the daycare workers, a fact which I can't even think about for too long because it makes me so worried for the coming generations, which is why I've never blogged about it.)
How different would our world be if both parents spent all day long with their children?
It's so weird, because I definitely have no desire to go back to that time period (I'm a big fan of our day and age, where even a major famine doesn't lead to starvation-- at least in America-- and I also happen to like things like indoor plumbing), but I think we also need to acknowledge that there are things humanity lost without even noticing, and perhaps we need to give these things a little more thought. And losing both parents' involvement in their children's lives, one after the other, is perhaps the most tragic loss we've experienced. I don't know how or when we can ever recover from this.
14 comments:
The interesting thing about the whole women's roles changing after WWII is a little strange. After all, being a SAHM was a luxury even before then. And most of the SAHM's then were probably wealthy enough to have had some type of nanny or something. But didn't the vast majority of women still have to work to help support their families pre-WWII? I think all WWII did was change the types of work they were doing.
Anyway, talking about men's changing roles is definitely interesting. There was an article in the NYT a while back about equal parenting or shared parenting - I can't remember the exact term they used. But it was quite interesting. Basically both parents work part-time and whichever parent isn't working on a particular day is the stay-at-home parent that day. It seemed pretty cool to me, but I'm not sure it's practical or possible for all professions.
I'm getting a book from the library soon by Michael Chabon. Can't remember the exact title, but something about Manhood. But he talked in his NPR interview about how the bar for fathers is set so pathetically low. I think this is slowly, slowly changing, but it's going to take a while. And I'd argue that Mormon culture isn't helping any (at least in the Mormon community; I don't think it has much if any influence on that outside the Mormon community).
Really, Erin? What about Mormon culture is lowering the bar for fathers? I remember Craig mentioning that Gordon B. Hinckley had said that generally speaking, if someone has to take the kids out of sacrament meeting, it ought to be the Dads doing this, and he always took that advice very seriously. (I realize that this is a very small example, but I'd like to think it's indicative of a larger mindset.)
What do you see in Mormon culture that's hurting fatherhood?
Also, I think it depends on what you mean by "working Mom" and "stay at home Mom." I reread all the Little House on the Prairie books recently, and it amazes me how much work Ma is always doing-- everything from sewing all their clothes to making cheese! So while she may not have had a job, she was certainly working just as hard as Pa was. I agree that the women who were rich enough to not have to do these tasks were probably hiring nannies to do most of the child-rearing, too...
I really like this post, Alanna.
I personally do value todays luxuries quite a bit (my blender is used daily, I'm too wussy to survive long without hot water, etc...) but I really do think it is sad how much of the family structure is lost.
I'm in a BYU Human Development class (which focuses on the emotional/moral/cognitive development of people) and we just spent the first half the semester discussing this very topic. Does a stay-at-home-dad provide different strengths than a stay-at-home-mom? Can a daycare worker really do the same job? And while there are outliers to be noted (aka: miracles) in lots circumstances, the answer is NO! A loving stay-at-home mom provides different stability/strength than a loving stay-at-home-dad. And a very different experience than even the most well-intentioned daycare employee. There are too many specifics to discuss in a blog comment, but the details of the cognitive development, the ability to grasp abstract ideas, emotional maturity/the child's EQ all gave extremely powerful results that the involvement of BOTH parents in a child's life bring much better things, than any unstable, one-sided or ever-changing substitute. (And yes, we looked at controversial statistics and theories very in-depth too...)
My professor is brilliant (doctorate in sociology, lots of awards, published research, everything) BUT, the reason why I REALLY enjoy the class because he is a convert to the church. He became passionate about the idea that each child needs TWO parents, who really parent, before he ever heard a LDS prophet agree.
I think it would be amazing to have both parents actually parent. To have two different examples of how to love, be responsible and work hard. A balance. And NOT just both parents there on an expensive Disneyland vacation. Or both parents sitting by you in church. But to have both, actually involved in the meaningful and mundane of your daily life--I really believe that generation after generation would be so much better!
Very interesting post, Alanna, those are really good points. The other thing, too, is think how often daughters probably would've brought food and water to her father and brothers during the day while they were working in the fields. Plus, when they had time when it was dark and they couldn't work in the fields, they would've been reading together or talking together or interacting in some way. Again, not that life was perfect back then, but not all changes are improvements.
Sorry, this is going to be a book.
All I'm saying is that nowadays a lot of people have this idea of the SAHM back in the day which never really existed.
What the church leaders say and what actually happens in the culture can be two completely different things. And it's going to take a long time of leaders saying things to actually change the entire culture. That's great that Craig takes the kids out. But should that be all it takes to make him an amazing father?
Far too many men in the church still think of themselves as baby-sitting when they're in charge of the kids for a couple hours. I've had women tell me how amazing Ryan is because of his willingness to solo parent whenever I want to get out. When women say things like thes we're encouraging the idea that men don't have to be involved in parenting their children.
I think this happens because we have an unequal emphasis on motherhood and fatherhood in the church. Not that the men don't ever get talked to about fatherhood, but it sure doesn't happen nearly as much as motherhood does for women and I don't feel there's a much emphasis on it as their "divine role". (When the visiting teaching message is about our divine roles and none of my teachees can come up with any role for themselves but motherhood - that's just wrong.) Overemphasis of motherhood, or rather underemphasis on fatherhood/parenthood, often means that many men who choose to be SAHD's feel looked down upon in the church culture because they aren't "providing" for their family in the traditional LDS way. As though they can't possibly be just as good of a parent as mom can. And that mothers who have to or choose to work outside the home are also belittled. Those kinds of attitudes tell men that they can't be as good of a parent and often give the message that their role is to just provide. Do you think the kids in primary singing that the father's role is to provide, preside and that the mother's role is to nurture, raise the kids, whatever it is that song says doesn't encourage future generations of men to feel they don't have a role in raising the kids since it's not their "role"?
I'm not saying Mormon culture is lowering the bar, but it's not helping push it any higher. When we're heaping praises on men just because they're taking the kids out of Sacrament Meeting or changing a diaper once in a while, that's not helping them become the best they can as parents. Not that they shouldn't be thanked and appreciated for these things. But often they're lauded to no end for doing these once in a blue moon where mom gets absolutely no praise for this at all. The Chabon interview really does have some great quotes about the wonders of parenting in general: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=113719470&ps=rs
Really, I agree with you that both parents parenting is a wonderful ideal to have and a goal to be aimed for. I think the church hurts this idea by their overemphasis on motherhood. And, as I said before, I actually think we're slowly, slowly progressing toward the both parents being involved idea as a society. More and more fathers truly want to be involved in their childrens' lives. Thankfully, at the end of the day, kids are (hopefully) going to be most influenced by what they see in their own home. So if we want to get as close as we can to what we feel we've lost, we have to start by emulating it in our homes. They need to see that both mom and dad provide and preside and raise and nurture and discipline, etc. As more kids are raised this way more future families will have two fully invested parents.
Just so you know, I'm not trying to say the mormon culture is any worse about this than any other particular culture. I just wouldn't assert that they're any better.
Discussions like this make me wonder how much we really know about how other families function.I think blogs, facebook updates, twidder, "good news minute" in Relief Society and a media that keeps nothing private or sacred, can distort us into believing that we really know a lot more about other people's family/relationships than we often do. And while I'm confident that there are evils in society (of all sorts), I think there is a lot of good too, that we don't know about. I think a lot of the sweetest things are kept private, as they should.
I really think there are a lot of families that are ignoring the strange slants of culture (whether it be LDS, Hollywood, or what) and doing the parenting thing right. I think there are wives making lunches for their husbands, but not blogging about it. I think their are fathers helping their kids with their homework and grocery shopping on a very regular basis, but because its sweet and normal, no one is making an party of it. I don't think there are nearly enough of these families, but I really do think there are a lot more than most of us give credit for.
I have friends who brag on their facebook status EVERY TIME their husband brings them flowers or does something unexpectedly sweet for them or their children. And they do act as if it is an unexpected act for their husband to be sweet. How sad is that?! Personally, I don't think you should take the sweetness of your marriage for granted, but I also don't think you should parade ALL of it around for everyone else. I know plenty of happy married couples (including myself) who don't announce all their sweet updates to everyone. Just because the funny couples exist and make a lot of noise, doesn't mean the rest of us aren't here.
And because I know I'm not alone in this idea, I wonder how many families have it right, that we don't know about. I like to think there are a lot of LDS, religious and high-moral families that have both parents parenting, doing their best. Not in the same way that Alanna originally blogged about--but both parents involved and fulfilling their sacred role of father and mother and spouse. Would the parents who are really doing it right, be telling everyone? And even if they were, would those who weren't getting it, be able to see the healthy balance?
And I realize both of my ultra-long comments may seem like they are contradicting each other, they really aren't! While I think it is heartbreaking, how society doesn't seem to value a strong, loving duel-parent family, anymore--I also realize that what is accepted in culture and popular in society are often poor representations of what is actually going on in the family. And I like to think that a lot of us are doing it right, we just aren't bragging as loudly! :)
Wow-- I am loving this discussion.
Erin, I see your point now, and I do think it's a valid one. But I like Juliana's point also; I agree that there probably are a lot more fathers pitching in and being good dads than we might be aware of. (Just for the record, and I hate even saying this, but I do have to clarify that I was just using that whole "taking the kids out during sacrament meeting" scenario as an example-- Craig does a lot more than just that!)
Craig and I were discussing all this, and he made an interesting point, too, and that is that so much of what I think of as "parenting" right now has very little to do with what I'll be doing in a few years. Right now parenting means mostly watching little babies and changing diapers, things that are very easily measured, but once your kids get older you have to be involved in very different ways, whether that means helping coach little league, or driving kids places, or just trying to make sure they're actually doing their homework. I think these will be times when it's even more important that parenting be done as a team, so that you don't have one parent being the nice one and the other one gets stuck being the mean one or whatever (I think it's important both for the parents, but also so the kids turn out all right!). It's also a lot harder then to "keep score"-- and probably a lot harder on your relationship if you keep trying to do that!
I feel like I"m losing my train of thought here. I do agree with Erin that it would be good if the Church emphasized men's divine role as Fathers more. That probably doesn't happen enough. (Unless they're discussing it in Priesthood and I just don't know about it-- but I sort of doubt it...!)
Thanks again, everyone, for your interesting comments!
I have nothing intelligent to add, but i enjoyed this as well. I ponder. :)
I always think about The Incredibles. They are sitting around the dinner table and the mom has to scream "It's time to engage!" to get the dad to even pay attention to his family. We polarize our worlds so that a woman's place is ONLY home things and a man's place is ONLY work. And how many Laurel lessons does it take to hammer that into a person's head? However, compared to a lot of people, we've got it going on.
Hmmmm. I feel like I should have something to add, but I'm too tired to think. It is interesting though. All I can say is that I LOVE being a stay-at-home mom. I feel bad for moms who don't have the chance to do it. I also love the days when Simon is home. His relationship with Javi is so different than mine. Not only because he's his dad, but because he's Simon and a little crazy. I love that pretty much any spare time he has is spent with Xavier (and me, obviously) He's not always home, but when he is, he's there, and I know Javi can tell.
Another thought I had this morning - my bet would be that fathers now are very possibly more involved in their daughters lives than they would've been back in the farming days. I'm betting back then they were a lot closer to and more involved with their sons than their daughters. So not all the effects are bad.
Anne: That's awesome that you love what you do. And while there are definitely moms out there who would love to be in your position there are plenty of others who are better moms because they get to feel the different kind of validation that comes through working outside the home.
I know I've got just the right balance of work and SAHM for me and I like to think that most other mothers figure what the right balance is for them as well, even if it takes a while sometimes.
Post a Comment