Hypocrisy does make women’s work harder

This meme has apparently been making the rounds of conservative mom town.

Which is great news, because it means people are beginning to Notice things. (h/t to Steve Sailer for that usage.)

But someone who has a relative living in, helping out domestically disagreed with the meme and further tossed out the usual cant about dishwashers and such in the comments to the disagreement-post.

The response is, in fact, hypocritical.  It’s not unusual among a lot of (often but not only male) conservatives when it comes to these matters of what women need to have a properly ordered domestic space.  They have some kind of support (NOT limited to the children), typically from relatives, but sometimes from non-relatives, often unpaid, and they just conveniently don’t connect their wives’ or their own (if a woman) relatively better ability to manage with their access to real support while berating other people for their “snark” at starting to think about the obvious implications of demanding Proverbs 31 performance out of a woman without giving her a fraction of the resources such a woman had.

She did have domestic help, and if you have it too (especially if you have it in the form of love from relatives), owning up to how that helps your own household be more functional and provide for the children in said household is a sight more Biblically loving and encouraging than ignoring or downplaying your own riches while telling others they should just imagineer that the dishwasher is their BFF and woman up more.

This is not quite what I was thinking about regarding husbands and communities in a different discussion, but it’s in the wheelhouse.

Advertisements

61 thoughts on “Hypocrisy does make women’s work harder

      • It looks like his family comes out of an Eastern tradition, so it might have been fairly easy to arrange this. Unfortunately, it seems he has not noticed.

        Like

        • Oh: this is what seems to happen when people do not fully connect ideals to material reality. That is an issue; it is unfortunate how well it has gripped those in sacramental traditions, where one would think the material world is better understood.

          The Eucharist is not confected without wheat and unpasteurized grapes.

          Liked by 1 person

  1. The difference between the work load with our first three (when I was on my own 10-12 hours a day, 5-6 days a week) and our last two (when the older three girls were emerging teenagers) was stark. It made a huge difference.

    The problem with kids as effective domestic help is that when you have a bunch of ’em back to back to back, you can’t really get around to teaching them well because you’re consumed with just trying to get stuff done. At least I couldn’t,until they are closing in on 10 years old. And they went to school, so…

    I think help from relatives, friends, part time neighborly assistance, etc is more feasible than the kids. Now, if you space them out three years between each, then yeah. But I wouldn’t know ANYTHING about that, lol.

    Like

    • I can add to Elspeth; I would have to say, yes, you DO get help from teens, so I can’t argue with that. But I had four under five at one point, and it was very difficult. What Scott and other men don’t seem to understand is that there are men out there who expect — nay, demand — the lifestyle their mothers produced under completely different circumstances. I did fine with one small baby and even with two which included one who was developmentally delayed by a year or so. But the mess we went through because I could not muster a holiday that was “perfect”…..yikes. That’s one thing I would like to forget because it’s such a bad memory, but it comes up Banquo-like in nightmares and as soon as holidays roll around year after year……the memory is as sharp and fresh as if it had happened yesterday…..that was when I had four all under five and one of them a very new baby. No slacking allowed.

      As Els mentioned, it was very traumatic for me dealing with all of the drama that came with the scenario of many small children combined with the expectations I couldn’t meet, and I never did succeed in being able to train my children properly to help — too many details and it is too personal and too complicated to explain them. Just suffice it to say that I was, for a period of time, too sick and depressed to do much because I bought the line that my marriage was hanging by a thread and it was because I was so wicked. Now I’m picking up the pieces, but it’s harder when they’re older. Fortunately they are fine in all the major areas and I’ve certainly no complaints, but many’s the time I would have given my right arm for someone to come and help a little once or twice a week. I never could afford to pay anyone, and would probably still feel guilty if I did try to get somebody to just come by in exchange for bartering (about all I can do in way of pay).

      And Proverbs 31 woman DID have household help. It’s right in there.

      Like

  2. Scott said:

    “Her response was, “So are we to not strive for this? Gotta love the snark.””

    But strive for what? And why isn’t the having help part of the goal?

    “Namely, that if an ideal is presented (in this case by God Himself) and something about the current context makes it difficult to conceptualize, apply or achieve, this does not mean we give into the natural human tendency toward complacency and laziness. Instead we strive to achieve it anyway. If we fail, we get up and keep trying.”

    I am a huge fan of the upper middle class family ideal–the nice home in a nice neighborhood, a nice church community, good income, harmonious cooperation between spouses and good schools, good food, music, sports, friendship and volunteering for the kids. That’s a wonderful ideal–but notice how it all has a tendency to fall down when we pull the “good income” piece out of the Jenga tower.

    At some point, trying to achieve a goal without reasonable materials turns us into the punchline of the two guys continuing to dig and fill in holes when the third guy who was supposed to stick in fence posts didn’t show up.

    “30,000 men raising their hands to the air, sobbing over the guilt of not trying hard enough and resolving to do “better” while never occurring to them that sacraments require both parties to keep promises. A few years later, I was being frivorced, just like them.”

    ALL 30,000 Promise Keepers attendees? Man!

    “Not to put too fine a point on it, but yes–this is precisely why it didn’t work. They all came home, got on their knees in front of their wives, (some of them even crying) prayed with them, promised to take the kids to more ball games, do more chores, and their wives lost all respect for them.

    “They thought they had found the key–the holy grail of getting their wives to respect them (which is what men actually want).”

    In that case, why is “work harder” the holy grail for women to fix their marriages?

    “Where was the commensurate women’s movement of the day?”

    It’s not that easy for moms to get a day off.

    If those guys were off at their stadium events–somebody was at home picking up the slack.

    Also, there have actually been analogous movements aimed at women, it’s just that Scott is not familiar with those books and those personalities. For examples, see Free Jinger and No Longer Quivering. There’s really no shortage of organizations focused on getting women to go full Boxer.

    SnapperTrx says:

    “Moms remember:
    You have domestic help too.
    They are called your kids.”

    It takes a while to get them to helpful size.

    Also, a mom with disabled children may never get much help from those children and may never really be able to stop doing “mom” stuff for them.

    Scott replies to SnapperTrx:

    “And washing machines, and dryers, and dishwashers, and not having to go outside to milk the cow, and…”

    Not everybody had their own cow (a single cow produces WAY more milk than a household needs per day). Hence, the “milkman”:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milkman

    https://www.uaex.edu/4h-youth/activities-programs/docs/Dairy%20Facts.pdf

    In the old days, poor people were dirty and wore dirty clothes.

    They weren’t washing each outfit every time they wore it, doing laundry every day, and they weren’t bathing every day.

    The main blessing of having washing machines and dryers is being able to do laundry every day without major household disruption (as is caused by hanging clothes indoors in the winter–been there, done that, got the t-shirt) and being able to wear fresh clothes every day.

    Liked by 1 person

    • And these days if you DON’T bathe your kids AT LEAST every other day and do laundry when things have been worn once, you are considered gross and neglectful by middle classers.

      Like

      • this is regional

        I can let my kids be filthy and no one cares.

        And I think it’s really important to keep in mind that people’s standards may not come from some kind of bougie desire to oppress you; there a lot of other reasons people might value daily bathing or have extreme laundering policies.

        Like

  3. Scott has said this when Mychael had oral surgery.
    “Mychael was here trying to manage things while her face and jaw were swollen and in so much pain that she could barely sleep–let alone take care of the kids with no rest.”

    Ya don’t say. Of course this could fall under the exception of being sick. Of course you need help then they might say, but then again why not strive to do it on your own regardless of circumstances, with God nothing is impossible, right? Recently he also wrote about helping out as she went back to work part time. So, yeah hypocrisy…..

    It seems more a feminist message to strive for not needing help. It’s says I’m a strong empowered woman, not the weaker sex, and can have it all and do it all.

    Like

  4. To add, how is it appliances didn’t save the day when she had surgery or went back to work? If that and kids were the solution to women needing help, why did scott help out so much.

    Like

    • Stone said:

      “To add, how is it appliances didn’t save the day when she had surgery or went back to work? If that and kids were the solution to women needing help, why did scott help out so much.”

      That is an excellent point.

      Like

  5. Here’s a big contradiction I see in the “Christian” Red Pill community:

    1. (during marriage) Waaaaah! I shouldn’t have to do any childcare or housework! That’s women’s work! Taking care of kids is emasculating!

    2. (after divorce) Waaaah! Why did my wife get custody? Waaaah!

    Pick a lane, buddy, pick a lane. If fairness is your thing, expect to spend a lot of time taking care of your children in marriage. And if you think you’re too good for childcare and housework, don’t expect to get a lot of custody in divorce.

    Also, while I’m at it, Scott has a t-shirt for sale that says, “Fathers…turns out you really can’t raise children without them.”

    It is a rather interesting question, what does Scott think are a father’s responsibilities? Because on the one hand, in Red Pill Land a father is supposed to be completely indispensable, but at the same time, Red Pill guys are very eager to explain what is not their responsibility. In fact, truth be told, they tend to be much clearer on the subject of what they don’t do. Their actual rock-bottom obligations tend to boil down to “bossing people around.”

    I realize that Scott’s practice is rather better than his theory, but I would challenge him to look harder at his practice when developing his theory.

    Also, I’d like to take a whack at this quote over at Dalrock’s:

    “Bob: So, I‟m thinking of a wife who is planning for that weekend. She’s got the option of either her husband, on Saturday, doing all the projects around the house so that he can watch the game on Sunday; or she can send him to the Stepping Up® Super Saturday event, down at the church, that’s happening in their community. We’ve got hundreds of churches that are participating in this; but she’s not going to get any “Honey, do” lists done that day. What would your counsel to her be, Dennis?

    “Dennis: Give up the “Honey, do” list for a day.”

    Dalrock and his readers are obviously appalled by all this churchian acceptance of female bossiness.

    But there is a problem with that critique. Namely, if a husband and father is such an irreplaceable jewel (as Scott would have it), then of course losing him for a whole day on Saturday is a major sacrifice. It only wouldn’t be a sacrifice if he wasn’t any use at home…

    Again, here’s another Christian manosphere two step:

    1. I’m irreplaceable and precious and you can’t cope without me.

    2. Don’t actually ask me to do anything.

    Like

    • I think these people want the pre-1850 father custody approach (at least, they think they do). They might be missing some pre-1850 things, of course, but that alone is a reasonable request.

      Like

      • A whole lot of American fathers did not have legal rights over their children pre-1850:

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emancipation_Proclamation

        Likewise, an unmarried American father in 1849 would have far fewer legal rights vis a vis his children than is true in 2017.

        Also, come to think of it, in the colonial era, the paternal rights of even married white fathers were time-limited by the fact that parents would legally bind their children to apprenticeships starting from around the age of 10.

        Like

  6. Here’s what I took out of the Proverbs 31 meme — when I was overwhelmed with many small children, it reminded me to take things ONE AT A TIME, not to look at the big picture or I’d end up accomplishing nothing at all. Do the next thing, and the next, and the next.

    I mentioned this at Scott’s blog and naturally such a comment did not get past moderation. In an application such as the above, it admits that each one of us is human with flaws and failings. You cannot get it ALL done PERFECTLY. I cannot understand why this is making excuses and not at least striving towards a standard. Apparently to them it is. Very telling.

    Like

    • One thing that jumps out at me now about the Proverbs 31 woman is that it doesn’t sound like she has small children at home. This is a portrait of a mature woman who has wrapped up her reproductive career and is enjoying a productive and happy middle age.

      Rereading Proverbs, I have noted how much of it is devoted to a) cautioning young men against fornication and b) propaganda for monogamy aimed at married men. I would file Proverbs 31 as “propaganda for monogamy” and would point out that it probably wasn’t originally intended for women at all. After all, it’s “The words of king Lemuel, the prophecy that his mother taught him,” presumably intended for his benefit…

      Like

  7. This. “This is a portrait of a mature woman who has wrapped up her reproductive career and is enjoying a productive and happy middle age.”

    I’ve said this one a few times in re Prov 31. I feel like she’s within about 5-10 years of striking distance for me, at 44.

    If you read the verses, see:
    v. 23 Her husband is known in the gates,
    When he sits among the elders of the land. (hubby is an elder)
    v. 30 Charm is deceitful and beauty is passing,
    But a woman who fears the Lord, she shall be praised. (implies that beauty is passing away)

    I thought that the point of Prov 31 was that it made a good life-goal on the physical plane – not a “get this done today, please”.

    One should certainly choose a mate who has the heart to pursue an honorable life (which includes Prov 31 for women) but expecting full fruit from a blossom is a bit unkind. However, Americans are prone to thinking that life is static, and that years and maturity don’t bring improvement, only decay. Thank you, I’m not done developing and growing yet – and don’t intend to be until I’m on my deathbed.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Yeah.

      It’s more like a bucket list than a daily schedule. I mean, how many fields a week is this lady supposed to be buying?

      Like

  8. Not only does Scott have his MIL living with him, there was a post on his old blog about how his wife wasn’t keeping things clean enough and asking Lori of all people if his wife should have to do more. She isn’t meeting the ideal with help and other women are supposed to do more with less. Hypocrisy is right.

    1. (during marriage) Waaaaah! I shouldn’t have to do any childcare or housework! That’s women’s work! Taking care of kids is emasculating!

    2. (after divorce) Waaaah! Why did my wife get custody? Waaaah!

    I pointed this out once and was accused of being a raging feminist. The complaints about custody are actually complaints about child support.

    Like

    • The custody stuff comes from a proto-redpill book, The Garbage Generation, which is actually a good read and far from entirely wrong, even though the author is so enraged at women that he seriously believes that pre-industrial revolution wives made no household economic contributions looooooool

      Like

  9. casparreyes
    May 13, 2017 at 4:17 pm

    Does the modern woman not have a dishwasher, and a washing machine, a dryer, a vacuum, and a sewing machine? If that’s not recognized as domestic help then there’s no hope.

    Here we go again. Let’s see dishwashers are more just sanitizers. Most food still has to be scraped and scrubbed off before just throwing it in. Is the vacumn a robot? If not, a woman is still behind that pushing and with 3 kids at home under 5…good luck. To do it properly vacuuming takes a lot of time. Add in a pet hair and oh my….

    Like

    • And then a kooky response from donalgraeme:

      Modern women cannot envision life without those things. The vast, overwhelming majority had at least some access to them their whole lives. So as far as they are concerned those are just normal things which every woman has everywhere. [Theory to follow] And since women conceptualize time differently than men, they don’t consider the fact that in the past those things didn’t exist. Thus, those appliances are baked into their assumptions of what is normal at all times and in all places.

      LOL. I wonder how many modern men would accept living in the type of conditions that people lived in during Biblical times. There’s no need for a vacuum if your floor is made of dirt.

      Like

      • Nonya said:

        “LOL. I wonder how many modern men would accept living in the type of conditions that people lived in during Biblical times. There’s no need for a vacuum if your floor is made of dirt.”

        The last few years, it finally occurred to me how few references there are in the Bible to housecleaning. The 20th/21st century household tasks do not really map well onto the world of the Bible. Housecleaning looms large for us in a way that it did not in either the OT or NT. No doubt it was a chore keeping up with OT rules on diet and purification–but it wasn’t really what we would think of as housecleaning.

        The familiar triad of cooking-cleaning-childcare barely feature at all in Proverbs 31. Childcare probably doesn’t appear because the Proverbs 31 is a mature woman with grown children, but I suspect the reason for the absence of cooking and cleaning was that she had people to do that stuff, and hence was able to focus on more commercially valuable activities.

        DG said:

        “Modern women cannot envision life without those things. The vast, overwhelming majority had at least some access to them their whole lives. So as far as they are concerned those are just normal things which every woman has everywhere. [Theory to follow] And since women conceptualize time differently than men, they don’t consider the fact that in the past those things didn’t exist. Thus, those appliances are baked into their assumptions of what is normal at all times and in all places.”

        !!!!

        Let me unpack this a bit:

        1. Who among us has not lived in a home without a dishwasher for a substantial period of time? That’s not exactly uncommon. Plus, the @#$%^&* things break down pretty regularly and have a startlingly short working life for such an expensive appliance, so even people who have dishwashers get to go without from time to time.

        Like Sunshine Mary, come to think of it.

        2. All modern conveniences break down, so it doesn’t require vast leaps of imagination to imagine what it’s like to not have a washer or dryer of one’s own for an extended period of time.

        3. There are substantial portions of the US where residents are used to multi-day blackouts caused by storms (I know this is true of the hurricane-prone SE and the Pacific Northwest).

        I grew up with it being nothing unusual to heat canned soup on a wood-burning stove if a storm that took out our power.

        4. There are a lot of immigrants in the contemporary US, and a fair number of US-born people with third world experience, not to mention their children who grew up with their stories. Hence, there is actually a large number of people in the US (including female people!) familiar with fewer modern conveniences.

        5. There are such things as camping trips.

        6. Some of our European cousins don’t wash clothes very often, even when they have washers. A younger relative did an exchange program to Germany, and my, was that an eye-opener! One of her host moms bragged about not washing jeans for years and was (if I recall correctly) rather stingy about laundry and bathing privileges. I met my younger relative when she got off the plane, and she smelled pretty ripe at that point.

        I also did a study abroad program to Western Russia, and a lot of the Russians absolutely reeked. The combination of unwashed clothes and unwashed body is pretty striking to the American nose. It’s traditional in Russia to go to public baths (banyas) where you’d get plentiful hot water and maybe whack yourself with birch twigs–that’s the sort of tradition that you get when you don’t have reliable or plentiful hot water at home, and you wouldn’t go pay for a wash every day.

        So, I think there’s actually a lot of “presentism” at work in projecting into the past the hygienic standards of the modern US and assuming that our forebears had the same hygiene standards we do, but worked much harder at it. They did not.

        Like

  10. “Because on the one hand, in Red Pill Land a father is supposed to be completely indispensable, but at the same time, Red Pill guys are very eager to explain what is not their responsibility. ”

    I find the shirt confusing. What is meant by “really”? You can’t really raise them? Well, technically you can it just sucks for the children and is a lot harder for everyone, but it can be done. Families that have military fathers who are gone 6 months at a time? Someone is raising those kids while dad is away. Not under ideal circumstances, but they are being raised and not all of them turn out to be basketcases.

    Like

    • “I find the shirt confusing. What is meant by “really”? You can’t really raise them? Well, technically you can it just sucks for the children and is a lot harder for everyone, but it can be done. Families that have military fathers who are gone 6 months at a time? Someone is raising those kids while dad is away. Not under ideal circumstances, but they are being raised and not all of them turn out to be basketcases.”

      Yeah.

      I believe year-long deployments are pretty common.

      If you have a decent husband, parenting and housekeeping are easier with him, and it’s a hardship when he’s away. Red Pill guys, however, are determined to make married parenting harder than single parenting…

      Like

  11. Women conceptualize time differently? That is a new one. I think we are all well aware of how much harder things were in the “days of old”. In fact, I often think how lucky we are to be living in the age of google where there is an answer to just about every household or family problem seconds away. Often its not the actual labor task we need help with it as much as it having time to recharge our batteries and finding emotional release. Those who have young children at home are often emotionally drained way before they are physically drained, but as usual unmarried, childless men talk about these things as if they know what’s up.

    Like

  12. Scott said:

    “Mychaels comment made it pretty clear, or at least I thought it did. Namely–either Proverbs 31 has an application for today’s wife and mother, or we throw it out completely. ”

    Sure it has applications! Some ideas:

    1. A good wife doesn’t have to do All The Things.

    2. A good wife doesn’t have to do all the scut work at home. It’s OK to outsource tasks to improve the family’s overall functioning.

    3. It’s OK (indeed praiseworthy) for women to work hard and make money.

    4. A good wife can be trusted with a lot of freedom.

    5. It’s OK to have a nice home and nice stuff.

    6. It’s good for girls to learn math skills, because otherwise they won’t be able to see if merchandise is profitable or not.

    7. It’s important to help poor people.

    8. It’s OK (indeed praiseworthy) for a woman to have a sense of dignity.

    9. Women can be wise and have good advice.

    10. She should enjoy the benefit of her hard work. (“Give her of the fruit of her hands.”)

    Scott said:

    “But, as we have seen–and the manosphere has been instrumental in reminding us–men and women are quite different–in every conceivable way. Even in their approach to understanding what is fair, what is just, what is a good excuse to get out of something, how to employ those excuses, ad infinitum”

    Yes–for example, manosphere guys typically want to sign women up for a way of life that they would never accept for themselves.

    “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” is a completely alien idea.

    Like

  13. This is a little bit off topic, but it is in that thread, so here it is:

    Elspeth said:

    “With that said, I have always viewed Proverbs 31 not only as an ideal, but also as a picture of a full life rather than a moment in time. It’s not as if young children have the level of understanding required to “rise up and call their mother blessed”. These are adult kids who have acquired some perspective, and it is a joy when you get to experience that.”

    Cane Caldo replied:

    “This is true. Let me know when you have convinced the other Christian women that adult, unmarried children should stay at home under their fathers’ authority–rather than move out to explore and do their own independent thing–so that mothers can reap their rewards.”

    !!!!

    There aren’t a lot of Christian men who are really excited about the idea of having adult unmarried children living in the parental home “under their fathers’ authority” indefinitely–that is definitely a niche preference among men.

    In fact, as I recall, my dad was rather more keen on getting us kids out and launched than my mom was. My dad had me going to out-of-state college at 16. That was NOT my mom’s doing.

    Also, I do not think that the historical record supports the idea of an Anglo-Saxon tradition of keeping adult unmarried children at home. The English had a very well-developed tradition of boarding schools for the prosperous (including girls), and the children of the less prosperous (including girls) might become apprentices and go live with their employer as tweens. Some of these apprenticeships might be very, very far from home–in Jane Austen’s Mansfield Park, Fanny’s brothers go to sea at 10 years of age. Tween drummer boys were common in the military well into the 19th century.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drummer_(military)

    There seem to have been quite a number of female indentured servants in colonial times:

    https://www.nwhm.org/online-exhibits/jamestownwomen/10.htm

    So, I do not think that CC’s picture of adult children living under the paternal thumb until marriage matches up well with the historical record.

    Like

    • The idea of having unmarried children required to live at home until marriage, as a cultural norm, is from Asian and Middle Eastern cultures. It wasn’t typical for most people in Western civilization. The historical record also shows that having unmarried children still living with parents was also costly, and it was expected that they leave home to work for someone, or join the priesthood or a convent.

      The historical record shows it was common for parents to live with their married children for financial support.

      Like

      • Maea said:

        “The idea of having unmarried children required to live at home until marriage, as a cultural norm, is from Asian and Middle Eastern cultures.”

        My suspicion is that living at home with parents as an adult is a Western European norm–but primarily a Southern European norm. You certainly see it coming through very strong in modern Italy and in contemporary Hispanic culture in the US.

        http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/27/italian-court-orders-father-to-pay-for-upkeep-of-his-28-year-old/

        “Around 65 per cent of Italians aged 18 to 34 still live with their parents, the highest percentage of young stay-at-homes anywhere in Europe, according to Istat, the national statistics agency. That compares with 34 per cent in France and Britain and 42 per cent in Germany.”

        (The Italian dad was forced to keep supporting his 28-year-old unemployed eternal student son.)

        I don’t get the vibe that it’s all about control in those cultures, but more about togetherness and enjoying being smooshed together, especially in the case of US Hispanics. (My buddy is Hispanic, and she says when her brother and his family came to visit for a number of days and there were 8+ people all squished into a tiny house, she actually really liked it.)

        Like

        • On reflection, aren’t the European-based cultures in the US notorious for keeping adult kids at home just about all matriarchal?

          This is not my area of expertise, but I feel like there is a strong correlation between matriarchal culture and adult children at home, at least in European cultures.

          Like

        • Yes, I do think it is somewhat south European. The Nuclear family model is considered a much more Northwest Europe model than anything else (basically, Germanic/Nordic).

          I have a contact with south European heritage, and one of the things she definitely has as a cultural/familial attitude is a strong sense of young unmarried women as being not yet mature, so she is definitely comfortable with them living in the home as needed because of that.

          Like

  14. In fact, as I recall, my dad was rather more keen on getting us kids out and launched than my mom was.

    LOL, You must have posted this here as I was posting a similar comment there.

    I don’t know about the historical record, frankly, but I do know that dads -including Christian ones like mine in fact- are much more likely to be ready to push the kids from the nest.

    Like

  15. Elspeth said,

    “I don’t know about the historical record, frankly, but I do know that dads -including Christian ones like mine in fact- are much more likely to be ready to push the kids from the nest.”

    Of course average dads are eager to get adult kids off the family dole–that’s totally understandable.

    When I was a teen, my parents were on the one hand very disapproving of parents who booted their kids out at 18 (which is very much a thing in the white blue collar world), but on the other hand, they obviously regarded with dread the possibility that any of their kids would wind up like my dad’s female cousin, 40ish and living with her parents and obviously never going to move out, ever.

    That was the attitude that I grew up with, and it’s taken some recalibrating to get used to the idea of possibly having adult children at home for some time (that being the current US norm).

    There’s a conversation running on a related subject here (would you charge your kids rent?) and there are an interesting variety of opinions and cultures on display:

    https://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=1051855

    Like

    • When I was a teen, my parents were on the one hand very disapproving of parents who booted their kids out at 18 (which is very much a thing in the white blue collar world), but on the other hand, they obviously regarded with dread the possibility that any of their kids would wind up like my dad’s female cousin, 40ish and living with her parents and obviously never going to move out, ever.

      Booting kids out at 18 or making them pay rent is also a blue collar black thing. I’ve noticed mothers and working class married couples do it a lot, but they probably need the money. I think that it makes it a lot harder for kids to get on their feet financially.

      My parents didn’t charge me rent when I came home after college and was planning my wedding. They also let me and my husband, kids and dogs stay there rent free for while when our home sold before our new house was ready. It was supposed to be 6 weeks but it ended up being closer to 6 months. The result was tens of thousands of dollars saved which is a big deal when you have young kids.

      Now they are building a house and my mom keeps pointing out that there is enough space for us to move in, “if we wanted to” hint-hint. Followed by, “have you noticed how old we’re getting,” guilt comments. My mom goes to the gym 5 days a week and runs half marathons. She and my dad just love a full house.

      Like

  16. My dad was NOT AT ALL into kicking kids out at 18. But he very much believed adulthood meant striking out and paying your own way; married or not. I had one brother -his doing very well with a lovely family- who left home at 26 even though he was a year older than me and I left home a month before my 21st birthday. I married 18 months after that which frankly probably wouldn’t have happened as quickly if I had remained at home.

    Yeah it was messy . The story is well known, but I am so happy with the guy I ended up vwith.

    Much later my dad said he knows his girls all left home earlier because he was so much stricter on us but he wasn’t trying to get us out. He was keeping us safe.

    Like

    • Elspeth said:

      “Much later my dad said he knows his girls all left home earlier because he was so much stricter on us but he wasn’t trying to get us out. He was keeping us safe.”

      A CAF guy once said (and this is probably right) that many grown daughters living at home tended to have the same amount of freedom that he himself enjoyed at 15.

      It certainly was the case that my baby brother had easily 10X the car access that my sister had, and I didn’t drive at all when I was living at home.

      It’s a national phenomenon that there are somewhat more young adult men living at home than young adult women: ” However, millennial males (40%) were significantly more likely than millennial females (32%) to live with mom and dad.”

      http://www.marketwatch.com/story/more-men-than-women-live-with-their-parents-2013-08-02

      Some of the possible explanations given are women marry earlier, parents give sons living at home more freedom and parents expecting more housework from daughters.

      Like

      • Oh, yeah. My brothers came and went as they pleased from age 16 on. And yep, they got to use the car.

        When I drove a car outside of driver’s ed at school, it was my own, which I bought while living on my own LOL.

        Like

        • I would be fine with adult children living at home provided they were working and helping with bills.

          That said, I came from a home where girls were discouraged from moving out and discouraged from getting an education. It did me a great deal of harm. I had no tools with which to handle anybody or anything. I can relate wonderfully to certain groups of people, but only because it is an authority figure situation, and it always exhausts me.

          With a highschooler coming up whom I have no choice but to homeschool, I had to do a lot of thinking as to just why I react in certain ways to certain situations — and realized that while I taught well, I always had a knot in my stomach every single day and was exhausted by three o’clock every afternoon. I realized that I had a hard time relating even to the children I taught. I did all the things I did because I thought they would please my parents. I made all my choices based on what others wanted me to do.

          It is my opinion that a lot of traditionalism and conservatism is designed to enable the authority figures in the hierarchy to have as much power as they possibly can grasp — and once they taste power, their hunger for it is increased so exponentially that they cannot get enough. They will not be satisfied until they have stripped all underneath them of whatever power they may have had in the beginning. The hierarchical stack eats away at all those beneath and the ones on the bottom of the pile are the ones who end up paying the ultimate price for the structure to stand.

          Like

      • Read “Boys Adrift” by Leonard Sax, MD. It’s the best study to date as to why we have a plethora of adultescent men. I would be willing to bet that most of these ‘spherians may be secretly closet adultescents……just a possibility. They certainly act like it.

        Like

  17. Pingback: Modern practice and ancient principles aren’t mutually exclusive… | Things I Wish I'd Known Sooner

  18. Some more related thoughts:

    –There is no idealized vision of large, poor families in the OT, because having a large, poor family was not the OT ideal. The OT ideal was a large, RICH family.

    –There also isn’t an idealized vision of large, poor families in the NT, either, and for that matter, you’re not going to find a lot of praise of large families in the NT.

    –So a lot of the contemporary large family conservative religious ideology is theologically speaking a historical novelty

    Like

  19. The hubs has indicated to me ad nauseam, that he has absolutely NO INTEREST in being married to a drudge. He likes having a partner in crime, so to speak. For a while, at his insistence, I had a housekeeper coming in once a week But then i decided that I really didn’t want to spend my very-hard-earned income on cleaning. I wanted to go shopping. We came to an agreement on what would constitute an aceptable level of cleanliness and that’s where we are. Meanwhile, when not working 50+ hours a week, i play in my garden, go swimming, shopping, indulge my Inner Julia Child and spoil the man like crazy. (Also, he agreed to clean the bathroom because i positively LOATHE the task, and I cook and clean the kitchen – well, except when he grills). Basically, he knows I adore the daylights out of him and he likes seeing me happy and smiling and baking!

    Like

Comments are closed.