S/O: What's wrong with being a '1950's wife'?

[fairfarmhand]

Just read the serving food to your husband thread and the 1950's wife statement intrigued me! I have to say that I think I am a bit of a 1950's wife - or at least I try to be!! I really do take pride in serving my husband in all the ways that I can - making things easy for him, cooking food that he likes, not stressing him out when he gets home from work etc etc.

 

He helps me out with my stuff as well, and there is lots of give and take, but in our house he is the leader and he is treated and respected as such. Part of my satisfaction as a wife comes from looking after my husband well.

 

Am I alone in this? Or have I read too much into this?!

 

 

I think I like my role too, but it helps that my dh was not raised to be a 1950's man so I don't feel undervalued and unappreciated. I appreciate the fact that if I don't feel like vacuuming, he will come home and do it just because he wants to help out.

 

but I'm like you, I like to make him happy by cooking his favorite foods and taking care of him and my house. The neat thing is that he likes to make me happy too! We are both servants to one another. And he doesn't feel that all I'm good for is cooking, cleaning and sewing. He appreciates my other gifts as well.

 

However, I draw the line at girdles and high heels while vacuuming.

 

:)

[My3Boys]

Though the authenticity of this is in question, here is one person's idea of a 1950's wife: :lol:

http://www.j-walk.com/other/goodwife/images/goodwifeguide.gif

 

Oh brother :rolleyes: My mom still believes many of these. She was born in 1938. Staying away all night? WTH? In college we studied the 1950s wife and mother, and saw the contribution she made to the "anything goes" 1960s, as she was not only subservient to her husband, but generally very lenient with the children - especially the boys.

 

 

I think we can blame the rise of liberal child-rearing philosophies, such as Dr. Spock espoused, and the growing atmosphere of radical liberalism on college campuses for that. Many a well-raised child has had their upbringing erased by the worldviews presented by their radical professors.

[fairfarmhand]

"I give not out of my gender role and societal expectation but out of my freedom and choice."

 

Peela, I love this quote! well said.

[fairfarmhand]

And I worry that a certain segment within the homeschooling community is pushing for a return to this. It shouldn't be controversial among Christians for young women to get a college education and work for a few years before having children. I'm absolutely in favor of moms with young children being full-time homemakers. However, IMHO it should be a season within their life, not the only thing they ever do with themselves.

 

I do partly agree with this. However, a young lady should have the freedom to marry young and have children if that is what she wants. And should be entitled to the respect anyone else might get for a career path.

[Laurie4b]

Which kind of 1950's wife? The average African-American wife? Or June Cleaver? Or a farmer's wife? Or a woman who worked full time and was expected to keep the house clean, take care of the kids, cook dinner?

Do you mean a white SAHM in a middle-to-upper-middle class family? My mother was the latter and resented it; apparently so did a lot of other women in our neighborhood, because in the 70's divorce went around like the flu.

My mother kept the house clean (and had a housekeeper once every couple weeks), cooked, kept us clothed, yelled at us, shopped, and socialized. She did make costumes for us at Halloween and took us shopping, too. She came to a few of my sports events in high school. My father worked more than fulltime and when he was home, he worked, too--putting additions on the house, yard work, building a patio, etc. In a way, my mom had it good but she did not like kids, so had no joy at all and was bored out of her mind and depressed because she was supposed to be fulfulled and wasn't.

 

I love kids, and my own kids bring me immense joy, but i don't think I would have enjoyed her life either. Homeschooling is stimulating; housework is not. My mother didn't like housework either, though I know some women do. I don't like a whole lot of social butterfly socializing either. I like meaning in my life. My mother had none. I work part-time partly because we need the money, but partly because I like what I do. I was happy homeschooling without working, too.

 

My mother-in-law has lived the typical middle-to-upper-middle class white SAHM thing her whole life. She appears to have enjoyed it. However, dh has no memories of warm, fuzzy times, though he knows he was loved. She was too busy with managing the logistics of 5 kids 5 and under and with the housework, which she liked and which was a priority to my f-i-l. We always eat in the dining room at her home and everyone serves him/herself. There is definitely a sense of serving my f-i-l, but he adores her and serves her well, too. Their roles are very prescribed.

[Caitilin]

There are two books that give the downside to the 50's wife image very well, one fiction and one non-fiction.

 

The fiction one is "The Women's Room" and the non-fiction one is "The Feminine Mystique".

 

I was born in the late 50's, and grew up with 50's housewives. All, repeat all, that I ever heard about being a housewife growing up was how awful it was. My mom used to say, "I am a drudge." Repeatedly, and meaning it. When moms got together they complained all the time. They were bored, they hated cooking, they hated listening to people talk about cooking, they hated pinching pennies and not be recognized for it. Bottom line is that they conveyed that they felt that their lot in life propelled them into a subservient position that their intellects and talents did not deserve and that they were both completely trapped and completely financially vulnerable. Most of them were depressed most of the time. The mags talked about how much they should enjoy their lovely homes and clean kids and their service to their family, and they thought that this was the most ridiculous thing they could imagine, even though they still did the work.

 

I would have done anything to avoid being a housewife. Those two books perfectly elucidated what I saw of my mother's generation and life. But they posed no real alternative in any kind of way that would be acceptable to me, either.

 

I thought that if I ever stayed home I would be bored out of my mind and probably very depressed. It was a complete surprise to me that I would so enjoy being home--I almost didn't have a frame of reference for it. When my DD was born I didn't know anyone who would admit to enjoying their children. Not anyone.

 

It's ironic that I have so enjoyed being home with my DD, so that I could teach her to be a strong woman who didn't have to stay home. Ha!

 

But there is the key. It's a 'get to' not a 'got to.' In the 50's, 'the role of women' was discussed, and almost always in the singular--hard to imagine today. Now there are choices, and that, IMO, frees up the stay at home role and gives it a lot more dignity. It also obligates us to educate our daughters to be capable of independence, whether they live independently or not. Not just a teaching credential to have 'something to fall back on' but rather a teaching credential if you love teaching, but something else that is both sensible and chosen if that is preferable. And classical education gives the foundation to pivot in any direction and to have an enriched life no matter what career is or is not pursued.

 

:001_wub::iagree:

[LauraGB]

When I think of a 50's housewife, the first thing that comes to mind is the valium popping glorified maid.

Me too. Sometimes I feel like one, though (minus the valium :tongue_smilie:). But I don't look anywhere near as cool. And I'm not really good at it. So, in my head on some days, I am, but to an outside viewer, I so am not.

 

And, I guess if it makes you happy, there's nothing wrong with it. To each their own.

[Gratia271]

Isn't it about finding a partner with whom you agree in these matters? I have known many people from many walks of life; and, of the wide range of people I have known, those who have been the most "satisfied" with life are those who found partners who shared similar perspectives about these kinds of topics.

 

I know many working women who who would rather be at home and vice versa. I also know many working women who denigrate women who embrace a role as wife and mother to the exclusion of a career. Many old colleagues (and family members) ripped into me when I abandoned the practice of law to raise my children and then home educate them. It is all about choices each of us hopefully gets to make for ourselves. After all, we have to live with the choice, not them.

 

In the best scenario, our partner is on the same page with us. I don't have a "servant" spirit, which does not mean I don't love my DH. Some might say it does. That is one couple's dynamic... we have our own dynamic. It works for us which is why all of these books pp have mentioned don't work for many of us ladies. They assume a paradigm to which we don't relate. IMO, there is no one way to have a healthy relationship with someone. You need to be in sync with your partner, not someone else's. And, yes, to live some people's lives, I would probably need medication. Those same people might need medication to live mine. It works for us; and, if 1950's style works for others, that is great!

[G5052]

 

Nothing if you like being one and your hubby likes having one.

 

Rosie

 

DH and I are considered outliers among some of our friends because I have always maintained a professional career, I handle all the finances, and he is not that involved in homeschooling other than wanting to be updated on any changes or major concerns. He is quite comfortable with that, and so am I.

 

And we stay out of the dynamic of those who choose to be otherwise.

[Laurie4b]

You are not alone, I think way too many here have read deeply into this that what you're doing is wrong...(valium/control/rolling fatties...really?) Too many people today think that biblical guidelines for roles in a marriage are stifling, suppresses one's rights, and someone mentioned subservient?

 

..

 

Do you equate "biblical guidelines in marriage" with "being a 1950's housewife?"

 

Your own post didn't fit. Stereotypical 1950's husbands were not stay-at-home dads. Your post described mutual servanthood without rigid role definitions. The phrase "1950's housewife" is, I believe, evocative of rigid role definitions that were true across the board (religious or not) in a certain demographic group in the U.S. (primarily white, middle-to-uppermiddle class families.) I believe to some extent it also describes the inequality of work-distribution in many working class homes, where both husband and wife worked full time (she often for less wages) but it was expected that when he came home, it was time to relax (or take out the trash and mow the lawn once a week in the summer) but when she came home, it was her job to cook, clean, and attend to the kids' needs by herself-- the stuff SAHM's took all day to do. That wasn't "his" job at all.

 

 

I have seen posts that stated what you described: mutual service, which seems to fit "biblical guidelines" a lot better than the mentality of the 1950's stereotype. If Jesus did women's/servant work, such as in the washing of feet, I think men who follow him can follow his example as well as women who follow him--just like your husband did.

 

I really don't see a lot of "me generation" talk, just talk that service goes two ways .

[GWOB]

Do you equate "biblical guidelines in marriage" with "being a 1950's housewife?"

 

Your own post didn't fit. Stereotypical 1950's husbands were not stay-at-home dads. Your post described mutual servanthood without rigid role definitions. The phrase "1950's housewife" is, I believe, evocative of rigid role definitions that were true across the board (religious or not) in a certain demographic group in the U.S. (primarily white, middle-to-uppermiddle class families.) I believe to some extent it also describes the inequality of work-distribution in many working class homes, where both husband and wife worked full time (she often for less wages) but it was expected that when he came home, it was time to relax (or take out the trash and mow the lawn once a week in the summer) but when she came home, it was her job to cook, clean, and attend to the kids' needs by herself-- the stuff SAHM's took all day to do. That wasn't "his" job at all.

 

 

I have seen posts that stated what you described: mutual service, which seems to fit "biblical guidelines" a lot better than the mentality of the 1950's stereotype. If Jesus did women's/servant work, such as in the washing of feet, I think men who follow him can follow his example as well as women who follow him--just like your husband did.

 

I really don't see a lot of "me generation" talk, just talk that service goes two ways .

 

Excellent. I agree completely.

[Impish]

I missed the first thread.

 

That being said, about a year ago, my marriage was in very serious trouble. During that time, I discovered two things: one, that God had placed it on my heart to view my dh as the head of household, and two, Wolf's love language was Acts of Service.

 

Thanks to RSD, I can't always do what I want/need to do. But, there is definite appreciation from my dh when the house is clean...and it rocks his world when I'm 'dressed up' when he comes home. 'Dressed up' means not in jogging pants and tent like tshirts or scrubs. Jeans, a nice fitted tshirt, and a bit of make up, and he's incredibly pleased.

 

All it costs me is a bit of time (usually skipping afternoon nap time) and means so much to him, so why not?

 

We already have a routine of him coming in, squeals of "DADDY'S HOME!!" and getting stampeded by the kids. Once that's over, he and I head outside and talk about our days.

 

I wouldn't say I'm a 50s wife, but I'm definitely a more 'traditional' wife in many respects. I don't always meet the goals I set for myself, thanks to RSD, and my husband always pitches in when RSD rears its ugly head. He took Monday off work because I hadn't slept the night before, and when I didn't sleep well again Tues night, I was still napping when he came home. He took the kids out, got supper, and intended for me to sleep til this am (I was up at 630 pm, back to bed at 9, up again from 1130-2am).

 

For me, I'm happiest when my husband is happy. I love pleasing him. At the same time, he would say the same about me.

 

It works so much better for us than when we were both fighting to be 'in the lead'. I'd go so far as to say that my husband respects and loves me more NOW than he did before.

[MomOfOneFunOne]

I get that some ppl like this idea(l) and some ppl don't. What I don't really get is the hostility.

 

Why can't it just not be one's thing w/o being so emotionally provocative?

 

I tend to think that those who have such strong anger and loathing (either way) are lugging some emotional baggage that has less to to with the actual topic of what kind of housewife/partner/super-mate one is or wants to be than having issues that lie beneath the surface and somehow find themselves unleashed on this topic for some reason.

[JFSinIL]

Dh gets to leave the house alone almost every single day. He gets to talk to different people and do different things. I am stuck at the house most of the day most every day. I do not get to meet new and interesting people. I have to do mind-numbing chores and help dd with school day after day, week after week.

 

.

 

Yup - and my hubby travels to work on a commuter train with padded seats, he reads his paper, listens to his mp3 player, naps, or chats with his train friends twice a day. If he was behind the wheel in traffic I'd have more sympathy.

[Daisy]

Which 1950's housewife should I compare myself to?

 

My mom's mom was a 1950's housewife whose preacher husband abandoned her with 4 children. She went to work and moved into the projects of south Montgomery.

 

No thanks.

 

Okay, I know the stereotype you all are talking about but seriously, as soon as the guy said, "CUT," life returned to normal.

 

And I imagine normal looked a lot like whatever worked for their family.

Edited September 22, 2010 by Daisy

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

I get that some ppl like this idea(l) and some ppl don't. What I don't really get is the hostility.

 

Why can't it just not be one's thing w/o being so emotionally provocative?

 

I tend to think that those who have such strong anger and loathing (either way) are lugging some emotional baggage that has less to to with the actual topic of what kind of housewife/partner/super-mate one is or wants to be than having issues that lie beneath the surface and somehow find themselves unleashed on this topic for some reason.

 

I wonder about the hostility too. As Rosie said earlier (and I paraphrase) If you want and like that model then there is nothing wrong with being one.

 

This reminds me of when I ponder why there is such hostility towards homeschoolers from some of the folks with kids in PS. I often get told by those close to me that they probably feel homeschooling is an indictment of their choice to send kids to school. They see homeschooling as a criticism of what their kids do and of their parenting.

 

I think this is potentially the same type of problem.

 

I've know some great 1950s housewives (some even truly of the 50s), I've known plenty of modern gals who try to work some aspects into their lives (the number of college educated working moms who are canning and baking pies in their spare time is impressive) and some who are modern all the way. All can be great wives and mothers and it really doesn't matter if everyone is happy.

 

As for the drink and chatting with hubby at the end of the day--my best friend's parents met at the end of everyday (between 5 & 6) for a cocktail and a chat. They discussed their day, social activities, what was happening with the kids, plans for the week, gossiped, etc. Just like in the movies. They were happily married for 60 years or more. Sitting and chatting at the end of the day isn't always a bad idea nor does it have to been demeaning to the woman. I think it kept them close and a part of each others activities.

[Mejane]

My mom was a late-50's housewife. She stayed home to clean and cook, BUT had eight hours a day to do it while we were at school. There was no running as our activities (what few we had) were school-based. Then we played outside until dinner, did our homework and went to bed. We spent a lot of time at our grandparents' house. Grandma also did all the holidays.

 

1950's housewives didn't pour as much time or effort into their kids as do we (whether or not we choose to hs.) They weren't expected to work outside the home even if they didn't have children. My mom did not wear dresses and pearls, but she also did not mow lawns, shovel snow, or haul wood. I think she had it easy when I compare her life to mine.

[Nestof3]

I have no hostility toward anyone here at all, but I do believe there has been an imbalance in the literature written on the subject of marriage. That is what I have been addressing. There has been a huge emphasis in the Christian book market on how women can please their husbands but very little written about how men can please their wives (other than books about avoiding pornography). To me, that indicates that overall, there is an imbalance that many people are unaware of.

 

I have heard women talk about how much their marriages improved when they began serving their husbands more, but I never hear men talk about how much their marriage improved when they began serving their wives more. I'm only asking in this thread, "Why is that?"

 

And, the women I have mentioned (like my MIL) do have a lot of hostility. They view their husbands as helpless, selfish people, but they have convinced themselves that this is their role -- to keep the man happy.

 

Who wouldn't be happy having everyone focusing on their needs all the time. I'm only asking, how often is it happening the other way around? And, if it started happening the other way around, how much better would the marriage be?

 

I get that some ppl like this idea(l) and some ppl don't. What I don't really get is the hostility.

 

Why can't it just not be one's thing w/o being so emotionally provocative?

 

I tend to think that those who have such strong anger and loathing (either way) are lugging some emotional baggage that has less to to with the actual topic of what kind of housewife/partner/super-mate one is or wants to be than having issues that lie beneath the surface and somehow find themselves unleashed on this topic for some reason.

[brehon]

Agreeing here, and very well said.

 

I personally love being a SAHM. I would work outside the home if I needed to in order to put food on the table, but I am definitely happier at home.

 

I found the "valium" comment to be incredibly offensive and disrespectful, especially to all of our moms and grandmothers who sacrificed, worked hard, loved and cared for their families and took pride in that.

 

 

The Valium comments were not made to be offensive or disrespectful; but, rather, reflected the reality of a certain number of women in the 1950's. After all that phrase exists for a reason. It may be hard for younger women now to understand that up until a couple of decades ago the majority of women (including university educated women) had very few choices in life (and this doesn't even include poor and/or minority women who had even fewer choices).

 

I think that is the key word -- choice. If you [general you] wish to emulate a stereotypical 1950's housewife and both you and your spouse are happy with that choice, then great. That choice, however, does not mean that those women/couples who choose differently are somehow failing to live according to Biblical principals or are selfish. They've simply made a different choice.

 

In my family I am the one who works and my dh stays home with the kids. He retired a couple of years ago. I don't expect him to greet me dressed up (I'm fairly sure he wouldn't put on make-up:D) with a nice, hot cuppa in hand. (I work for 24 hours and get home in the mornings.) It's nice these days for most of us to have the ability to choose what works best for our individual situations.

[GraciebytheBay]

I don't think there is anything wrong with it if it works for your family! I do think there is a danger in putting too much pressure on yourself to fit the "perfect" image of the wife who cooks, cleans and supports her husband perfectly all the time. As long as neither spouse gets bent out of shape when there is a deviation from the routine and both respect each other as partners in this crazy thing called life, I can see where it could work very nicely.

 

That having been said, I think we live a modified version of this. I do no ironing and do not consider myself to be a great housekeeper. However, I do appreciate my dh working so hard for us, so I try to be sure he doesn't trip over anything on his way in the door (!) and emphasize to the kids that we need to straighten up for Daddy. One thing that annoys him is having school books all over the house, so I try to be sure they are put away. I also try to at least run a brush through my hair. I do these things because I love him, not because I consider him my "master".

Edited September 22, 2010 by GraciebytheBay

[PiCO]

I was born in the late 50's, and grew up with 50's housewives. All, repeat all, that I ever heard about being a housewife growing up was how awful it was. My mom used to say, "I am a drudge." Repeatedly, and meaning it. When moms got together they complained all the time. They were bored, they hated cooking, they hated listening to people talk about cooking, they hated pinching pennies and not be recognized for it. Bottom line is that they conveyed that they felt that their lot in life propelled them into a subservient position that their intellects and talents did not deserve and that they were both completely trapped and completely financially vulnerable. Most of them were depressed most of the time. The mags talked about how much they should enjoy their lovely homes and clean kids and their service to their family, and they thought that this was the most ridiculous thing they could imagine, even though they still did the work.

 

I think many people will be unhappy if they are concerned about doing what society expects of them. Especially if they spend their time complaining and don't pursue their own interests. Not everyone will ever fit into the same box.

 

My mother was put into the "50's housewife" role, and it's what she thought she wanted. But she spent more time outdoors than in (gardening), and she was a swim coach. Eventually she went back to school and got a master's in computer science, but by then it was the 70's and that was OK.

 

My father's mother had a college degree (unusual in those days.) She had no interest in being "just a housewife" either- she was always involved in some cause, usually stirring the pot.

 

My point is, not all wives do what's expected of them by society. Plenty of people are happy doing what society expects at any given time, but I don't think one should just do what society expects- one should pursue whatever fulfils one's destiny.

 

Women today are expected to do everything- bring home the bacon and fry it up in the pan. Work full time, cook, cart the kids to a zillion activities. Women who want to be 50's housewives now are going against the norm- doing what works for their family, fulfilling their own destiny. So I say- more power to you!

[Gratia271]

I have no hostility toward anyone here at all, but I do believe there has been an imbalance in the literature written on the subject of marriage. That is what I have been addressing. There has been a huge emphasis in the Christian book market on how women can please their husbands but very little written about how men can please their wives (other than books about avoiding pornography). To me, that indicates that overall, there is an imbalance that many people are unaware of.

 

I have heard women talk about how much their marriages improved when they began serving their husbands more, but I never hear men talk about how much their marriage improved when they began serving their wives more. I'm only asking in this thread, "Why is that?"

 

And, the women I have mentioned (like my MIL) do have a lot of hostility. They view their husbands as helpless, selfish people, but they have convinced themselves that this is their role -- to keep the man happy.

 

Who wouldn't be happy having everyone focusing on their needs all the time. I'm only asking, how often is it happening the other way around? And, if it started happening the other way around, how much better would the marriage be?

 

There is an imbalance in literature where marital relationships are involved. IMO, it is assumed females like to serve, be caretakers, etc..., and it is further assumed males like to be served. I have been around many people who don't understand women like me who aren't caretakers.... translated we don't care about our families. :confused: They don't accept men as caretakers (DH and brother). DH enjoys taking care of me, which of course is not masculine, right?

 

As I said earlier, the goal is to have a partner that is on the same page with us about these issues. People who continue to do the same thing while harboring hostility should stop. In all fairness, some (by no means all) women do these things because it brings them gratification. They are the better person, they take care of everyone else, they hold everyone's worlds together. They like people being dependent on them. Their motives are not necessarily selfless.

[Daisy]

The valium comment cracked me up. My Dad's mom was popping them. Course she married at 15yo to a monster & stuck in that marriage for 40+ years.

 

All I'm saying is that the 1950's stereotype is just that...a stereotype. It isn't reality.

 

I love staying at home. I love taking care of my family, but I'm not trying to pattern my family after any previous stereotype. We are doing what works best for our family.

[PiCO]

The Valium comments were not made to be offensive or disrespectful; but, rather, reflected the reality of a certain number of women in the 1950's. After all that phrase exists for a reason.

 

 

Yes, over prescription of valium was a reality in some circles. My mother said any time she asked her (male) doctor about a symptom she was having, he offered her a valium prescription. For Navy doctors it was a way to shut up the wives.

[PiCO]

I get that some ppl like this idea(l) and some ppl don't. What I don't really get is the hostility.

 

Are you talking about this thread? Because I don't see the hostility.

[Dawn in OH]

When I think of a 50's housewife, the first thing that comes to mind is the valium popping glorified maid.

 

My thoughts exactly. And everything being "Yes Dear" rather than having a say in anything.

 

I control the bank account, the spending, and the bill paying, for good reason. Although I do consult my husband before spending money on something other than groceries.

[pdalley]

 

All I'm saying is that the 1950's stereotype is just that...a stereotype. It isn't reality.

 

I love staying at home. I love taking care of my family, but I'm not trying to pattern my family after any previous stereotype. We are doing what works best for our family.

 

:iagree: And honestly, I live in the south - have my whole life and do not know one 50's housewife that was popping Valium. And I would have too. My grandmother was a nurse and discussed ailments with people in the checkout line or anywhere else she ran into them.

 

Now we won't talk about my MIL and her zillion cocktails at 1 pm... But she lived in CA - not the south.

[MSNative]

 

As for the drink and chatting with hubby at the end of the day--my best friend's parents met at the end of everyday (between 5 & 6) for a cocktail and a chat. They discussed their day, social activities, what was happening with the kids, plans for the week, gossiped, etc. Just like in the movies. They were happily married for 60 years or more. Sitting and chatting at the end of the day isn't always a bad idea nor does it have to been demeaning to the woman. I think it kept them close and a part of each others activities.

 

:iagree: My husband and I try to have cocktail time together several times a week. (much later than 5 because of kid activities.) I love it. We reconnect, talk about current events, build a relationship beyond just childrearing. Plus, on those bad days, knowing that I have a fun date on the deck with dh is better than valium.

 

I'm thankful that women of the past worked hard so that I could have all the choices I do. I wish that women of the present would back off the accusations about those choices. (Actually have had women saying that my choosing to stay home was an affront to all women. Puhlease. I hear some people here feeling like they are getting accused for having a non-1950's marriage. Again, puhlease.)

 

I don't think the 1950's marriage as described by many here - wife gets no respect, husband is selfish extra child, is healthy. Nor is the one that gets portrayed nowadays - husband dotes on wife, wife is princess who always gets her way and fusses at and picks on husband, etc. I'm thinking of the Julie and Julia type marriage - Ugh. The main character was just a self-centered, spoiled brat. So, I don't think we get anywhere swapping one spoiled brat for another. Sadly, I have seen several twenty-somethings getting married with the expectation that they are the little princess who will get everything. Then they are shocked when 1 year later they are divorced.

 

Happily, real life is much different from stereotypes. Most marriages I've seen have way diff. dynamics from mine, but they work. Took me so long to realize that just because my dh and I argue (and my parents never do) doesn't mean we have a bad marriage. We just have a diff one. The key is respecting each other.

[Mejane]

I was born in the late 50's, and grew up with 50's housewives. All, repeat all, that I ever heard about being a housewife growing up was how awful it was. My mom used to say, "I am a drudge." Repeatedly, and meaning it. When moms got together they complained all the time.

 

 

My recollection is the opposite. My mom and her peers really seemed to enjoy their lives. Maybe they were all on Valium and I just didn't know it? ;)

[Daisy]

:iagree: And honestly, I live in the south - have my whole life and do not know one 50's housewife that was popping Valium. And I would have too. My grandmother was a nurse and discussed ailments with people in the checkout line or anywhere else she ran into them.

 

Now we won't talk about my MIL and her zillion cocktails at 1 pm... But she lived in CA - not the south.

 

Well, I grew up in Alabama and it was my Alabama grandmother who was popping valium. She called them her nerve pills. LOL.

 

I think my point is simply that there is something to be said for CHOICE. I don't think any of us would want our ability to choose taken away. I wouldn't want to live in an era where all women everywhere were expected to live by a cookie-cutter mold regardless of whether that expectation was SAHM or career mom.

[TXMary2]

While I have embraced a fairly traditional homemaker role, when I think of "50's housewife" I think of some girl who had no ambition in life except to get married and have children and who typically did so by the age of 21.

 

And I worry that a certain segment within the homeschooling community is pushing for a return to this. It shouldn't be controversial among Christians for young women to get a college education and work for a few years before having children. I'm absolutely in favor of moms with young children being full-time homemakers. However, IMHO it should be a season within their life, not the only thing they ever do with themselves.

 

I see the exact opposite from some christians, it isn't going to college that is controversial, it is the girl the doesn't want to go and would rather get married and raise babies. I don't see anything wrong with doing that forever if that is what the woman really wants. Being a wife and mother is fulfilling enough for some women.

[Wendi]

I just can't help myself! I have to share this

. Enjoy! (Uh, if you're not familiar with MST3K, parental guidance suggested.)

 

Wendi

[OnTheBrink]

Agreeing here, and very well said.

 

I personally love being a SAHM. I would work outside the home if I needed to in order to put food on the table, but I am definitely happier at home.

 

I found the "valium" comment to be incredibly offensive and disrespectful, especially to all of our moms and grandmothers who sacrificed, worked hard, loved and cared for their families and took pride in that.

 

:iagree:

[mommaduck]

Agreeing here, and very well said.

 

I personally love being a SAHM. I would work outside the home if I needed to in order to put food on the table, but I am definitely happier at home.

 

I found the "valium" comment to be incredibly offensive and disrespectful, especially to all of our moms and grandmothers who sacrificed, worked hard, loved and cared for their families and took pride in that.

Really? You THINK you know my mom? My mom and grandmother were both better as accountants and bank managers than they ever were as mothers. They attempted the SAHMing and literally could not hack it. I really wish they had been the perfect mom. I used to hold it against them that they weren't. But due to various things in their lives, they just. weren't. able. to. I spent years trying to be everything opposite of them. I've succeeded at being a loving mother. I learned to cook. I found out when hanging out with other traditional families that I didn't fit, and was usually outcasted because I didn't stick "woman talk", because I held educated and strong opinions (and my husband LIKES that), and because I'm not June Cleaver perfect.

 

I've learned that I don't fit into other people's boxes. And I really don't think we should have a box and tell all women to fit into it.

[creekland]

Really? You THINK you know my mom? My mom and grandmother were both better as accountants and bank managers than they ever were as mothers. They attempted the SAHMing and literally could not hack it. I really wish they had been the perfect mom. I used to hold it against them that they weren't. But due to various things in their lives, they just. weren't. able. to. I spent years trying to be everything opposite of them. I've succeeded at being a loving mother. I learned to cook. I found out when hanging out with other traditional families that I didn't fit, and was usually outcasted because I didn't stick "woman talk", because I held educated and strong opinions (and my husband LIKES that), and because I'm not June Cleaver perfect.

 

I've learned that I don't fit into other people's boxes. And I really don't think we should have a box and tell all women to fit into it.

 

You and I aren't a whole lot different from each other. I can't do the full time SAHM thing either - nor could my mom. Hubby and I LOVE educated conversation - esp with each other when we can say what we really want to. My house is a semi-mess and we're both ok with it! When we're not, we both pitch in to get it where we like it. Life is way too much fun (for us) to spend too much time cleaning or cooking.

 

And overall, to each our own. Our way is no better nor worse than anyone else.

[Carol in Cal.]

I have no hostility toward anyone here at all, but I do believe there has been an imbalance in the literature written on the subject of marriage. That is what I have been addressing. There has been a huge emphasis in the Christian book market on how women can please their husbands but very little written about how men can please their wives (other than books about avoiding pornography). To me, that indicates that overall, there is an imbalance that many people are unaware of.

 

I have heard women talk about how much their marriages improved when they began serving their husbands more, but I never hear men talk about how much their marriage improved when they began serving their wives more. I'm only asking in this thread, "Why is that?"

 

And, the women I have mentioned (like my MIL) do have a lot of hostility. They view their husbands as helpless, selfish people, but they have convinced themselves that this is their role -- to keep the man happy.

 

Who wouldn't be happy having everyone focusing on their needs all the time. I'm only asking, how often is it happening the other way around? And, if it started happening the other way around, how much better would the marriage be?

 

Very well put. I totally agree.

 

I actually know a couple where the husband got serious about the marriage at one point. Before that they always clashed. He had a very time consuming career, and she was not that happy at home. Then he would take on big volunteer jobs and she would never see him. They bickered a lot. Then at one point he started to pray to want to work on his marriage (quite a far back starting point, I would say) and slowly he grew in that area, and she responded, and now they are extremely happy together. She has become his most cherished friend--they are really cute together, after about 20 years of marriage.

 

But you're right, it's usually the wife that does this. I think that that's one of the reasons why Firestorm (?) was so popular--it was the husband who changed.

[GWOB]

Agreeing here, and very well said.

 

I personally love being a SAHM. I would work outside the home if I needed to in order to put food on the table, but I am definitely happier at home.

 

I found the "valium" comment to be incredibly offensive and disrespectful, especially to all of our moms and grandmothers who sacrificed, worked hard, loved and cared for their families and took pride in that.

 

The valium comment was an accurate representation of how many, many women dealt with their unappreciated servitude. My grandma was a 50's housewife. Her first husband left her when my uncle was 2 and my mom was 6 weeks old. She had no job, skills, possesions,, or anything. She stayed with family until she married an oppressive man. She stayed home, had 4 more kids, and did everything for ungrateful family. She wasn't allowed to get a driver'' license until she was 35. Only after my step-grandpa passed away 12 years ago did she finally begin to live. She has made many comments about how miserable she was. I don't think her life was an anomoly. Many other women were forced into this role and felt the same way.

 

The problem is that many women today try to emulate a fictionalized TV version of perfection. June Cleaver was not real. Those other TV wives were not real. I'm fine with women running their lives as they see fit, and if emulating a fictional person floats your boat, go for it. I prefer to live in reality.

[PiCO]

I just can't help myself! I have to share this

. Enjoy! (Uh, if you're not familiar with MST3K, parental guidance suggested.)

 

I find it alarming that Brother does homework, but Daughter makes dinner and does not study. She went to school- didn't girls have homework back then?

[Carol in Cal.]

You and I aren't a whole lot different from each other. I can't do the full time SAHM thing either - nor could my mom. Hubby and I LOVE educated conversation - esp with each other when we can say what we really want to. My house is a semi-mess and we're both ok with it! When we're not, we both pitch in to get it where we like it. Life is way too much fun (for us) to spend too much time cleaning or cooking.

 

And overall, to each our own. Our way is no better nor worse than anyone else.

 

OK, so, I know you didn't mean it like this, but this comment could really stir up SAHM's. It implies that staying at home is dreary and that those who are satisfied with it don't 'LOVE educated conversation.' Now, don't get mad. I KNOW you didn't mean it like that. But this is the kind of thing that unconsciously brings on the anger that was mentioned upthread. That's why it's so hard to discuss.

[nono]

valium/control/rolling fatties...really?

 

I wrote the fattie comment, and yeah, really! :D It was a joke at my own expense! Then I went on to enumerate how I do what many still would feel is very traditional roles, but the point being that it wasn't dicated to me (by some 50s ideal). It is an agreement between my husband and me. As it should be in each couple's situation! In no way was my comment saying to the OP -- "Oh, you must live this way."

 

But, to answer your post, am I subservient to my husband in what some would consider the "Christian" ideal? Well, he is the CEO of the family, but considering I control the money (and am also the enterprise (root) admin of our home's computer network), it's probably arguable who has ultimate control. :tongue_smilie:

 

Oh, and I certainly didn't perceive any hostility in the OP's question. It seemed very open and conversational, hence my feeling it was OK to try to crack her up a bit. No harm intended.

[Impish]

OK, so, I know you didn't mean it like this, but this comment could really stir up SAHM's. It implies that staying at home is dreary and that those who are satisfied with it don't 'LOVE educated conversation.' Now, don't get mad. I KNOW you didn't mean it like that. But this is the kind of thing that unconsciously brings on the anger that was mentioned upthread. That's why it's so hard to discuss.

:iagree:I blinked at the 'educated conversation' myself.

[Sophia]

I think it's rather funny how people are romanticizing the working husband's role in this thread. He gets to meet fascinating strangers while I'm stuck at home! He gets quiet, alone time in the car on the way to and from work! He gets to eat lunch out and doesn't have to do the dishes!

 

It's all in the spin, isn't it? He also gets the incredible pressure of knowing he better pull in the bucks or his family is sunk. His fascinating people probably couldn't care less about him. And quiet, alone time in the car is probably spent in traffic--

 

IDK--I think it's nice to serve my husband, but it's more because I love him and appreciate him, not because it's the thing to do. I find that when I serve him my focus is off myself, and that leads to something greater and more fulfilling for me. I also appreciate when he serves me and recognizes when I have a tough day.

 

Interesting thread.

 

:iagree: wholeheartedly.

 

Maybe the negative response to the 1950's image is that it's associated with the wife being taken advantage of. No one likes to be taken advantage of. When I was younger, it seemed to me many men were concerned they looked "whipped" if they were considerate of their wives in front of other men.

Really, marriage is better when you don't have to think about who served whom last, and who washed the dishes and who had the harder day. I do things for my husband because I love him~whether the year is 2010 or 1950.

[ma23peas]

I have no hostility toward anyone here at all, but I do believe there has been an imbalance in the literature written on the subject of marriage. That is what I have been addressing. There has been a huge emphasis in the Christian book market on how women can please their husbands but very little written about how men can please their wives (other than books about avoiding pornography). To me, that indicates that overall, there is an imbalance that many people are unaware of.

 

 

I think you're missing something here...it's not an imbalance but merely a consumeristic fact that 80% of those who buy those types of books are women...men just don't buy them they rarely will unless guilted into it by their wife...fits the women are from venus, men are from mars phenomena.

 

Tara

[ma23peas]

I wrote the fattie comment, and yeah, really! :D It was a joke at my own expense! Then I went on to enumerate how I do what many still would feel is very traditional roles, but the point being that it wasn't dicated to me (by some 50s ideal). It is an agreement between my husband and me. As it should be in each couple's situation! In no way was my comment saying to the OP -- "Oh, you must live this way."

 

But, to answer your post, am I subservient to my husband in what some would consider the "Christian" ideal? Well, he is the CEO of the family, but considering I control the money (and am also the enterprise (root) admin of our home's computer network), it's probably arguable who has ultimate control. :tongue_smilie:

 

Oh, and I certainly didn't perceive any hostility in the OP's question. It seemed very open and conversational, hence my feeling it was OK to try to crack her up a bit. No harm intended.

 

 

No harm taken, reading through these posts, there was a definite bend against her doing something for her husband as being 'forced to' as the ladies in the 1950's must have (which they weren't....yes, we have more opportunities, I left a very lucrative position b/c I valued my time with my family more than I valued comforts)...but I do take issue with the word subservient...nothing she is doing is that...she is using a servant's heart to honor her husband...that is nowhere near subservient..."obeying others without question"...HUH??? My grandmother never 'obeyed' my grandfather in the 50's...they each fulfilled roles and responsibilities...it's a shame and breaks down the family when they don't as has been evidenced here....

 

But being a servant to our spouse..that should be honored and revered, not mocked and degraded as I've seen some point to here...

 

Tara

[angela in ohio]

You are not alone, I think way too many here have read deeply into this that what you're doing is wrong...(valium/control/rolling fatties...really?) Too many people today think that biblical guidelines for roles in a marriage are stifling, suppresses one's rights, and someone mentioned subservient?

 

In my mind, what you are doing is right, and the fact you have not received as much support for what you're doing is unsettling..but a fact of the 'me' generation...

 

We've been married 18 years, part of what makes our marriage work is that we are both serving each other....he lifts me up with his words of encouragement, he works incredibly hard supporting our family, I work incredibly hard homeschooling, wearing many hats outside of home, we work to have dinner for him every night (for the family, we eat dinner together every night, it's important)....we do our best to keep our 'jobs' at home as on task as he does for his...we do laundry, mop, weed, tend to the pastures/animals...My husband is sooo appreciative of all we do and we are sooo appreciative of all he does...

 

We have a unique perspective, due to a bad car injury, I could not stay home with babies, I literally could not pick them up out of their cribs..no lifting at all..so my husband volunteered to be the stay at home dad until our babies were up and walking and easier for me to be with them, we did this for 5 years...we STILL served each other...he did exactly for me what we're doing for him now, he wasn't as good at cooking, but he'd order takeout :) there is nothing wrong with that, it's healthy....

 

My grandmother and mother carried on the tradition, neither took valium in their life...grandmother is 95 and mother is 68...both raised incredible families and both have 'served' their husbands just as their husbands have 'served' them...thanks to my grandfather's savings and planning my 95 year old grandmother is still living at her very own home and has not needed a nursing home...she has her loving daughters who take turns sitting with her and giving her company and a part-time helper....my hardworking father is still working 6 days a week at age 69 to support and make sure their retirement years are stress free from money worries...it keeps him in great shape as well...my mom still makes him dinner every night and cooks large breakfasts for us all...

 

Nothing wrong with having a servant's heart..nothing wrong at all..

 

Exactly.

[cjbeach]

Nothing wrong with it, if you like it.:) I do!!!

 

We have very traditional roles, now. My dh is a workhorse. I do the house stuff. We share kid-stuff.

 

My gfs from my 20s think it's pretty funny how domesticated I am, but I am. I never thought I was ever going to get married. I loved dating. I loved my late 20's single life. But now, I like running my home.

 

I gave up a stable career in an unstable economy (nursing) to be a f/t SAHM.

 

I serve my dh dinner primarily because it takes him forever to get off the phone/computer to get to the table and we clean up together. I'm another who makes the plates up at the stove. But also I kind of like the nice little things like serving him dinner. :001_smile: Seriously, we're dorks like that. But he's my partner in this life and it's all about those little things.

Our lives are so busy that I guess it's just the little things I can "do" to show him how much I appreciate him. And he **totally** digs it. We laugh because my MIL is the antithesis of the domestic Mom. She was the SAHM of the 70s who sat on the sofa reading or talking on the phone, chain-smoking, and burning boxed mac and cheese.I think my dh went out of his way to marry someone who is the complete opposite of his mother.

 

For me, it all stems from a combination of compulsive craftiness, DIY-love, and frugality. I am constantly learning to do more and more 50's housewife type "stuff" now. I want to learn to can. I bake. I cook. I clean. Heck I want to go back further than the 50s... I want to learn the pioneer woman skills. Cooking from scratch? That's what I want to be like. ;) (ETA- IRL I'm all about my train case of MAC products and my flat iron so you have to picture this in your head.) I love being home with my kids. Not all women do, I get that. I have friends I've told "Girl, go back to work. You HAVE to get out of the house." That's why we have vanilla and chocolate.

 

I had a great mom. She loved being a mom. When I finally had kids I just assumed I'd put them in daycare/school and work f/t. It never occured to me I'd be a SAHM. Maybe it was my mom's influence (she died before the kids were born)??? But here I am, completely in love with this life. I'm so lucky. We all have our moments with the kids, but it's such a fleeting time.. I want to cherish every minute. Same with my hubalicious. I couldn't love him more. If I can dote on him in a cheeky 50s housewife sorta way that take an extra 10 minutes, hey,I'm all about it. :001_smile: My hubby wakes some mornings to his clothes pressed and hanging on the closet door and his lunch hanging on the doorknob. I try to look nice when he comes home too. He thinks I'm beautiful and always tells me how lucky he feels when he drives up and sees me outside with our kids and neighbors. He said "I have a cute wife, beautiful kids, my dinner is ready, life is good!" And he reciprocates 110%. Like I said, we're dorks, but he LOVES all of the little things and thanks me. It's a partnership.

 

I have this book, RADICAL HOMEMAKERS, on my Amazon wishlist. I haven't read it but it describes this simple, simple life I have, that I never knew I wanted. (Ugh, the link is not linking. Description: Radical Homemakers is about men and women across the U.S. who focus on home and hearth as a political and ecological act, and who have centered their lives around family and community for personal fulfillment and cultural change. It explores what domesticity looks like in an era that has benefited from feminism, where domination and oppression are cast aside and where the choice to stay home is no longer equated with mind-numbing drudgery, economic insecurity, or relentless servitude.

 

Radical Homemakers nationwide speak about empowerment, transformation, happiness, and casting aside the pressures of a consumer culture to live in a world where money loses its power to relationships, independent thought, and creativity. If you ever considered quitting a job to plant tomatoes, read to a child, pursue creative work, can green beans and heal the planet, this is your book.)

 

Again, it's right now. It's where I am right now, at this point in my life. In a few months I may have a whole different outlook/wants/needs.

Edited September 22, 2010 by cjbeach
sorry, trying to fix broken link

[Parrothead]

:iagree:I blinked at the 'educated conversation' myself.

Hmm... I do wonder why women at home are perceived to be less educated than women who choose to work outside the home.

[Mrs Mungo]

I think that depends upon what you think a wife in the fifties looked like.

 

My dad's mom had a job. She kept an immaculate house, but had a reputation as a terrible cook (with the exception of a few dishes that she grew up cooking). She was a *seriously* strong lady. She was the chief of our tribe and sued the US government twice. Subservient? I think not, lol.

 

My mom's mom stayed home, but had enough volunteer jobs to keep her very busy. She loved to dress to the nines. Her nieces loved to stay with her because she let them try on her makeup when the rest of the family thought it would send you straight to hell. She got up every morning and made my grandfather breakfast, kept her house immaculate, gardened, canned, etc. But he took care of her too. He could do *anything* he put his hand to. When her mind and body started to fail, he took tender care of her for years.

 

Just because I'm a SAHM, doesn't mean I can't have an educated conversation with my dh (or anybody else). My hubby knows I'm busy with volunteering, teaching the kids, etc. I cook, but we clean about equally. We like our house to stay clean because we entertain quite a bit and we would rather do a little each day so that we can GO on the weekend.

[Happy2BaMom]

I think the way people respond to this post depends largely on their personal family history. Several posters have mentioned how powerless and oppressed their female relatives/neighbors/etc. felt.

 

I never saw that. I saw my grandmother and her three sisters (born in the teens/20's) marry men who were wonderful men. The women ran the house and the men. They all played bridge, or went bowling or square dancing. They all raised their children as SAHMs, and all were active in their churches and communities. My dh's mother's and grandmother's lives were the same way. They were strong, strong women, but they were respectful of men and their role.

 

I admire them all. Now, as a SAHM, I get to listen feminists who state that being at home with your children full-time is a waste (is that not the Anti-Christ speaking, or what) and that I'm "setting women back" with my choice. Personally, in today's hook-up culture with thriving pornography industries and a 50% divorce rate, I think women are pretty far back already.

 

To the OP, YOU GO GIRL!!

Edited September 22, 2010 by Happy2BaMom
grammatical errors

[Embassy]

Just read the serving food to your husband thread and the 1950's wife statement intrigued me! I have to say that I think I am a bit of a 1950's wife - or at least I try to be!! I really do take pride in serving my husband in all the ways that I can - making things easy for him, cooking food that he likes, not stressing him out when he gets home from work etc etc.

 

He helps me out with my stuff as well, and there is lots of give and take, but in our house he is the leader and he is treated and respected as such. Part of my satisfaction as a wife comes from looking after my husband well.

 

Am I alone in this? Or have I read too much into this?!

 

Sounds like love to me. Love puts the needs of a spouse above your own. Don't ever let anyone make you feel like you are doing something wrong there.

 

I try to put my dh's needs first, but I am not the typical 1950s housewife and my dh is definitely not the 1950s husband. He cooks, cleans, spends lots of time with the kids, does most of the grocery shopping, etc. A 1950s housewife is much better, in my estimation, than a 1950s husband.