Both of my grandmothers were leaders in their own right.

My paternal Grandmother was head of the Horticulture Society in her small town. Grandfather was a farmer. She was also a full-time wife and mother and grandmother.

My maternal Grandmother was Commissioner of the Girl Guides, helped run her local church. I believe she was the financial officer? I would have to check. Grandfather was a machinist but worked at a grocery store for much of my childhood. She was, again, a full-time wife and mother and grandmother.

Both women were beloved by their husbands and families. They were well-taken care of and lead in the areas they cared about. Their leadership roles came after the family had been established.

This is the ideal model in my mind as the best of both worlds is achieved to whatever degree the person is able.

I'm going to have to disagree with this guy. Nobody can have it all, but removing all roles from women outside the home isn't the solution either.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

It isn't possible, anyway. Younger generation is too small, for that.

I'm terribly confused on this one because I'd love to play Angel in the Home, but Hubby thinks that's sorta lame and I'm so easily bored that I'd quickly get up to some mischief. More mischief than usual, that is.

But, I love the idea... Sounds so romantic.

Decisions decisions.

That awkward moment, when you realize how many office jobs are just UMC men parking their women in a sort of Wifely Daycare, to keep her from getting frisky with the pool boy. 👀

I think he's missing the larger point that what wifely submission looks like, in practice, is largely up to the husband. She's supposed to be in submission to him, not to some bitter rando on the interwebs.

For a lot of men, their wife is their greatest confident and the person they trust most, so removing women from public life actually hurts those men. Wives are often business partners or stewards, after all. Or she helps him get business contacts or he uses her income to support his investments or business. Some local farmers have wives with day jobs because those jobs come along with family health-care plans, for example, and they can take out loans against that income to purchase machinery, etc.

If you hide all wives in the house, you take away his greatest economic asset.

I couldn't agree more.

I think the only exception is when small kids are being raised. In our home, I don't want my wife working (she doesn't want to either) while we're building our family but once they're old enough I certainly wouldn't stop her from getting a job or being more active in our business.

Yeah, kids really change the dynamic, but kids don't stay small forever, and some couples can't have kids, so it's important that Christians remember that subsidiarity is a worthy goal. The decision should be made at the lowest-practical level, and that's the home, in this situation.

The whole idea, that we carve such rules into stone at a societal level, in order to keep husbands in their rightful place as the head of house, is schizophrenic. He can't be the head, if all he says is whatever someone has decided he will say. Then he's just a figurehead. He has to be free to make decisions and respond to the environment.