Gender Imbalance in Higher Education
by Ted Slater on 04/08/2008 at 12:39 PM
I'm not an expert in anything. I'm pretty good at playing keyboard in church, editing authors' manuscripts, and making chicken saag, but even in these areas there are people light years ahead of me.
I've been studying issues relevant to singles for years now, and was single for 36 of my 41 years. I may be able to act as a "mentor" to some singles, but the truth is that I'm no expert in this field.
Which leads to this post, and the one I plan to write next.
I just read over at Alex Chediak's blog that 58 percent of U.S. undergrads are women.
Call me a sexist, but my first reaction is to find that disappointing. Call me a sexist, but I believe that in most cases the husband should be the primary income-earner in the family, and that the wife should be free to stay at home with the kids. It follows, logically I think, that more men should be preparing for these income-earning careers by going to college. And that women should be careful not to bring on exorbitant school loan debt that may prohibit them from being able to carry out their dreams to be stay-at-home moms.
Oh, this blog post is so politically incorrect. A chunk of our readers are going to misinterpret what I'm saying, insisting that I believe women should be ignorant and that they are only qualified to be barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. I'm not saying that. I married a woman with a master's degree, after all. Another chunk of our readers are going to say that I'm subtly characterizing men, who attend college at a rate less than women, as irresponsible gamers who are prolonging their adolescence out of fear of taking on responsibility. I'm not saying that either.
I am saying, though, that I find these stats to be puzzling. Sure, some of the non-college-going men may be attending trade schools or taking on careers that don't require college. And many of the college-attending women may be pursuing lower-cost liberal arts degrees that make them more well-rounded, that give them opportunities to meet their husband, that don't rack up the debt, that equip them to take on jobs while awaiting Mr. Right.
Or perhaps college has become less about education, and more about socializing. I'm not saying that's a bad thing.
But as a complementarian, rather than an egalitarian, something just doesn't seem right here with three women going to undergrad for every two men.
Can we talk about this puzzling stat? Can we discuss it here on The Line as non-experts without this conversation degenerating into complaints of "feeling offended"?
101. Katie B said the following at 2:41 PM on Apr 9:
The comments as to SAHM's actually working inside the home got me thinking, is the idea of working from the home supposed to comfort a woman who doesnt feel called to that but still desires motherhood? I must admit the idea of being a SAHM is highly unappealing to me, not because I want to work outside the home, honestly what I want to to could be probobly be modified to do from home, but that I go stir crazy rather fast, I need a change of scenery to get things done and keep things together. Staying in the house for the majority of the day is hard for me. As is daily routines rather than goal oriented projects. This is the way God made me, does that mean I will be a bad mother, or that I have to do things in ways that are frustrating and inneffective for me to be a good mother? or can I adjust the plan and methods to give my children the best I have to offer? even if it doesnt look like the typical SAHM? And does my education, and the graduate degrees I plan on make me less fit to be a mother because before I have children I focused on the passions and calling God gave me as an individual?
(that isnt meant to sound angry or bitter, but these are the logical questions I have from the comments posted)
102. Jill said the following at 3:04 PM on Apr 9:
farmer tom,
What part of my statement do you have a problem with: the assumption that God can lead in his will or that God has led me in his will?
I'm not saying that thunder clapped and I heard the audible voice of God. What I'm saying is that I sought God's will for my life through reading the Bible, praying, becoming familiar with his character and listening to the wise council of those around me. Then I stepped out in faith. From the way that things have worked out (through his provision and the circumstances I am in) I can see his hand in my life and I know (in my heart) that I am where he wants me to be.
Do you deny that we can have a knowledge of God's will? That would mean that we're walking around in the dark and maybe if we're lucky we'll end up with a life that's kind of like what God wants for us.
I'm truly interested in understanding what you mean.
103. Ann said the following at 3:15 PM on Apr 9:
I will be going to grad school in one year and I am a female. I am currently completing my degree in agriculture. There are about seven times more males than females in my undergraduate classes. As for graduate classes, there are about 10 time more males in plant science courses.
As for the statistic....it does not mean much not know the parameters.
104. Tim said the following at 3:32 PM on Apr 9:
What about the women out there that got higher education, a good career, and not make really good money? I think this is a problem I've noticed, because they will not even consider those 'lazy' men that make less money. And for all the rest they've priced themselves out of the market, as they bring only demands and requirements, and no flexibility.
Are there women that actually would be willing to be in relationships where they are the major breadwinner, with a husband that does most of the homemaking? There are men that would be well suited to this type of arrangement. Yet, I don't think I have ever heard of it as anything other then an unfortunate and deplorable necessity when it does happens.
105. B.M. said the following at 3:36 PM on Apr 9:
As an evangelical, Christian women who has read through the Bible several times, I am constantly perplexed by the numerous Christian people who believe that in the "most Christian" kind of families, "the husband should be the primary income-earner in the family, and that the wife should be free to stay at home with the kids." The Bible has a lot to say about the respective roles of the husband and wife, but if I recall correctly, no where does it say that the "right" thing to do is for a man to go out and work and for a woman to stay at home with the kids. I am in no way demeaning that kind of lifestyle - I was raised in a traditional, single income home where my father worked full-time and my mother stayed home and raise us kids (not to mention homeschooling all 6 of us to boot!). But I do think that it is a gross misinterpretation of the Bible to claim that this traditional, Christian family structure is what God requires of genuine believers. There is no where in the Bible that says men should go out to work and women should remain at home; this structure is a social construct, not a god-given command. I am all for obeying God even when it is politically incorrect, but I also don't think it is acceptable to create rules and regulations that do not exist in the Bible.
106. S said the following at 3:53 PM on Apr 9:
Farmer Tom -
I agreed with Jill on her post, so at the risk of sticking my neck out there, let me take a stab at it.
There was no verse in the Bible that said, "Go to Purdue, major in Engineering, live in this dorm, etc." What I can tell you is this. When I visited that campus, I KNEW without a shadow of a doubt I was supposed to go there. I sat in my Engineering 101 class, and when the speaker was there to talk about the field of engineering that I am now in, I KNEW that was what I was supposed to major in. Mind you, I was doing a lot of praying and seeking all along. I got involved with a great church on campus, which supported us as students both spiritually and socially. As far as my roommate goes, that was nothing but a God thing. We were matched by the housing dept., and we have been best friends since the day we moved into our first dorm room. It was a God thing. The awesome thing is that looking back, I can see how the direction that God pointed me in has put me where I am today and where I'm going tomorrow.
As for what to tell your SS class... Trust God. Pray and ask his will. Listen for him. When you're doing the right thing, He will give you peace about your decision.
I don't remember exactly what verses I was clinging to during that phase of my life, but a couple come to mind now...
Hebrews 11:1 - Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.
Psalm 139:16 - All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.
Isaiah 26:3 - You will keep him in perfect peace him whose mind is steadfast, because he trusts in you.
Jeremiah 33:3 - Call to me and I will answer you and tell you great and unsearchable things you do not know.
107. Ann said the following at 3:55 PM on Apr 9:
I will be going to grad school in two semesters. I am very excited. However, most men seem intimated by me due to my education. As a single women, I am not going to wait for my Mr. Right. I will go to graduate school. God seems to be calling me to teach at the college level. At times, I feel continuing my education is a crime. I am told all the time to find a nice guy, get married, and have kids. Why is it acceptable for males to continue their education, but not females?
108. skp said the following at 3:59 PM on Apr 9:
Maybe the reason men aren't pursuing higher education is that they can. It's all practical. Men can work as heavy equipment operators, truck drivers, plumbers, machinists- farmers- and maybe they won't be rich but they will make a living. Women tend to shy away from these fields and so they need a college/ or at least associate degree education to make a living. It's difficult to get a decent entry level job in an office without a college education.
109. Kellie said the following at 4:03 PM on Apr 9:
Sarah22 (#45):
Just speaking from experience. While in school (working nearly full-time) I earned about 20% of the income I earn now....nurse's aide vs. registered nurse.
110. S said the following at 4:06 PM on Apr 9:
Tim (#104) -
There are actually quite a few families at the place were I work that have the kind of family dynamic that you are describing. Granted, it is not traditional, but it works for them. In a two instances that I can think of, the couples do not have children. Both of their husbands worked at the beginning of their relationships, but when it became apparent that they could live on one income, the husband decided to quit his 'day' job. In both cases, the men take care of the house, but also do odd jobs for neighbors, etc. I also know of a couple families that have school age children, but do not know the details of how they came to be in their current work situations.
111. Candice Watters said the following at 4:30 PM on Apr 9:
To those who argue, “women have always worked,” you miss a vital distinction. Yes, women have always worked, but not always in a way that took them away from their children. Prior to the industrial revolution, their work on the farm or in their husband’s trade was a family affair. What’s different about the way women work now is that often it takes them away from the little people, relying on strangers and “professional” caregivers to make up the difference.
And tragically, Marci, it does make a difference. Despite the anecdotal evidence you've seen, the data is overwhelming that children raised in institutional day care are at a distinct disadvantage on many fronts. I would suggest Home Alone America by Mary Eberstadt for an excellent overview of the problem, as well as further sources for study.
112. Tyler said the following at 5:27 PM on Apr 9:
It is unfortunate that your view (Ted Slater) is regressive. Rather than shunning these statistics you should embrace their potential. We should celebrate what Christ started long ago namely improving women's lives despite the cultural forces working against it. It is true that debt is challenging, but that does not mean that education should be avoided. You forget that humans have souls and the practical answer is not always the best. Yes God has called men and women to raise and serve their family with all the have. However, a man's mind and a woman's mind are equal regardless of their occupation. To those of you who find that boys and men being disadvantaged I recommend you look at the rest of human history (as well as newer studies that there is no "boy's crisis"). See the attached URL. http://select.nytimes.com/2006/07/03/opinion/03warner.html
113. Amir Larijani said the following at 6:31 PM on Apr 9:
When people say that education is an "investment", that is true, but--with all investments--one must count all the costs and then reasonably assess the potential return on investment, and how long it will take before such return is realized.
At my alma mater, for example, the tuition alone can run you $40,000 per year.
That doesn't include books, lab fees, room and board, laundry, SGA fees, flight fees (if you major in flight), engineering fees (if you major in engineering or computer science), or equipment fees (if you major in aircraft maintenance).
Ergo, it is quite plausible to graduate with student loan debt that could exceed even a modest mortgage. One could easily graduate--with a bachelor's degree--with over $50,000 in student loan debt.
Now, let's say you are an aspiring SAHM. You get an engineering degree. You have a $50,000 albatross around your neck. You are 23 years old. You want to get married and start having children.
You may find yourself working until you are 30 to pay off those loans.
During that time, you could have been having children. Or you could have been socking away money for savings. Or you could have been deferring it to a 401(k). Or you could have given large donations to charity or Christian causes.
And that brings us to another important economic concept: opportunity cost.
Now remember: I'm not a SAHM "mandater" by any stretch.
This is America, and I am all for your right to pursuit of happiness. My political leanings on such matters are VERY libertarian.
But I will not apologize for articulating the cost. Which is absolutely essential when considering education as an "investment".
114. Amir Larijani said the following at 6:38 PM on Apr 9:
Candice: Another fine resource, albeit from a purely secular perspective, is The Two Income Trap, by Elizabeth Warren and Amelia Warren Tyagi.
I'm going to provide a review of that book later this week. I cannot agree with every one of their suggestions, but their presentation of the facts is staggering.
115. Marci said the following at 6:58 PM on Apr 9:
Candice,
Thanks for the link to that book. I will certainly look it up. It's interesting that you raise the point about children who are put in daycare, though, because I've never considered putting a child in daycare. Nor do most of my friends - in my community, it's very common for the grandparents of the newborn to watch the child if the mom must be out. I know many cases where friends born in another country flew their parents over to help watch the child. The feeling here is that there is security in having one's parents - whose values you'd know - help care and nurture the child. When I have children, my mom should be retired, and is really happy with the idea that she can be a grandmommy with all the perks.
However, I know that not everyone is in this position - and I will definitely give that book a read.
Many Thanks,
Marci
116. Tammy said the following at 7:20 PM on Apr 9:
Candice,
I am a professional caregiver or as you say "professional" caregiver. I went to college for what I do. While being at home with the child is great. I know I am not the child's mom, but for some kids I am the only safe adult they see all day. Someone has to watch the kids, if both parents work or there is a single parent home. I believe in the African Proverbs "It Takes A Village To Raise A Child". I see my self as part of that village, and having an impact on the future of USA.
There are skills children learn, that you can't learn at home. For instance, if no other children around at home, you miss out on social interaction with kids. Also if you do not homeschool, children will have issues of attachment and that mom's and dad's leave, but come back once kindergarden starts. The National Association For The Education Of Youn Children website(birth-age 8) http://www.naeyc.org has information about what professional childcare is. Not all child care is professional, and if it is called daycare the cargiver is nothing more than a babysitter, with no academic learning going on. There is daycare, childcare, professional childcare (most workers have at least an associate degree in Early Childhood Education), head start, and MRDD pre-school. There is full or half day and 5 days or only a couple.
You have to your research as a parent about the childcare places. You cannot enroll your child anywhere.
Candice, you comment about "professional childcare" seemed to imply that you have never talk with childcare workers or teachers at colleges who equip people to work in early childhood education. There things that happen between birth-age 5 that affect children for the rest of there life. I see myself as having a postive affect of the children I teach.
117. DannieA said the following at 7:23 PM on Apr 9:
I once had a guy friend tell me his deepest wish was to find an understanding woman who wouldn't mind working while he pursued his passion of raising the kids and cooking new recipes.
I was very happy there was at least a male guy who didn't fit the norm :)
118. Maria said the following at 8:08 PM on Apr 9:
My intention is not to sound legalistic when I write this, but is it more acceptable for a young man to have educational debt than a young woman, becasue of the assumption that a woman is more likely to be a stay at home parent, once she has children? Would the return on her investment (college education) be fruitless if she didn't use her education outside the home?
Also, what if the father wanted to be the primary caregiver? I realize that is not the norm, but should it be frowned upon?
119. Grace said the following at 8:32 PM on Apr 9:
I am a twenty year old female college student who greatly appreciates the post. College was always a given for me, even though I never enjoyed school, had only nebulous ideas of what I'd be interested in doing for the rest of my life, I was smart and college was where I was supposed to go.
I recognize how God has used College to remove me from my situation at home, to put me in a Bible believing church that is teaching me the true meaning of fellowship but I also recognize that had I the option I would rather not have the debt and not have the degree. I know my degree will be useful, I know that God does not let it fall by the wayside but I also recognize that the debt I'm taking on by going to a school that's tuition is over 30k a year is going to haunt me for a long time.
I think it's important for us to examine what is Biblical views and what is Women's Lib interfering. Feminism has influenced all of us and many times it's not in positive ways.
Some women are called to College that is very true but others are not and sometimes I think we don't bother to take the time to seek God in this area.
120. JennyW said the following at 9:53 PM on Apr 9:
I attended a state university where the ratio of girls to guys was 60:40, although within my major it was slightly higher. I had wondered about this, too.
I certainly think it's possible that guys are more likely to go to trade schools than girls. I also think post #18 made a great point about the natural tendencies of guys and girls who aren't trying to develop godly character in their lives. I noticed over and over in my classes, whenever there was a mixed-gender group project, the girls were way more likely to take a leadership role than the guys. It really seemed backwards of the way things should be.
I was talking with my dad about it one time, and his theory was the ever-increasing absence of fathers in the home. If a guy doesn't have his father to love him and mentor him and model manliness for him and cheer him on, he's not going to be as likely to step up to challenges (like a college degree) and attempt leadership himself. And, if a girl doesn't have a father around to love her growing up, she's going to try to find worth elsewhere--from teachers, peers, or wrong relationships. This is not to say that college students aren't responsible for their actions, but it does help explain a large part of why typical college students are the way they are. They needed their fathers.
121. BDB said the following at 10:50 PM on Apr 9:
Nicole (#60) wrote:
>>In choosing to go obtain my PhD I also chose a field that would be friendly toward a family (especially if I teach at smaller, private schools)<<
Which field? Inquiring minds want to know...
For example, my sister completed an AuD, and only after she was a Doctor of Audiology did she explain that lots of women who are good at science choose this field because they can work part-time as moms, and still use the scientific part of their brain.
As for the statistic, some of it is age, too. Men who go into a trade requiring physical labor may marry women with little schooling. After the kids are in high school, she starts thinking about going back to work. If she has any office experience, she'll realize quickly that better jobs in an office require business coursework. I had a number of women on my staff who went back to school once they realized that they were limited in office jobs.
Jill (#102): I believe you.
122. Anna said the following at 11:48 PM on Apr 9:
In regards to whether women tend to go into liberal arts-type degrees rather than anything with a large economic dividend, I'd like to point out that in Canada, at least, women dominate in all fields except for certain segments of engineering. That is to say, the majority of pre-med, pre-law, pre-pharm, etc, students happen to be female. Take that as positive or negative as you wish. I see the interest of any student, gender regardless, in such fields as an asset to society.
If anything, I'd expect the complementarians to be the ones supporting having more women in the workforce, since they believe that men and women have very different ways of approaching life. If this is the case, surely a female perspective on societal issues can only improve the health care system, for example. For both men and women, work outside of a home is not an evil thing, nor even an unpleasant necessity to help support the nuclear family. There is no sin in using one's talents to seek God's glory wherever it may be found, there is nothing evil about serving other people by healing wounds, building bridges, making coffee, defending the innocent, designing websites, even. Families are important, and may even be the most important aspect of an individual's contribution to the world. Nevertheless, the flame-resistant pajamas your children sleep in, the communication system aiding cerebral palsy patients, our knowledge of the structure of DNA, radiation therapy that may save your life, blood transfusion techniques... here's a short list of contributions working women have made to the world. (Can you tell I'm in health sciences?) SAHM's are some of the strongest, wisest women---nay, people--- I know, but to declare motherhood as the only vocation open to those bearing two X chromosomes seems more than short-sighted. Nor am I being a rabid feminist here: penicillin, diabetes research, heart transplants... there's a short list of male contributions to health care research. Our society rides on the labour of both men and women before us, on their dedication both inside and outside of their homes.
In regards to debt, I suppose living north of the 49th has probably helped as my friends and I have found that working fulltime during the summer months in addition to scholarships can usually tide one through a school year. Debt management, at least in my experience, is about smart planning, not about the number of letters behind your name.
123. Katherine said the following at 12:00 AM on Apr 10:
Christina (in green),
Thank you so much for the response! I had not read your blog post--I was interacting with what you wrote in this thread, so I didn't get my language of giftedness from your post so much as from my own thoughts. I have, however, gone back and read your post.
I didn't say this explicitly before, but let me do so now: of course I strongly affirm that the exercise of one's own gifts is always in submission and obedience to God. Period.
What I found puzzling is that you declare that women are as a group naturally good at leadership, and men are naturally as a group not/hesitant, an observation I find to be manifestly wrong. It is not the case of a few exceptions: when there are as many cases that are exceptions as there are cases that follow the rule, something must be wrong with the rule. Lots of men are good at leadership, and they are encouraged by others to pursue, develop, and exercise this. Lots of women are not naturally drawn to leadership, or, even if they were, are actively discouraged or hampered by others. Honestly, the widely held view of Western civilization for at least the past two millenia was that of course women shouldn't lead because they lack the fully developed reasoning faculties of men and because they are subject to the overwhelming lusts and moral weakness inherent to their nature. I'm most certainly not saying I agree with this line of thinking, merely observing that this was/is a widely held view, which made your assertion all the more puzzling to me.
Also, I was thinking less about the marriage relationship and more about human society in general. I'm not talking about wives rebelling against their husbands, but women and men using their varied God-given gifts to contribute to human functioning and flourishing.
124. PLH said the following at 5:55 AM on Apr 10:
Ted-I apologize if I slammed your point. I don't think you meant it to be sexist, but that was my gut reaction. I have had several bad experiences among conservative churches that only validate women who are SAHM and act as if that is the "right" choice for all women. I do think that we should encourage women AND men to attend college. My suspicion is that the reason fewer men attend college is because men are more likely to pursue skilled trades that only require vocational training (mechanic, electrician, ect).
Candice-The book looks interesting. However, you argue that most women were around there children. This is MORe common but not universal. The book is not written by a women's historian. If you read some of the work for Mary Frances Berry, the Politics of Parenthood, she is a well-known prof of family and women's history. The book is an excellent overview of the history of child rearing. Certainly children were generally cared for by family members, but not necessary their mother. Laurel Thatcher Ulrich's A Midwife's Tale is an excellent book as well that shows you how women lived in pre industrial times. Martha Ballard, a middle income wife and mother of I believe 10 children, did not spend most of her time caring for children. Actually, the older children cared for the young. This was far more common.
Finally, I just wanted to say I think the most important thing is affirming people where God has placed them. For some women, indeed most at some point, they will be mothers. But some never will be and may serve God other ways. And, even if a woman desires to be SAHM, it's not the God given way for families to live.
125. Marla Brown said the following at 6:46 AM on Apr 10:
@Tammy:
Good childcare workers *are* very useful and helpful, in particular with children who for whatever reason have no other option or no other stable adults to relate with on a regular basis. For those children, you are a blessing in an otherwise sad situation.
Daycare (or "professional childcare" w/ academic instruction - although I'm very loathe to engage my children in "academic learning" before they begin primary school) is not necessary for a child's development. The skills that daycare teaches (limited social skills, some learning skills, etc) can be taught by a loving mother and father who are engaged with their children. Additionally, children can meet peers in relatives' kids, play groups, church events - there is no need for daycare in that respect.
I don't think every single woman who "stays at home" is really active in caretaking her children and home; there are those who are neglectful, lazy, and take advantage of their time at home to pursue their own leisure activities. To suggest, however, that daycare is needed for proper development is an insult to us highly-educated, caring women who choose to make the raising of her children and keeping of her home/family her primary pursuit.
126. Katherine said the following at 6:59 AM on Apr 10:
DannieA (#117):
Sounds like a great guy! I sincerely hope he is able to.
127. Sarah said the following at 8:56 AM on Apr 10:
Can someone please tell me where in the bible it says for women to be stay-at-home moms? Also, I don't understand why a women would pursue a university education, then not use it and then become a stay-at-home mom. I respect stay-at-home moms totally. But why don't stay-at-home moms just pursue only that and career-women just pursue that. Its not only that I personally find this (education of stay-at-home moms) a huge waste of time, effort, and money. But I believe God wants us to be good stewards to the resources we are given.
128. Ted Slater said the following at 9:07 AM on Apr 10:
Sarah -- good question. I appreciate your wanting to go back to the Bible, rather than mere custom, to better understand God's general plan for the roles men and women take.
I encourage you to go up to comment #99 by Jennie -- she does a great job of explaining what I was unable to explain.
I think you may misunderstand what SAHMs do. Yes, they spend most of their hours based out of their homes, often raising their children. But they also are involved in a number of other activities, some of which bring in income, others of which don't. They may write (as Candice Watters and my wife do), they may volunteer at their church, they may make things and sell them on Ebay, they may provide part-time counseling services, and so on.
As I wrote above, there is a benefit in SAHM-minded women attending college. Though they may not use their education to earn money outside the home during their children's formative years, their education can enrich their personalities, help them bring in extra income by working at home, and provide the context in which they meet their husbands.
I would *never* encourage women to not pursue education, either formal or informal. *That* would reflect poor stewardship.
129. Louise said the following at 9:46 AM on Apr 10:
Comment 127 raises a good point.
I believe it is practical for all people to acquire a job skill after completing high school, whether through a college education, trade school, or other training.
But I don't really understand why any woman whose number one goal is to become a stay at home mom/housewife would put the time, energy, and money into advanced degrees.
But...it's not the first time I don't understand something and it won't be the last.
There was an article in last Sunday's Chicago Tribune Magazine. One young woman who described herself as "religious" and was incurring a large student debt for a law degree stated she was going to use this training to become a better stay at home mother.
Hey, I'm not telling anyone what to do. I have my hands full trying to manage my own life and own goals, but from my way of thinking this concept just does not make sense
130. Kellie said the following at 9:54 AM on Apr 10:
So does Boundless think that women who do not plan to be SAHMs are in sin? Or maybe just selfish or materialistic?
131. Hannah said the following at 11:29 AM on Apr 10:
I would like to be a SAHM, but what if that isn't God's plan for my life. I would like to be prepared for whatever he throws my way. That is one reason I went to get my degree. I also wanted to have it in case my future husband was injured or died and I had to find a way to support myself and my children. There is nothing wrong with planning ahead.
132. Louise said the following at 11:40 AM on Apr 10:
Comment 131, I totally understand why a woman whose main goal is to be a SAHM would obtain a bachelor's degree or other training for a job skill.
I just don't understand why such a woman would obtain advanced degrees.
But...I'm not saying people shouldn't do as they please, I am just saying I don't personally understand this particular course of action.
133. BDB said the following at 12:33 PM on Apr 10:
Katherine (#123) wrote:
>>Honestly, the widely held view of Western civilization for at least the past two millenia was that of course women<<
**Cough** I think we need a thread on how liberalism is misleading people on history. I'd like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that Human Rights were invented by a bunch of dead white guys - a number of which spoke French, ironically...
134. BDB said the following at 12:42 PM on Apr 10:
Regarding law degrees, etc. Please keep in mind that life expectancies have changed. Women can easily live 40 years AFTER their kids are in college. Going back to school after kids are grown is a great idea - particularly if there's an opportunity to start working at the same time as college expenses kick in.
I went to graduate school with several women who were not working. Grad school can go very well with motherhood. It's a good way to prepare for a new career that one can start AFTER the kids are grown and in school.
I know a woman who did this with law school - she didn't start until her daughter was about 10. The advantage to doing it later is that often the family (e.g. husband's career) is better equipped to pay tuition without incurring debt. I know a number of women who went back to school and became teachers AFTER their kids were grown. They were able to get a master's degree and credential to go along with the bachelor's degree they had before they were married.
But be realistic - it's a lot harder to start from scratch and go through both an undergraduate and graduate degree - that's a lot of years of spare time to take away from your family.
135. Marla said the following at 1:20 PM on Apr 10:
I see an artificial divide being created here -- career women / stay-at-home women.
Our lives are able to encompass much more than just one of these choices. I am a woman who currently holds a master's degree (and plans on pursuing a phD) in literary theory. I teach, write, and research at the university-level. No, I don't believe in the proverbial balancing act of 'supermoms' -- when my husband and I have small children, I plan on staying home full-time. I am even considering homeschooling them for primary school. I cannot deny, however, that one of my passions is teaching and the academic life -- and I don't see any reason *why* I should have to give that up for one of my other dreams, being an at-home mom. I can't do both at the same time, but once my children are older, I can certainly incorporate my academic work back into my life. Alot of people here seem to think that at-home moms only want to be at-home moms for all eternity. I assure you - most of us have dreams that involve other things as well!
[I also am in the lucky position of having no student loan debt - and my husband only has about 3k worth of it. Obviously, women who wish to stay at home also need to think of the financial aspect, but there's no reason - money taken into consideration - that they can't pursue a more-career related passion before and after their time as an at-home mom]
136. ag said the following at 3:00 PM on Apr 10:
Speaking of manufacturing divisions between moms...
This may be a regional difference, but based on the activities described by Ted, Candice Watters and Ashleigh Slater would NOT be considered SAHM's by the moms at my church. They would be considered mothers who work part time.
137. Holland said the following at 3:03 PM on Apr 10:
So, you're a woman and you choose not to go to college in order to be debt-free as a SAHM. Fine. What other avenue of intentional personal growth will you undertake? I certainly think it's possible to mature without a college experience, but it does seem that college makes that maturation process more straightforward and pushes you harder and more relentlessly than you would push yourself alone. I don't think college is just for vocational education but also for the expansion of one's mind and life and to (in many ways) birth people from childhood into adulthood. It's not the only way, but it's a good way and a straightforward way. If you choose not to go that way, you need another plan. And working at McDonald's while filling up your Hope Chest and hanging around with your high school friends probably isn't a plan.
138. Tami said the following at 3:19 PM on Apr 10:
It seems that taking classes at a community college would be a good choice for yet-to-be SAHMs who have no desire for a degree. These schools offer courses that can teach you how to run your household. Also, they require less of a long-term commitment, and also cost a LOT less. If you're simply going for the education, you don't even necessarily have to worry about the grade -- your studies are completely for your own benefit.
Have a part-time job that also has the benefit of training you on some skill you can use in the future.
These are good ways to keep yourself from "sitting on your hands". They provide a way for you to make the most of your time, without a big time commitment or incurring massive debt.
139. Ted Slater said the following at 3:57 PM on Apr 10:
ag wrote, "Candice Watters and Ashleigh Slater would NOT be considered SAHM's by the moms at my church. They would be considered mothers who work part time."
"Work" is an awkward term. It can refer to effort expended in exchange for money, or effort expended for no money.
All SAHMs work -- some earn money by doing so, others receive no financial compensation. Being married to a SAHM, I can confirm that while it can be a rewarding occupation, it can be very difficult. Regardless, it is honorable, as I have no doubt we'd all agree.
140. Bethany J said the following at 4:16 PM on Apr 10:
College and grad degrees are being equated with education here. Education is ever so much broader than 4 years on a campus. Holland at #137 ought not to be so sarcastic and demeaning. Correspondence courses, online classes, credit-from-experience, and CLEP tests are easy solutions for those who want to have college quick and easy. Staying with your family, volunteering at a church or local organization on a steady basis, working part-time in an apprenticeship role in an industry of interest, serving overseas in missions for some time... the opportunities for "intentional personal growth" are numerous and abounding. I do like Holland's choice of words, and totally agree that plan and direction is needed for all (though I'd go on to say that actually people in a traditional 4-year college program have less of that than those pursuing alternative methods).
As for maturity and independence, both are most likely better learned outside of a typical US college campus. Ted, I'd greatly enjoy and have a good time laughing at the comments you'd get on a post about Stay-At-Home-Daughters. :)
141. Nicole said the following at 7:51 PM on Apr 10:
BDB #121:
I am pursuing my PhD in economics. Mostly the idea of being a professor at a small private college allows me to have a more flexible schedule. Economics is the field I fell in love with, but it is also in high demand to the point I can choose where I work. There is also a lot of demand for consultant work in economics which would allow me to work at home :-)
142. Marie said the following at 9:04 PM on Apr 10:
Oh dear...I guess I have two more things to say.
After reading some of the comments, I started thinking. As I have mentioned before, I am a junior in college who is hoping to marry and have a family but is still single. I have grown and learned so much through my college experience, and I am so grateful for it. If I had decided to forego college and continue in the retail job I had then, I would have been making less than $7 an hour and living at home. I don't believe God would have brought me a husband any sooner, and I don't know what would have come of that situation, but I know I would not be who I am now.
Second, in response to Maria Brown (#125): I don't mean to be "in-your-face" or anything like that, but I would like to explain something from my point of view. I am majoring in early childhood ed, and I have had experience in many different daycare and school environments, some of which serve disadvantaged and unemployed parents. I don't think that Tammy was suggesting that daycare is "needed for proper development" at all. There are children who thrive at home with their parents, and I am thankful for that. However, some parent(s) may not be living the ideal life or providing it for their children, but when they bring their children to a daycare, the caregivers have an enormous chance to make a positive impact on the child's development (physical, social, emotional, mental) and the parents. I will not encourage any of the bad decisions, but I can step in to fill the gaps. This is one of my passions, so I am pumped about being able to do this later. :)
143. Sarah22 said the following at 9:12 PM on Apr 10:
Holland said: "I don't think college is just for vocational education but also for the expansion of one's mind and life and to (in many ways) birth people from childhood into adulthood. It's not the only way, but it's a good way and a straightforward way. If you choose not to go that way, you need another plan. And working at McDonald's while filling up your Hope Chest and hanging around with your high school friends probably isn't a plan."
That's one of the most ignorant statements I've ever read on this site and I've read quite a few. The fact that you think any young adult Christian woman who desires to be a SAHM would be working at "McDonalds and filling her hope chest" is so stupid. Yes, stupid.
FYI: I think college often has the opposite effect on young people, instead of growing them up it delays adulthood even farther. I have several friends in college who are getting ready to graduate with bachelor's degrees and they don't even know how to cook a nutritious meal or clean the bathrooms in their apartments (which are paid for by mommy and daddy) properly. I’m not saying this is the case with all college students, but I don’t think in general that college is just super for “growing” all young people up into mature adults.
144. Ellie said the following at 10:15 PM on Apr 10:
Random fact: My Christian college enforces a 50:50 balance on admissions....but I've heard tell that it's thus harder for a girl to get in here than a guy, due to that, as there are more female applicants than male.
145. Leah said the following at 1:40 AM on Apr 11:
Kellie- NOWHERE has boundless EVER said, or suggested, it's sinful to not be a SAHM. What they HAVE said is that being a SAHM is generally the best move a mother can make, if at all possible, and that being a mother is generally the position most women will be called to. It therefore follows that most women, IF POSSIBLE, should be SAHMs when they have kids. Note the "IF POSSIBLE". Never has boundless mandated it.
146. Christina (in green) said the following at 6:16 AM on Apr 11:
Holland (Comment 137),
If I had not been so opposed to working in finances and insurance (and more aware of the impact student loans would have on my life goals), I could have graduated high school and taught myself (in books purchased from Barnes and Noble or loaned through the library) how to do those things, pay to take $100+ exam, pass it, and work for my father. (Who by the way does not have a college degree, did those things, and has supported a SAHM and 5 children, 2 of which have graduated from college and police academy, another 2 heavily involved in expensive sports-one of which may progress to the professional level- and another taking private art lessons...because that is his gift)
University (especially the one I went to) was by no means a "straightforward" way to usher in adulthood. For many (especially at my school), it was an excuse to prolong adolescence, as our meals were taken care of by a cafeteria staff, our homes were cleaned for us by janitors (exept our bedrooms, of course), and most parents (or student loans) paid for the cost.
It was over-glorified (and more licensed) high school. I did most of my growing up in high school prior to college so as not to fall into the same traps as my fellow college students (excessive drinking, dropping out, academic probation, and loose sexual behavior).
I learned and my mother let me grow under her supervision, teaching me values that would make a "straightforward" transition into adulthood rather seamless. College had little or nothing to do with it, other than being an oppurtunity to put those values and my education under her leadership into practice without her supervision.
But see, unlike everyone else, I already knew what it meant to be an adult.
147. joanne said the following at 7:10 AM on Apr 11:
this entire blog is based on the fact that by not going to college one is immediately going to get married and have children. This thinking has two faults
1) I found its much harder to meet like-minded young men this side of college, as the opportunities to socialise are less, and a lot have been snapped up at college
2) if you dont get married early, through no fault of your own, you need to be able to do something with your life. and if your God-given gifting happens to be micro-biology, then i feel that God would want you, even though you are female to use this talent. I do not think God will give someone a talent that he doesnt intend them to use... What answer will you give to God when he asks about the use of your talent?
148. Talia said the following at 11:33 AM on Apr 11:
This is slightly off-topic, but I would like to hear more about that this women/leaders and men/followers. If I am understanding this right, some of you said (and I'm paraphrasing), that women were more likely to step up and take the lead whereas men would sit back and breathe. If this isn't Godly, then why did God make it so easy for women to step up?
I've been in academic group settings where when waiting for a leader to be determined, several women would step up to the plate. And they would do a great job. I've also been in meeting where men have been top dog, and they did a great job.
Is it 'wrong' for a women to be considered a leader, and if so, why does it seem that God made women this way only to state that she not be leaders and should let a man take the initiative? Why give the inclination if you don't want someone to use it?
149. Christina (in green) said the following at 10:50 PM on Apr 11:
Talia,
Read Genesis. It wasn't how God created us, its just what we did and how we sinned in creation.
God created Man to be the head of woman and together they were head of creation.
In the fall, Woman obeyed creation, man obeyed woman, and God was completely forgotten.
Woman took the lead, and man followed.
Both sinned.
Mindlab hit on it the best =p
150. Christina (in green) said the following at 8:32 AM on Apr 12:
Jethro (#46)
Girls also get the benefit of affirmative action.
More scholarships have traditionally been offered to women as opposed to men because at one point they were the minority.
Though generally (based on the numbers above) that is not true anymore, certain disciplines still provide more scholarships to women...such as engineering, math, physics, computer science...simply because they are the minority.
151. ag said the following at 5:46 PM on Apr 13:
Ted,
You thought I was saying that SAHM's don't work? Wow! What an interesting and erroneuous interpretation of my comment.
Maybe this will help you understand...
The SAHM's that I know consider their experience to be vastly different from those mom's who earn any kind of income for their families (and hence are bohelden to the associated obligations). The distinction is about income not the definition of work.
For example, if a woman writes and publishes a book, she has some pretty strong obligations outside her family, some of those obligations are legal in nature. Similarly, if a woman counsels others for a fee, or if she is involved in the sale of merchandise, she has some pretty hefty and often legal obligations apart from her children.
The SAHM's in my church beleive that true SAHM's activiely and consciously work to minimize any legal or financial obligation that might take precedence over their children. At my church, foregoing an income is a defining factor in calling oneself a SAHM.
Also, many SAHM's can attest to the fact that not earning an income is one of the most difficult challenges in deciding to be a SAHM. The psychological and social ramifications of foregoing an income is a huge adjustment. For that reason, the term SAHM is reserved only for those mom's who have chosen (at least for the present time) to earn no income.
152. Leah said the following at 8:54 AM on Apr 14:
ag- surely even SAHMs who work part-time are forgoing income? They're earning a lot less than they would be otherwise. In my books, if a mother spends most of her time at home with the child, she's a SAHM, or at least "mostly a SAHM". If I worked one day a week while I had a young child, I'd call myself "mostly a stay at home mum". And I think that would be very accurate.
153. Richard said the following at 2:06 PM on Jul 12:
I think a lot of men avoid college because they realize that going to college isn't the best way for them to make money and make a living.
Most of my male friends are going into trades and construction and making a ton of money at it too. There are 22 year olds who are making $50,000 to $60,0000 a year while those graduating from college often start off making around $25,000 and are saddled with absurd debts.
Most women I met while at college didn't have serious career plans; they were just using the time to delay going into the real adult world.