Oooh... studied this and taught this one. Great work.

Yes I believe there are specific roles and I do believe it is healthy. <smile> But I also believe that sometimes taking on the role of the other sex is good, too.  It encourages understanding. For example, I believe ALL married men should have to spend six months as a house husband and send the wife off to work every day.  It would promote better understanding and a better sense of partnership. 

And if the roles fit better, keep them. <smile> I believe in some roles being defined, but there is always room for adjustment.

yeah, I taught this one, too ... and, as you know, have thoroughly investigated this issue for years, but it's good to be familiar with the extremes, too, and then try to find some balance.  Whatever the social roles, men and women are in no way the same ... except for our individual value.  

Laurie and I were watching the Gonzaga basketball game last night.  During halftime, a bunch of girls--university girls--pranced out like ponies to begin some kind of routine. We could see them behind the commentators.  Laurie said, "And here come the girls, prancing."  I asked her why girls liked doing that sort of thing.  Totally foreign to me.  She had no answer.  I assume that Portland State and Gonzaga didn't force these young ladies to do this and that they chose to do it.  This goes beyond a gender role as far as I can tell--but it may be cultural--I don't know. Girls just seem to be "cheerleaders"--in life as well as in athletic contests. What do you think?

Good illustration! 

 

The best description I have heard came through some marriage ministry a dozen or so years ago.  They compared men to laser beams, well-focused, single-task oriented, and strong, while women were compared to radar, constantly scanning the horizon for trouble, then directing the laser in that direction.  There is definately a strong, innate difference between men and women.  As for the roles in society?  I tend to think that is culture driven AND history driven ... History builds the culture, so for several millenia, in general, our global culture has been male dominated and has well established expected behavior for both genders.  It is very hard to break through what has been established.  My mantra, however, is different but of equal value.  We need each other for balance!   

Ain't that the truth!

In my house, I still do the dishes, cooking and laundry.

We kind of have an unwritten rule, he takes care of the outside and I take care of the inside on the home.

He also earns the living and pays the bills.

 

 

Totally opposite from last marriage where I did it all!

 

 

That was more or less the arrangement my X and I had ... but he helped inside, too!  lol  Where do our "roles" come from?  Any thoughts?

Maybe some of our duties where just past down from one generation to another; with women always tending to house/kids and the man earning the income.  Now that women are out in the work place, sometimes making more than the husband.  The roles have reversed to some extend.  And rightfully so, if the wife has to go out and earn a living. 

 

I may be working f/t now after 16 years of being a stay-home mom; actually I ran my husband's f/t business on top of the house and raising six children.  But that's besides the point, I started to work outside of the home because my husband's work was so sporadic and we were fighting so much about me spending money that I decided to help out; also to be able to buy a new pair of shoes without hearing about it. 

 

I am now considering quitting my job and going back to being a stay-home mom.  Only now, with a new house to care for, a allowance each week and me not running his business.  Even working F/T, I still have to do everything I did before.  The kids have their chores that they did even when I was home but my husband choosed to do what he always did ~ go out to work F/T (period).  I spoiled him.  We've been married for 19 years but it was a lot of work in me putting up with him and even vise-versa at times.  One doesn't realize what one has until it is taken away.

 

Women are just better at doing many tasks at once; as running a household and keeping up with the kids.  I guess insinctively, we just do what we're good at.  I believe the man was given the responsibility by God to lead.  It's built within the very fabric of his being to provide and protect; as leaders do. 

 

But maybe over time, with 'women's lib', the man's role to lead were crossed with a women's yearning to be respected for what they do.  Also with the excuse to catch up on payments for the material things that were purchased. 

 

If a man stays home and takes care of the kids and house because his wife makes more money than him, will cause problems with the man's pride.  It's ingrained in him to provide and protect.  You take that away from him, then he has nothing.  He will never get the same satisfaction that a women gets by caring for the kids and keeping the house clean.  It's just how we were built.

 

Now a women who got a taste of being a man, very seldom wants to go back.  It's the love of money which is the root of all evil.  Now a days, our society is about having a bigger house, a bigger car; with two and three cars, bigger entertainment centers, etc...our grandparents and parents were satisfied with less. 

 

Also, our society allows marriages to split too easily.  Broken families are a common place when both parents work.  In the old day, what kept a family together was the women staying home.  She then relied solely on her husband to work and it gave her her responsibility.  This is only right when everyone participates and take pride in what they do.

 

I think it's ok for a women to go back to work when there are no children at home; there is also many charities to be involved in.  I hate soap operas and such, keeps women at home doing nothing.  I think it takes a lot of creativity and organization to manage so much unused time, so working whether for free or for earnings is good for the person.

You seem kinda unsure ... outside of marriage, are there prescribed roles for males and females?

I don't believe a man can stay home and take care of the kids while his wife provides (paying the morgage, car, insurance, food, utilities, etc...).  It will ruin over time (low-esteem, depression, loss of respect from not only his wife but others) because it goes against what God called him to be as provider and protector of the family.  If you don't want to include God, then society itself, since the beginning has always placed man as the provider and protector of the family.  Women naturally look to men to lead.

 

Example:  One day when I was 24 years old (before Christ), I was waiting for the bus in Pittsburgh to go to work.  It was a crowded stop with lots of men and women waiting.  One crazy (demon) possessed man decides to look under all the nurses dresses. 

 

While they were being harassed, I was looking around for the men to do something!  There they were reading their newspaper or something else like it was none of their business!  So I stepped up to the plate and I pushed the man and said, "Stop looking under these women's dresses!"  He then came at me and I punched him square in the face.  He then ran and I continued to chase after him saying, "Now don't come back to this stop again!"  I turned back to wait for my bus and everyone applauded. 

 

The key here is:  If a man don't take the lead, then a women will take his place.  Once she becomes the leader, let's say as the one who makes more money than him and pays the majority of the bills, then she will always hold that over him and many quarrels will come from it.

 

In my situation at home, the reason for our many quarrels over the last 12 out of 19 years of our marriage was because for the first 7 years, I was ok with 'helping out'.  The problem was after time, I could never hand back the chores that I thought he should do. 

 

Like:  (1.) Paying the bills (wasn't that bad and it's ok for women to do) but what happened with us was my husband expected a full report in the morning to what was paid and if I paid something that maybe he thought should of waited, then I would hear about it.

 

(2.)  I have been the one who had to do all the accounting for the business and our personal financing for tax purposes.  (3.) If applying for a loan, I had to be the one who made the appointment and fill out all the paper work. (4.) Always being the one who was thoughtful in my gift purchases and even asking him to go out on dates.

 

The first three were the main reasons for our quarrels.  Though he was the one who went out to make a living, I still expected him to provide with the financial chores as well.  Another reason for our quarrels, was him providing our family with a bigger house.  Our (3) bedroom (1) bath wasn't cutting it for our family of eight!  It was only my commitment to God.. and my husband's love for me (& God) that held this marriage together.  Fifteen years of always hearing, 'Next year, we'll do it next year' built a thread of unbelief and mistrust, that was about to break with each passing year. 

 

These last few months, I have watched him pay the bills, apply for loans and in the end provide us with a beautiful (6) bedroom/3.5 bath home.  It was like a big weight on my shoulders was lifted and the whole family could breathe again as we watched 'dad' provide for the family. 

 

He has provided so well, that we don't have to sell our other w/6 acres and will rent it out to family from our church.  In about 2-3, he will attempt to build a house to sell on one of the acres there.  That's fine with me, I don't really care.  I just wanted a newer and bigger house for my kids.  I eyes twinkle again when I look at him, something that I have been missing for 12 years.

With a wolf pack in the wild, if the Alpha Male don't take the lead then his position as leader will always be tested by the Subordinate Males in the group.  Same goes for the Alpha Female and the Subordinate Females under her.  If there is a pack of females and no males, then the Alpha Female takes charge.  If a male comes along, the Alpha Female will test his strength to lead, if he doesn't show dominance over her; she will chase him away and look for another male.

 

Not that we live by animal rules but women no matter how strong or self-sufficient, they will always fall for a man who will provide.  Young single women will rarely date a man who don't have a car and now the more mature women won't even consider a man a prospect, unless he not only has a car but a house (which means he has a good job and can provide).  Or at the very least, doesn't mean that she will be the only one with a good paying job.

The flaw in what you say is the huge number of single women, myself included, who are more than able to fend for themselves as even you demonstrated.  This illustrates that the dominant, submission assumption is actually in nothing more than male perpetrated gender roles.  It is man's tradition, not necessarily God's word ... You see ... it doesn't make sense.  If men and women receive the same Spirit, receive the same anointings, the same gifts ...  why would God suddenly say ... "Yeaa but you can only teach kids and other women."  The Church robs itself AND the world of the gifts of God through her women ... so sad.  Perhaps I can suggest a book, Why not Women,  by Loren Cunningham (YWAM) and David Hamilton

So it's ok for you to work F/T and your husband to stay home, clean house and raise the kids?

To whom are you speaking?    I'm a single mom.  Have raised my three kids pretty much solo. 

Oh ok....not an easy thing to do.  But if things were different, it would have been ok for him to stay home, clean house and raise the kids while you worked?

I have never seen that dynamic work successfully. At this point I'd say it totally depends on the family.  No set rules, except the obvious, i.e mom's deliver babies, and at least initially, are the primary care-giver. 

 

My personal opinion is that there are prescribed responsibilities, but whether those are determined genetically or culturally  ... I'm leaning more toward culture as the determining factor.

I certainly understand your offense towards the Church but it all depends on the maturity of the Church.  My Church doesn't have a problem allowing women to teach men, as long as they are anointed to do so and serve as part of the core leadership.

And I don't have a problem with that as long as they hold the same standards over the men who minister.  I'm not sure "maturity" is the best word here, either.  We get into big trouble when we try to compare one with another either as individuals or ministries.  God is an intimate God, and works in us and through us individually.  That applies to various assemblies also.  Each one has a different  "calling", so to speak, and can no more be expected to alike than the believers that fill them.   

Perhaps "vision" is a better word ... ?  as in vision of/for the Church? 

So in the church you now attend, don't allow women to teach an audience that has men in it?

Most local assemplies relegate woman to the nursery, the choir, or the prayer circle.  These are vital positions, to be sure, but most believers do not believe women, for example, belong in the pulpit.  How many female senior pastors do you know?  Jesus, on the other hand, demonstrated his value for women repeatedly breaking the social rules of his time. 

 

I'm not lifting women over men, but I believe we were designed to minister beside men ... with marriage as our example.  Not one greater or superior to the other, but rather recognizing and perferring one another ... yoked together to accomplish His purpose jointly.  One or the other are insufficient for the task.  BOTH are required.    So should it be in the Church.  One day, it will be. 

My role were passed down several generations. My great-grandmothers, grandmothers and mother didn't work. None of my aunts worked unless it was a family business that they helped with.

 

 I take that back. My mom had one sister who was a single til she was 40 so she worked in a dept. store.

 

I worked outside the home until 4 years ago when I lost my favorite job in the radio business.

I don't need to work outside the home anymore because my husband makes really good money.

I just work home based businesses.

 

I don't like my husband doing the dishes because he doesn't load the dishes the way I like them.

He messes up the laundry. He tried to help when I was working two jobs in 98.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So you're saying that in your experience, gender roles are a cultural inheritance, yes?  We do what we are taught by family and tradition.  Correct? 

 

Thanks for participating!

Pretty much. I kind of broke the mold in my family because I worked and my ex stayed home.

 

 

Gender roles can't be completely ascribed to family values and tradition because you have to ask yourself where did they come from in the first place?  They are perhaps reinforced by the family and passed on through tradition, but they can't possibly stem from that.  I think men and women do have some inherent differences but are so alike in many ways.  There are so many different theories on this subject (why the society we live in is patriarchal)... some people think men and women are completely different but our society places more worth on "male values" rather than "female values", which reinforces gender inequality.  Others say that men and women are similar and that society (particularly laws) are structured in a way that makes it difficult for women to say, have children and work at the same time.  Anway, that's just about gender inequality... I guess overall I don't think it's a very easy question and I'm inclined to look at it from a sociological standpoint.  I think gender roles are mostly something that is reinforced through society and the way the economy is structured.  You have to wonder whether a baby born without knowing his/her gender ... without having any hints or societal biases whatsoever (eg, parents give it non gender-specific toys and clothes, not allowed to treat him/her in a gender specific way) ... you have to wonder whether that child will take on the stereotypical traits of whatever his/her sex is.  I personally think the child would grow up being more rounded than anyone and would take on both roles regardless of their biological sex.  Gender is a social construction that is constantly being reinforced.  What's the first thing a child sees when it comes into the world?  A bunch of blue or pink balloons saying IT'S A BOY! or IT'S A GIRL!   And imagine the confusion and discomfort that would ensue if there was no way of knowing!  Dress a baby boy up in "girl" clothing and people will treat it differently than if it were a girl.  It's all there from the beginning.  

I tend to agree with you that nurture plays a huge role in gender behavior, although there are obviously some innate differences in addition to physiological ones.  The point I want to make in my paper is that in spite of the innate differences, humans, regardless of gender, should be of equal value to a society for a heathly balance. 

Thanks for your perspective! 

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh Bobbbbbb!  Thank you for stopping by!  How are you, my friend???  How are  ... things ... ?  Girls thriving? 

commentroad.com Hope you are doing well.