I do believe adults should prioritize giving their children a stable home over almost anything. There's an awful trend of people arguing that children somehow benefit when adults divorce for selfish reasons. "My children will be happy if I'm happy (with my hot new lover)" is nonsense.
But we're also teaching our children how to live. A mom who constantly martyrs herself will teach her daughter to do the same (or the daughter won't want kids at all). It's important to model a healthy, balanced life.
The thing about the “trad” life is that the “do everything the hardest and longest possible way or you’re destroying your kids” expectation only falls on women. The husband is permitted to have any kind of job so long as he makes money so the set up is him in an office doing his email job all day while she is at home, down by the river, beating clothes against a rock with a baby slung over her back because detergent is deemed toxic or whatever.
Rigid gender roles are bad for men too. Many (most?) men would rather share work in and outside the home with their partner rather than take on the sole responsibility of being the breadwinner. I don’t begrudge people who have a traditional gendered division of labor (my own parents did) and I don’t think it’s inherently reactionary or regressive. But I don’t think it should be a norm imposed on everyone either.
I am a big believer in minding my own business so if a very traditional division of labor works for some couples, that’s fine, but I also find trying to impose that on everyone unsavory.
And I find it funny that the trad husband gets to spend his days in the 21st century while the trad wife has to LARP being an 1850s prairie marm (who happens to have internet access and a Twitter/TikTok account) “for the sake of the children.”
For example, even if we grant that making divorce harder is good for children *while they’re children*, such a policy might make children’s lives worse overall by making it more likely for them to be trapped in an unhappy marriage years in the future.
I am not convinced that making divorce harder will do much to save families. I think even fewer people will opt for legal marriage in a context where getting out of a failing marriage would be hard or impossible under new restrictions. I don’t believe people will allow themselves to be coerced into permanent unhappiness.
Given children grow up to be adults, isn’t this a bit of a false dilemma? Making life harder for adults will make life harder for children when it’s their turn to grow up!
Would you not say that children and adults have a difference in tolerance to stress, particularly when it comes life long ramifications from acute stress?
I can’t really speak to that, I’m not a developmental psychologist - my point is just that the opposition between “children’s interests” and “adult interests” is a false one. A big part of how we conceive of children’s’ interests is their future as adults. “Lifelong ramifications from stress” is actually an example of that.
Children do — or should — have less tolerance for stress than adults but in our current culture anything that might be considered good for the parents, especially the mother — this is much less of an issue when it comes to fathers’ needs — is assumed to be somehow taking away from the well-being of the child in some way. I’ve seen mothers characterize taking a shower or eating a meal as extravagant luxuries that hurt their kids if doing those things take even a moment of their time and attention off of their kids. It’s all… quite a lot.
Right, and these sorts of parenting norms are bad for children too because they will grow up to face the same social expectations when they become parents.
Absolutely. And I don’t know how good it actually is for kids to be treated like the alpha and the omega at all times. Like yes their actual needs should be prioritized but no, they shouldn’t be treated like gods whose parents — especially mothers — live to serve in endless self-sacrifice. I think showing kids that their mom is a human with needs teaches them consideration for others.
It may help to see the family unit as a whole, not of individuals with competing rights. I understand the purpose of the family is where everyone can grow and develop. This quote from my Faith tradition has been helpful in my family: The integrity of the family bond must be constantly considered and the rights of the
individual members must not be transgressed. The rights of the son, the father, the mother—none of them must be transgressed, none of them must be arbitrary. Just as the son has certain obligations to his father, the father, likewise, has certain obligations to his son. The mother, the sister and other members of the household have their certain prerogatives. All these rights and prerogatives must be conserved….
I do believe adults should prioritize giving their children a stable home over almost anything. There's an awful trend of people arguing that children somehow benefit when adults divorce for selfish reasons. "My children will be happy if I'm happy (with my hot new lover)" is nonsense.
But we're also teaching our children how to live. A mom who constantly martyrs herself will teach her daughter to do the same (or the daughter won't want kids at all). It's important to model a healthy, balanced life.
The thing about the “trad” life is that the “do everything the hardest and longest possible way or you’re destroying your kids” expectation only falls on women. The husband is permitted to have any kind of job so long as he makes money so the set up is him in an office doing his email job all day while she is at home, down by the river, beating clothes against a rock with a baby slung over her back because detergent is deemed toxic or whatever.
Rigid gender roles are bad for men too. Many (most?) men would rather share work in and outside the home with their partner rather than take on the sole responsibility of being the breadwinner. I don’t begrudge people who have a traditional gendered division of labor (my own parents did) and I don’t think it’s inherently reactionary or regressive. But I don’t think it should be a norm imposed on everyone either.
I am a big believer in minding my own business so if a very traditional division of labor works for some couples, that’s fine, but I also find trying to impose that on everyone unsavory.
And I find it funny that the trad husband gets to spend his days in the 21st century while the trad wife has to LARP being an 1850s prairie marm (who happens to have internet access and a Twitter/TikTok account) “for the sake of the children.”
They’re selling an image on social media. The wives you have in mind are that most vividly contemporary breed, the professional influencer.
For example, even if we grant that making divorce harder is good for children *while they’re children*, such a policy might make children’s lives worse overall by making it more likely for them to be trapped in an unhappy marriage years in the future.
I am not convinced that making divorce harder will do much to save families. I think even fewer people will opt for legal marriage in a context where getting out of a failing marriage would be hard or impossible under new restrictions. I don’t believe people will allow themselves to be coerced into permanent unhappiness.
I’m far from convinced either, I was just granting it for the sake of argument
Given children grow up to be adults, isn’t this a bit of a false dilemma? Making life harder for adults will make life harder for children when it’s their turn to grow up!
Would you not say that children and adults have a difference in tolerance to stress, particularly when it comes life long ramifications from acute stress?
I can’t really speak to that, I’m not a developmental psychologist - my point is just that the opposition between “children’s interests” and “adult interests” is a false one. A big part of how we conceive of children’s’ interests is their future as adults. “Lifelong ramifications from stress” is actually an example of that.
Children do — or should — have less tolerance for stress than adults but in our current culture anything that might be considered good for the parents, especially the mother — this is much less of an issue when it comes to fathers’ needs — is assumed to be somehow taking away from the well-being of the child in some way. I’ve seen mothers characterize taking a shower or eating a meal as extravagant luxuries that hurt their kids if doing those things take even a moment of their time and attention off of their kids. It’s all… quite a lot.
Right, and these sorts of parenting norms are bad for children too because they will grow up to face the same social expectations when they become parents.
Absolutely. And I don’t know how good it actually is for kids to be treated like the alpha and the omega at all times. Like yes their actual needs should be prioritized but no, they shouldn’t be treated like gods whose parents — especially mothers — live to serve in endless self-sacrifice. I think showing kids that their mom is a human with needs teaches them consideration for others.
It may help to see the family unit as a whole, not of individuals with competing rights. I understand the purpose of the family is where everyone can grow and develop. This quote from my Faith tradition has been helpful in my family: The integrity of the family bond must be constantly considered and the rights of the
individual members must not be transgressed. The rights of the son, the father, the mother—none of them must be transgressed, none of them must be arbitrary. Just as the son has certain obligations to his father, the father, likewise, has certain obligations to his son. The mother, the sister and other members of the household have their certain prerogatives. All these rights and prerogatives must be conserved….