Breadwinning wives

[kimmie]

This is my first time starting a new topic, so here goes...

1.  For all you wives out there who have had to be the main if not THE breadwinner for your family, how did you handle it?  Did you want to be the breadwinner, or was there resentment in doing so?  How did you cope?

2.  For those wives who are transitioning or who have transitioned from being the breadwinner to being a housewife, how did you adjust?

3.  And let's not leave out husbands... what are some ways to encourage the husband in his manliness while the wife is out earning the money?  This is assuming that the husband is taking steps to have a career someday.

[Bon Voyage]

My wife is the breadwinner this year so I can finish my bachelor's in EE.  Its nice not working, or should I say working for pay.  I pay to work.

[Nelta]

delete by nib

[kimmie]

:angry: I will let God be the judge of any married couple who is working hard to one day be able to fulfill their gender roles - given that they cannot do so at first.  He knows each and every circumstance, and they are not all the same for every struggling couple, whether they be young or old when married.  

I know of a married man who cannot work two jobs due to health issues.  And overworking affects the marriage relationship even more.  I'd rather see a couple, even though struggling to get their gender roles where they need to be, spend more time nurturing their marriage relationship rather than neglecting it.

[Bon Voyage]

Nelta, why are you always so negative?

[janine]

Lord God, please Sir, allow me to go back to my proper role... I don't wanna work outside the home...

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (JerryBrooke @ Nov. 23 2003,4:01)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]Nelta, why are you always so negative?[/quote]
One might ask, rather, "why is she always so clueless?"

But since that wouldn't be appropriate, I won't.

- Bob

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (Nelta @ Nov. 23 2003,00:01)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]One way we go against the teachings of the scriptures is when we  decide to change the roles God has for the sexes.  Many women are working because they are encouraged to do so by their husbands.  Others because they are single moms and there is no income coming in. [Bob: I would guess that this is even Nelta's acknowledging the obvious].

As a older woman I try to do as I am commanded to do and that is to teach the young women to love their children.  Now no one has to teach a woman to emotional love her children (motherly love) unless she has squlched (?) that nurturing gift God gave her, but not all understand the agape (love) one is to have for her family.....children.  For a woman to go out into the work place and leave her children for someone else to raise (even if it is the husband) then she should rethink the agape type love...which includes valuing the souls of her children.

Many times women work for more material things.  Bad reason.  Others to put their husbands through school...bad reason.

If we did things the way God wants it done IMO we will not get married until the man can support his family... [/quote]
Nelta's fundamental problem is that she fails to acknowledge the difference between the first century and the twenty-first (it's a mistake frequently made, and by many):

"Be an example to the unbelievers around you

Another marriage theme in the Greek Bible reflects the fact that Christians lived as a dispersed, essentially powerless minority among a skeptical, sometimes hostile majority. Christians are exhorted to strive toward marriages that are ideal both from the standpoint of Christian teachings and the opinion of unbelieving world:

"Beloved, I urge you as aliens and exiles to abstain from the desires of the flesh that wage war against the soul. Conduct yourselves honorably among the Gentiles, so that, though they malign you as evildoers, they may see your honorable deeds and glorify God when he comes to judge." (NRSV)

This emphasis on "witness" meant that Christians were to submit even to authorities who were hostile or oppressive toward them (1 Peter 2:13-21) They were also to structure their families in accordance with Graeco-Roman norms, including a wife who submits to her husband, so that Christians would impress even unbelieving spouses with their socially acceptable conduct:

"Wives, in the same way, accept the authority of your husbands, so that, even if some of them do not obey the word, they may be won over without a word by their wives' conduct, when they see the purity and reverence of your lives." (NRSV)

But while these "Tables of Duties" counselled Christians to adopt societal norms as much as possible, the writers modified the prevailing Graeco-Roman patriarchal structure by adding a duty for the husband to be considerate and respectful toward the wife:

"Husbands, in the same way, show consideration for your wives in your life together, paying honor to the woman as the weaker sex, since they too are also heirs of the gracious gift of life—so that nothing may hinder your prayers." (NRSV)

The covenant between equal partners envisioned by Genesis 2 remains even as Christians are urged to conform as much as possible to the prevailing culture for the sake of witness."

- http://www.therightchristians.org/BibleSay.htm#marriageold

The problem is, of course, that application of the first century solution to the twenty-first doesn't make sense absent some present day common sense. The first way to bridge that gap is first to look for the underlying principle being advanced and base contemporary application on the principle before attempting to resort to the original practice originally practiced. In other words, for all the complaining one may have about "women working outside the home", mothers and wives will continue to do so not just due to economic considerations (the primary one being avoiding poverty) but because it is acceptable in our culture to do so.

Nelta forgets that the slice of history in which women were expected to be June Cleaver and run around the kitchen in pearls and heels has only been true for a small segment of the population and only for a short period of time. Throughout history, women worked in and out of the house and will continue to do so regardless of the religious postering of some.

- Bob Brandon

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (kimmie @ Nov. 23 2003,3:29)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]:angry: I will let God be the judge of any married couple who is working hard to one day be able to fulfill their gender roles - given that they cannot do so at first.  He knows each and every circumstance, and they are not all the same for every struggling couple, whether they be young or old when married...[/quote]
Well put, Kimmie. Nelta, listen up.

- Bob

[winky]

Proverbs 31:10-31 seems to praise a woman/wife who works.

[boringoldguy]

The really important question isn't who goes to work but who raises the children.

In the days when most people either lived on farms or, if they lived in towns, worked in some kind of family-owned enterprise, this discussion would have seemed bizarre.    Everybody worked, and the kids were not just taken care of at home, they were a part of the economic unit that the family made up.    It made no sense to say that somebody worked "outside" the home, because the home was a productive enterprise.

That changed with the process of industrialization when, instead of working in their own farms and shops, people started marching off to factories and offices.    The "ideal" of women staying home and men going to work was a product of this new system of wage slavery;  if the women stayed home, there would be more jobs for the men.  (This was also the real motive behind mandatory eduction through 12th grade - to keep younger people out of the workforce a little bit longer.)

Nowadays, because more income is needed to allow families to buy the ever-increasing products of those factories, we encourage women to go to work and send the kids to day care.

All of this suits Wall Street, but I don't think it's good for anybody else.    I think it's really important to find some way to keep your kids out of day care and have them with the family.   If that means making less money and having less "stuff", then so be it.

[seekr]

Nelta, freedom in Christ, means freedom in Christ. There are no set ways of doing anything. We just follow and go forward with what He has put before us and if we are leaning into the Spirit, He will direct us. God may have one wife stay home and another may work. It is personal relationship.

seekr

[Nelta]

deleted by nib

[Nelta]

deleted by nib

[Bon Voyage]

It is not because you disagree with me Nelta.  It is because of all the way back to the Gospel Advocate Board, I remember that a good bulk of the messages I have seen you post to various boards are chock full of negativity and sarcasm.

I don't think I am the only one who sees you this way.

[Nelta]

deleted by nib

[WileyClarkson]

Jerry,

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]It is not because you disagree with me Nelta.  It is because of all the way back to the Gospel Advocate Board, I remember that a good bulk of the messages I have seen you post to various boards are chock full of negativity and sarcasm.

I don't think I am the only one who sees you this way.[/quote]

You are not alone in that opinion :0  I've know Nelta for more than just several years also and she has always been negative about something.  Never posted to to Gospel Advocate board but I think that came after her time she spent with us on the RM-Bible list!

Nelta,

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]I believe you think I am negative when I disagree with you, Jerry.:-) [/quote]

We love you, :givingkiss: and we appreciate your input :thumbup:   Always have, and always will.  You are a totally unique :thinking:  individual.   But you "DO" come across as aggrevatingly (:bangingheadagainstwall:)  negative :angry: and on a :soapbox: in many discussions (especially in this particular discussion!).  You always have.  Ever since the early days of the RM-Bible Discussion List.  Remember Bill Denton and how aggrevated he use to get with you? :D  That may age you and me just a little :0

[gbShorty]

I always appreciate Nelta's posts.  She makes me think.  And, I do think she's sincere.  She asks tough questions, sometimes hitting our weak spots.  I don't think that's a bad thing to do.

Pertaining to the subject, young children definitely need a parent or close caring family member around.  Day cares aren't the best alternative and I think Nelta knows that from experience.  I don't think mom always has to be the one to stay home but certainly should try.

[WileyClarkson]

Kimmie,

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]This is my first time starting a new topic, so here goes...

1.  For all you wives out there who have had to be the main if not THE breadwinner for your family, how did you handle it?  Did you want to be the breadwinner, or was there resentment in doing so?  How did you cope?

2.  For those wives who are transitioning or who have transitioned from being the breadwinner to being a housewife, how did you adjust?

3.  And let's not leave out husbands... what are some ways to encourage the husband in his manliness while the wife is out earning the money?  This is assuming that the husband is taking steps to have a career someday. [/quote]

My wife and I have flip-flpooed several times in our lives between being the main breadwinners.  We did that right from the start in our marriage while I was trying to make a photographic studio earn us a living (which takes three to five years of hard work under the best business concitions!) and she worked in a book warehouse and then for a lawyer.  When we moved to the country after 5 years and three kids, I was again trying to build a business.  We had made good money in the stock market and were semi retired but fairly tight on money.  She had to work outside while I worked on the business.  When the stock market cratered under the high interest rates following Carter, she had to drive 65 miles to work (we also had free tuition to a private Christian school for our daughters for a couple of years--which was an incentive to make the drive!) while I continued to try to make a living in a depressed area without becoming a nuclear construction hand.  When I went to work full time in nuclear security, I became the cheif bread winner (with benefits!) and she found work locally with a friend of ours as a ranch secretary (she really loved that job!!!).  She has almost always worked and I have worked rotating shifts and fixed shifts for 20 plus years.

I think I can speak from experience on this one.

1st.  Our marriage is basically an egalitarian marriage.  It has been that way since the start and will nat ever change.  We became one person through marriage and we function as one person.  In other words, we don't go against the other's wishes.  There is no real head person in our marriage.  Everything is a joint action.  That is the basis of what you are asking above.  It is what makes it possible for us to go back and forth as to who is the main breadwinner.  There has never been resentment about that.  Resentment only came in when we didn't have enough money because neither of us was working and we had to be extremely tight with money.  Interestingly, we keep separate checking accounts and divide out the expenses, etc.  Joint accounts never seemed to work with us.  What ever we are doing, we have survived almost 30 years of marriage and three daughters going through public schools, and public and private universities (Tarleton State University and Abilene Christian University), one with a Masters in Religous Education from ACU who is now a childrens minister and two (our twins) who are now 25 and STILL in ACU.

2nd.  Can't answer for my wife!

3rd.  The idea of manliness (meaning "I'm a Man---UGHHH UGHHH UGHHH!--and I'm the boss of this marriage!!!) is really stupid and the idea that only the man is capable of earning the living for the family based on Scripture is really pushing the applications of Scripture, IMO.   A man who feels that his manhood is threatened by a wife who willing helps earn a living for the family is on an ego trip, IMO.  He should be on his knees thanking God he has a wife that loves him enough to do that and he should remember that through marriage, God has made the husband as much an equal part of the wife as He has made the wife an equal part of the husband.  We are one in marriage.  That is forgotten by many when a hiearchal marriage is the only idea of marriage.

My oldest daughter (the children's minister) is the main bread winner in her marriage.  her husband doesn have a degree and works as a warehouse hand.  They are happy because both are working together for a common goals.  They have a 10 month old daughter to raise and a whole lot of school debt to pay off.  Before they married they agreed with each other that she would be the main breadwinner and her career would come first.  He would get jobs where ever she was working as a minister.  He knew right from the start that she would earn more than he would.  It was a common decission.  They share decissions just about the same as my wife and I have always done.  If I don't make the right decission, then I am "guided" to the right decission by a loving wife who tweaks my ego a little and then allows me to make the "right" decission!  When we are in agreement, it is always right!

Hope I have answered a couple of questions sufficiently for you.  They are good questions!

[Nelta]

deleted by nib

[Nelta]

deleted by nib

[kmv]

To me, the idea that the husband must be the main breadwinner, or have the higher salary, is just buying into the world's mindset.  God doesn't judge anything by monetary value.  Why on earth do we?

We try and try and try to turn God's magnificent Scripture into just some list of do's and don'ts.  Husband must earn the money-check.  Wife must keep the house-check.  How ridiculous.  

We totally ignore that God didn't create male and female roles.   He created male and female.  The miracle is the differences that we bring as men and women, and as individuals, to any role we live -in the workplace, in the church, in the home.

It doesn't matter what our family childcare choices are.  It matters what our family PRIORITIES are.  I know we've all seen parents who put their careers before their children's development.  We've also seen parents who put their status in the community, or the church, before their children's well-being.  Some people put more value on their cars and vacations than on their children; some put more value on the cleanliness of their home or the maintenance of their lawn than on the well-being of their children.

I know it would be comforting to have a one-size-fits-all, thought-free answer to the child care dilemma.  But there isn't one.  We each have to struggle to find the way God intends our family to live out His word.

kari

[WileyClarkson]

Nelta,

it is not a mixing of the roles.  If you really understood the marriage concepts of 6000 years ago, 4000 years ago, and 2000 years ago, you would understand that.  Kari is quite correct in her understanding of how God made us and what our priorities should be.  Male and female were made equal and when married they become ONE person and that is an equal mix that makes a 100% single person in marriage (not 80x20) that is sealed by God.  It is man (male) with sin guiding him who distorted what God set up and gave himself supiority over the female for all time--which is contrary to how God made us.  When Paul addressed marriage in several different books, he was addressing in the societal/time context of 1950 years ago.  It was a totally different society.  For someone who doesn't believe in the "church of Christ Patterns" in a bunch of areas, you sure come off as following a pattern in this area!  If you go to the following website, you will find a set of three articles by Dr. Kenneth Shrable.  You may know him from the RM-Bible and Berean Spirit boards.  He presented the three papers at the 1996 Pepperdine Lectureships.  While they are not a direct study of the marriage relationship and time frame, they are a study of females, the time frame 1950 years ago, and why Paul used the language he used and gave the directions he gave to the churches at that time regarding females.  I know right now that you won't agree with anything on my web site but the address is as follows:

http://www.clarksons.org/spirit_leads.htm

BTW, while you are there, read Lance Pape's article on the Genesis man and woman.  It's very good!

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]When someone wants to mix the roles in the family he/she will naturally flare up when their sacred cow is kicked.
[/quote]

Let's get something straight right now Nelda.  I don't get flared up at someone kicking at a sacred cow.  I have very few sacred cows to kick  The ones I do have possess really tough hides, and this isn't one of them.  However, anyone who has the nerve to sit in judgement of me and my wife on how we handle our marriage and that we are going against the Word by doing it that way, I will get flaired up at.  You do not have the right to sit in judgement on me and my wife or anyone else on this board.  You are welcome to discuss views but you do not judge people to be wrong or sinning because they do not agree with your views.  

The RM discussions is a matter of history and you know those records are public.  Since we have known each other for so long, I was poking a little fun at you and you know it.  I used to really enjoy watching you and Denton go at each other.  You got him going like no one else on the list.  However, your comments tonight are judgemental and I will get stirred up if you starting sitting in judgement of the members of this board.  Discussion is one thing---judgementalism is quite another---and you are coming across as being very judgemental and condemning of anyone who disagrees with your position.

Well, I guess I have said enough.  It's been 22 hours since the last time I had any sleep, so, good night Nelda.  I will pray for you tonight that you will eventually learn to be more tolerant of differences of opinion and less judgemental of those who disagree with you.

[boringoldguy]

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (kmv @ Nov. 24 2003,10:44)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]It doesn't matter what our family childcare choices are.  It matters what our family PRIORITIES are.  [/quote]
These statements don't make much sense to me.

Our priorities determine our choices, and our choices reveal something about our priorities.     I bet that if we asked the children, they'd say what choices we make about child care matter quite a lot.

[boringoldguy]

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (JerryBrooke @ Nov. 24 2003,6:32)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]I remember that a good bulk of the messages I have seen you post to various boards are chock full of negativity and sarcasm.[/quote]
Let me set off a stink bomb here:

The entire "Spiritual Sword" thread is an excercise in sarcasm and negativiy.   I know that I've been sarcastic and negative more than a few times, too.

Nelta's no worse than I am or than some others are.   I don't see any need to have a "gang up on Nelta" party.

Just my opinion.

[kmv]

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--][!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--] (kmv @ Nov. 24 2003,10:44)
It doesn't matter what our family childcare choices are.  It matters what our family PRIORITIES are.   [/quote]

These statements don't make much sense to me.
[/quote]

Sure they do.  You don't really think that our particular day care set up is the sole evidence of our family priorities, do you?  Of course you don't.  

kari

[boringoldguy]

I don't see how you can say it doesn't matter.

And as I said, most people make decisions in accordance with what's important to them.

[WileyClarkson]

BOG,

What is the point you are trying to make?

You are saying the same thing as Kari from what I can see.

Kari is using the phrase "family priorities" and you are using the phrase  "make decisions in accordance with what's important to them" and they mean the same thing.  Setting priorities is the same thing as doing what is important.  Priorities are actions taken by their relative importance and that is action based on "accordance with what's important."  As long as the "family priorities/decisions in accordance with what's important" are made with the view of what is best for the children in the eyes of the children's parents, where is the problem and why the "These statements don't make much sense to me."  

You are both basically saying the same thing!  If you feel you are not saying the same thing, how about elaborating some on what you are saying so we will have a better understanding.

[boringoldguy]

Wiley,

My original comment was that while it doesn't matter who earns what money, it does matter who takes care of the kids.

Kari said that child care arrangements don't matter.

Those don't seem to me be to be the same.

[winky]

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (kmv @ Nov. 25 2003,11:17)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--][!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--][!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--] (kmv @ Nov. 24 2003,10:44)
It doesn't matter what our family childcare choices are.  It matters what our family PRIORITIES are.   [/quote]

These statements don't make much sense to me.
[/quote]

Sure they do.  You don't really think that our particular day care set up is the sole evidence of our family priorities, do you?  Of course you don't.  

kari[/quote]
I think here is where the communication broke down. There is a difference betweeen saying that day care is not the sole evidence of family priorities (I imagine that everyone would agree on that) and saying that family child care choices don't matter.  I believe BOG is saying that although child care choices are not the sole evidence, they do matter, inasmuch as they represent the choices made based on family priorities.  

<self deprecating sarcasm mode on>
Gosh, what would everyone do without all these helpful people around here to restate what everyone said?
<self deprecating sarcasm mode off>

Wendy

[WileyClarkson]

Wendy,

Thanks for the clarity.


BOG,

In that sense, I have to agree with you.  Who takes care of the child/children does matter.  However, I don't think it "has" to be one of the parents on a full time basis as Nelta espouses while the other is the only working parent.    If both parents are working (must work--no choice--where many of us have been and will continue to be all of our working lives) then I would agree the quality of the daycare, IMO, becomes a matter of great importance.  However, the choice of child care is something that many times is based on what is available within the budget.  Day care in my area has historically been full with no slots open for children for months on end in the better day cares (the ones that offer the most extras--if that makes them better), plus government regulations are pretty excessive these days which is making for a lot less slots than a few years ago.  I have heard it is much the same in most of the larger cities also.  So, it then becomes a decission of trying to find the best for what can be afforded from what is available.  I don't think we should be in a rush to judgement based on that one parameter.  The family priorities that Kari was talking about, IMO, will always include what is best for the child within the parent's capabilities.

Kari, why don't you elaborate a little more fully on your comments.  Somehow, I suspect you and BOG are still alot closer together in views than is coming across---but I could be wrong :0   I have been before (but not very often!) :D

[boringoldguy]

I think it's a great misfortune to have strangers raising your kids, no matter the "quality" of the daycare.   In some situations I suppose there's no alternative.  However, I often wonder why people have children if all they do with them is pack them off to the daycare.

[kmv]

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--].  However, I often wonder why people have children if all they do with them is pack them off to the daycare.[/quote]

Gee, boring.  Maybe it's so that they can have the pleasure of having complete and ignorant strangers pass judgement on something those strangers know absolutely nothing about.

You are no more competent to judge the decisions my husband and I make about child care than I am to judge the way you raise your children.  In fact, you are less competent to judge my situation than I am yours, because at least I'm not dumb enough to think I know your family better than you do.

[boringoldguy]

Kari,

Since you assert that priorities matter more than actualities
why don't you explain how that works in the real world?

Why don't you tell us how your child care arrangements reflect your priorities?

[winky]

OK. This question is going to probably just highlight my ignorance for everyone to see, but I'm going to go under the assumption that I was always taught in school "There's no such thing as a stupid question."

As a preface, my husband and I hope and intend with all our might to be able to stay home with the kids until they are school age. Right now, it's not possible, which is why we're holding off on having kids.

My question is, assuming that you find qualified, competent, preferably even Christian care-givers (day care, in-home care, whatever), how is "packing them off to day care" for 3 or 4 years before they reach school age any different than "packing them off to school" for 12 years of their lives?