Site hosted by Angelfire.com: Build your free website today!

Atheists Concerned for America: At last — the Tough, Super-Sensitive Topic of HOUSEWIFERY!

Home

Several years ago I wrote this essay and actually put it up as one of the very first essays on the site, but through unclear error I accidentally deleted its page in the directory. By lucky chance, though, I was sweeping through my inbox for old writings of mine and found it! Henceforth now, following a little bit of editing and touching-up for the sake of 'self-maturing' and 'modernization' (so to speak), I am happy to re-present to you this emotionally-charged essay on the tricky topic of American Housewifery:

**


"The Puzzling Question of Housewifery in America: Sacred Tradition or Modern Servitude?"

By Jordan "BluntJoey" Adorno

In the United States of America, the guarantee of equal liberty for all has historically always been greatly reduced for, strangely, the leading fifty-one percent demographic within its embodiment: Women. The richest cause of this ever-polarizing disadvantage is America's undying, mainly Christian-based misogyny, which all throughout the country's history has (inconvenient or not) hostilely marginalized the basic rights of women, given that traditionally the value of women strictly extended only as far as her tie to her home and husband permitted. In contrast, now the amount of women that make the choice to become housewives is much smaller, and in almost every case the women that do are themselves from families where the role of women was similarly margined to strictly the home. (Or, put bluntly but accurately, from families where women's role was always to be modern-day house-servants, be it or not cleverer-hidden.) Nonetheless romanticized, this "housewife” role retains its perpetual honor in American culture as indeed an old-fashioned societal paradigm presumed perfect, but which I hereby argue as being, in fact, very much the opposite: put simply, housewifery fails to compete with societal progress despite its glamorized cultural imprint. Its exploited sexist promotion throughout American history has only brought forth prevalent discrimination on the value and pursuits of modern women. For example, although the majority of American women now work, on average they earn only seventy-seven cents to their male counterpart's every dollar. (Take a look at this egregious example alone: USA Today: "Women dominate nursing field, yet men make more".) This is just one of the NUMEROUS detrimental consequences of our ancestors' cultivated image of women as best-fit in the simple, subservient housewifery role, which persists despite Feminism's impact upon recent generations. And it will only continue to stick its poison into the modern day, too...Unless, that is, we as a culture finally realize how sexist and damaging the housewifery tradition really is!

However, first the question of how to define "housewifery" in America: forefront all else, a housewife is the caretaker to affairs in the home while her husband remains responsible for the family's financial uptake — an uncanny emulation of the Christian family hierarchy. A housewife typically may have worked a temporary job prior to, but never during, her marriage, because at that duration she is fully dependent on her husband economically, and in return, he on her domestically. Thus, she cleans his house, washes his clothes, cooks his meals, raises the children, employs any and all duties specific to the home; ultimately, though, what is most importantly expected of the housewife is that she always acts as a lady, the supportive and loyal "Mrs. John Smith", as her behavior is heavily reflective of him and his overall reputation. Therefore, pertinent to a housewife's instinct, then, must be constant vigilance in a strive for utter image perfection, obviously since she's ever-dependent on her husband for survival. The subservient part to their "conventional" family style which, Biblically-based, places him at the head of household and her his caretaker, she has therefore no independence or authority whatsoever, not even in the home technically, much less in the career world. This very family unit, that which lessens women to subhuman status, is scenic of "Genesis", book one of the Bible, wherein the roles of the genders are immediately established as such: explaining women as the first to "sin" but second to be created, it consecutively contends that they fit the role of men's "helpers"...Yes, man and housewife fulfill the Biblical system of family like "God" supposedly intentioned. (Genesis 2-3).

In fairness, it is certainly plausible that the true aspect of housewifery that is romanticized is more so the idyllic (so said, anyway) concept of the 'stay-at-home mother', per say. Specifically, this theory of motherhood is then viewed somehow "superior", unseemly enough, to the mother who is burdened with balancing both a career and motherhood simultaneously; the problem now being the historical institution of housewifery has proved inevitably all-forfeiting, an apparently unwanted culture ultimatum since decrease in practice has reached a defunct level for the present generation. Yes, the problem is the perhaps unexpected latter factor of generational division: America now faces a clash between conservatives who are ever-promoting housewifery and liberals, particularly women, who are vehemently demoting it. Shocking for many, a phenomenal realization of our society as being guilty of arguable mischaracterization in its historic representation of housewifery as something universally golden nonetheless becomes brighter-apparent with every day! Yes, now the futile consequences of the institution are being vividly illuminated to the entire sphere of the country. Sadly, for many, many - tradition dies hard. Worse, every irrespective aspect of the housewifery tradition has undoubtedly each its own stigmatic impact on society.

However, the most nameable consequences of this modern-day form of servitude surround most urgently on two variables: first, how a housewife potentially would not survive if left unexpectedly forced to fend for herself, inadequately trained; second, how that same potential stay-at-home mother will be subconsciously viewed as inferior by her own family and friends sheerly for living a life that begins and ends right within the walls of her own home (meanwhile Father is seen as the talented supporter of his family)! The boys of these families especially will learn to associate women ONLY with their mothers, likely to never be totally comfortable with women as their career equals, much less superiors (if the situation merits, of course), for religious traditions have left them ignorantly unprepared for the reality of such change. It is not a flaw in the child, but a flaw in his upbringing, whose mother can dryly be described as "a brainwashed victim-of-gender-default who concedes her own personal prospects, aspirations and dreams of future for Biblical correctness." Now, on the contrary, a child who sees his or her parents as independently equal - two unique, special people each in themselves - is much less likely to become prejudice. Hence, it is these "secular parents", furthermore, that will be honored as the innovative generation that pushed aside the prejudices.


Such is just pure common sense.


What is stated above can very easily be received wrong, dismissed as words offensive and bent on hate, rather than with actual consideration to their overall theme of urgency: these bouldering obsolete gender stigmas MUST COME TO AN END!!! It is inarguable that most Americans have close ties with these women, each of whom I hereby voice apology for, each of whom I defend as the victims of socially gilded, sexist generations that slowed human progress by degrading fifty-one percent of its comprising body — women!!!! And as such, its decline foresaw a more balanced, speedy mode of progression thereafter, as women in bigger numbers embraced independence thanks to innovative resources illuminated to them by the voice of Feminist Movement (which, emerging in its second-wave in the 1960s', marked the beginning of the move away from disproportional gender-exclusion in the workforce). Thus, the modern world may distract in its apparent equality and fail to exemplify since women today have individualistic liberties, but housewives in turn suffer the endangerment of the highly risky, fifty-five percent divorce rate in the United States as of yet, that which is only sub-inclusive of the secondary, shocking sixty percent of marriages which involve adultery (most divorces are filed under, "irreconcilable differences"). Clearly, while matrimony obviously does needs an evaluative reformation as a separate issue entirely, how do these alarming facts relate with housewifery? Given, obviously a housewife today is dangerously likely to be a product of divorce, just like the next, correct? However, the scenario is much more detrimental for the housewife: her career disappears, as does her life. Both parties will suffer their own separate distresses and dilemmas, but the man, with or without a wife, is still securely the, "head of household", for his respectable career is as untouchable as ever. His welfare is fine, and a replacement will be easy. However, this woman obediently fulfilled what was expected of her, most likely married young, incidentally never sought secondary education. She didn't enjoy equality; becoming "Biblically correct" in a backwards path of sexism that led to demise.

Imagine:

Salt harshly intensifies her wounds for she is likely to still be given custody over the couple's children (if they have any, which in this scenario is very probable), as even today many modern courts do not acknowledge men as equally competent parents, worsening matters for the woman. These are the facts outside of the romanticized, typical delusion that is conditioned into our society; hidden consequences affecting everyone. Clearly, a strong woman must hold herself in equal merits as her husband in every which way, ranging from economic to domestic affairs in order to secure her own welfare, for she is ultimately her own responsibility. Legalistically, a housewife is in no way equal to her husband, and the reality of divorce, if ignored, would be faced with detrimental consequences, whereas most modern women's personals financial independence as to secure themselves with. It may contradict religious orthodox and "sacred" tradition by allowing women equality, but it is a practical philosophy of survival that, if nothing else, all strong marriages must be wary of as a possible worst-case scenario. Today, the majority of American parents have both the responsibilities of work and home to uphold, and our society did not deteriorate because of the shift of working mother, rather it just inputted, as do the rest, reinvention the typical American family. And as such, if it is honorable for a woman to remain at home with the children, is it not then, logically speaking, twice as honorable for both spouses to hold a steady career and raise their families? Is the idea of Mothers and Fathers as equal partners in the duties of parenthood really that unspeakable?

Troublesomely, Conservatives tend to retort their disapproval in the form of another equally feeble argument: stressing that when women tend to the household exclusively it is in the best interest of the family, and it is this belief that is socially upheld to a still polarized degree of unfairness. No adequate parent should ever feel any less than the next because of his or her gender, or because of any other preconceived notions for that matter; for it is of no bearing no matter how much emphasis society places a greater important on motherhood. The American Psychiatric Association, for example, has concluded following years of study that same-sex couples raise children in equal esteem as heterosexual couples ("Lesbian & Gay Parents & Their Children: Summary Of Research Findings", 2014), proving it’s the quality of the overall parenting, not the gender identifying, that makes the real difference. Equally notable is this preconception every time a single father is disadvantaged over mothers in custody battles based solely on gender bias. (Though many progressive states have made these sorts of discrimination illegal, thankfully.) Consequently, single fathers and gay parents are on the list of the many "exceptions", so to speak, that are needlessly unappreciated, often disapproved of rampantly by Conservative Christians especially as well, because their devoutness lay with God's orders which they politically influence against culture blindingly. The current generation must treat housewifery as historical; a failed, theoretical attempt to preserve healthy families. The lifestyle must be regarded with sensitivity, but firmly acknowledged as impractical for the advancement of our society. This is crucial because each person's particular upbringing has importantly lasting effects and the fact that remains stipulated truthfully is, acknowledged or not, simply that a child must be entitled to proper parenting.

In a full and compassing conclusion, it is sound fact that American society has long-placed stigmas upon each gender that have proved substantially damaging. For example, suggesting it be socially abnormal for a man to aspire to be just as loving and nourishing as any Mother (and vice-versa) has had the opposite-intended effect of becoming a malignant, socially-accepted excuse for lackluster fathers to crutch upon. No one parent is any less equal than the next. The social consequences of housewifery leave every American citizen victimized by sexism, even if many overlook. Perhaps someday women will be able to take equal pay for granted: sexism will be happily buried, it's prevalence and destruction a shameful history. Then, a neighboring grave: racism, bigotry, anti-Semitism, homophobia, siblings of unquestioned prejudice obliterated – perhaps someday. But nonetheless, action must be taken now, because currently it is infringes on our liberties wholesomely. Conclusively, no attack is being placed on the women of previous American generations, in which housewifery was central. It is a mere evaluation, derived from a common universal sympathy (ideally), as on the surface of housewifery it does appear that women choose the lifestyle, though truly it was their survival in an unfair world. This sympathy is long overdue for American's social faults like this, suffered and overlooked, were much too prolonging of, seemingly, the current generation's dream, which is modestly illuminating its colorful fulfillment: An America where any person prepared to be a good parent has a chance, where society no longer accepts only traditional, conventional family units but instead welcomes the embrace of diversity; and then, most of all, it is an America in which the aspirations of every man and woman are viewed as equally measurable. It is an all-deciding societal 'letting go of', a manner in which to honor the victims of prejudice in our past, women and the rest, because there is no stronger way than by holding satisfaction that we as a society remember not to repeat our ancestors' pain.

**

Email: atheistsconcernedforamerica@yahoo.com