The Attack on Marriage and Traditional Families
Long Island Dad, wrote a great piece ragarding the so-called “attacks” on the traditional family and the concept of marriage. I am fully aware of the touchy topic, especially with the more modern type families of single parents, gay parents, or even something as simple as never getting married but living together as a partner. I understand the debates and the attacks from both sides.
But what about Stay at Home Dads? If marriage is the same and we have several children but the dad stays home is that considered traditional? No not really, as it is a new concept ever since the rise of women in the work place and filling important positions. The rise of Stay at Home Dads I believe is because there is a rise in equal opportunities for the other spouse…. the wife in this case.
But Long Island Dad, isn’t saying he looks down on non-traditional families, but the attacks on the traditional family is something that is driving him nuts. In fact, it is driving me nuts too. But what is really happening here? I mean there are single women having children without the presence of men, and as a premeditated decision. I am not speaking of all gay people but I had a conversation last summer with a gay woman who rolled her eyes and basically looked down on the fact I was raising a somewhat traditional family. As if it was some “old school” and outdated option. I wasn’t outright ridiculed but the next thing that came out of her mouth was “well, ain’t you just a good ol’ boy?”
Is this a way to justify their own actions as if maybe they are questioning whether or not what they are doing is right or wrong? I mean I don’t know. But why attack marriage and the traditional role when love is love? I mean heck, I didn’t say to myself that I wanted to get married to a woman and then have 3.6 kids because that is what families were like back in the day. I got married because I loved somebody. As a result of that love we had kids.
But Long Island Dad says it best:
People get married as a natural progression of their relationships. Not because they need to be recognized by some legal entity or validated by a religious faith. People get married to show a commitment to each other; some do it before God, and some before a judge. By doing it, they say, “I have chosen you. I love you. I am committed to us,” the union itself creates exclusivity.
But could it be that untraditional families have been ridiculed for so long and found unaccaptable in our society that it causes people to get angry at the norm… that being normal, or traditional, is not good?
What are your thoughts on the issue? I would like to hear what you have to say about the increase in attacks on traditional style families.
I think the “attacks on traditional families/marriage” are similar to the “war on Christmas”: largely invented as a rallying point by people who are afraid of inclusion and are afraid of change.
What I hope happens is a shift toward understanding that each family has individual needs and will fulfill them as necessary, whether that means either parent staying home with the children, another person providing care, or not having children at all, without pressure.
Nice post.
Patti, good comment. You make a good point regarding the War on Christmas.
I also decided to stay at home with the kids because my spouse was making a lot more money than I was and we agreed one parent should stay home and raise them.
And welcome to Inside Fatherhood!
First of all, thanks for the exposure Steve. Second, thanks for your insightful and thought provoking commentary on this issue. Especially the point regarding attacking the “norm” as a response to being shunned for so long. Maybe that’s what I’m/we’re doing now. Maybe we’re just shedding light on an issue that seems to be undermining the fabric of our society; that everyone should be entitled to there own choices without fear of ridicule or judgment. Maybe, I’m just that naive.
I think families are built by love and loyalty, not by any other structure.
Kate I think you are right and it doesn’t really go much beyind that.
Long Island Dad, I really thought you made some good points in your original article. And I don’t think you are naive but society seems to be.
so because we do something the traditional way, the way we feel comfortable, we’re ‘good ol’ boys(or girls)’ and, what?, not hip or cool to the latest trends? some people raise kids together and never get married, because they don’t feel the need to establish that legal or spiritual connection. some people do. it is completely a matter of personal preference and no one should be ridiculed for their choices either way. i think non-traditional followers who criticize traditional followers are exposing their bitterness or insecurity over being ridiculed themselves.
megachick, I agree. I am sure there are some exception but your last sentence seemed to pinpoint it for me. Being ridiculed themselves may have brought about rebellion and retaliation on the norm and society’s mores.
I found your blog through a link on Thrify Mommy’s site. We, too, are a traditional family where my husband stays at home with our daughter and I work most days outside of the home. I agree with you: families start with love, not a politial statement. The woman you talked to sounds as if she is talking out of anger, not love.
Anyway, I wrote a post about how we handle the SAHD thing. I’m the blogger, however, because I like computers more than my husband does. I will tell him to read your blog, though, because I think it would really help him. Thanks!
http://holeinthefence.wordpress.com/2006/12/08/sahd-and-wohm-our-family-business/
Sophie, nice blog you have there. I read down through that post and it sounds just like our situation here. Get your husband to stop by when he can.
As for the first part of your comment, she was definitely speaking out of anger.
Well, I certainly agree that it’s nasty, impolite, and politically wrong-headed to make fun of any person for being part of a so-called traditional nuclear family (a form that actually emerged with the Industrial Revolution and was never natural or traditional, but anyway…). But let’s be real: it’s still much tougher, in many, many ways, to be a member of a so-called traditional family (which is a category with many subcategories, some of which are disadvantaged, most of which are just different, some of which might be stronger) and it much more common to be “attacked” (which takes forms from name-calling to passing laws, for example against gay marriage) for being non-traditional. I think megachick is right to say, “i think non-traditional followers who criticize traditional followers are exposing their bitterness or insecurity over being ridiculed themselves.” Yes, I’d say that probably does happen. And look at how we’re talking about it in this blog, tossing around terms like “normal” to describe ourselves — defining ourselves as the baseline against which family should be measured. Think about it.
Jeremy that was a well thought out response. I understand your last assessment but traditional families are considered traditional because the “were” normal. Among those traditional families there weren’t a lot of variance when it came to dynamics. Same old song and dance.
Good comment and welcome to IF