School trains girls to be good wives

Horrors!

These ignorant "foreigners" don't know enough to take on American values.

But, It is nice that thoughtful groups such as "nomarriage.com" have enough backwards thinking Mexicans to use as examples of the practices of inferior, less-advanced cultures.

they must do it with passion????????? I wonder if the girls were taking notes. I can picture them going home and reading that thinking "I must do it with passion"

This program is a great idea. It should be part of the home economics courses here in the US. But it goes both ways. Men should also be taught how to be good husbands.

Anyway, it's just a course, nobody says they have to follow it later in life. But at least they will be taught.

I need to find out how much it costs and send my wife there.

Funny how the teacher is talking about how women should always be at home and not work... wonder where her husband is tonight?

the fault is not with 'good', but with 'wife'.

the concept of 'wife' culturally, if not overtly includes all the sexist 'history' of human abuse of half its makeup.

i would rather ban 'marriage' and all that the tradition denotes, than mumble uselessly about the 'symptoms'!

Bull-hicky to both of you!



This is an inherently sexist comment. What is the implication here? Husbands are always unfaithful? or only husbands who have good wives.



You of course can chose to say away from the institution of marriage, but many of us find it quite fulfilling.

The implication that marriage is abuse is ridiculous.

Marriage is an agreement between two people with the blessing of, and in concert with their community and society. My marriage is beneficial to me and to my wife.

think about it eB, does the 'enjoyment' that you derive from your relationship come from the social sanction?
No it is from the partnership you have developed, through concerted effort, together, and has "nothing" to do with "wife"ness!

Of course the best and most important part of my marriage is our personal relationship (the way you stated it sounds a bit clinical, but I guess I agree).

I am also part of a community, a society and a culture. This is important. We can not deny that this has a huge impact on our ideas and values.

First, society bestows legal rights on married couples. You better believe that this is important to us.

Second, there is a cultural understanding of what it means to me married. When I introduce my spouse as my wife.. there is an instant understanding of what that means. My employer respects the importance of this relationship. My friends do as well.

Third, the symbolism of marriage from society is also important. Before I was married, I did not understand the symbolism of the wedding ring. Now this little piece of jewelry is a very important symbol of my love and commitment.

So, to answer your question. Marriage has always been a social institution as well as a personal commitment. We are all part of our society and we gain a lot from our culture and our community.

Both personal commitment and the support and acceptance of society... I wouldn't want it any other way.

I didn't think that comment was about infidelity. I thought soserene was implying that the teacher's husband was holding down the home front while she taught the class. Am I right?

Did you even bother to click the link before you shoot off your mouth?

"Now all women want to go out to work, but working an eight-hour day when one is a wife or a mother is just not possible," Topete, a vivacious and impeccably groomed 60-year-old, said after one of her evening classes.

"It means neglecting one's husband. He could start looking elsewhere for affection and that could mean divorce," she warned.

Actually, I was just cracking a joke.... ya'll take stuff too seriously sometimes... where's gus? lol

from your your additional comments i realize that you (as a couple) are indeed fortunate, and rare, in your interpretatation of the symbols of marriage, and i respect that.

But: do the 'legal rights' really create the partnership (or just a social bonus)?
if you for some reason could not be 'wed', would you live apart because of the 'opinions of your neighbours?
when you introduce your wife, and "some" people take this to mean someone over whom you have 'dominion', are you not offended?
Does your employer not prefer that you have 'obligations' and are less likely to tell him/her to bugger off if morality is a question?
If things got rough, and selling your wedding rings would mean eating, would you allow each other to starve?

Silly comment you say, and i agree; but the point is you two make the attachment, and everything else is 'icing on the wedding cake'!
[congrats by the way]

I am a Family & Consumer science teacher in a middle school. I am also a counselor at the school. All of the students take my class. Some of the things I cover in the class are
Budgeting- which includes opening checking/savings account. How to maintain a checkbook, credit, credit cards, loans, different types of savings accounts, how to find the best account for you etc
Child Care- parenting skills and child development
Housing & Interiors- cad design program
Consumer issues- what rights a consumer has and how to resolve problems also advertising and how it affects them
Nutrition & Food prep.
They see me 7 weeks in the 7th and 8th grade - in the 6th grade I teach conflict resolution- as part of the guidance program.

I saved some of the books from the 50's and 60's. You can only imagine some of the things that are written in them. example- NEVER let your husband see you with curlers in your hair, how to choose a flattering skirt

My husband makes dinner every night. I hate doing it and frankly, he is a better cook than I am. We share parenting duties- but really I am responsible for most of that- and I want it that way because, frankly I am better at that. We fight constantly about cleaning etc.

my criticism here is that 'living' courses should be taken by all in school;
including a general understanding of plumbing, and electrical repairs.
But they should not be tied to false 'responsibilities' within a marriage, or streamed in groups to specific sexes.

students should be taught in school to be as competant as possible in all areas, and then as successful human beings they can decide wisely on their relationships, without foolish undertones of 'filling the gaps' in their personal profiles!

BoGoWo,

Marriage has always been very much a part of culture and society. Our culture and our community inform how we meet, what our responsibilities are in our relationship, what our rights are and what makes a good spouse.

The personal relationship is very special and very important. But, marriage is more than that.

The fact that marriage is a ritual that binds us with our history, the values of our culture and the beliefs of those around us make it a deeper bond.

Let's say that I happened to be born in a small hunting community. Marriage is this society may mean that my responsibilities include providing food, shelter and protection to my family. My wife's responsibilities may include making our home, cooking and looking after the kids.

In this type of society, it is a great advantage to have these roles for man and woman very well defined. The biological realities of child-bearing make this especially important.

But are these roles wrong? To me it is clear they are not. A "good" marriage in this type of culture means loving and caring and respect (and yes I mean 'respect'). A man who asked his wife to hunt, or a woman who didn't look after the kids would be looked down upon as not holding their responsibility.

Of course our culture today is much different. It is different because our needs, our history and our values are different.

Today we have more freedom to choose the values and the type of commitment we will accept when we enter into marriage.

However, most of us (and I might argue that all of us) enter marriage with the support and the acceptance of a community with a distict culture. Our marriages will have the same values as those of our culture.

The "legal rights" are important. Not only are they important legally -- more than that they represent a national recognition of what marriage means. I am American and this is part of my culture.

My wife and I also enter the marriage with values and ideas that shape our marriage. They provide a bond, and an understandting that turn our marriage into more than a relationship.

Our marriage is something sacrad in a very real way, it is a link to our cultures and our pasts. This is why for many of us it is important for marriage to have a religious significance. But even for me (as someone who is not religious) it is important that marriage has a cultural "spiritual" significance that transcends daily life.

The idea that both the husband and the wife should be "equal" -- meaning they should not have culturally defined roles -- is a very new phenominon. This is a part of American culture for only the past 100 years.

You of course are free to follow this idea as a value of your culture.

But you should not judge the cultures or marriages of others. Phrases like "dominion" and "sexist history of human abuse" are unhelpful since they only reflect your own values.

It is impossible to judge someones elses culture without understanding these issues from their point of view.

eB; i have what i feel is a healthy respect for your wisdom in life, drawn from various meaningful posts over a broad range of subjects.
Having said that, i would respectfully suggest that you reassess your last post, in the light of today's changing (for the better) society, as the embedded sexist content should be addressed.

If in the 'hunter/gatherer' society that you dredged up from the past, if the female partner is most skilled at hunting, and the male partner is best able to care for the children and do 'domestic' things, then they should take those roles; or what is much more likely a suitable arrangement to share them.
If their neighbours see fit to criticize such choices, it is the neighbour who should be censured, and told to mind their own business, not the couple held up to ridicule!

The last thing i would want to do is to cast any aspersions on your choices, or those of your family; i always assume comments here at a2k are intended as generic, and refer to 'opinions' of the author.

I also find acceptance of the status quo in society a much easier route to being accepted by that society, and paying 'lip service to outdated traditions serves to avoid 'rocking the boat'. However, i refuse to ignore faults that i see within the fabric of that society in order to maintain a sham docility, allowing the extreme cases requiring redress to go unnoticed.

BoGoWo,

Thank you for your kind words.

The issue I am trying to raise is one I find is very interesting. How do we reconcile our values, and the values of our own culture, with the often very different values of others.

You may disagree with them, but many well-meaning people from other cultures accept, and even appreciate, different well-defined roles for men and women in a marriage. I am very uncomfortable criticizing other cultures.

Using the terms "inherent sexism", "outdated traditions" and "sham docility" to is very strong-- especially when you are referring to the practices of cultures that people belong to and value today.

Cultures do change. Whether these changes are for the better is, of course, a matter of judgement (which is quite difficult when you are in the middle of the culture in question), but cultures do change.

I feel strongly that cultures must change from the inside. If you want to be a voice for change in your own culture - be all means do it. You are part of the culture. You understand it. You have an investment in it. You also are mindful of the basic values and needs of the culture that require sensitivity.

It is not useful to comment on, or try to change, other cultures. You don't understand the reasons for their practices. You don't understand the values. You have no right to judge and no foundation on which to base your own judgement.

The hunter/gatherer example I "dredged" (did you mean this word to sound so condescending) up is interesting because the needs of this society are so different than ours.

In a small non-industrial society, child-bearing is very important. If bearing children was not a top priority in a community the community would not last long. In this context having different roles for males and females makes a lot of sense.

First, the women are simply more important than the men for having children. If the woman are killed, the community is in real trouble. The men are simply not as crucial. This is why the having the men do the dangerous tasks makes a lot of sense.

The other fact of life is that women are especially vulnerable during pregnancy.

A culture develops to meet the needs of the society. Modern American values simply would not work in this environment.

But my point is this. People live in societies with values and rules. These cultural customs all make sense in the context of the society or they wouldn't survive. You have every right to work to change the society you are part of. I don't think it is right to assume that our culture is superior, or that we should think that our values will work in the lives of others.

eB; as i read through your 'reasoned' comments, and flinch as some of my wording gets repeated, it becomes apparent that the divide between us is of no consequence, and further 'debate?' is to no avail.
Surely we agree that supporting the right of all to choose their own 'direction' and pursue it, so long as it does not do disservice to others, is fully acceptable.

As previously stated, i respect your choices, as i feel they are honestly chosen, and in no way feel any need to 'enlighten' them.

I think we both agree that what is of most importance is getting people to think about what they do, rather than simply following the tails of those who have gone before, mindless of different options and paths that can be taken.