Three years ago, our family made the decision for me to leave the workplace to stay home. The beginning was very tough. I struggled with boredom, lack of direction and lack of purpose. I truly believed my children to be more important than all I gave up, and struggled with a sense of guilt when I realized that I really wanted to return to work. I began feeling like I was only serving everyone around me and had no real sense of my own worth. I told myself it was just a matter of time and it would take care of itself as I got used to the transition.
I viewed this decision as an act of obedience to God to benefit our family. I set my children as a priority above myself and reminded myself that they were worth the sacrifice when I struggled. That is not such a bad line of thinking, but it wasn’t working for me, and it really is not scriptural.
God created Adam in the garden for work. He tended the garden, took dominion of the animals and subdued his environment. Eve was created from his side to be a help-meet for him. In other words, Eve was also created for useful labor. The dominion mandate is given before the command to be fruitful and multiply. Since God created woman for this purpose, woman can only feel truly complete fulfilling this purpose.
I think too often those women who make the decision to leave the workplace fill their time with entertainment and child-rearing duties. Soaps, luncheons, study groups, play dates and a plethora of activities fill each day. Unfortunately, these are only pastimes and do just that: pass the time. They do no minister to the soul, giving purpose to each day. Take a look at the Proverbs 31 woman. Her day was not focused on entertainment, nor her children, nor yet fellowship with other believers. Her day was filled with useful labor, and through her godly example, her entire family grew spiritually.
I’ve never considered the price of a vineyard, nor sold my fine weaving down at the market, but I have found purpose in useful work. I have taught myself to crochet, knit, sew and can. I have made things for the children and for presents. I have tried to find ways to save money while maintaining a nutritious diet for our family. We have virtually eliminated convenience foods from the menu and I have been making our own fresh bread and recently began making pasta as well. I have taken time to work on my writing since it has always been a dream of mine to some day author a book someone would actually want to purchase. As of yet, none of this has actually resulted in an increase in our family’s income, although some of it has definitely saved us some money. I’m working on that part next.
I think the feminist movement has denied a good deal of what it is to be a woman by denying the innate desire to be home, raising children. But I also think the church has done the same by denying her desire to work. In reality, the desire to labor productively and to rear children are two halves to the same person. I think this plays out differently for each person, but I truly believe the key for battling some of the depression and anxiety that frequently accompanies the decision to stay home with children is found in recognizing God’s plan. We are created by Him, for Him and to Him. Our children are the heritage of the Lord, and we certainly have a great responsibility teaching and leading them, but when they become the focus of our day, we step outside what we were created for. It is not good for us and it really is not good for our children, either. Useful, constructive labor (not just hobbies) will help give purpose to each day. And when a woman is successful in ordering her days according to this God-given purpose, “Her children arise up and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praiseth her.” (Proverbs 31:28)
This is a great post Dana. I feel exactly the same way. My husband and I firmly believe that women are to be keepers at home, however that does not mean being unproductive.
I didn’t realize that you were such a recent SAHM. My husband and I went through a similar process in 2002. I was amazed at how little we missed my corporate salary. It was God’s timing too. My father was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s in 2003 and I assumed responsibility for overseeing his care. God has blessed me with opportunities to earn money from home that I never even dreamed existed before.
Good post!
Wonderful perspective! I truly enjoyed it.
I became a stay at home mom 20 years ago. Never looked back. I left the corporate world where I managed a huge staff for Auto Insurance IT at a large insurance company in Hartford.
I worked when my first was born,and I hated every minute of not being with him, but when my second came along I really felt I needed to leave and raise my own children instead of outsourcing my parental responsibilities.
We cut our income in half. We made due. I never regret one minute of this decision, and in the meantime have found many opportunities to make money while being able to be home for my children.
I learned a valuable lesson regarding the lie of “the feminist movement” and that is women can have everything.. but just not all at once. I have had a career, a family, an income, etc., and above all, family is more important to me than anything else. Your kids are only young once and if you cannot enjoy them (even the days that are tough and miserable) when they are young you really miss a lot. Listen to the words of the cat’s In The Cradle – by Harry Chapin.
Thanks, everyone!
Yep, just three years. I’ve never missed work…at least not to the point of considering going back. Leaving my children every day was far worse. Even though it was with their father!
I actually started crying in the middle of a training session!
We were lucky in that our income actually increased when I quit. : )
But I won’t get into all the issues surrounding that or why it didn’t happen sooner.
Very insightful, Dana.
I often feel like, for me, being at home is a continuous search for that balance between being a mother and being productive.
I agree that the key to staving off the unhappiness that so many stay-at-home moms feel comes with maintaining some sort of other purpose.
Great post.
I think some of the struggle produced by the feminist movement is not whether women should be at home or at work but rather what gives women value. Some answer raising children and keeping house. Others say earning an income, etc. I believe this struggle exists in part because we tend to view ourselves according to externals, i.e. what we produce.
God says we are made in His likeness. His love gives us our value. He will give each individual purpose. He will guide our steps. He gives us freedom to be who He created us to be. And yes, He has work for us to do.
Very true, Renae! Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
Part of the difficulty, in my mind, stems from the physical and cultural separation of “home” and “children” from “business” and “work”. In other countries, not as “advanced” as ours, those lines are blurred; children of all ages hang out(and help out)in family businesses and market stalls, or in rural areas, farm work, handcrafting, and raising children flow seamlessly together. There are a lot more adults around too — no socially isolated SAHMS craving a little adult conversation.
I occupy my time with “home arts” like gardening; I would love to add to our income by using my professional training (Spanish interpreter) — but most potential clients probably wouldn’t appreciate three children tagging along with me! Haven’t found a way around that yet!
Well said, Rebecca. And you’ve spoken to something I’m preparing to explore a bit further. : )
Families have purpose, too, perhaps beyond each individual within the family.
Dana,
This is a great post. I am a new SAHM too. And… the transition was very difficult for me. The house got messier instead of cleaner. When my husband and I both worked and Marissa was in school, no one was here to mess it up. When I worked, I often stopped for meals on the way home or we ate out. I had no idea how to do it all.
So, I created a business plan, standard operating procedures and a daily planner. I acted/organized just like I did when I was at work. I am still learning, but at least I don’t feel like I am drowning anymore.
I’m looking forward to what you have to say about the family purpose. Come on, already! I know you’ve got some really good thoughts brewing there.
I also think a lot about that issue, and long for the day when the cultural paradigm shifts.
You raise some excellent points, but I’m curious and more than a little bit troubled by the one-liner about “the church” denying a woman’s desire to work. Naturally, our children must come first, but aren’t most religious schools staffed primarily by women? Aren’t the church staff mostly women? Aren’t religious publications full of articles and research by women, and don’t those women go out and speak with the blessing of the church, even in churches?
I began my freelance writing career while home with my daughter, and I never encountered any criticism for or questioning of that within the church. I’ve heard Father Thomas Loya, an expert in the Theology of the Body and scriptural gender roles, speak about the importance of women bringing their unique gifts and strengths into the corporate and political worlds.
Could you share a little more about your perceptions of the church denying that desire in women?
Thanks you everyone. Julie, I think that is the hardest…trying to keep up with the house with small children! And wondering where the time went…
Jennifer, it may take awhile, but I will get there.
Rockstories, thank you for raising this. You can as easily argue that I have mischaracterized the feminist movement, for there is a broad base of women who call themselves feminists who fight for the right of women to be respected in their chosen fields, whether that be in the workplace or at home. I am speaking only to that brand of feminism which implies that to stay home is to betray the cause of women.
On the same token, certainly not every church believes a woman’s place is in the home. Some churches are as liberal as the world. As a conservative, Christian homeschooler, I tend to run in more conservative circles. So the themes which come up most frequently in studies are biblical womanhood and women as keepers of the home. I’m not going to go with what I consider on the fringe of Christianity, but here is an excerpt from a Baptist church, a denomination I consider mainstream (this is coming off a quick internet search, however, but echoes what I hear):
Of 26 descriptors for femininity, number 26 is:
26. Keeper at Home She is not a busybody. She loves to stay home and stays home. Home is where her heart is. She does not work out in the world unless she has no husband to care for her or he can’t. If she is business-minded, she works out of her home.
There are entire ministries devoted to it…and this is no criticism of these ministries. I think they are doing wonderful work. But it is part of what I am referring to.
A simple internet search for “keepers of the home” or “biblical womanhood” will bring up a plethora of sites about staying home.
I am not in opposition to any of them so please don’t take that as a criticism.
Many of them do have sections about working out of the home, and I don’t think they exactly promote a woman sitting around watching soap operas all day long. But I personally get the sense that you stay home because Titus 2:5 says to and since scripture says to, you will be happy. If you have the desire to work, do it from home. (And this could just be me, but I frequently get the sense that that if is supposed to somehow be that part of the world that I haven’t beaten out of myself, although that is just my take, and not necessarily coming from anywhere). That is an oversimplification, but it is a general sense I get from some in these ministries. (Boy do I feel like I’m walking a tightrope right now!)
The part that I feel is missing is the fact that we, like our husbands, are created for meaningful labor. At one time, a keeper of the home had an extraordinary amount of work to do. Early Christian women did not have microwaves and vacuums and WalMart. So when we are done keeping the home, we have a whole lot more time on our hands for idleness. We fill that time, but with what?
There are all sorts of options to fill that time that are not destructive, but I at least had the basic (false) notion that acting in obedience to God was somehow going to bring pleasure in and of itself. It was better than the anxiety of leaving my kids, but I wouldn’t characterize the transition as a pleasant one.
I was engaged in meaningful, kingdom-building work prior to the decision to stay home. As stressful as my job was, it had purpose.
The rest of this has more to do with what Rebecca brought up. We are looking at these passages in the 21st century. The line between home and work was much less distinct even 100 years ago. Their was a division of labor, but often the wife worked pretty much alongside the husband on the family farm or in the family trade. We have been left in a sort of state of transition. Working very often means an either or situation, and that has not always been the case.
Does that make any sense?
and we have more stuff…so we spend a lot of time cleaning and straightening, but not actually producing anything.
Had to put that in there, because I couldn’t say that my house is exactly always clean at the end of the day, despite all the labor.
enjoyed that post. didn’t realize you had only been home fro 3 years. have you been homeschooling longer than that?
i think every woman misses “being productive” in the family once she comes home. i certainly did. my husband continued to tell me how productive i was just by taking care of the kids and the home but i still wanted more. like you, i’ve really wanted to do some writing, but things i have pursued have not panned out yet.
enjoyed that post.
It has been almost exactly three years, in fact. I think I would have turned in my notice three years and three weeks ago. I’ve been homeschooling bout the same amount of time.
you totally rock
http://kuqiwawa.blogspot.com
I’d like to add my two bits to your response to Rockstories, if I may…but I’m really just referring back to my first comment. I think in Biblical times, life was much more like what I described in my comment. Women engaged in a mixture of productive work in “cottage industry” type work, in homemaking and child-rearing, and in family businesses. But although some “opportunities” were entirely closed to them, their lives were much more integrated, making “economically productive” labor and homekeeping more easily combined than they are in our cubicled culture. We see the woman of Prov. 31 fame buying vineyards and making and selling fabric, for example. With that in mind, I think what Paul and the other New Testament writers were addressing was not that women were strictly limited to housework and baby tending, because women in those days weren’t agonizing over some supposed choice between femininity and career or home and work. Rather, Paul and the apostles are teaching that they were not to be spending their time gadding about and gossiping just because their husbands provided for them. This was a concern with the widows, too, for example, who were provided for by the church — Paul’s directive guarded against women placed in a situation of economic dependence consequently becoming idle and engage in worthless — or even immoral — pastimes to the ruin of their souls (soap operas and bridge parties, anyone?). I agree fully with Dana’s exegesis of the Genesis passage — and many other observers of human nature have drawn the same conclusion. All people — even children — need to engage in meaningful, productive work; without it we become less human. Not to mention that our children need to see that example!
Rebecca, you just saved me a whole post. Maybe I’ll just cut and paste your comment later, when I get to it!
We have been placed in a curious place of “either/or” that never existed before the industrial revolution. I think a lot of women who are “keepers of the home” today would have been chastised for idleness even 150 years ago. Myself included.
Dana and Rebecca–thanks for the detailed responses. For the most part, I agree with what you’ve both said. A couple of points I’d like to add.
First, Dana, I’m Catholic, and not cafeteria-style. Definitely not what could be classified as a “liberal” church. But being Catholic, “the church” to me means the Catholic church, where the doctrines of the faith are very clearly spelled out for us, so my construction of your reference to “the church” wasn’t entirely accurate.
Regarding the blurring of the lines, I have mixed feelings. While you both raise a valid point that we’re living in a different world today than we were in biblical times, that seems too easy an answer to me for a couple of reasons. First, of course, God knew what was coming–it’s unlikely that he would have provided guidance that would become obsolete.
The other, and more complicated, is that the change to which you refer seems to me to be one that’s been very destructive to society, not because of anything to do with gender roles, but because work so bleeds over into our lives that our families often don’t get our full attention–I suspect that we were living a lot closer to God’s plan when we weren’t taking cell phone calls at our children’s baseball games and frantically typing on our Blackberries “just for a minute” during dinner.
Finally, I don’t think it’s fair to suggest that work and soap operas are the only two options. There are always useful things we can do in our neighborhoods and communities and extended families and even within our homes that are useful and enriching.
All that said, I’m definitely with you on the basic concept–I’m an attorney, former business college instructor, and current full-time writer. I just think that there’s some oversimplification going on in the argument.
Tiffany
Rockstories, I don’t disagree with any of your points. And I wasn’t exactly making an argument against the church, per se, but certain movements in the church which I think go too far in the other direction.
I certainly do not think that entertainment is the only thing to fill time with, but I do think it happens too often. That isn’t the church’s fault, but is the age old problem of sin.
And I don’t believe God gave us advice that was obsolete, or that we have to return to a society like that which existed prior to the industrial revolution. But the split that occurred between work and home at that time has given rise to some challenges.
Of course there are enriching opportunities all around us. And those are the things that we need to seek out in order to find purpose. My basic point is only that focusing on spouse and children alone will not satisfy a woman because that is not her sole purpose on this earth.
Thanks for being part of the Carnival of SAHMs. For me, the feminist movement wasn’t about sending women out of the home and into jobs. It was about choice. Giving women who wanted to work but could not the choice to do so without feeling like they were not true women. I made the choice to stay home with my children, and is till consider myself a feminist.
I ought to take my comments over to my own blog, but I’ll have one more go.
I am Lutheran, Rockstories, (catholic and orthodox with miniscules), so I probably actually have more in common with what you believe than Dana. The CCC has some of the best practical and theologiacally grounded things to say about family life than anything anywhere.
As Dana mentions, she is addressing the conservative evangelical reaction to the feminist movement, which teaches that a woman’s role is pretty much strictly confined to the home (surf around and you’ll find plenty of evidence of this). I even have even a prominent Lutheran book written withing the last 40 years (which is otherwise quite good) on male/female roles, which suggests that a woman might have a garden (”outside the home”) and raise some vegetables without compromising the biblical mandate to be a “keeper at home”. I think it has not been as much of an issue within traditional RCism.
In the fifties, with the advent of some much time saving technology in the home, it became a mark of status for a man to keep a wife at home in relative leisure and idleness. I think this is what Betty Friedan encountered when she wrote The Feminine Mystique — women who were depressed and demoralized because they had little meaningful work to fill their time. Somewhere a couple of years ago I ran across someone’s response to Friedan: she said something like “I grew up during that time period, and I wondered where all these depressed, unfulfilled women were — my mother and her friends were housewives and were always happy, busy, and involved in the community.” This demonstrates the difference to be made by our own attitude and choices — I know SAHMS who can’t wait to get back to work because they are so bored (they can’t find anything interesting to do beyond the workplace?) and I know working moms who are great parents with happy husbands and well-adjusted kids… and the reverse of both.
Rebecca, feel free to extend as much as you want on my blog. They add nicely to the discussion. When I was reading your comment, I couldn’t help but think of “Mama’s little yellow pill” and the use of Valium.
Man oh man can I relate to this. I struggle with “just” keeping home and yearning for something outside the walls of my house. My mother keeps suggesting I just be happy raising my kids, as that’s how she was. She doesn’t seem to be able to relate to my struggle. I have a real entrepeneurial desire and I feel sometimes like it’s never the “right time,” I should just be content keeping house and educating my children. I love all that but why am I not to look for more?
This struggle has caused me many sleepless nights and hours of frustration. I feel guilty no matter what I’m doing, like I’m either denying myself or my family something. Maybe that’s really how it is–I cannot have it all.
Thank you for adding your thoughts, Anna-Marie. It is funny that you bring up contentment. I may post on it over the weekend, but I think this is interesting;
content (v.)
1418, from M.Fr. contenter, from content (adj.), c.1400, from L. contentus “contained, satisfied,” pp. of continere (see contain). Sense evolved through “contained,” “restrained,” to “satisfied,” as the contented person’s desires are bound by what he or she already has.
The original sense of the word is related to restraint and containment, not a sense of satisfaction. And the first entry from Webster’s 1828 says,
CONTENT, a. [L., to be held; to hold.] Literally, held, contained within limits; hence, quiet; not disturbed; having a mind at peace; easy; satisfied, so as not to repine, object, or oppose.
It seems to suggest to me that contentment isn’t something that just is, but something we must seek to maintain. No matter what I do, I’m likely not to find contentment by just doing it. I have to discipline myself to seek fulfillment within the barriers of what is offered me.
That isn’t to say that I cannot move forward from where I am, but what would be the point of dreaming of the moon when it isn’t a realistic goal? There are plenty of things which are realistic, and I have to seek satisfaction in those things, not wait for it to be delivered.