Career Women - So far from what God intended

[RedPonyDriver]

Well I am too ,but I am not bored as I study things I had no time to do when I worked ,I have a chance to visite people far away ,again impossible before .I am studying the bible and have become an expert on a subject which links in with the bible and expands it .

I live in a small apartment...no kids, live in the city. I'm very involved with church but it's not the same as 8, 10, 12 hours a day of mind-bending thinking, continuing education, all that stuff...I've never been very domestic, I'm not one for a bunch of stuff like that. There's no car shows in January/February and July-September. So...I'm bored out of my mind!

 

[Hetta]

So a career woman has a career because she loves money, but a man has a career because he ... what? Loves work? LOL.

 

[Hetta]

Career Women - So far from what God intended
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Womens Page/career_women.htm

by David J. Stewart

1st Timothy 6:10, “For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many

I mean no unkindness to anyone, sincerely. I know there are many hardworking women who have applied themselves to become successful in a career.​

However, the Bible says what it says. God hasn't changed. God's Word hasn't changed. The world has certainly changed in many ways over the past 2,000 years, but God is still the same (Malachi 3:6). God desires for women to be mothers, and care for the home.

1st Timothy 5:14 tells us what God's will is concerning younger women... “I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully. For some are already turned aside after Satan.” Here we notice 4-things:

1. Get married
2. Bear children
3. Guide the house
4. Stay out of trouble

That's it. That's what God wants for young women. 1st Timothy 5:15 tells us that women who fail to obey these divine priorities have turned aside after Satan.

It is tragic that being a homemaker has become so despised nowadays, which is frowned down upon by career-minded women. Feminism has engineered women in America. A stay-at-home-mom is often viewed by career women as being a slave, a victim and having no life. The problem is that American society has deteriorated to the point where motherhood is no longer considered an honor and privilege. Many feminists view children as a nuisance, a hindrance to personal success; thus, many blinded women have chosen not to get married, not to bear children and not to guide the house. It is evil.

*Staff edit* <article snip> Please continue reading the rest of the content in the above article link.

There are plenty of children being born in America, plenty of women who are willing and happy so stay home, and that's fine for them. That scripture isn't law. It isn't a commandment. And for we older women, I don't find it binding. I married, bore children, and have never given anyone the occasion to speak reproachfully. I don't know about "guiding" the house. It kind of guides itself. We also have an iRobot Roomba. SO much fun. It runs around cleaning the house when we're gone.

I don't frown at SAHM's, and as a feminist I have viewed children as a beautiful gift. So you're wrong.

And not everyone should be married and not everyone should have kids.

Again, it's not a command.

 

[RedPonyDriver]

So a career woman has a career because she loves money, but a man has a career because he ... what? Loves work? LOL.

Well, isn't that the ONLY reason us wimmens would want a career?

Mustn't let the young wimmens think about getting an education cuz then they may be smarter than the menz and maybe even (oh horror of horrors) be their boss. Keep 'em dumb so they'll know their place, pregnant, barefoot, in the kitchen and dependent on the menz.

It screams of insecurity to me. If a man can't handle an intelligent, educated, independent woman then maybe he needs to look in the mirror for the problem.

 

[keith99]

Well, isn't that the ONLY reason us wimmens would want a career?

Mustn't let the young wimmens think about getting an education cuz then they may be smarter than the menz and maybe even (oh horror of horrors) be their boss. Keep 'em dumb so they'll know their place, pregnant, barefoot, in the kitchen and dependent on the menz.

It screams of insecurity to me. If a man can't handle an intelligent, educated, independent woman then maybe he needs to look in the mirror for the problem.

Of course money isn't the only reason, emasculating (some of) the men is a damn good reason. I want to and I'm about as far from their target as you can get.

 

[RedPonyDriver]

Of course money isn't the only reason, emasculating (some of) the men is a darn good reason. I want to and I'm about as far from their target as you can get.

Let's face it...there are men AND women in the workplace (and in life) that you'd have no problem throwing under a bus.

I personally went to work because I had spent many years getting an education, did NOT feel like moving back home and well...it takes cash to do things like that. I didn't marry until about 10 years after i finished school and well...sitting on my backside and waiting for "prince charming" was not my thing...for some it may be...but...it's not a blanket prescription for everyone that has 2 X chromosomes.

 

[Hetta]

Let's face it...there are men AND women in the workplace (and in life) that you'd have no problem throwing under a bus.

I personally went to work because I had spent many years getting an education, did NOT feel like moving back home and well...it takes cash to do things like that. I didn't marry until about 10 years after i finished school and well...sitting on my backside and waiting for "prince charming" was not my thing...for some it may be...but...it's not a blanket prescription for everyone that has 2 X chromosomes.

Well that's part of it, isn't it. Once they started edumacating the wimmin, it was downhill all the way.

 

[Cearbhall]

So a career woman has a career because she loves money, but a man has a career because he ... what? Loves work? LOL.

Yeah, that's the other thing I'm not getting. And there seems to be another part of this school of thought: the idea that mothers should stay home with their children or they'll regret it, without any mention of the fathers running the same risk. For example, in this post:

Myself I went to work and regret doing so as it damaged me and my child . It is something you cannot get back again your babies Young years ,and the terrible stress of dropping them off at nursery and then you are tired and buy quick ready meals . [...]
I should at least have waited until they were much older but coming from poverty of money not culture I thought I needed a nicer place to live and so on but while you can have many years to live you cannot get back those lost years .

I don't see a difference between mothers and fathers in this argument, but it's not feasible to have zero working parents in a society, so what is anyone supposed to do with this advice?

 

[RedPonyDriver]

Oh...men are supposed to work to "support their families". Women are supposed to stay home, be fully dependent on a man, and "raise a family". What happens if dad splits, or dies? Who's going to support the family financially now? Mom has no skills to get a decent paying job so the alternative is welfare (which is universally hated by the conservative crew). What if dad gets sick and can't work anymore, plunging the family into poverty and again, in desperate need of the safety nets that the conservatives want to get rid of.

The patriarchal ideas DO not work in this world. AT ALL. Unless there's a guaranteed minimum income, universal health care and a strong safety net patriarchy will NEVER take hold. EVER. And I thank God for that.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

So a career woman has a career because she loves money, but a man has a career because he ... what? Loves work? LOL.

Don't try to reason out dogma. people who build up an ideal based around a preset image of the world are lost once reality surpasses that image.

 

[Locutus]

You see this for me is too much . Next to a neglected child ,is the one suffocated by a mother who is too sensual .Neither one is good ,and they are both about the mother . The thought of remembering being breast fed by my mother would give me nightmares as I can remember fairly clearly after 18 months . I think a lot of problems stem from
mothers who use their children for their own needs . I would want to run a mile from
a smotherer .

Interesting! I don't mean to be unkind, but it's possible you had some unpleasant experiences while breastfeeding, or your mother felt anxious or resentful perhaps. The World Health Organisation recommends 2 years minimum for optimal physical AND psychological wellbeing. Some people where I live BF for 3 years, and multiple kids at once. Toddler and baby.

And also interesting that you equate the sort of parenting which is the norm around here, with 'smothering'. You are aware that it's the same sort of parenting which happens in many cultures other than our own? Baby wearing, extended breastfeeding, no external child-care, etc? It's all very well established and standard stuff. And I can assure you in the strongest terms possible, after raising three kids that way - it's not even slightly 'about the mother'. The mother comes dead last in the equation. If I'd wanted it to be about me, I'd have bottle fed, used baby sitters, and kept my kids in a room down the hall so I could get some sleep

 

[Locutus]

Yeah, that's the other thing I'm not getting. And there seems to be another part of this school of thought: the idea that mothers should stay home with their children or they'll regret it, without any mention of the fathers running the same risk. For example, in this post:

I don't see a difference between mothers and fathers in this argument, but it's not feasible to have zero working parents in a society, so what is anyone supposed to do with this advice?

There is no difference, once kids are weaned. I ended up staying at home beyond that because we wanted to grow food and downshift. Either of us could have done it, but my job at the time was the most demanding in terms of hours away from home etc, so was the best one to go. I was more than happy to give it up, too

 

[The Cadet]

The patriarchal ideas DO not work in this world. AT ALL. Unless there's a guaranteed minimum income, universal health care and a strong safety net patriarchy will NEVER take hold. EVER. And I thank God for that.

 

[keith99]

Oh...men are supposed to work to "support their families". Women are supposed to stay home, be fully dependent on a man, and "raise a family". What happens if dad splits, or dies? Who's going to support the family financially now? Mom has no skills to get a decent paying job so the alternative is welfare (which is universally hated by the conservative crew). What if dad gets sick and can't work anymore, plunging the family into poverty and again, in desperate need of the safety nets that the conservatives want to get rid of.

The patriarchal ideas DO not work in this world. AT ALL. Unless there's a guaranteed minimum income, universal health care and a strong safety net patriarchy will NEVER take hold. EVER. And I thank God for that.

And with the woman usually being the younger partner in a marriage and women living longer than men it is very likely the man will die first leaving any woman who has been 'sheltered' totally up the creek.

It seems some don't care about that however.

 

[Cimorene]

I thought the 'Proverbs 31' lady had a job outside the home? Probably less ladies worked outside of the home during that time bc just maintaining a house would have taken way more work w/out all the modern conveniences we have. Way more women had huge families then too & kids didn't go off to school every day. So then it would have made more sense to stay home. Now. Not so much for most. Idk what my mom would do with all her time now that we're older.

 

[Oafman]

At any given time, there are always a handful of threads on this forum which are not a good advert for religion, and this is one.

Thankfully, the majority of religious people - in the developed world at least - do not support this kind of misogyny.

 

[Cearbhall]

There is no difference, once kids are weaned.

I guess this doesn't apply to me anyway since I want to adopt. But assuming for a moment that I did give birth and I had to work, that's around one year, depending on the baby...I personally think I would just pump after my maternity leave ended. If pumping didn't work, I would switch to formula.

I ended up staying at home beyond that because we wanted to grow food and downshift. Either of us could have done it, but my job at the time was the most demanding in terms of hours away from home etc, so was the best one to go. I was more than happy to give it up, too

I'm glad that worked out for you.

 

[Hetta]

I personally think I would just pump after my maternity leave ended. If pumping didn't work, I would switch to formula.

I personally have had two colleagues who pumped after they returned to work, and they did so in a manner that nobody ever saw them BUT they also didn't have to go and sit in the restroom to do it. Of course, the ideal scenario would be a more liberal extension of maternity and paternity leave so that people don't have to race back to work after 6 weeks with their newborn.

 

[Hetta]

I thought the 'Proverbs 31' lady had a job outside the home? Probably less ladies worked outside of the home during that time bc just maintaining a house would have taken way more work w/out all the modern conveniences we have. Way more women had huge families then too & kids didn't go off to school every day. So then it would have made more sense to stay home. Now. Not so much for most. Idk what my mom would do with all her time now that we're older.

Yes she does. Proverbs 31:10-31 quite clearly shows the woman buying fields, planting, and that has employees. While her husband sits around talking, btw.

 

[RedPonyDriver]

I personally have had two colleagues who pumped after they returned to work, and they did so in a manner that nobody ever saw them BUT they also didn't have to go and sit in the restroom to do it. Of course, the ideal scenario would be a more liberal extension of maternity and paternity leave so that people don't have to race back to work after 6 weeks with their newborn.

I personally never had to deal with the whole maternity leave thing...BUT...a woman having to head back to work 6-12 weeks after giving birth is barbaric. I do not understand why the US doesn't have a comprehensive paid parental leave policy. Probably because the corporations whine that it will cost them a little of their billions in profits and the congresscritters that are bought and paid for by these corporations are "urged" not to support this.