Why I stopped being a feminist

[Gage]

No correlation because laws back then did not allow women rights and allowed blacks to be slaves. There is no law, nothing holding a woman back from doing anything today. And no there is no Inequality in the workplace, women are paid the same for the same work, look it up.

Yes, I see all that, but it is the same for blacks also. They have every right to do whatever they want now, yet many still feel resentment towards whites for the poor treatment of their ancestors, and for some, every time they feel slighted or treated unkindly by a white person, they assume they are being discriminated against, and it reminds them of being used, taken advantage of, and discriminated against for so long in the past. Same thing that women are feeling. I'm not saying it is justified. I've been on the receiving end of white hatred and compare it to what was going on with the Laminates. And women also need to not assume males want to dominate them. But if men would at least acknowledge the injustices of the past (and the realities of the differences now) rather than complaining about women's "victim-hood," they would go a lot further with reconciling and building a better relationships with the women in their lives.

What correlation I don't accept is when the gay population compares their plight to blacks and women. With them it is a behavior issue and not race or gender discrimination.

"it reminds them of being used, taken advantage of, and discriminated against for so long in the past."


LOL, Sarah I literally have no words to this idiotic statement. All I can do is shake my head.

I don't understand. You don't acknowledge that blacks were used, taken advantage of and discriminated in the past? You don't acknowledge that many women were also treated this way and were not allowed to work outside of the home?

In the past! Have you looked around? There are no more Negro auctions. What does the treatment of someone 200 years ago have to do with today? As much as you want to blame 200 years ago, its just plain ignorant to do so.

[David13]

I totally agree. I personally have no resentment towards men. But how do you help men who are resentful of women. That's what I'm seeing on this thread. What do you say to them except to point out that the things they don't like about women are the same things women historically have not liked about them.

And I don't have any resentment toward women. I don't know if that was directed at me or not, but if it was, it's way way off the mark.

But I'm going to say that Meili's post above shows a very neutral point of view from her perspective. But that's not what I've seen in your posts.

Even the textbook you quote shows a decided slant.

"Feminism" didn't invent normal human relations between men and women. They existed for many generations. "Feminism" didn't invent equal treatment of women. And even your textbook quote does recognize that there were exceptions. How many exceptions? Is it possible there were more exceptions to the rule than adherence to the rule?

I wrote textbooks 30 years ago, and I know who wrote textbooks then and now, and some of the writers are quite slanted by their own personal experiences. Young people should not look at those textbooks as gospel, but should, from an objective point of view make their own understanding of human relations.

My point, and I think the point of this whole thread was that a whole lot of women get caught up in a trendy feminism that takes things way way too far. Where they become the abusers and scoffers that their "movement" is supposed to object to. And they think they are "modern" or "liberated" in so doing.

Worse still is there are vast legions from what I hear in this very church, of those following these trends.

But there's something else that's very important to recognize in Meili's post that these "feminists" don't recognize. That there are different roles for men and women.

Were your grandfathers abusive and slave owner like toward your grandmothers?

dc

[David13]

It would be nice to hear someone actually tell angry men and husbands to forgive their wives' behavior, but again and again on this forum we have this immediate frenzy of blame on the woman and her faults.

I disagree. I think it's best to help yourself before you set out to help others. Then you are in a good position to do so.
dc

[Sarah]

It would be nice to hear someone actually tell angry men and husbands to forgive their wives' behavior, but again and again on this forum we have this immediate frenzy of blame on the woman and her faults.

What? All I hear from you is blame the white man! Blame the white man for today's black mans problems. Blame the white man for today's woman's problems.

Well you are misunderstanding my intent with all these posts about the past. What I see is male frustration with women, and attributing all their frustration to some kind of undefined feminism. I gave my opinion of how feminism got started in the first place - that it stemmed from past treatment of women - and that is why I've been tying it back to the past with slavery and the rise of women's rights. I don't blame women's or African American's problems today on the white man. I'm only pointing out the hypocrisy of complaining about women's assertion of power when that was man's role over women traditionally.

[Sarah]

It would be nice to hear someone actually tell angry men and husbands to forgive their wives' behavior, but again and again on this forum we have this immediate frenzy of blame on the woman and her faults.

I disagree. I think it's best to help yourself before you set out to help others. Then you are in a good position to do so.
dc

True. Maybe I feel a little tempted to give advice because my husband and I have been through a lot and have come through with a great marriage.

[Sarah]

I totally agree. I personally have no resentment towards men. But how do you help men who are resentful of women. That's what I'm seeing on this thread. What do you say to them except to point out that the things they don't like about women are the same things women historically have not liked about them.

And I don't have any resentment toward women. I don't know if that was directed at me or not, but if it was, it's way way off the mark.

But I'm going to say that Meili's post above shows a very neutral point of view from her perspective. But that's not what I've seen in your posts.

Even the textbook you quote shows a decided slant.

"Feminism" didn't invent normal human relations between men and women. They existed for many generations. "Feminism" didn't invent equal treatment of women. And even your textbook quote does recognize that there were exceptions. How many exceptions? Is it possible there were more exceptions to the rule than adherence to the rule?

I wrote textbooks 30 years ago, and I know who wrote textbooks then and now, and some of the writers are quite slanted by their own personal experiences. Young people should not look at those textbooks as gospel, but should, from an objective point of view make their own understanding of human relations.

My point, and I think the point of this whole thread was that a whole lot of women get caught up in a trendy feminism that takes things way way too far. Where they become the abusers and scoffers that their "movement" is supposed to object to. And they think they are "modern" or "liberated" in so doing.

Worse still is there are vast legions from what I hear in this very church, of those following these trends.

But there's something else that's very important to recognize in Meili's post that these "feminists" don't recognize. That there are different roles for men and women.

Were your grandfathers abusive and slave owner like toward your grandmothers?

dc

I wasn't referring to you but the general sense I got from some of the posts. I just felt there was a lot of generalizing and labeling going on that was unwarranted.

And yes, I don't agree with those women in the Church for example who are pushing for the priesthood or things like that. I respect our differences and see the big picture, and agree with Meili's post.

I did have some sorry examples of husbands in both my and my husband's ancestry, but I also have some wonderful examples too. In one example I'm thinking of you see a husband feeling entitled to being waited upon by the wife and not helping when he was at home - she doing all the cooking cleaning and childcare to the extreme while he was doing his own thing. I saw the wife of this man live a life of resentment, and became a very weak-minded, low confidence women. So, when I see men complaining about the demands or expectations their wives have, I like to point out that it is a good idea to examine what expectations they are projecting upon the wife, because that might be one of the causes of her expectations for the man. Selfishness breeds selfishness.

[Sarah]

I totally agree. I personally have no resentment towards men. But how do you help men who are resentful of women. That's what I'm seeing on this thread. What do you say to them except to point out that the things they don't like about women are the same things women historically have not liked about them.

And I don't have any resentment toward women. I don't know if that was directed at me or not, but if it was, it's way way off the mark.

But I'm going to say that Meili's post above shows a very neutral point of view from her perspective. But that's not what I've seen in your posts.

Even the textbook you quote shows a decided slant.

"Feminism" didn't invent normal human relations between men and women. They existed for many generations. "Feminism" didn't invent equal treatment of women. And even your textbook quote does recognize that there were exceptions. How many exceptions? Is it possible there were more exceptions to the rule than adherence to the rule?

I wrote textbooks 30 years ago, and I know who wrote textbooks then and now, and some of the writers are quite slanted by their own personal experiences. Young people should not look at those textbooks as gospel, but should, from an objective point of view make their own understanding of human relations.

My point, and I think the point of this whole thread was that a whole lot of women get caught up in a trendy feminism that takes things way way too far. Where they become the abusers and scoffers that their "movement" is supposed to object to. And they think they are "modern" or "liberated" in so doing.

Worse still is there are vast legions from what I hear in this very church, of those following these trends.

But there's something else that's very important to recognize in Meili's post that these "feminists" don't recognize. That there are different roles for men and women.

Were your grandfathers abusive and slave owner like toward your grandmothers?

dc

I wasn't referring to you but the general sense I got from some of the posts. I just felt there was a lot of generalizing and labeling going on that was unwarranted.

And yes, I don't agree with those women in the Church for example who are pushing for the priesthood or things like that. I respect our differences and see the big picture, and agree with Meili's post.

I did have some sorry examples of husbands in both my and my husband's ancestry, but I also have some wonderful examples too. In one example I'm thinking of you see a husband feeling entitled to being waited upon by the wife and not helping when he was at home - she doing all the cooking cleaning and childcare to the extreme while he was doing his own thing. I saw the wife of this man live a life of resentment, and became a very weak-minded, low confidence women. So, when I see men complaining about the demands or expectations their wives have, I like to point out that it is a good idea to examine what expectations they are projecting upon the wife, because that might be one of the causes of her expectations for the man. Selfishness breeds selfishness.

What advice would I give this woman in my heritage who I just referred to, who was met with resistance with her requests for help, and then developed resentment? I would give the same advice to her that Meili offered, and that is to forgive your husband and not expect any help from him. This child-bearing role and that of nurturing their bodies and souls is yours if you choose, and every time your husband feels your expectation or your disappointment in his lack of help, he will want to distance himself from you more. All you can do is request and respect your husband's agency to choose what he will do.

And so for the husbands who request things of their wives and are met with resistance, my advice is the same, forgive your wife and forgo the resentment and disappointment or you will be met with more resistance.

If you are a wife and feel your husband is making demands of you, you can respectfully decline to meet those demands, and if you are a husband with a demanding wife, you too can respectfully withhold and lovingly explain why too. It is okay not to give when specific gifts have not been agreed upon or are being given or received for the wrong reasons.

To feminists and abolitionists of all ages, I would give similar advice. If you want someone to give you something, including freedom, you can't be demanding or you will make the one with the gift to give want to give it to you even less. The more women act entitled to freedom or particular gifts, the less men will want to give it to them and visa versa. We all simply need to appreciate the things we have and make requests without a feeling of entitlement, for we all really deserve nothing.

[Serragon]

Anytime we generalize a population, whether it's men or women, blacks or whites, Mormons or Christians, etc., we are using the dehumanizing methods she discovered in herself as she made this documentary. You cannot ever find peace and love using those tools. The only way we will find love and peace in our lives is through looking at every single person as an individual who is deserving and in need of love, respect, concern, and so forth.

It is absolutely true that anytime we abstract away from the individual we are using a dehumanizing method. This type of abstraction is how terrible things can be done to people without biting the conscience of the perpetrator. it is very dangerous and very powerful.

By the same token, it is still necessary to abstract away from the individual to be able to understand and evaluate the merits of various cultures. You can't understand culture by looking at the individual. it is only in the aggregate that this happens.

People are not divorced from their culture and it is not wrong to make initial judgments about people based upon these abstracted attributes. For example, I may feel comfortable hitchhiking in a certain country as that may be a standard way of travel in that culture. This does not mean that all people in that country are safe or will pick me up, but my initial judgement is sound. ultimately, I need to judge each person attempting to give me a ride individually, however.

My point here is to agree with the idea that we should ultimately judge people individually on their own merits while not throwing out the powerful, though dehumanizing, abstractions that can tell us much about the shared values and culture among a population of people.

[Yahtzee]

If I may, I'd like to defend Sarah. What I understood from her posts is simply historical context. She's not defending feminism, she's reminding us why it exists in the first place. Much like the video showed, you have to listen to your "enemy" to understand where they are coming from. You have to listen without expecting too be offended.
It's not inaccurate that historically a woman had no right to own property. I hope no one can defend that. Women were left destitute because of those kinds of laws. And yes, that does affect women today, like it or not. The past always affects the future.
So I also agree it's important to understand why feminism came about and the good and bad consequences of it. That doesn't mean any of us who do so agree with the principles of modern feminism (ie-selfishness and man hating), but doing so allows me to have more compassion for those who adhere to it and the ability to attempt rational discussion with them.

[David13]

If I may, I'd like to defend Sarah. What I understood from her posts is simply historical context. She's not defending feminism, she's reminding us why it exists in the first place. Much like the video showed, you have to listen to your "enemy" to understand where they are coming from. You have to listen without expecting too be offended.
It's not inaccurate that historically a woman had no right to own property. I hope no one can defend that. Women were left destitute because of those kinds of laws. And yes, that does affect women today, like it or not. The past always affects the future.
So I also agree it's important to understand why feminism came about and the good and bad consequences of it. That doesn't mean any of us who do so agree with the principles of modern feminism (ie-selfishness and man hating), but doing so allows me to have more compassion for those who adhere to it and the ability to attempt rational discussion with them.

The distinction that I think needs to be made, is that the "feminists" of today, in most part, have gone beyond what would be a healthy action against the past, and have devolved into their own hate society.
An inappropriate reaction.
dc

[EmmaLee]

This is where our modern-day version of "feminism" started - https://www.amazon.com/Origin-Private-P ... 2e5e270617

"The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State (1884), was a provocative and profoundly influential critique of the Victorian nuclear family. Engels argued that the traditional monogamous household was in fact a recent construct, closely bound up with capitalist societies. Under this patriarchal system, women were servants and, effectively, prostitutes. Only Communism would herald the dawn of communal living and a new sexual freedom and, in turn, the role of the state would become superfluous."

This is a good summary - https://medium.com/@robertstacymccain/c ... 1e960c7858

[Rose Garden]

1) Active priesthood holder, struggled to get through college with a teaching degree and works at a middle school, or

2) Non-member wealthy CEO who makes his money in the entertainment industry?

99% of today's Mormon females choose number 2. I didnt say 99% end up with rich Alpha males but that is what they would choose if it was an option. Some dont have the choice because they may be fat or not very attractive, and about 1% actually believe the gospel and try to live it.

Please stop comparing the struggles and hatred blacks have for whites to feminism and marriage and women. Their is zero correlation.

What to you mean there is no correlation? Women in that day were "owned" in much the same way a slave was, and had very few rights.

Just like there were good and bad slave owners there were good and bad husbands and fathers, all which create resentment. I'm just trying to get some of you to acknowledge that fact. What I sense from men is that their resentment stems from the fact that they are stuck with a wife that doesn't treat them well, and I agree that wives could do a better job of lowering their expectations and being kinder.

Did you read that blog post Fiannan posted? Obviously the feeling young wives and mothers continue to face today, which is just a part of the sacrifice required to be a mother, is feeling like a slave to their children and oftentimes their husband too. It would be nice to define what the real complaint is against women, because that is what this thread feels like - one big women bashing party, and just throwing out labels. I don't believe that women are more prone to victim-hood attitudes by nature. That is a pride thing - getting defensive for example. I know lots of men that have that problem.

I acknowledge that there were good and bad husbands and fathers back when women were legally owned by men and even now. But my acknowledgement isn't going to soothe your soul. There will still be people in this world who don't acknowledge it and you will continue to feel frustration toward those people until you resolve the resentment issues within yourself.

The roles of women and men are different. No woman is going to be rewarded with a good, loving husband until she manages to be good and loving herself. A married woman will not see any change in her husband if she is unwilling to change her attitude as well, even if he does change. The only thing any woman who feels put upon can do is repent of the resentment within her own heart.

Women who feel resentment toward men will look around and see no escape from the hurtful situations they find themselves in with the men in their lives. That is the nature of resentment. It is personally condemning, confining, hopeless, helpless, and leaves those who embrace it in an utterly dark and gloomy place. It takes a lot of effort to throw off resentment but it must be done before a person will see any outward changes in their lives. No woman who is in an abusive situation will escape it permanently by resenting the men in her life. She will eventually find herself back in a worse situation than she was in before until she finally learns her lessons and repents of her own sins.

I totally agree. I personally have no resentment towards men. But how do you help men who are resentful of women. That's what I'm seeing on this thread. What do you say to them except to point out that the things they don't like about women are the same things women historically have not liked about them.

There is nothing you can do to help except be as kind and understanding as possible. People need to be ready in order to see their own resentment. It's a difficult thing to see within yourself and having someone point it out to you before you are ready to hear it generally only makes things worse.

I find it helpful to focus on ways in which my own life can be enriched by the knowledge the Lord has given me. That takes the pressure off so I don't feel the need to try and change other people's perspectives. They will come around when they are ready. In the meantime, I have plenty to keep me busy.

[Fiannan]

[Gage]

If I may, I'd like to defend Sarah. What I understood from her posts is simply historical context. She's not defending feminism, she's reminding us why it exists in the first place. Much like the video showed, you have to listen to your "enemy" to understand where they are coming from. You have to listen without expecting too be offended.
It's not inaccurate that historically a woman had no right to own property. I hope no one can defend that. Women were left destitute because of those kinds of laws. And yes, that does affect women today, like it or not. The past always affects the future.
So I also agree it's important to understand why feminism came about and the good and bad consequences of it. That doesn't mean any of us who do so agree with the principles of modern feminism (ie-selfishness and man hating), but doing so allows me to have more compassion for those who adhere to it and the ability to attempt rational discussion with them.

Sorry not buying it, bologna. A woman not being able to vote 100 years ago effects my daughter today NONE. Do you cry in bed at night screaming "why couldnt women vote 100 years ago?" Do you wake up depressed and mentally drained because of it? Did your employer fire you today, did he say "we are sorry to inform you but women couldnt vote 100 years ago, you're fired?" What a load of crap. Affects women today my ars. BS. But i will agree with you on how "not many women agree with Feminism" because they dont, its mostly lesbians and fat women pushing it, because to go back to my original point, women want an Alpha rich man to take care of them, a woman cannot breathe without a man. Because women obsess over 2 things- men and money.

[Sirocco]

I became more and more aware of how feminism and the left viewed me and I couldn't be a part of it anymore.


to quote an infamous gay conservative; "Feminism is Cancer"

[Gage]

Feminism has nothing to do with equality, if it did women would be pushing for change in divorce laws. These women pick and choose what they cry for with equality. They shout and show proof of their empowerment and "girl power" by sleeping around and having one night stands "like men do". They show their "independence" by divorcing yet they are with a new man the next day, many times the same night, most times before the divorce is ever mentioned. Women are nothing but fragile, attention starved, mental head cases that cry 'girl power" around the same women that they hate and cant stand to be around.

[Fiannan]

If I may, I'd like to defend Sarah. What I understood from her posts is simply historical context. She's not defending feminism, she's reminding us why it exists in the first place. Much like the video showed, you have to listen to your "enemy" to understand where they are coming from. You have to listen without expecting too be offended.
It's not inaccurate that historically a woman had no right to own property. I hope no one can defend that. Women were left destitute because of those kinds of laws. And yes, that does affect women today, like it or not. The past always affects the future.
So I also agree it's important to understand why feminism came about and the good and bad consequences of it. That doesn't mean any of us who do so agree with the principles of modern feminism (ie-selfishness and man hating), but doing so allows me to have more compassion for those who adhere to it and the ability to attempt rational discussion with them.

Sorry not buying it, bologna. A woman not being able to vote 100 years ago effects my daughter today NONE. Do you cry in bed at night screaming "why couldnt women vote 100 years ago?" Do you wake up depressed and mentally drained because of it? Did your employer fire you today, did he say "we are sorry to inform you but women couldnt vote 100 years ago, you're fired?" What a load of crap. Affects women today my ars. BS. But i will agree with you on how "not many women agree with Feminism" because they dont, its mostly lesbians and fat women pushing it, because to go back to my original point, women want an Alpha rich man to take care of them, a woman cannot breathe without a man. Because women obsess over 2 things- men and money.

[h_p]

Women are nothing but fragile, attention starved, mental head cases that cry 'girl power" around the same women that they hate and cant stand to be around.

You must attract some really lousy women to have that kind of opinion.

[Gage]

Women are nothing but fragile, attention starved, mental head cases that cry 'girl power" around the same women that they hate and cant stand to be around.

You must attract some really lousy women to have that kind of opinion.

No just from my experience with women- from dating, friendships, supervising for 20 years. Ask any woman, and if they are being honest, they will tell you that they hate other women "because they know how they are" is the most popular response I have gotten. Some will flat out just say "I dont like them, they are whores, sluts, backstabbers, etc". Women are fragile, mentally, any little thing can set them off or bother them, they are fragile and cant handle much. They wine about the most petty of things, because they bother them, because they are fragile and cant "take much". I have refereed some of the pettiest fights between women, you would have thought these grown women were 5. Women despise other women. Women have to have attention. The number 1 argument with any woman I have dated has been "you dont give me enough attention" or "when are you going to find time for me" this mind you after they have run all of my male friends off, many times my brothers too because we are close and hang out a lot. Women have to have attention from males- friends, strangers, etc. as long as its a male- sometimes just a glance is fine- as long as the male "noticed them". Females compete with other females for the attention. "hot women" of course get the most attention and they make sure their other "hot friends" are not around when they are "out for Alpha males." Have you ever wondered why when you go out on the town there is always a fine girl and her fat friend, and sometimes you or your buddy have to take the "fat girl", well the fine girl always brings the fat one to make herself look ever more prettier of course but mainly she knows that she will have the pick of any Alpha man because Alpha men dont date fat girls, they dont have to. So the hot girl doesnt have to worry about any competition and is guaranteed the Alpha man. Women are very competitive with one another and get very jealous. The number one priority and goal and ambition in life for a female is to date as many Alpha males as she can and of course marry one. because they want a rich Alpha man to take care of them, that is their life goal. Its the ambition for fat girls too but eventually they realize they cant obtain an Alpha because Alpha's dont date fat girls, they dont have to.

[h_p]

Women are nothing but fragile, attention starved, mental head cases that cry 'girl power" around the same women that they hate and cant stand to be around.

You must attract some really lousy women to have that kind of opinion.

No just from my experience with women- from dating, friendships, supervising for 20 years.

I rest my case. :))

[David13]

Women are nothing but fragile, attention starved, mental head cases that cry 'girl power" around the same women that they hate and cant stand to be around.

You must attract some really lousy women to have that kind of opinion.

No just from my experience with women- from dating, friendships, supervising for 20 years.

I rest my case. :))

Yeah, but it's still not much of a case, as he acurately describes a whole lot of women there.
dc

[Yahtzee]

If I may, I'd like to defend Sarah. What I understood from her posts is simply historical context. She's not defending feminism, she's reminding us why it exists in the first place. Much like the video showed, you have to listen to your "enemy" to understand where they are coming from. You have to listen without expecting too be offended.
It's not inaccurate that historically a woman had no right to own property. I hope no one can defend that. Women were left destitute because of those kinds of laws. And yes, that does affect women today, like it or not. The past always affects the future.
So I also agree it's important to understand why feminism came about and the good and bad consequences of it. That doesn't mean any of us who do so agree with the principles of modern feminism (ie-selfishness and man hating), but doing so allows me to have more compassion for those who adhere to it and the ability to attempt rational discussion with them.

Sorry not buying it, bologna. A woman not being able to vote 100 years ago effects my daughter today NONE. Do you cry in bed at night screaming "why couldnt women vote 100 years ago?" Do you wake up depressed and mentally drained because of it? Did your employer fire you today, did he say "we are sorry to inform you but women couldnt vote 100 years ago, you're fired?" What a load of crap. Affects women today my ars. BS. But i will agree with you on how "not many women agree with Feminism" because they dont, its mostly lesbians and fat women pushing it, because to go back to my original point, women want an Alpha rich man to take care of them, a woman cannot breathe without a man. Because women obsess over 2 things- men and money.

Gage,
Most of us are trying to have a civil conversation, but when you start calling my opinions and experiences "BS" it makes that extremely difficult. I don't mind people disagreeing with me, but the tone in your writing comes across as angry and vindictive.
It is quite evident you've had some negative relationships with women and for that you have my pity. I hope some day you meet some who can help you overcome your offense to our gender.

[h_p]

Yeah, but it's still not much of a case, as he acurately describes a whole lot of women there.

Most of the women I know are pretty amazing. I guess we just move in different circles.

[Gage]

I only said BS because I thought it sounded "nicer" than saying anything else. I wasnt trying to sound mean or uncivil. Sometimes I say things not realizing the context or the situation, I apologize. There really was no ill intent.


I am not bitter at any females sometimes I just ramble about them mostly in good humor. One thing I have learned is you wont find many men saying anything negative about females, anything negative always comes from other females. I did not expect to get much agreement with my ramble from people on a Mormon discussion board. The funny thing is many females will agree with what i said, well to themselves. The only thing you will get from other males is how wonderful women are. Its hard for many men to say anything negative. Many men simply are 'mesmerized" by women, is usually why most men get walked all over and then left. Most Mormon men are brought up taught that Mormon girls are pure at heart, mind, body and soul and do no wrong. Its simply not true. The scriptures tell us that the Lord will be 'fed up" with females and their behavior in the last days. So I suspect what I say may have a little truth to it.

[Sarah]

It's a little tricky for women especially in the Church to know what to focus their desires on and what is appropriate to want and hope for in their future. My mom for example married a convert in her late 20's and had a career by then. It was a difficult choice for her to leave her job that first pregnancy and she received a lot of pressure from co-workers to stay. This was in the late 70's when it was the popular choice to leave the stay-at-home role and work. So consequently she raised me with the counsel to stay home and be a wife and mother. That was the most important job I could have and to not let the work-place be a temptation. The only problem with this counsel now-a-days is that many women don't get married or at least not for awhile and so education and job goals are also a need for a woman to consider.

I went into education because my mom said she thought that would be a good career choice in that if you had to work you could have hours that would match your kids' hours. But I hated teaching in the classroom, as a young adult. Now, I think after having 5 children, I would handle and enjoy it a lot more. But at that time in my life all I wanted to do was get married and stay home and have children. So I did look for a man who I felt was responsible, hard-working, and who I thought had a future. That's a natural desire for any woman who wants to have children, to have husband who will be able to support her in that endeavor. While I wanted to have kids right away my husband wanted to put it off for a few years while he finished school. And so I worked low-level jobs that were not fun waiting for my husband to be okay with starting a family. While I was having babies I did envy my husband's freedom at times and some of his expectations and attitudes just made it worse. Eventually I came to see how things really were in our relationship and we were able to fix things.

Now that my youngest is out of diapers I'm starting to feel more freedom again, and if I did ever have to work I would do something else besides Elem. Ed., but really the greatest goal both men and women should have is to bring children into the world and work together to do that. We see cranky, confused, angry women in the world because they have left one frustrating role for one that looked appealing but was empty. Men too have been lured by worldly things to forgo or delay the sacrifices necessary to bring about a large family. Instead of feeling sorry for ourselves because the opposite sex is not behaving the way we think they should, we need to focus on building up the Kingdom of God and everything else will fall into place. That has been my experience. We can't force our spouse to always have that same goal but we do the best we can in our sphere of influence. The Lord does see your sacrifices and he recognizes how others treat you, and if you are able to bear it well and love despite other's bad behavior, he does reward you with blessings.