Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Unflip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Unflip

1 2

Original poster

Study on marriages with children - but strong criticism of second wave feminism...

44 replies

Tinselperion · 11/12/2011 11:40

I was sent this study about the factors that help marriages stay strong when kids come along - a good summary of the study here. I thought it was mostly no brainer kind of stuff but it's always interesting when academic research confirms it after controlling for factors like socio-economic background, age, education, ethnicity etc.

The most interesting finding in my opinion is on p.38 about generosity. It states that the 1960s and 70s saw a rejection of what was at the time an expectation that all the generosity in a marriage should be proffered by women alone, and that second wave feminism advocated a more individual attitude within marriage as a reaction to these sexist expectations on women. However it goes on to say that this more individual attitude caused marriages to become more susceptible to divorce.

This study finds that in fact marriages are happier and more likely to stay together not if women throw off 1950s expectations of wifedom, but if men adopt the same expectations - so both spouses make a regular, overt effort to "serve" the other (the study gives the examples of a spirit of service, frequent displays of affection, a willingness to forgive the faults and failings of one?s spouse, shared housework, and little things like making a cup of coffee, giving a back rub...)

I'm in two minds about the "blaming" of second wave feminism here. On one hand I really worry it sort of blames the victims somehow and gives feminist bashers a stick to beat women with ("this study says feminism causes divorce, so women should go back to the kitchen sink"). I also instinctively don't like the fact that it seems to be saying that I as a woman should be behaving like a 1950s housewife...(maybe I am reading more into this than I should).

On the other hand it is saying that that to strengthen marriages, both spouses regardless of gender should adopt the behaviours that were previously expected only from women in traditional gendered marriage roles.

Anyway I'm in a muddle in my own head about it - like the fact that in the strongest marriages, equal expectations should made of both partners but really don't like the bashing of second wave feminism to get to that conclusion (and don't know enough to know whether this is legitimate bashing or not).

OP posts:

ThePoorMansBeckySharp · 13/12/2011 20:04

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet.

ElfenorRathbone · 12/12/2011 20:38

"Me too. It'd be like having a total stranger in the house. What is she thinking? (as an aside I'll bet that's part of the difficulties people have with nannies, she lives with you, she's intimately involved with your life and kids, but she can't be totally open with you - what is she really thinking?"

The awful thing is, where people are living in bad marriages/ cohabiting arrangements, that's actually the dynamic between those people. What's s/he really thinking? Is s/he actually plotting to kill me? Is s/he plotting to destroy my sanity? Is s/he shagging someone else? Is s/he lying the whole time?

MooncupGoddess · 12/12/2011 15:35

Drowz0r - it's lovely that you're so keen to participate in MN and the feminist section in particular. However, you may find it helps to lurk for a while first to get the hang of the acronyms, the style, the different sections etc, etc. There's a good Feminist 101 thread you could search for too.

LRDtheFeministDragon · 12/12/2011 15:27

PS - if you click on 'topics', you'll find a section on Legal and Money, and if you post there they will usually be able to give you some good advice.

LRDtheFeministDragon · 12/12/2011 15:24

It's ok, that's why there's a link at the top in blue marked 'acronyms'.

I suspect benefits are a separate issue - that's how I read all of this anyway. I don't mean any offense if you are on benefits, I'm well aware from my own students how hard it is to get job these days. I just think that probably what is meant by money is more than that.

Drowz0r · 12/12/2011 15:19

Is DP Dear Partner or something? I joined the forum like yesterday so I don't get all the acronyms, sorry folks.

Ohh money after education? Sorry, thought we meant while being educated and such. In all honesty a lot of the benefit system is a myth to me so I wouldn't know much about your legal entitlements.

But quite right, education does not promise cash. Education isn't always about jobs these days either. You can have a degree in just about anything - I suppose it's up to us to increase our chances of getting a job by picking subjects most profitable?

LRDtheFeministDragon · 12/12/2011 15:19

Well, don't feel too bad ... just ponder what DH and I owe and you'll feel much better ...

I am actually very interested to see how the picture of marriage/outcomes for children will change in response to the changes in HE. I should think we don't yet really know what effect the the target of 50% going to university has on it all, or what effect the large loans might have.

JuliaScurr · 12/12/2011 15:16

oh, s*d off, LRD, there's no need for that

LRDtheFeministDragon · 12/12/2011 15:15

I am far too young to remember!

JuliaScurr · 12/12/2011 15:02

yes, dp & I are so decrepid that we qualified for full grants to get our degrees. Remember those heady days? Due to my Tragic Cripplisation we now live in Grinding Poverty. Mind you, the free parking makes it all worthwhile

PenguinArmy · 12/12/2011 14:30

I assume there are a lot of people with education but not money atm and in a few years I'm sure people will use it as a stick to beat people with and a reason to not encourage poor people to go down the education front. Maybe a revival of women shouldn't study if they then become a SAHM.

SinicalSanta · 12/12/2011 14:13

Me too. It'd be like having a total stranger in the house. What is she thinking? (as an aside I'll bet that's part of the difficulties people have with nannies, she lives with you, she's intimately involved with your life and kids, but she can't be totally open with you - what is she really thinking?)

But we know that a good relationship requires a bit of self sacrifice, a bit of indulgence for ones failings and a bit of tongue biting. Of course it should go two ways, not just the wife giving it all.

LRDtheFeministDragon · 12/12/2011 14:10

Erm ... I could be wrong, but I suspect when Julia says she and her DP have shedloads of education, she means she's a degree or two past the stage where she's applying for grants from university ...

Drowz0r · 12/12/2011 14:04

Dragon: Oh, yeah, I wasn't saying we disagree on that... just adding stuff to the conversation. It's certainly not ideal.

JuliaScurr - you should be able to get grants from university. Or the county you're in or something. Student services can direct you to where, though you can't claim retrospectively.

I think any extreme can make people rebel, especially teens. Extreme communism will make a rebel out of anyone, similarly the rebellicious rich kid with their super capitalist parents is quite well known to happen... so it's not really about the view itself but the enforcement of it, I would gamble.

1950s wives? What models do you have? I'm kidding. Resist the urge to kill...

LRDtheFeministDragon · 12/12/2011 14:01

No, actually, I'd find it creepy. I think most normal people would. Maybe that is the issue - if you have education or money you feel more able to put yourself first?

SinicalSanta · 12/12/2011 13:55

Well, who wouldn't want a 1950's wife to serve one's every need?

1950's wives for all, I say!

JuliaScurr · 12/12/2011 13:51

The outcome of teenage dd is hideous rebellion of hair removal, obsessive clothes buying (b'day, Xmas money), interehst in X factor andn all manner of nonsense because of my 'lectures about feminism, communism ans such'. I can't describe the horror

LRDtheFeministDragon · 12/12/2011 12:36

But you're a feminist. I think someone needs to study the outcomes for feminists with children. I suspect they are good, because the benefits of feminism often apply to children too.

JuliaScurr · 12/12/2011 12:31

I'm interested in the education/poverty thing because I and dp have shedloads of education but sod all cash

LRDtheFeministDragon · 12/12/2011 12:17

I think we're miscommunicating somehow here.

I believe you there's a correlation between marriage and education in terms of performance in the children.

I just find this worrying and far from ideal.

Drowz0r · 12/12/2011 12:08

I do definitely remember there being a corrolation between marrage and education in terms of performance in the children. Children from a marrage generally perform better in school and such. I honestly don't have the figures with me, I'll try and dig them up... (I'm in work at the moment). At any rate, it basically said you are more likely to have a higher performing child if you are married, believe it or not...

Now that's not to say marrage is the solution. To me it says there is a downfall in support for lone or seperated parents... and in turn a pressure to remain married.

LRDtheFeministDragon · 12/12/2011 11:31

It's possible higher education shares some values with a good marriage.

But honestly, if these values are so important and so beneficial to children whose parents have them, isn't it awful they're not being taught earlier on?

If we did that, instead of saying 'marriage is a great structure for parenting .... wealth is great ... higher education is great' we could isolate whatever actually helps women, and stop pushing people into patterns that may suit children but don't always suit parents.

Drowz0r · 12/12/2011 02:01

Probably. In Wales (where I live) most students were about 4 days a week. I only had to turn up, and my fellow students, 3 days a week to lectures on our course. Though personally I turned up 5 days a week to do lab work and stuff... although not everyone did that.

Well the loan can be for for a variety of things. Most of us on computing courses needed to buy decent computers, so as a student that's pretty much a loan.

I suppose higher education shares some values with marriage? Like commitment, ability to understand someone of different opinion... I find a lot of people who have gone into work first and not education find it exceedingly difficult to appreciate someone else's point of view, or at the very least, accept someone else can have a different view - even if you think it's stupid. Though I expect this kind of education/marriage relationship is very broad and you can get these values from other places.

There is an odd balance with the "marriage worse for woman, divorce worse for men" in the same "You hit me so I hit you" kind of way. Really speaking it should be mutual for both and as least "damaging" as possible or working for a "no one hitting anyone"-if that's not pushing my analogy too far.

LRDtheFeministDragon · 12/12/2011 00:02

Btw, I think it makes perfect sense that if marriage has historically been bad for women and children (it has, and often still is), divorce is worse for men, doesn't it? Men (on average) get much of the benefit of marriage so lose out when they get divorced. The solution would be to work out more equal partnerships, I think, not to assume that women losing out during marriage and men losing out after divorces is somehow balancing each other out and therefore ok (which sometimes seems to be the assumption people work with I find!).

LRDtheFeministDragon · 11/12/2011 23:59

We have really different experiences of students, I think. I expect both happen in different places. Frankly 3-4 days at university and home for the weekend sounds like a waste of the loan to me.

But anyway, my reason for bringing it up is that I'd like to think that Higher Education isn't the silver bullet for preventing bad outcomes in marriage and for mums. It seems kind of absurd that it should be and a sign of how skewed our society is.

One thing that occurred to me - thinking about people I know who did/didn't go to university and the other differences than education between them - was to do with how you get to control your environment. I know women who've never lived alone and in the main, they are more likely to be doing huge amounts of housework for their parents than women who've had the experience of living in their own place with no-one to answer to than themselves. And IMO this housework stuff isn't a trivial, icing-on-the-cake issue, it's a huge issue that has to do with power balances.

I could be totally wrong though, just trying to resist the idea that it's really Higher Education itself that has this effect. Apart from anything else it is too easy, if we stop with that observation, to fall back on the old 'educated mothers are good, uneducated mothers are bad' stereotype which is IMO pretty poor.

Unflip

1 2