Fathers and sons

[Bells2]

Just wondered how others cope with partners who take risks with their small children that they find terrifying.. my husband is absolutely great with our 2 1/4 year old son and they often go off to the park and so on together. However, my idea of what is dangerous and his often differ sharply and I sometimes get very upset when I witness him doing something with our son which to my mind cold potentially lead to a nasty accident. I just don't think he is very good at anticipating possble outcomes of situations and a number of times, I have been reduced to tears over this.

My husband is very apologetic when he sees how upset I am and also, on a few occassions when he has realised the full potential implications of various activities but nonethless I find it difficult to know how to react. I am reluctant to turn into a constant nagging spoilsport but equally, I think I need to be able to relax and not constantly worry that our son isn't going to be put in mortal danger on a regular basis.

My son has a toy kitchen, 2 dolls, a pushchair, a a microwave and a cleaning set!. He also has a range of fire engines, trains, toolsets etc. It has never occurred to me or my husband that there is anything remotely odd about this.

I view both my husband and I as able to provide an equal but different quality of care for our son and I wouldn't have it any other way. I am so grateful for the way gender relationships have moved on in the past generation or so. My father's relationship with us was so much more distant and less involved than my husband's is with our son - much to the enrichment of them both. I am no radical feminist - just an equal half of a working couple trying to do what's best for our family.

I also agree with you Lil - it is laughable to imagine that abuse of women in a wide variety of ways is somehow a new issue and one that it is linked wth them having the freedowm to choose to work.

Thanks, Bloss, for your full and very thought-provoking answer. I makes sense to me that mainting a mutually loving and respectful marriage relationship is fundamental to christian life. As you say, if you're a christian you need to lead by example. It would hardly do if your non-christian neighbours regularly heard you having loud ding-dongs with your partner or saw you patiently suffering gross inequalities. BTW, my original posting on the 10 commandments was directed at MrsHudson. The point I was trying to make was that the 10 commandments contain no marriage guidance along the lines of 'obey your husband'. I'm glad, Bloss, that you have picked up on this and have referred to biblical teachings which stress the importance of mutual consideration in marriage.

Like Marina I have a muddled christian past. I'm not sure what to call myself now, but always open to suggestions!

I think it's fascinating that you have made a personal journey from total unbelief to a strong christian 'take' on life. Marina has mentioned the Alpha course - did you do this or something similar?

I am running out of time, but, Mrs Hudson, can I ask you a similar question. How did you come to embrace christianity? Broadly speaking, your views on the Bible seem more literal than those of Bloss. Do you find this puts you in open conflict with your non-christian friends? I know from my own church past that some christians feel they cannot be true friends, let alone marry, non-christians. Is that the case with you? To me, your stance seems to be somewhat at odds with contemporary life. As Marina says, many of us have to bring in two wages in order to have a roof over our heads.

Mrs Hudson you say that some radical feminists you have come across are guilty of not compromising. What a bizarre statement. I'm sure there's even more non-radical men out there that don't compromise as well but since you promote that women should obey their husbands, then I guess they don't need to learn the meaning of the word!

I can't help but wonder what sort of a man wants to live with a woman who obeys him all the time!!!!It must be boring and engender a lack of respect for ones wife, not the increase you desire.

Bloss, fascinating post - as a rather wooly Catholic it was very interesting.
Huge misconception about women and work somewhere in this lot. Middle class & upper class women had a hiatus from paid employment from the end of the 19th century until mid 20th century. Before that most women, other than a very few upper middle class members of society, worked. They either worked in agriculture, factories or cottage industries. Also, aristorcratic women were generally responsible for running vast households. Although, not strictly speaking paid employment their duties were onerous and would make the modern housewife look like a dosser.
So, to suggest that society's ills would be cured by women staying at home is most bizarre. Society has always had a wide variety of problems to deal with and I think many of them are better dealt with today than ever before. Our children are safer, healthier, better educated, better fed & have longer life expectancy than at any point in known history.
I have to say that I am completely opposed to the view that women should stay at home and look after the home & children - UNLESS that is what they want to do.

Mrshudson, what a truly interesting discussion you have prevoked here,The only point i strongly disagree with is toys designed for one sex only,i have 1 son and 1 daughter,we have thought nothing of buying a kitchen/dolls/cooking utensils for my son and cars etc for my daughter,infact thats what they have asked for,my son helps around the house,washing and cleaning with me, he sees nothing wrong with this and neither do i.I hope he grows up into a well adjusted adult who dosent have sexist veiws.

Ok, a lot of what I have said has been misconstrued.
Tigermoth, I will quote Eph 5:22 "Wives submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church" this is where the original 'obey' quotation came from that is in some marriage vows. The word 'submit' being taken to mean 'obey'. Although I do agree with Bloss that this is Eve's punishment that women have to submit to men whilst on earth. I know I will get condemned to high heaven for saying that, but there you go.

Marina and Bells, I applaud you for giving your sons girls toys to play with, I have not come across anyone else who does this any more than I have seen boys dressed in pink! But you must agree that society does favour gender stereotypes for children especially, all the Christmas ads for toys do this all the time. That's the point I am trying to make, that society cannot bring boys up to be stereotyped boys and then expect them to be 'new-men' when they are older. My husband's generation were particularly bad for following stereotypes and he was brought up to be the definitive 'male'. It would be unfair of me to now demand that he take on a more nurturing and domestic role.

Lil - I am sure that you are right and there are a lot of radical men out there too, but since I am posting on Mumsnet I am only discussing women. I cannot slate any men as they are not here to defend themselves.

And now I must make the point again that these are only my views and not to be taken in any other way. I do not think that women are responsible for all the ills of the world and I understand that sometimes both parents have to work for financial reasons. But I really do believe that more women make better carers than men because of the bond we have in the womb. With men, the nurturing aspect is learnt, with most women it occurs naturally. Probably because men have higher levels of testosterone which is an aggressive hormone, and we have a combination of progesterone and oesgrogen which makes us more emotive.

Ok?

Well said, MrsHudson. They may be your own personal views, but I think you certainly make some valid points!

And I second that - it takes a lot of courage to take an alternative stance, maintain it and not end up being stroppy, personal or abusive! I understand entirely where Mrs Hudson comes from as another Christian and really welcomed Bloss' piece - I wish that I could have written something so well. We do do things a bit differenly in our family; I am a very happy working mother and chose to cherish rather than obey my husband. However, hooray for such articulate people!

I can happily accept that these are your personal views, Mrs Hudson. I don't agree with a fair number of them as you've probably guessed, but that's by the by!

May I please go back to a question I asked you in my last post and add a little more on to it? Do you find your views, as put across here, are well accepted in the real world? Or are you saying more here than you would say face to face? I just find your views of life at odds with what I see around me. Do you find many of your friends share your views of christianity?

For instance, while I agree that there's gender stereotyping on TV toy adverts, I don't personally know of any parent who would prevent their boys cooking, sewing etc or who would refuse to let them play with the sort of 'girls' toys you mention - especialy in the pre-school years. In all the creches and nurseries I know, toddler boys are encouraged to play with dolls and pushchairs just as much as the girls. As for equality in marriage, the christian married women I know certainly don't seem to be submissive to their husbands.

Mrs Hudson, I do agree that gender stereotyping does exist where toys are concerned. However, as Tigermoth points out, most pre-school settings encourage a genderless approach to play. My dd's love dolls...and cars, and tool kits, and train sets.They can't wait for their dad to get out his old scalextric ( nor might I add, can he !). But whether girls play with cars or not...most of us end up driving them, and most men end up with babies. I wish you'd seen my sisters sons in their hand-me-down (from my dd's) pink sleepsuits, socks, snowsuits etc! So sweet. They still have things from us, but as they get older it seems less appropriate to dress them in dresses or girly leggings. They are still quite happy with pink t-shirts, barbie vests etc!! Actually, they'd probably be equally happy in flowery leggings and tops, but I think 'society'would find it odd, and their dad would not be enthusiastic! (He's quite traditional ) I really want to add more, but time for stories and bed (and then that glass of wine, hurrah!)

Hi Tigermoth.
I am quite happy to tell anyone my views if they ask me about them, but I never start off a conversation based on my opinions. Most of my friends accept me for who I am and I do likewise. My viewpoints rarely come up in conversation to be honest. As for non-Christian friends, well I don't ask people if they are religious or not, I don't see it as my business. If they are friendly then I will talk to them, it's as simple as that.

I go to various toddler groups too and whilst I have seen that girls are allowed to play with cars and trains and so on, most mothers will present their boys with 'boys toys' and if their boy does pick up a doll or plays with a teaset, the mother always makes a joke of it, whereas the girls don't warrant any remarks.

Also I am quite surprised by the views here as most of the professional mothers I know who look after their children (some stay at home and some go back to work after a while) take on the main burden of childcare. Their husbands are rarely home before 6pm and they usually have their teas cooked for them. In fact, these mothers usually complain that when their dh's are left in charge of the child they never know what to do with it, that they dress them in clashing colours or feed them the wrong food, etc, etc. I feel like screaming at them "Well at least he's trying!! Give the poor man a break!" In fact some of these women don't bother if their man never changes a nappy or prepares the food. Yet when talking about equality they come across as quite radical in their viewpoints and go to great lengths to point our their rights within the marriage.

As for my life being at odds with society, well I rejoice in that as I certainly wouldn't want my life dictated by society. I am happy, my husband is happy, our children are happy. What more can I say?

Message withdrawn

Bloss - I find your posts very interesting, not too long at all.

However, just a short question: I'm still not quite clear why you looked to Christianity. You mention having "Meaning of Life " discussions in your late teens but what tipped you towards enquiries into Christianity? Did you investigate other religions to the same degree? Without wanting to sound trite, was this some reaction to your parents view that religion is the crutch of the intellectually weak?

With regard to the submission issue, I'm not married so it's a little difficult to comment. However, I can understand, to a point, that submission, trusting, giving yourself - however it is to be phrased - to your husband can lead to a fulfilling relationship. I'm just not sure why a husband cannot submit to his wife in the same way. It's not clear to me.

Please post more when you get the chance.

Thanks so much for your posts, Bloss. I think they're absolutely fascinating and very brave. I was especially interested in your 1% leap of faith as I'd been wondering when it was coming! I think that you're absolutely right about intellectual thought and research taking people only so far with proof of God. You go much further that most of the religious people I know in pursuing the historical and scripturial (is this a word?!) evidence. You remind me of a Thomas Aquinas lecturer we had at college who predicated all his speech, lectures, writings and thoughts on God's existence. (Bit of a tendency to try and convert one on the spot though! Unlike you.) He annoyed the pants off some of the students (again unlike you) but his stuff was so fascinating and well researched that many of us tolerated his proselytizing ways in order to hear his thoughts! One of the things I remember him saying was that ultimately religious belief demands a leap of faith and no amount of studying will enable that leap to be made. This sounds similar to your position if I'm understanding you properly?

I've been told that there's a lovely piece of graffitti somewhere in Belfast which reads something like:
FOR THE NON-BELIEVER NO EVIDENCE IS ADEQUATE.
FOR THE BELIEVER NO EVIDENCE IS NECESSARY.

I've always thought that it sums up the problem quite well and that's why, as a non-believer, I'm not going to ask about the submitting to your husband stuff! I just don't think I'd understand, though I'm willing to try. I think Tinker's asked some interesting questions. I'm looking forward to the next installment!

Bloss I'd be interested to know some of the books you read because although I regard myself as a Christian I have trouble accepting that the Bible is the word of God and not the word of God as interpreted through fallible men. That means trying to understand how much of the bible is God's word and how much was added when things became formalised with the foundation of the church. Although I attend church regularly - and tried all the local ones before settling on this one - I see the church more as a barrier to faith than a help.

Throwing the cat amongst the pigeons....

Recently, on the way into work I was listening to the Today program and John Humphries was speaking to a Wiccan lady (witch) and a Catholic lady from the Catholic women's society (or something like that). It was a very interesting debate but if I hadn't already known which path I was following, I would have found the Wiccan the more agreeable as the other lady's attitude to any beliefs other than her own was hectoring and disrespectful.

Hedgehog - please do not take one person's views as the views of that particular church they belong to. In every religion there is bound to be at least one person who comes across as extreme and a bit of an arse (if you'll excuse my phrase!). But this should not be a testament to that religion. There are probably lots of Wiccan women out there that you would strongly disagree with and vice versa with the Catholics.

After all, it's not really the people who make the religion, it's the faith and belief that is sustained there.

Don't you think this thread should b

Oops! Got cut off there! I was meant to say, don't you think this thread should be renamed as this discussion doesn't have much to do with fathers & sons anymore.

Well there you go, I'm not her for a few days and we've gone into Brotherleeeeeee Lurve mode! (sorry, no pun intended there at all!) Any experience I've had with people who have converted. why do we say converted, what happened to them? a rya of light in the middle of the night? Nae I think not, but I do find that some people of various religious followings can be very overpowering in their beliefs. Good grief imagine ME obeying my husband what a joke, I personally don't go to church and really can't be bothered with it at all, but I don't mind if other people do it as long as they don't try an put their views on me. Now this comes from someone whos mother is a devoted Christian and has been for over 30 years, she never once in that time has ever and I mean ever tried to put her Beliefs on me or anyone else, and because of that I think a lot of people respect my mum for her beliefs. Anyway, I've said my bit and Lil, where have you been girl, you've been very quiet for a while, but I do see that you are getting on form again, and I lurved the Grrrr!
Tigger

Well Bloss, I am surprised, but intrigued rather than appalled!

Just doing a bit of cutting and pasting from your thought-provoking post:

You say "my vows to dh were the same as his - "to give due honour" to him. As Christians, we knew that that meant submission from me and servant leadership from him"

Please, please explain, when your time permits.

I think your definition of submission will be different to mine. Do you mean more of an opening of your heart to another's needs, rather than unthinking obedience? Is this near the mark when you say submission in marriage can work in an equal partnership? But why the different meanings for husband (servant leadership) and wife (submission)? How can the partnership be equal when you are each promising different things to each other? I see Tinker has asked a similar question.

Mrs Hudson,
Again doing a little cutting and pasting:

You say: "I am quite surprised by the views here as most of the professional mothers I know who look after their children (some stay at home and some go back to work after a while) take on the main burden of childcare..... Yet when talking about equality they come across as quite radical in their viewpoints and go to great lengths to point our their rights within the marriage"

I can see what you are getting at, but isn't it right to strive for a better life, whether it's one with your own christian values or one with your own 'radical'or 'feminist' beliefs? I am sure you cannot always live up to your own christian ideals, Mre Hudson - you're human after all.

I know how I'd like my marriage to be - ( PS I would not class myself as a 'radical feminist') - of course my marriage does not always match my ideals - but that doesn't mean I can't have a viewpoint at odds with my sometimes imperfect reality, and strive to make my ideals translate into real life. Isn't that what you are doing as well?

St Paul's letter to the Ephesians reflects the patriarchal society he lived in. If he were alive today, I doubt he would express the ideal married relationship in the same terms. He would probably relate it to our modern 'ideal', which involves notions of equality, trust and co-reliance.
It's like the Catholic church's refusal to allow women priests, because Jesus didn't choose any women disciples. Actually, Jesus made a point of behaving courteously and affectionately to women who were regarded as being 'beyond the pale' by society at that time. Yet it would not have been appropriate to have unmarried women travelling with him, because of the social mores of the place and time he lived in.
What I'm saying is, the bible needs to be viewed in its historical and social context. Of course, it contains many beautiful, edifying texts that enrich our faith, and our understanding of life's challenges, but to accept it blindly without recognising its contextual aspects, is to waste the intellect that God gave us.

I agree Lisav!

This has all been very thought-provoking and has made me think more about my Christian marriage. Being submissive is not something that comes naturally to me, either and I too struggled with this, wanting to be obedient to God but my own person, as it were, in my marriage.
It made me think about Christ's relationship to God. Although God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are co-equal, God the Father is the head of Christ-not in essence or nature, but in function. Jesus was in His very nature God, but He "laid aside" His rights and privileges and humbled Himself as a servant.
I feel the issue of submissiveness is not about superiority or inferiority but about making sacrifices.
Bloss, it was so interesting to hear how you came to be a Christian. Have you ever read 'A Severe Mercy' by Sheldon Vanauken? It's the true story of how he and his wife came to Oxford as non-Christians and how CS Lewis touched their lives.
Your story reminded me of a passage in the book where Vanauken is writing to Lewis, struggling with the faith and belief aspect of Christianity, and Lewis writes: "But I think you are already in the meshes of the net! The Holy Spirit is after you. I doubt if you'll get away!"