#61430- Singleton responses

[vorpal blade]

My wife and I watched the episode, "Betty, Girl Engineer." We also watched a number of other episodes. It is too bad they don't have television programs like that any more. Every episode reinforced some positive family value. The episode was no more shocking that the Church's Proclamation on the Family.

Betty's family did try to discourage Betty from becoming an engineer. They didn't feel it was right for Betty, even though they acknowledged that she was plenty smart enough. They didn't think she would be happy in that field, and as it turns out Betty later decided she wouldn't be happy in that field. The show indicated the field might be good for other girls, but not Betty. Some people in the episode were happy that Betty wanted to be an engineer -- like the older guy she worked with on her first (and last) day of job experience. You can draw the inference that engineering would not be suitable for most girls. But, I'd like to point out, no one tried to stop Betty from becoming an engineer. The decision was left to her to pursue this career if she wanted to. I see nothing wrong with that.

[ahem.]

Mary Ann Watson wrote about the episode in her book "Defining Visions: Television and the American Experience Since 1945." I know the book is available in the HBLL, and I'd recommend it as a very eye-opening read. Her chapter on gender and family is especially intriguing. Honestly, that chapter is a lot of why I now self-identify as a feminist.

I actually own a copy of that book. I don't think I've seen the episode in question, but the rereading of Watson's commentary on it certainly casts a different light than Vorpal's does. Hmmm.

[Marduk]

No other solution here but to go to the horse's mouth, Ahem. Let us know the results.

[Waldorf and Sauron]

Betty's family did try to discourage Betty from becoming an engineer. They didn't feel it was right for Betty, even though they acknowledged that she was plenty smart enough.

Betty's family didn't discourage Betty from being an engineer because it didn't fit her personality. They did so because she was female, and American culture had clear definitions of what kind of work was appropriate for women, and what kind of work was deviant from the norm. For example, the career instructor at the beginning of the episode did not know the girls personally, but still tried to corral them toward "proper" women's jobs like secretarial work. For the career placement instructor, the choice for young women was not whether they should train to be a wife/mother OR train for a career, but rather, which careers were appropriate for women.

They didn't think she would be happy in that field, and as it turns out Betty later decided she wouldn't be happy in that field.

Clearly, the family didn't think she would be happy in that field—because she's a woman, and it's a man's field—and Betty foresaw the resistance she would encounter, putting B.J. down as her name to disguise her gender.

Here's the basic structure of essentially all stories in American film and television: conflict and resolution to the status quo. The conflict is that Betty decides to pursue a deviant career, and the tension throughout the episode is centered around the question: will she concede to her parents "family values," give up her career goals, and choose to wear the dress and emphasize her role as a date and a mate like her parents, boss, and society expect? Or will she continue violating gender norms, studying engineering, and losing her femininity? This is the dramatic question, and clearly it was resolved through Betty's embracing her so-called "femininity" (I say so-called because I don't believe true femininity has to do with jettisoning career aspirations) and playing dumb around the engineering foreman. The writers of the show resolve the conflict by having Betty "realize" her mistake and reverting to gender conformity. Why did Betty decide she wouldn't be happy in the field? Well, that's not entirely clear, other than that the writers changed her mind. In fact, the writers themselves were pressed for time when they wrote the ending, and never were satisfied with it, feeling that Betty's change of heart wasn't really explained.

The show indicated the field might be good for other girls, but not Betty. Some people in the episode were happy that Betty wanted to be an engineer -- like the older guy she worked with on her first (and last) day of job experience.

Hmm, I didn't get that impression at all, I'll have to watch for that when I see the episode again. I was under the impression that he was confused and/or accommodating more than anything.

You can draw the inference that engineering would not be suitable for most girls.

It's not an inference to draw. It's the moral of the story. It's the central message that practically everyone sends to Betty: Women should not be engineers.

But, I'd like to point out, no one tried to stop Betty from becoming an engineer. The decision was left to her to pursue this career if she wanted to. I see nothing wrong with that.

That's a nice way to put it. Certainly there are different degrees of trying to stop someone from doing something, from gently persuading, to shaming and ridiculing them, to threatening and forcing them. The characters in the show stopped short of threat and force, and their tactics worked.

A few questions: do you believe that the should be a difference between "mens work" and "womens work"? When women do work (whether by necessity or by choice), should they be encouraged only to work in careers traditionally associated with women, such as secretaries, nurses, and schoolteachers, and discouraged from masculine jobs such as engineers, scientists, lawyers, and professors? When a woman does choose a "masculine" job, is she taking a job that should rightfully belong to a man, and depriving another man of the pretty housewife he deserves after a long day's work?

[vorpal blade]

Well, I’ve watched the show a few more times now. Parts of it I played over and over again until I could write down the dialogue. I could post that, if there was a lot of interest. I don’t have all the dialogue, just some of it – about six pages.

I’ve come to the conclusion that there is a lot more to this story than you see at first. You could even argue that the point of the story was to encourage young women to take up engineering as a career choice. It is clear to me, however, that every character in this story has a different opinion about women in the workforce.

Betty's family didn't discourage Betty from being an engineer because it didn't fit her personality. They did so because she was female, and American culture had clear definitions of what kind of work was appropriate for women, and what kind of work was deviant from the norm. For example, the career instructor at the beginning of the episode did not know the girls personally, but still tried to corral them toward "proper" women's jobs like secretarial work. For the career placement instructor, the choice for young women was not whether they should train to be a wife/mother OR train for a career, but rather, which careers were appropriate for women.

You are generalizing when you describe the “career instructor,” Mr. Glover. We only see him talk to two girls, Betty and a ditzy blonde. The ditzy blonde wants a career in “cinema,” and Mr. Glover at first thinks she wants to be in the movies. Turns out she wanted to be an usher in a theater so she could watch for free the latest movies. Previously she had told Betty she would really like to be a ski instructor since they wear such cute clothes. She is obviously not very smart, and her wish to be an usher is obviously not a real career choice. Mr. Glover tries to steer the ditzy blonde to a job more suited to her capabilities, which also happens to be a traditional female job, as a secretary.

When Betty writes that she wants to work on a surveying crew Mr. Glover does absolutely nothing to discourage her from this. He just silently hands her the address where she is to go to report for her practical work experience. You might make something out of the fact that he is not smiling at that time. But you can’t say he has tried to corral her at all, for anything. Saying he tries to corral “them.” i.e. all girls, is not justified by what we see in the story.

Mr. Glover, the guidance counselor, is not a very likeable person. He squints a lot. He is abrupt and impatient with the students. He interrupts them as though they aren’t important people. If we do get the impression that he may have ideas about appropriate careers for women, we are also given the impression that this is the opinion of a person you really wouldn’t like to know. The status or likeability of a character is an important clue to how the audience is supposed to think about what is said or done.

Betty’s parents are very surprised when Betty announces she wants to be an engineer. They think at first she is joking. That may be partly due to the fact that they never considered a girl becoming an engineer. But the thing that really surprises them is when she tells them she is going to work as part of a surveying crew. The parents try to persuade her not to do this, but it is important to note that Betty wins each argument. I think this says a lot about what the writer was trying to accomplish, subtlety, with this episode.

The mother just doesn’t think it is suitable for a girl, but Betty is prepared and asks questions Margaret, her mother, can’t answer directly.

Margaret: Oh, Betty, this isn’t the sort of life for you. You…you shouldn’t be out working with a …a road gang.

Betty: It’s not a road gang, mother. I’ll be with the county surveying crew, approved by the high school getting practical experience. That’s the idea of it! Practical experience.

Margaret: It doesn’t sound very practical to me. A girl?

Betty: What’s wrong with girls? Girls enter all kinds of professions nowadays, and why shouldn’t they? Answer me that?

Betty was right; lots of girls were entering all kinds of professions in those days. I don’t think it was a matter of appropriateness as it was a matter of being unusual. There were no clear definitions of what was an appropriate kind of work in American culture in those days. I think Margaret was more concerned with Betty working in a road gang than being an engineer. Margaret could not answer Betty’s question, and I think this was a significant win for Betty.

Jim, Betty’s father, has someone different arguments, but he too loses to Betty.

Margaret: Well, this business of going out with a surveying crew. You don’t think she is really serious, do you?

Jim: Oh yes, she is quite serious….for the moment, at least. But I’d say after half a day of tramping though the dirt and lugging surveying instruments she’ll be ready to take up some nice vocation like crocheting. [Audience laughter]

Betty comes in and hears the last part of this.

Betty: I will not give this up after half a day, or half a year, or anything else. Can’t you understand I really mean this?

There is a great deal of joking around in the episode. Not everything can be taken with dead seriousness. I think Jim is serious in thinking Betty will soon give up her romantic notions about becoming an engineer, but he is kidding when he suggests crocheting. Jim goes on in his arguments:

Jim: Betty, before you plunge headlong into this thing….

Betty: I’m not plunging. I went to all the lectures. I took the tests. I showed a strong aptitude for it.

Jim (looking uncomfortable): Oh…

Betty: It appeals to me. I love the out-of-doors, and I’m no dummy at math.

Jim: No, what little you’ve had so far. But wait until you run into trigonometry and calculus. Do you realize engineering schools are some of the toughest to get into?

Betty: So you think I should give up a thing just because it is difficult?

Jim (more discomfort): Er…no…no…I just meant that….

Margaret (finishing Jim’s thought for him): …you’re a girl. That’s the main thing. But what’s your training been so far? Music, ballet, English literature?

Betty: There’s music and poetry in a fine bridge. One lecturer said there’s beauty in a well constructed sewer pipe.

Jim: Wait a minute…this lecturer…is he tall, dark and handsome?

Betty: Oh, don’t be so juvenile, father. There is more to life than romance and all that gonk. The point is, I have found my niche. My life now has direction. There’s a great demand for engineers today. And, it’s a profession that pays very well.

I think there is more of a point here than just that engineering or surveying was traditionally a man’s job. The parents are pointing out that, up to now, Betty has acted like a typical girl and shown very little interest in higher math. Someone who was genuinely interested in engineering should have shown interest in trigonometry or calculus before her final few months of high school. Up until now what Betty has shown interest in is music, ballet, and English literature. That is what Betty is prepared to do, and what experience shows fits her personality. Betty replies with a romantic notion of engineering, and the practical side of paying well.

At this point her parents remove all objections to her going to work with the surveying crew, or becoming an engineer. I’d say Betty has won her case with relative ease. From this point on they are supportive of her decision to pursue her career, is she wants to. The decision is totally up to her. They still don’t think Betty is making a good choice, and Jim still thinks Betty will give it up within half a day, but they support her in making her own choices.

I’d also like to point out that the other members of Betty’s family never oppose Betty’s decision to become an engineer. Kathy, the baby of the family, doesn’t really understand it, thinking Betty wants to drive a train. That’s a typical engineering joke. But she thinks it is cool. Bud, Betty’s sixteen year old brother, really likes the idea of Betty becoming an engineer. He is not too happy with Betty just expropriating his boots, but getting an engineer in the family is a good thing, he thinks. He soon begins peppering her with engineering questions. I think it is telling that Betty has absolutely no interest in hearing practical engineering questions. She refuses to listen to him. I think if Betty were honest she would admit that she really isn’t interested in engineering after all.

So, after successfully overcoming the opposition (what little there was) in her family, the remaining obstacle in this episode is Doyle Hobbs, the young engineering student who is in charge of the surveying crew. He is taking some time off before he completes his degree to earn some money working as a civil engineer. Doyle gives Betty a hard time. He questions why she is there. He treats her rather rudely. He lectures her about what he thinks is the proper role of men and women in society. He makes himself rather obnoxious. And I think the writer intended it that way. He is saying to young women that you will come across some obnoxious people who don’t believe a girl belongs on a survey crew. Engineers have a reputation of not being good with working with people, and Doyle is not an exception. Later you see he is rude and unreasonable to Freddie, who takes Betty’s place after Betty runs home in tears.

But here is another point that might easily be overlooked. Doyle takes seriously the task to teach Betty the trade. John Lynn, Doyle’s assistant, would have been happy to have Betty along to be his assistant and just hold the “chain.” But Doyle wants Betty to learn as much as she can. He does not think she belongs there, but he will help her to become as successful as he can in the profession she has chosen. His real problem is that he is too free with his advice and tries to run Betty’s life.

Another point that needs to be made is that Betty does not play dumb around the engineering boss. She tries to act as smart as she can to impress him, but she has no idea what a transit is, or a plumb bob, or what he is talking about when he says “vernier,” and is honestly confused when he says to look through the telescope. Doyle does not expect her to know, and he doesn’t expect Freddie to know either. So he tells them what they need to know. At Betty’s age I would have acted the same way Betty did, and not because I thought this would endear me to Doyle. Because I was dumb when it came to practical engineering experience.

I think the moral of this episode comes from the words of kindly, wise old John Lynn, after Betty runs away from the job.

Doyle: John, the one big difference between you and me: when I have something to say, I say it.

John: Doyle, they tell me you have a good head for this business. That you’re going places some day. I understand you’re a real hot engineering student. I wouldn’t know much about that. All I know is holding the other end of a chain. But I know enough not to try and run other people’s lives for them.

It’s the lesson Betty’s parents have to learn, time after time, in regard to Betty. Later (in another episode) they try to select which college Betty should go to, but learn to back off and let Betty run her own life. The message seems to be to those who watch this episode, don’t try to tell other people how to run their lives.

At this point it looks like Doyle has won, and Betty has lost. Betty hasn’t quite given up, however. She won’t “take orders from that little pipsqueak” Doyle, so she tries to read engineering books. She can’t make out anything in them. Doyle comes to her house with a box of chocolates with some idea of making up for treating Betty badly. I think it is interesting that Jim wants to tell off Doyle about the high-handed way he treated his daughter. Notice that dad is now fully supporting his daughter. Doyle uses some flattering words to Margaret, saying that he now understands where Betty gets her good looks from. He ruins this in the next sentence by telling Margaret that she looks very motherly. Doyle, boy engineer.

As it turns out, Doyle doesn’t let Jim have a chance to talk. He goes through his vision of how the world ought to be. And to my ears it doesn’t sound bad. It sounds a lot like the Proclamation on Families. He comes on really strong.

Now, this is where the writer introduces a little twist. Betty does not win (overcome the opposition) by convincing Boyle to see things her way or support her in her decision to be an engineer. She wins by adopting a different strategy. She will put on the dress and flirt outrageously with Doyle and maneuver him expertly into a corner where he will want to ask her out on a date. She really is quite clever at it. She beats Doyle at his own game. Does she give up engineering? Actually, we don’t know that. Perhaps she has just learned that going along with Doyle’s vision of how life ought to be is ultimately what she wants to. Or perhaps she just needs to merely make him think that in order to get what she wants out of life. There is nothing to prevent her from going on to engineering in the future.

[Marduk]

Vorpal, there's an overarching point that is made here that you haven't really addressed.

Any time media is presented for mass consumption, the specific characters are often seen as archetypes (especially in early television.) Hence, the mother becomes everymother, so to speak, representing how women in general feel about their children. The father's ideas represent men everywhere. I'm not saying this is the case always, what I'm suggesting is that people will take an indication given by popular media and point to it as normative.

This means that media has an obligation to either make the characters normative, or give an indication as to why their behavior is abnormal (abnormal here not meaning wierd or insane, simply meaning unusual or different than normal.) Hence presenting a girl who rushes into the decision to become an engineer, is headstrong, and finally realizes that she has no place in a particular field, comes with the suggestion that it has application to women in a larger sense. You're right that no one forces her to stop pursuing that career choice, or even if she stops after that is unclear. What IS clear is that she acts brashly and without considering "good advice." Everyone from her parents, to the counselor, to her on-the-job mentor have differing reasons why this career is wrong for her, and none of them have very much to do with her specifically (well, the parents have a few. But even those are shortsighted at best.) Yet, the moral of the story is that each of these individuals is vindicated and shown the rightness of their actions.

Lastly, it seems clear that you and I have a very different idea what The Proclamation on the Family says. Certainly none of the values in that document would be violated by a woman choosing to be an engineer instead of a secretary.

[vorpal blade]

Your view of what I said is so at odds with what I was trying to say that it is difficult to respond.

I'm not saying anyone's behavior is different from the norm. I'm saying that some of the interpretations of what their views are has been misunderstood or misconstrued.

I'm not saying Betty rushed into her decision to become an engineer. She thought about it for a week, took all the tests and attended all the lectures. It was, as she pointed out and I referenced, not plunged into. She just has yet to learn her own mind.

She doesn't learn she has no place in engineering. She learns that she does, if she wants a place.

She doesn't act brashly, and she isn't really given any advice. Her parents and Doyle don't think it is a good choice for her.

The counselor never says whether this career is good for her or not.

The moral of the story is that we shouldn't run someone else's life. It's not that Mom and Dad are vindicated at all.

Lastly, it seems clear that you and I have a very different idea what The Proclamation on the Family says. Certainly none of the values in that document would be violated by a woman choosing to be an engineer instead of a secretary.

The point I was making was that Doyle believes

By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children.

[Sharona Fleming]

Vorpal, I must disagree with you. Perhaps it’s because I am a female, but Doyle’s vision of how the world ought to be doesn’t sound that great to my ears and it sure doesn’t line up with my interpretation of the Proclamation on Families.

Here is what Doyle says to Jim:
“It’s not that she couldn’t be an engineer. She might be a darned good one, but think what a dirty trick that might be on some guy…some young engineer, some young guy who works hard all day in the dust and heat—Why does he do it? So when the day’s over he comes home to some nice, pretty wife. That’s what makes working all day in the dust and heat worthwhile. That’s why your bridges and roads and everything are built—to make a nice place for the guys, their wives, and their kids to live. But if your nice, pretty girls are out working in the dust and heat too, who are the guys to come home to?”

Doyle’s words as well as his tone (which I wish I could convey better here) give off the vibe of entitlement, and I confess that it drives me nuts. Because he is a male, he feels he is entitled to a job in a field of his choice. He feels he ought to be allowed to make his own choices about his career and future, but he doesn’t feel that women deserve the same privilege. Instead, a woman should be content with being a pretty little wife to her husband. It’s her job to be there when he gets home merely because, as a male, he deserves her.

When I read the Proclamation on Families, I see nothing that fits with Doyle’s worldview. I don’t see anything that says a woman should not seek employment because she might be taking some guy’s job. I don’t see anything that says males are entitled to nice, pretty wives simply because they work hard all day. Rather, I do read about partnership and equality in marriage. And though perhaps you see that in what Doyle is saying, I just don’t. I see the old “separate spheres” mentality that has the potential to keep a woman an unwilling prisoner in her own home and a man uninvolved in the household. I can’t see equal partners in Doyle’s vision—how can I when he makes women out to be nice, pretty little things to be had by men?

(I hope that the tone of my response does not convey hostility or anger--please excuse me if any such feelings are perceived. I do not mean to make a personal attack on anyone who feels differently, but I just feel very strongly here.)

[Hypatia]

Hey guys! Guess what! I'm a bonafide female engineer! I have thoughts on the whole, "do women deserve to have jobs and careers of their choice?" debate but...I'm really not sure what you guys are discussing here. Are you discussing whether or not a fictional character is sexist?

And, to quote one of my favorite movies:

"You have a sexist [album] cover."
"What's wrong with being sexy? Lots of covers are sexy!"
"SexIST!"

Anyway, if anyone wants views on female engineers from a female engineer, let me know.

[Laser Jock]

I have thoughts on the whole, "do women deserve to have jobs and careers of their choice?" debate but...I'm really not sure what you guys are discussing here.

That's a debate? Who takes the contrary view?

[Katya]

I have thoughts on the whole, "do women deserve to have jobs and careers of their choice?" debate but...I'm really not sure what you guys are discussing here.

That's a debate? Who takes the contrary view?

Who in the world? Or who on this forum?

[vorpal blade]

Vorpal, I must disagree with you. Perhaps it’s because I am a female, but Doyle’s vision of how the world ought to be doesn’t sound that great to my ears and it sure doesn’t line up with my interpretation of the Proclamation on Families

I haven’t yet transcribed the dialogue you are referring to, but I disagree with what you read into what Doyle says. To me he is not talking about entitlement. I would say that he believes that jobs should be given to the best qualified person, whether male or female. Women should be allowed to make their own choices about their career and future. You see this in way he helps Betty to learn about surveying so that she can be successful in this career if she so chooses. He believes women are every bit as deserving as a man to choose their own path. He does not believe that a woman should not seek employment because she might be taking some guy’s job. He does not believe that men are entitled to nice, pretty wives simply because they work hard each day. I think you are reading way too much negative connotations into Doyle. There is nothing in what he says or does that indicates anything other than mutual and equal respect and status; a full partnership. Nothing like keeping a woman an unwilling prisoner in her home. Women are not things to be had by men. I’m really sorry you see Doyle’s point of view that way.

How can I explain Doyle’s point of view in a way that wouldn’t be misunderstood? My suggestion is to read The Family: A Proclamation to the World.

I found these words from Paul Mavis to coincide with my view of the series Father Knows Best. Paul Mavis is said to be is “an internationally published film and television historian, a member of the Online Film Critics Society, and the author of The Espionage Filmography.” http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/41983/fa ... ason-four/

Reading reviews of the show from today's critics, you might get lucky with a fair-minded assessment (DVDTalk's former reviewer, Jeffrey Kaufman, gave it an affectionate pass), but mostly you're going to wade through a lot of film and television school P.C. dross that either dismisses the show as "camp" (I can't think of a series that's less "camp" - a term that's seriously misused, anyway), or attacks it for perceived transgressions against all that is holy in today's pop culture studies: gender issues, race issues, political issues, sociological issues (it's a pity "entertainment issues" are rarely discussed). These frankly ridiculous criticisms of Father Knows Best are usually based more on the personal prejudices of the critics who have been steeped in the "hate anything traditional" politics of the American higher education system than anything inherently "evil" in this warm, funny show (hey - you want a job teaching film and TV history? You want to publish? Better come in through the Left door). Looking through a few of these pieces prior to watching Father Knows Best, I was vividly reminded of why I left professional academia.

You present a popular point of view, which I believe is incorrect, so I'm happy to have a chance to respond to it.

[vorpal blade]

I have thoughts on the whole, "do women deserve to have jobs and careers of their choice?" debate but...I'm really not sure what you guys are discussing here.

That's a debate? Who takes the contrary view?

Who in the world? Or who on this forum?

Everyone I know believes that women are just as deserving as men to have the jobs and careers of their choice. As far as I can see this is a non issue. I think even Doyle Hobbs, a character created to put forth the view that a woman's place is in the home, would agree. I think the issue here is whether in the divine design are fathers to preside over their families in love and righteousness and be responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families, while mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children?

[NerdGirl]

Bah. I would really like to watch the episode in question, but netflix canada does not have it.

[Craig Jessop]

I don't think that careers and mothering are mutually exclusive, but I do think that there needs to be a choice made before kids are born.

Now my experiences are purely anecdotal, but I have seen lots of families with working mothers whose kids turn out just fine. The mothers did not neglect the nurture of their children whatsoever, though sometimes they had to get help -- as if chores like vacuuming and laundry have anything to do with nurturing. To me nurturing is teaching, loving, and being there always. I had elementary school teachers who would take days off to be with sick kids. To me, that's nurturing. My mom would make a hot breakfast before school. Coming from her, it was nurturing because she did it because she loved us. If these things come from a sense of obligation, it doesn't matter who makes breakfast.

However, I have seen MULTIPLE families whose moms went back to work or school after staying at home for ten years or so. In every case the kids have suffered greatly. Obviously there are success stories, but this is what I've personally seen. The paradigm is thrown off, and boundaries are changed. Kids see mom is gone and a maid doing what were formerly her domestic duties, and think that it means that mom has quit her job entirely -- after all, cooking and cleaning were mom's jobs, right? So they rebel in the ways that actually matter, while the older kids who grew up with mom at home turn out fine.

I don't care if my future wife wants a job outside the home. If she can manage both, more power to her! If she wants to stay home, great! I just think that she and I would have to discuss -- before kids -- what she will be: a stay at home mom until the kids are all in college? Or a working mom? A woman forced to stay at home would be far less nurturing to her kids, I think, than if she worked. The converse is also true. It just depends on the person, and the decision is up to her, her husband (as a partner), and the Lord.

[thebigcheese]

However, I have seen MULTIPLE families whose moms went back to work or school after staying at home for ten years or so. In every case the kids have suffered greatly. Obviously there are success stories, but this is what I've personally seen. The paradigm is thrown off, and boundaries are changed. Kids see mom is gone and a maid doing what were formerly her domestic duties, and think that it means that mom has quit her job entirely -- after all, cooking and cleaning were mom's jobs, right? So they rebel in the ways that actually matter, while the older kids who grew up with mom at home turn out fine.

I wonder if there would be a difference in outcomes for full-time and part-time employment.

[Marduk]

I think it is ridiculous to suggest that a woman's choice of employment in any way jeopardizes or changes her ability to comply with the Lord's plan for families. In the same way, it is equally harmful for a father to choose to work outside the home for 60+ hours per week if there is an alternative that will allow him to remain at home. These are individual decisions left to individual families for a reason, and that is because there is no one-size-fits-all employment structure that every family can follow.

Vorpal, I don't think you could be more wrong about what Doyle says, and unfortunately you are filitering it through a lense that insists on seeing what isn't there in order to comply with your world narrative. He describes a woman working (and hence not being home to greet her husband who has worked all day) as a "dirty trick," for heaven's sakes. He claims the only reason why a woman exists is to give a man reason to work, to come home to a "pretty wife." These sort of phrases and ways of speaking treat the woman as more of an object; why isn't she an "intelligent" wife? Why is the perspective coming from the male? What about what the woman wants and needs? These sort of questions are simply too foreign for Doyle to consider.

But it is tough when this is the indoctrination that you've grown up with to see it from a different perspective.

[vorpal blade]

I think this statement

I think it is ridiculous to suggest that a woman's choice of employment in any way jeopardizes or changes her ability to comply with the Lord's plan for families.

contradicts this statement

These are individual decisions left to individual families for a reason, and that is because there is no one-size-fits-all employment structure that every family can follow.

Vorpal, I don't think you could be more wrong about what Doyle says, and unfortunately you are filitering it through a lense that insists on seeing what isn't there in order to comply with your world narrative.

I think this is true of one of us, and it isn't me.

He claims the only reason why a woman exists is to give a man reason to work, to come home to a "pretty wife."

False.

These sort of phrases and ways of speaking treat the woman as more of an object; why isn't she an "intelligent" wife? Why is the perspective coming from the male? What about what the woman wants and needs? These sort of questions are simply too foreign for Doyle to consider.

False. Have you even seen the episode?

But it is tough when this is the indoctrination that you've grown up with to see it from a different perspective.

True of one of us, and it isn't me. I lived through the 50s, and I've also lived through the years you have lived. I've seen the indoctrination you've been given, and I understand your perspective. The same is not true of you.

[Marduk]

Exactly the response I would've expected.

[Craig Jessop]

Exactly the response I would've expected.

He had some valid points.