Humor will not be tolerated!! -Portia

I really liked Waldorf and Sauron's answer to this, and have some additional thoughts. I may just be repeating their sentiments, but I kind of feel strongly about this because I'm always being accused of being a hypocrite for being a well-educated and independent women who belongs to a church that allegedly disagrees with the idea of well-educated and independent women.

I always took that part of the Family Proclamation to mean just the opposite of a June Cleaver - 1950's type family. It says that men and women have certain responsibilities, but having a responsibility for something doesn't mean that you have to be the one who does it all by yourself. For example, men have the responsibility to make sure that the temporal needs of their families are taken care of (with their wives helping them as individual circumstances dictate). I think it's safe to assume that means that the husband has the responsibility to make sure that household repairs get taken care of. In my family, my dad is pretty accident-prone and not at all mechanically inclined. My mom is very good at home repair, so she would be the one who fixed things that broke (she's re-upholstered our couch several times, changed the element in our oven several times, and she built me a new bed frame once). It's still my dad's responsibility to make sure those things are taken care of, but that doesn't mean he has to do them. My mom does them when she has the skills to, and if there's something she can't fix, he's responsible for making sure that it's taken care of by a professional.

Similarly, some families (especially in a recession) may go through a period of time where it's easier or more logical for the mother to be the one with a job. Maybe the mom has a more marketable educational background. So some families might go through a time where the father stays at home while the mother works. That doesn't change the fact that the mother is responsible for nurturing the children. And even in a family where the mother stays at home and the father works, that doesn't mean the mother does nothing but curl her hair and watch soap operas and make the children look cute for when daddy comes home. I think the proclamation encourages women to be educated and skillful and involved in the community.

So I don't see role-reversals like this as an exception to some kind of rule found in the proclamation, I see them as the proclamation in action. I think in those stereotypical 1950s TV families, the mother and father certainly are not helping each other as equal partners. The proclamation isn't talking about a division of labor, it's setting out a plan for ensuring that all of the family's needs are met by assigning responsibility and then saying that the parents need to help each other and do whatever is necessary in their own circumstances to make sure that everything is taken care of.

It's kind of like the Relief Society presidency I'm in. I'm the enrichment counsellor, and that means that I have certain responsibilities. But I help the president and the education counsellor with their responsibilities, and they help me with mine. And the president is like the father who presides. I see a husband and wife relationship as very similar to the way quorum or auxiliary presidency works.

I liked their answer, too, and I completely agree with what you've said, too, but I'd like to add my two cents as well. One thing I've always appreciated about the gospel is certain (obvious) things are pretty cut and dry, like don't murder and don't commit adultery. But then there are plenty of other things where we are given more like "guidelines" and are expected to use our own good judgment, like the Proclamation for example. I feel like it sets up the general guidelines for the family, but still leaves a decent amount up for interpretation.

Being a stay-at-home mother is something I've always had pretty strong views about. I'm currently not a stay-at-home mom, but I look forward to the day when I will be, but I also greatly look forward to going back to school potentially for my master's or further. I also think what I've chosen to do is just fine and my daughter couldn't be any healthier or happier. I think it's very important for women, mothers especially, to have education and be skilled. My own mother taught me this when I was younger and she returned to work while I (4th out of 5) was still a toddler. It's a good thing she did, too, because several years later she was unexpectedly divorced and had to suddenly fully support her children by herself. If she hadn't already been working and furthering her education, she would have had some serious trouble trying to just make ends meet for her family. I'm not saying every mother should brace themselves for potential death, but in reality, you really can't know what might happen. For example, my husband's uncle very unexpectedly died of cancer several years ago when he was in his 30's.

I completely agree with NerdGirl that I don't see these kinds of things as a role reversal, but as putting action to words. I also think it's very important for a woman to realize and establish herself as a wife before she becomes her mother, as well as maintain some degree of socializing. The truth is (most) children will grow up and leave the nest someday and it can be so detrimental for the woman that has dedicated herself to being a mother for 20 years and doesn't know how to do anything else to lament their departing rather than encouraging it. Too often I've seen mothers become so engulfed in being a stay-at-home other than they don't know what to do with themselves once their children have grown up, and often they end up stifling their grandchildren and it can just become too much. So, mothers, don't seal yourselves in your homes and spend all your time perfecting your cooking, sewing, and cleaning. I really don't think that is all that God expects women to do, yet I know so many stay-at-home mothers who become this. I like to think that He encourages us to be well-educated, well-rounded, and well-socialized. Again, this is just my two cents.

I concur. I can see where an outsider would think the wording limits husband and wife into cute little roles, it is easier to see from all the other talks and discussions on the subject that this isn't demeaning in any way. In fact, I plan on going back to work at some point in my life. Not because we need the money (luckily my husband has a good job), but because I just loved teaching math. I think that once my kids are in school, having that outlet that stretches me will make me a better mom. And I don't think that contradicts the Proclamation at all.

I also wanted to point out (while this was a different question, I feel it applies more to this thread) that I loved what Anomalous about having kids. I was beggining to feel sometimes like I am the only one who feels that way. Some people seem to think you need a big, horrible reason to stop having kids as opposed to just having as many as you actually want, be that 2 or 20. I love being a mom. But I don't think I would continue to love being a mom if I had 20. I am not a Duggar, though I wish I was. Man, they are amazing!

A few thoughts.

First, I had a stake president who was of the opinion that the best situation is where both father and mother contribute to the nurturing and teaching of the children equally and where both parents contribute to providing for the needs of the family equally. He based this on Moses 5:1

And it came to pass that after I, the Lord God, had driven them out, that Adam began to till the earth, and to have dominion over all the beasts of the field, and to eat his bread by the sweat of his brow, as I the Lord had commanded him. And Eve, also, his wife, did labor with him.

Interesting that (if this is a true principle) that it had to be restored in modern Scripture. This stake president had a counselor whose approach he considered superb, if not perfect. The counselor and his wife both had PhDs and taught at BYU. They both shortened their hours and arranged their schedules so that one of them would be at home with the children (most of whom weren't school age, yet) at all times. They found a way that both could have careers without it being at the expense of the children. But it meant that both of them had to be willing to give up having a normal 40-hour-a-week career and a double income.

Second, to my mind the ideal situation is for both parents to stay home. But that's just not possible. Most people in this world don't have fulfilling, satisfying jobs. They have jobs that let them get by. This is perceptively encapsulated in the comic strip Dilbert. I'll go throw myself under the machine every day because I have to to make sure my family is safe and healthy.* Encouraging my wife to throw herself under it, too, isn't progressive or enlightened. Family is what matters, not a career. If the only way that you can feel satisfied with your life is to push papers for 40 hours a week and make more than the Joneses, then you're pathetic. You've bought in to a great big destructive lie. Having a career is a necessary evil for some people (thankfully not all) and God does not promise you any happiness as a result. However, rearing your family in righteousness is a commandment and God promises that it is essential for mortal and eternal happiness. And that goes for both men and women.

Third, I agree with everyone that a mother who chooses to work isn't violating the commandments of God, per se. If she does so choose, she should examine carefully what her motives are. Ultimately, however, it needs to be taken before the Lord. He alone can confirm whether that is the right choice for her and her family. And as Sky Bones pointed out, even for stay-at-home mothers, there are plenty of other meaningful activities that a woman can participate in that don't result in a salary.

So in summary, I'd actually say that the questioner was actually more narrow-minded than they were trying to accuse us of being. The truth really does set us free.



*My wife has chosen to stay home when we have children, but I would've supported her equally had she chosen to work.