How much education does a SAHM need?

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by All-American

It's the difference between, say, supporting your child's decision to go on a mission and threatening to cut them off if they don't.

There is a lot of negative treatment that can occur short of "cutting someone off."

I don't get your distinction because there isn't one, actually.

Is it a biology professor's role at BYU, for example, to discourage women from going into medicine, because he thinks it isn't "family-friendly"?

Is the role of a law advisor at BYU to ask a female student "So have you really thought out what it would mean to be a mom and a lawyer?"

This is called DISCOURAGEMENT.

Not to mention the tremendous peer pressure.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

There is a lot of negative treatment that can occur short of "cutting someone off."

I don't get your distinction because there isn't one, actually.

Is it a biology professor's role at BYU, for example, to discourage women from going into medicine, because he thinks it isn't "family-friendly"?

Is the role of a law advisor at BYU to ask a female student "So have you really thought out what it would mean to be a mom and a lawyer?"

This is called DISCOURAGEMENT.

Not to mention the tremendous peer pressure.

You've "discouraged" me from going into law because you were not convinced that it was going to be what was best for me. That was altogether appropriate, and I appreciated the input.

Is it a history professor's role at BYU to discourage a man from going into teaching because he thinks it isn't "family friendly?" I've had professors do that to me, and I appreciated their input just as I appreciated yours.

I have no problem with the faculty of a university encouraging their students to pursue a path that they feel will bring their students the most happiness. If you feel there is no distinction between this and institutional repression, then that is where we'll have to disagree and move on.

[Tex]

As I said, Barbara, I think you've generally respected the line. This time you stepped on it, if not over it. Especially with your mealy-mouthed "persecution complex" link.

Re: the topic at hand, I didn't read the first 50 posts in this thread, so apologies if this has already been said. I don't know how to say this without sounding like I'm "pulling rank" but I've got more than a decade of experience with the Young Single Adult (18-30) and Single Adult (31+) programs of the church, in a few different roles. I think I've got as good handle as anyone else on the messages the young adults of the church are getting.

The church emphasizes stay-at-home motherhood as the ideal. Professional life plays second fiddle to that. It also recognizes that for many it's not possible, and the counsel from church leaders for years has been to do the best you can, and if mom has to work, so be it.

As I said previously, that value system is reflected in its institutions, including BYU. But that doesn't mean it's de facto demeaning to women who choose a professional life. I have women in my own family who have. Each individual needs to make her own choice.

Have there been some who have taken the counsel to extremes, being oppressive to women who've made that choice? Undoubtedly. They're the same people who speak ill of youth who come home early from missions, or gossip about a ward member's messy divorce. It happens.

But I've never seen institutionalized repression of LDS working women in the church, or at BYU. And I don't think that the female youth of the church feel that in any appreciable number.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by All-American

You've "discouraged" me from going into law because you were not convinced that it was going to be what was best for me. That was altogether appropriate, and I appreciated the input.

Is it a history professor's role at BYU to discourage a man from going into teaching because he thinks it isn't "family friendly?" I've had professors do that to me, and I appreciated their input just as I appreciated yours.

I have no problem with the faculty of a university encouraging their students to pursue a path that they feel will bring their students the most happiness. If you feel there is no distinction between this and institutional repression, then that is where we'll have to disagree and move on.

I don't feel it is appropriate for faculty at BYU to be discouraging women from entering professions. Period.

I mean, I can't even believe I'm having to defend this.

So we have gone from you saying that you don't believe that discouragement exists, to you saying that you actually support it.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I don't feel it is appropriate for faculty at BYU to be discouraging women from entering professions. Period.

I mean, I can't even believe I'm having to defend this.

So we have gone from you saying that you don't believe that discouragement exists, to you saying that you actually support it.

Is it appropriate for faculty at BYU to be discouraging MEN from entering professions?

If I went to a professor and told him my plans, I would hope that they would do for me just what they have done: give me candid advice, warn me of potential negatives, and do all they can to support me in whatever decision I make. I'm not a woman, but as I have talked with women at BYU, they have told me that they have had more or less the same experience I have.

You just are not understanding the distinction I'm making. I'm not sure how to make it more clear. I apologize for the deficiency in my communicative abilities.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by All-American

Is it appropriate for faculty at BYU to be discouraging MEN from entering professions?

If I went to a professor and told him my plans, I would hope that they would do for me just what they have done: give me candid advice, warn me of potential negatives, and do all they can to support me in whatever decision I make. I'm not a woman, but as I have talked with women at BYU, they have told me that they have had more or less the same experience I have.

You just are not understanding the distinction I'm making. I'm not sure how to make it more clear. I apologize for the deficiency in my communicative abilities.

I am talking about SEXISM. Not advice in general. You are pro-advice. Who is not? I am anti-SEXISM.

(advice women receive ≠ advice men receive from institution) = institutional sexism.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I am talking about SEXISM. Not advice in general. You are pro-advice. Who is not? I am anti-SEXISM.

(advice women receive ≠ advice men receive from institution) = institutional sexism.

Not being a woman, I can't say much regarding the advice women get from the institution. Tell you what, though: I'll talk to some of my friends and see what their experiences have been. If I can find much of substance to report, I'll check back.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I am talking about SEXISM. Not advice in general. You are pro-advice. Who is not? I am anti-SEXISM.

(advice women receive ≠ advice men receive from institution) = institutional sexism.

You can always start another 3 or 4 threads on the topic, Mike.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Tex

You can always start another 3 or 4 threads on the topic, Mike.

I know this may boggle your mind, but there is more than one aspect to womanhood in this church.

(actually people on both sides of this debate might argue that Tex is right, and I am wrong, it is uni-dimensional).

There was this girl at BYU in my major, the memory of it is just coming back to me. She was pretty, smart, nice, and just as ambitious as any of us guys. Towards of the end of my time at BYU, I ran into her, and talked to her. All those plans were gone, and she had literally become a different person. The abruptness of the change shocked me.

It was only abrupt to me, because I hadn't talked to her for so long.

People make their own choices. But the river only flows in one direction.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

As I said, Barbara, I think you've generally respected the line. This time you stepped on it, if not over it. Especially with your mealy-mouthed "persecution complex" link.

Re: the topic at hand, I didn't read the first 50 posts in this thread, so apologies if this has already been said. I don't know how to say this without sounding like I'm "pulling rank" but I've got more than a decade of experience with the Young Single Adult (18-30) and Single Adult (31+) programs of the church, in a few different roles. I think I've got as good handle as anyone else on the messages the young adults of the church are getting.

The church emphasizes stay-at-home motherhood as the ideal. Professional life plays second fiddle to that. It also recognizes that for many it's not possible, and the counsel from church leaders for years has been to do the best you can, and if mom has to work, so be it.

As I said previously, that value system is reflected in its institutions, including BYU. But that doesn't mean it's de facto demeaning to women who choose a professional life. I have women in my own family who have. Each individual needs to make her own choice.

Have there been some who have taken the counsel to extremes, being oppressive to women who've made that choice? Undoubtedly. They're the same people who speak ill of youth who come home early from missions, or gossip about a ward member's messy divorce. It happens.

But I've never seen institutionalized repression of LDS working women in the church, or at BYU. And I don't think that the female youth of the church feel that in any appreciable number.

Ironically, I think your own statements cross the line from "encouragement to be a mother" to "discouragement to being a professional."

You said if a woman "has to work, so be it." This is a common refrain in the church (and at BYU). This doesn't suggest "we encourage you to explore motherhood and the enjoyment and value that comes from staying at home," but it suggests "only in the worst possible scenario should you consider not staying at home." Those are entirely different statements with entirely different values attached to them. Those who DO work, then, are often made to feel as though they are doing wrong and often feel compelled to demonstrate why the acceptance of work was "necessary" and not just desirable.