How much education does a SAHM need?

[All-American]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Zoobs only care about a few things. This is not on the list of those things.

Then I'm not a zoob. I care quite a bit about this particular thing. I've had conversations with several of my female friends at the Y about education, raising a family, and this very topic, especially now, as a number of them are graduating. I find your characterizations to be inconsistent with what I have seen on the ground. I also find your assertions to be tainted with hubris. Why is it that when it comes to understanding how women at BYU think, a woman can't understand, and a BYU student can't care, but a doctor in Texas can see it all?

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by All-American

Are you open to a recent BYU grad lecturing you on how you're wrong about BYU culture? Because I don't see what you're seeing, and I still have the stench of Provo emanating from my cap and gown.

What, specifically, do you not see? Mike is a bit all over the place here so I am not sure which issue you are arguing.

[MikeWaters]

When you have managed to upset the feminists, the non-feministists, the LDS, the non-LDS, the zoobs, and the non-zoobs, you are probably close to a real nugget of truth.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

When you have managed to upset the feminists, the non-feministists, the LDS, the non-LDS, the zoobs, and the non-zoobs, you are probably close to a real nugget of truth.

Either that or you're as wrong as is possible.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

Either that or you're as wrong as is possible.

Except no one has offered a cogent rebuttal.

I've merely stated the obvious.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

When you have managed to upset the feminists, the non-feministists, the LDS, the non-LDS, the zoobs, and the non-zoobs, you are probably close to a real nugget of truth.

I'm not upset. I just think you're wrong. And when feminists, non-feminists, LDS, non-LDS, zoobs, and non-zoobs think you're wrong, it does not necessarily follow that you are right.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by All-American

I'm not upset. I just think you're wrong. And when feminists, non-feminists, LDS, non-LDS, zoobs, and non-zoobs think you're wrong, it does not necessarily follow that you are right.

No doubt you are preparing your brief.

In the meantime, we will scratch our heads wondering what you are talking about.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

What, specifically, do you not see? Mike is a bit all over the place here so I am not sure which issue you are arguing.

Originally Posted by mike

we have an entire cadre of LDS girls with no intention of becoming educated, or if educated, only moderately so, and if "very" educated, then not using that education in a vocation . . . . If you send your daughter to BYU, expect her to get much negative reinforcement if she is not on the SAHM-track.

Before I "prepare my brief," as you say, let's depose for a bit.

You say there's an entire cadre of LDS girls with no intention of becoming educated or using that education in a vocation. Do you believe there is a higher percentage of such girls than is typical? How much more? So much so that it crosses the threshold of institutional repression? To what degree would it need to be reversed to duck back under an acceptable threshold?

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by All-American

Do you believe there is a higher percentage of such girls than is typical? How much more? So much so that it crosses the threshold of institutional repression? To what degree would it need to be reversed to duck back under an acceptable threshold?

1. yes, higher percentage, when adjusted for parents income (i.e. social class), and esp. father's education.

2. Significantly more.

3. I know for certain there was institutional repression when I was at BYU. It's harder for me to speak to now, given that it is a decade later, but given that the fundamental aspects of the parent organization are not different and that cultures and educational institutions change very slowly, it would be shocking to me if there has been a sea-change.

4. I don't know that I am asking it to be "reversed". I am asking for a safe place for girls that don't fit the SAHM mold, in both the church and at BYU. If you do not prepare your daughters for the negative messages they will get at BYU, shame on you.

This is not anything different than I have been saying for years.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

1. yes, higher percentage, when adjusted for parents income (i.e. social class), and esp. father's education.

2. Significantly more.

3. I know for certain there was institutional repression when I was at BYU. It's harder for me to speak to now, given that it is a decade later, but given that the fundamental aspects of the parent organization are not different and that cultures and educational institutions change very slowly, it would be shocking to me if there has been a sea-change.

4. I don't know that I am asking it to be "reversed". I am asking for a safe place for girls that don't fit the SAHM mold, in both the church and at BYU. If you do not prepare your daughters for the negative messages they will get at BYU, shame on you.

This is not anything different than I have been saying for years.

Okay. I'll concede on points one and two, that there is significantly greater tendency for girls to eschew education knowing that they are going to be moms. I don't think that is a tendency unique to LDS women, but given the emphasis on family, I'll agree that it is more prevalent.

I also agree with you on part of point four, that the tendency does not necessarily need to be reversed. It may even be a good thing, all things considered.

But let me ask that you further elaborate on point 3. What was the nature of this institutional repression? How did it manifest itself? Who were its primary conveyors? What happened to those who tried to buck the trend?