involving us (women)

[Amie]

This article *http://emergent-us.typepad.com/emergentus/2006/06/emerging_women_.html* addresses the Emergent crowd, but I see it as applying to any ministry/church/religious and/or spiritual organization who wishes to include women. Oh my goodness just look at the wonderful suggestions that they've collected!!

Presence Ministries is extremely woman friendly in my experience. I think that would even be better worded "woman inclusive". The fellas there actually already do what is suggested in the article save for - Provide morning-to-midnight childcare at conferences. Consider providing a stipend for those who need it. Or sacrifice a conference and let your wife go while you stay home with the kids.. I suspect that is not because they are unwilling to have it available.

As an aside, I wonder why childcare is an issue for us and not for the men. Hmm...

Amie

[Amie]

I realized that the link that I had before wasn't working so I edited it -- it works now :)

[Paige]

Yes, I think she made some good points. As for the childcare issue, I think that as a society, we are still dealing w/predominantly women caregivers. Thats not a bad thing, IMO, just something we need to be more considerate of and willing to compensate for. (Perhaps part of the compensation needs to be on the expectation that all mothers want to stay up 'till midnight in conversation also?)

Paige

[Amie]

Paige,

I don't think that anyone is expecting all mothers to want to stay up - they are just discussing making that an option for those that do.

Why do you not see women as the predominate caregivers as bad? I wouldn't choose the word "bad" either. I would hope that society would move toward shared caregiving but ultimately it's a personal choice. Do you think that the way that society is set up right now affords us that choice? I'm not so sure about that.

Amie

[Paige]

Do you think that the way that society is set up right now affords us that choice?

I'm not sure either. I'm not sure it is even a "society" issue, but rather a family one. We are already free to whatever extent finances afford, to make the choices that work best for us. Single parent families have to have a wage-earner in order to survive (usually), so their choices are mostly about who they can rely on to stand in the gap when they are working. Two parent families have some different options.

My comment about "staying up" was mostly about myself. I feel tired a lot lately (kind of happens every winter), so the thought of staying up is not something I cherish right now. Sleep is preferable ;)


Why do you not see women as the predominate caregivers as bad?

Possibly because I don't look at my own situation as bad, but rather blessed. I'm thankful that I've been able to be in the home as my kids have grown (and are still growing) up. I've also been blessed with a husband who was always willing to help whenever possible. We have a traditional looking home, but it was by choice, based on what was the most practical for us.

[Amie]

Paige,

Why do you see yourself as predominate caregiver? (<-rhetorical) I could be mistaken, but it appears that Dave gives 100% of himself as well. I don't mean that in a bad way. I hope that you know that since you know also that my home has practically the same set up.

I stay home while Bryan works out of the home. I'm not sure that his work doesn't count as caregiving though. I'm not saying that you do either, I just think that is often undercredited for the full time workers (male or female) ya know?

I don't see the person supporting the family as limited to a paycheck, yet I do not limit the importance of the paycheck either. Financial income provides a great deal to the family, it is an honorable choice of life service.

Balance is definately important though, imo. One of the households that I grew up in was traditional and the man also thought that when he clocked out at work, that was all that there was to it - his day was done - his role filled. There is more that a person can (and many do) provide their family and I can attest for how it feels when those things are absent.

Men nurture in different ways than women, but both nurture (or are able to) none-the-less. I think that children benefit from both sexes and the one choosing to provide for the family financially, nurtures when they are in the presence of their children. They are also providing 24/7 though.

Many men are choosing to stay home nowadays and women are pursuing careers. There are challenges for them in making those choices - that make carrying out those choices more difficult. Feeling comfortable in their chosen roles can be tough, especially in light of how society views it. I'm glad to see more freedom being practiced.

Isn't it interesting how involving women, even societally, is so complicated?

Amie

[Paige]

Why do you see yourself as predominate caregiver? (<-rhetorical) I could be mistaken, but it appears that Dave gives 100% of himself as well. I don't mean that in a bad way. I hope that you know that since you know also that my home has practically the same set up.

I stay home while Bryan works out of the home. I'm not sure that his work doesn't count as caregiving though. I'm not saying that you do either, I just think that is often undercredited for the full time workers (male or female) ya know?

So very true!!! The way I worded it may just be a symptom of unexamined programming. It is truer that we both give 100%


Many men are choosing to stay home nowadays and women are pursuing careers. There are challenges for them in making those choices - that make carrying out those choices more difficult. Feeling comfortable in their chosen roles can be tough, especially in light of how society views it. I'm glad to see more freedom being practiced.

That was my point about the choices people can make today. There already are households operating with a woman as a paycheck earner and a man predominantly in the home with direct children and upkeep responsibilities.

I don't see us a disagreeing at all, do you?

Paige

[Amie]

Paige,

No I don't see us as disagreeing. I'm enjoying the talk however :).

Religious type of involvement doesn't really have to do with who stays home. Perhaps some unexamined programming lie within the article and the way I even opened this thread in that childcare is an issue not just for "women", but for any spouse within a family (this could even be an issue in same sex households) that chooses for said spouse to be at home. In simpler words, lol, there is a need for childcare for people who want to participate in travel-to events - it's a concern in my home at least, and for some of the women participating in that emergent conversation.

In your home church, do you participate as equally as the men, even leading conversations? Do you talk about issues that are somewhat woman specific? IOW, what is your experience?

Amie

[Paige]

In your home church, do you participate as equally as the men, even leading conversations? Do you talk about issues that are somewhat woman specific? IOW, what is your experience?

In our setting, everybody participates as they wish to. We have talked about women issues quite often. Everyone there is on the same page as far as equality among us all. It seems as if we've settled into what is comfortable and it kind of flows from there.

Paige

[Tam]

Well, here's a little of my perspective on this. : ) When I left institutionalized church, one of the most wonderful things I experienced is no longer really caring "how" things are done inside of them. For example...when I'd see things on tv regarding this denomination or that denomination and whether they'd "allow" homosexuals to do this or that in their church, my response was "who cares?" : ) I know that homosexuals are equal and important and we all can learn just as much from them as anyone else and that's the only type of setting I want to be in. The only thing about it that makes me sad, is that homosexuals and women and whoever...care so much about how an institution wants to rec'v them. I wish I could convince them that it doesn't matter how an institution rec'vs them. God receives them and that's all that matters.

As for the men and children thing. I don't mean to be a spoiler on this but honestly, if I were a man in this society...I wouldn't be involved in anything that put me much in arms length of kids that weren't my own. My husband has always been extremely involved with our kids. Changed diapers and the whole thing. He's a great dad. But I don't encourage him to be in situations where he's all that close to other children. I don't want him to be accused of something he wouldn't and couldn't ever do. It's just too risky.

I used to resent always being called on to work in nurseries etc. Wasn't my bag at all! The best solution for me? Leave the system and let them worry about all that. : ) FREEDOM! Wonderful thing! Tami

[Amie]

Tam,

I know what you mean about the whole institution thing. IF we choose to be involved in an organization, or in religious things, I think that it's good to examine how we would like to be. Not just for us, but for those who wish to involve us.

Religious leadership by in large affects the way Christians think today. 33% of the world is Christian. I think that maybe then, it may be beneficial to even consider our world involvement - and it is considered daily I'm sure.

As well, Islam makes up 21% of the world, Hinduism 14%, and it trickles down from there. Of the 16% so called "non-religious", half are "theistic". Religion has quite a grip on the world.

What a beautiful thing to imagine their waking up to the reality of freedom as you have. Does that mean though that organizations will no longer exist? I hope not actually. I think that they may look different though. Of course, I'm speaking way into the future, heh.

Amie

[Tam]

Tam,

I know what you mean about the whole institution thing. IF we choose to be involved in an organization, or in religious things, I think that it's good to examine how we would like to be. Not just for us, but for those who wish to involve us.

Religious leadership by in large affects the way Christians think today. 33% of the world is Christian. I think that maybe then, it may be beneficial to even consider our world involvement - and it is considered daily I'm sure.

As well, Islam makes up 21% of the world, Hinduism 14%, and it trickles down from there. Of the 16% so called "non-religious", half are "theistic". Religion has quite a grip on the world.

What a beautiful thing to imagine their waking up to the reality of freedom as you have. Does that mean though that organizations will no longer exist? I hope not actually. I think that they may look different though. Of course, I'm speaking way into the future, heh.

Amie

I understand Amie, I think I didn't do a very good job in presenting my view. :uhh: I really do care about all those groups you mention and I care very much about how women or gays are treated in them. I do tend to separate it a bit though from our own culture where we're free to "choose" our poison so to speak. But then again, many women in our own culture don't know any different. I was certainly in that situation before and you aren't even aware that there's any other way or you're sure to be condemned to hell. My greatest hope though is for ppl to be freed from the bondage of religion altogether. It would be great if women were treated like equals in church settings, but even greater if they knew that God would never dream up such a scenario as sending someone to eternal torment.

So that's more where I'm coming from. Sorry if I came across as brash or harsh. :) Tami

[Amie]

Tami,

I didn't take you for harsh at all :). I think that you had a great point. If we stop working to control how the leadership treats us, maybe we'll focus on the treatment that we decide to accept for ourselves. I am willing to bet that would make changes to the better.

Amie