Leave It to Beaver family values aren’t outdated

Share

Leave it to beaver_Game_Board_01Watching an episode of the old Leave it to Beaver TV series from the 50s. Beaver is showing his mom some beautiful drawings he found in a sketchbook. Mom tells him they’re his father’s work. And Beaver decides he’ll ask his dad to draw his school poster for him. Mom, by the way, is dressed in an elegant shirtwaist dress with a ring of pearls adorning her slender neck and nonchalantly dabbing furniture polish on her perfectly clean rag and tenderly dusting the top of an elegant cabinet in the front hall. Looks just like the way most moms live today…not.

The lesson of the show was great. Kids need to do their own posters for school–not get their parents to do the work. But there was an interesting scene in the classroom. After two girls volunteered to dress dolls up in costumes of the American revolution, a boy raised his hand, too. The teacher sternly corrected the boy. “That’s not funny,” she said. “Everybody else thought so,” said the boy.

Makes me think of the changes that have gone on in our culture in the several decades I’ve been an adult. Interestingly, many modern parents who offer dolls to their young sons find the boys still tend to choose guns and tanks anyway—or at least dolls that turn into huge-monster fighting guys.

But the most beautiful part about Leave it to Beaver is how much the dad respects the mom. I’ve always remembered a quote I read years ago. “The best gift a man can give his children is to love their mother.” Beaver and Wally’s dad loved and respected their mom.

That’s one thing a child might miss when being raised by a single mom alone. But, oh, the wonderful things that baby may have with its single mom can be forces just as powerful–for the positive or the negative. It’s more about the mental health and self-esteem of the custodial parent, no matter what the marital situation.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

On orders, women will torture as readily as men

Share

Nazi Germany stamp - wikipedia_300pxMost of us have heard of the experiment done in the 60s where a bunch of students (mostly male) were asked to administer increasingly stronger shocks to a “subject” in the next room (another student who reacted with screams and begging as the “shocks” grew worse but was really not feeling anything).

A scientist just recently set up the same type of experiment and found that women were just as likely to continue administering the worsening shocks as men were.  Thought processes:

 

 

 

“Everyone was doing it” so it seemed to be okay.

The “victim” was in another room and couldn’t be seen suffering.

Because the authority figure ordered it, the shockers could feel the responsibility was his rather than theirs. “I had to do it. I was following orders.” (Movie: A Few Good Men. Nazi Germany.)

One of the conclusions the scientist reached was that seemingly women can be just as cruel as men, but they don’t often get the opportunity to do it in a public way or on a large scale–because jobs with that kind of power are taken by men.

I’m remembering a line from some movie (if anybody remembers the title, please share). In one scene a wise older black man was talking to his friend (or son or brother). He said something to the effect, “Don’t be so judgmental of white people. If the situation were reversed, that would be us.”

So does it come down to who’s got the raw power? Or is it more about enlightenment? The ability to put yourself in another’s place and apply the Golden Rule, even though it might cost you something. Does it mean any one of us would do anything to preserve our own social standing/reputation? But what if the price is life?

Soldiers—men and women—around the world face these kinds of issues regularly. Check out Demi Moore’s tough performance in the movie GI Jane. The movie Courage Under Fire with Denzel Washington and a surprising Meg Ryan is a powerful story of what a brave female officer went through to defend her right to command—and to protect her men. And here’s a website about women in the military.

Let us pray for all soldiers to be safe, and for days to come when no one will have to make those kinds of choices.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

“Divorced” is single, too

Share

Divorce 401 – the advanced stuff most of us don’t know

Many of us single women were not always single. And for those of us who are divorced, our perspectives on living single might be slightly different.

A while ago I talked with Christina Rowe, author of “Seven Secrets to a Successful Divorce-What every woman needs to know,” about her work with and for divorced women. I asked her what made her write this book, and here’s what she said:

Christina: The obvious one is that I went through my own hellish nightmare when I got divorced. But the other reason is that I am passionate about helping women get through that experience and live successfully as quickly as possible afterwards.

Barbara: Boy, I wish I’d had some help like that when I got divorced. But you know, the Internet wasn’t around when I was going through it. What’s your take on how the Internet has changed realities for women?

Christina: The Internet has made it easy for women to access valuable information about the divorce process and educate themselves. There are also many online divorce forums and support groups, so you can communicate with other women in the same situation as you.

Barbara: You say about your book: “If you are a woman getting divorced you must know how to protect yourself, your children and your future. Everything is at stake now. Do not assume your husband will be fair, divorce is war.” Strong stuff. But totally spot -for the experience that many women go through.

Christina: The best way to get a divorce is to settle your divorce in a fair and amicable manner, but this is not always possible if your husband become adversarial and refuse to settle. Women need to know their rights and how to protect themselves and their children in the event their divorce turns ugly.

Barbara: Your book is a real how-to guide for women and divorce. You learned some really critical secrets that ended up getting you far more justice than you would have gotten otherwise.

Christina: If you are thinking about getting a divorce, it is critical you learn the divorce secrets to planning and executing a successful divorce.  That’s what I describe in detail in my book.  You need to take control of your divorce and find out what to do to make your divorce as painless as possible.

Barbara: I know you recommend other resources for women considering divorce, going through it, or having recently survived it. Can you share a few of those with our thinking-about-being-single readers?

Christina: If you go to www.secretsofdivorce.com, you can read a free chapter of my book, Seven Secrets to a Successful Divorce. My blog is also full of information and resources at www.secrets-to-a-successful-divorce.blogspot.com

Barbara: What else should women know about your book?

Christina: You will learn the 7 steps you must take before asking your husband for a divorce, secret tips on finding the right divorce attorney, how to win in the courtroom, 7 signs of a cheating husband, what to do when your husband refuses to pay alimony and child support, the 3 essential things you must know to protect your children during a divorce, how to deal with the emotional aftershock of your divorce and much more.

If you’re a woman in the throes of the divorce war dance, attend one of Christina’s workshops and buy her book at www.secretsofdivorce.com/home.  Her book comes with a free 40 minute private coaching session over the phone.

Once again, check out Christina’s blog: www.secrets-to-a-successful-divorce.blogspot.com

Singlism in college textbooks? Yep – read our guest blogger

Share

textbooksDiscovered a cool Twitterer the other day, Jeanine, who writes about SinglePhobia. Having become a college student later in life—going for a second degree—she was surprised to find how negatively single people were presented in her university textbook. Happily, she agreed to contribute to our SWWAN blog…

“I recently took a social psychology course as an elective toward an undergraduate degree in sociology.  Our assigned textbook was Social Psychology by David G. Myers (ninth edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 2008).  Myers is a prolific author of college textbooks, and I’d read another of his books for an introductory psychology class.  As I read more of Social Psychology, I began to notice that Myers seems to have a negative opinion of single people.

“Throughout the book Myers correlates being married with higher levels of health, happiness, success, and social status than for single people.  But rather than offer readers a range of views about marital status that supports critical thinking, Myers promotes one viewpoint and seems to denigrate single people.

“In the first chapter, Myers describes a correlation between obesity in young women and discrimination, and states that obese women’s unmarried status at the conclusion of the study – at age 31 – suggests that the women were discriminated against.  But does being unmarried at age 31 – or age 41 or 51 – necessarily indicate discrimination?  Is being single a negative indicator?

“There are volumes of scholarly research on happiness, life satisfaction, and loneliness in married, single, divorced, and widowed people, from many points of view.  But throughout the textbook, Myers only mentions research that supports his beliefs about marriage, and seems to find opposing views trivial.  Myers writes “the myth that single women are happier than married women can be laid to rest” without citing proof.  At times he sounds contemptuous, referring to unmarried people as “pleasure-seeking” and assuming that single people view marriage as being in “bondage,” “chains,” or a “yoke.”

“Myers also states that married people are more complex than single people, explaining that if a married person has a bad day at work, he needn’t fall apart, because his work self is only a small part of his identity.  According to Myers, “when our personal identity stands on several legs, it, too, holds up under the loss of any one.”   He concludes that a married person’s identity “stands on several legs” but that a single person’s identity stands only on one leg – his work life.  It is as if Myers assumes that single people have no other pursuits outside of work – nothing but four walls and the pursuit of mindless pleasure!

“Ironically, a chapter in which Myers disparages single people features a photo of the Delaney sisters, a pair of sisters who never married, and who each lived beyond the age of 100.  The text offers, “The Delaney sisters, both over 100, attributed their longevity to a positive outlook on life.”

“A social psychology textbook should encourage critical thinking about cultural beliefs, not reinforce stereotypes and suppress dissenting views.  College professors who assign this textbook should be aware of Myers’ biases and also assign texts that offer a range of representations of the lives of single people.

“In class we discussed the widely held belief that married people were better off in terms of happiness, health, and life satisfaction.  One student mentioned Jennifer Senior’s article about urban loneliness in New York Magazine.  I read the article and that led me to discover the Singles Studies web site at Berkeley, which led me to books that challenge anti-singles bias in academic research and popular culture.  Through further reading, I learned that certain studies that support Myers’ negative view of single people are flawed in terms of data, design, or interpretation, and that some of our culture’s assumptions about single people are based on flawed research.

Myers, David G.  2008.  Social Psychology (9th edition) http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/0073531898/information_center_view0

David G. Myers’ web site http://www.davidmyers.org

Alone Together, by Jennifer Senior http://nymag.com/news/features/52450

What a shame the textbook author has such a limited view of singles–I bet he doesn’t know any single women who are SWWANs! Like Jeanine’s writing? Follow her on Twitter

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]