My friend Usch is furious. She's just sent me a link to a USA Today blog post: Does God want women to stay home?, and a response from The Clutter Museum. Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Fort Worth, has started offering a humanities degree with a concentration in homemaking. And it's only open to women.
Now, I know a Southern Baptist seminary attracts students with a certain set of conservative values. And the students attending such academic institutions would not have countenanced going to a West Coast university, (e.g. Berkeley, CalTech, Stanford - which I associate with very liberal-verging on socialist ideologies). And to some extent, if they want to do that in their part of the world then who am I to say anything? Other than that it looks like a bloody useless degree in teaching grandmothers to suck eggs (much like the made up degrees some of the newer universities in the UK are churning out). But it's the fact that it's only open to women that I find patronising.
Paul and I both work full-time. From the moment we moved in together, we divided up the household chores thus. Paul = washing up, laundry, ironing, vacuuming. Me = cooking, cleaning (especially the toilet), dusting. In the garden now, Paul deals with the composter and the barbecue and brazier, and I deal with the plants (we flip for raking the lawn). It's a domestic arrangement that suits me just fine. I am not a Stepford Wife, and Paul would be horrified if I was.
And here's the kick in the teeth of good old-fashioned home values - when we eventually decide that procreation is a feasible and indeed desirable activity, Paul is going to be the stay-at-home dad. Why not? He's better with kids than I am. My friend's children think he's great. He's aiming for a career (writing) which enables him to work from home. I'm aiming for a career which will probably take me out of the country rather a lot. It just makes sense. So why not give prospective fathers homemaking classes too?
I took a bit of home economics at school, up to year 9 (8th grade). Can't say I remember anything from it. I had to relearn how to bake bread this time last year. I think I made burgers (to be honest I make it up as I go along with burgers now), and probably a flan. Anyway, the moment we could choose which "Craft, Design and Technology" option we wanted to take, I plumped for Technology, and was the only girl in the whole class (and I got an A* - boo yeah!!). I can remember pneumatics and electronics, and jolly useful they are too. A few girls took "Design and Realisation" (wood-bashing). Some more took "Design and Communication" (graphics). Even more took Home Economics and Textiles, but by far the most over-subscribed class was "Child Development" (it was open to girls and boys, but presumably all the boys were either far more interested in beating the crap out of a piece of wood/metal or they thought if they signed up for it they'd be called "gay"). It was looked down upon as basically being training for all those girls planning on getting themselves up the duff before GCSE results came out. And sure enough, most of them did so before their 18th birthdays.
But even then - the Child Development classes were three hours a week for two whole years, with coursework (it involved acquiring a relative's or neighbour's baby for a bit). This homemaking module is 23 hours altogether. GCSE Child Development didn't prepare my contemporaries for having children, so how on earth is a degree in homemaking going to work?
I don't think I'm angry about it. As long as I'm never expected to cross paths with a graduate of that class they may as well do a degree that's going to further segregate themselves from the rest of society. I'm a bit non-plussed by the fact that it is only open to women, but I assign this to the same internal directory as all that surrendered wife bollocks. But Jesus H Christ on a bike - what a thoroughly boring class to take when there are so many more useful and interesting subjects, even at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.
Now, I know a Southern Baptist seminary attracts students with a certain set of conservative values. And the students attending such academic institutions would not have countenanced going to a West Coast university, (e.g. Berkeley, CalTech, Stanford - which I associate with very liberal-verging on socialist ideologies). And to some extent, if they want to do that in their part of the world then who am I to say anything? Other than that it looks like a bloody useless degree in teaching grandmothers to suck eggs (much like the made up degrees some of the newer universities in the UK are churning out). But it's the fact that it's only open to women that I find patronising.
Paul and I both work full-time. From the moment we moved in together, we divided up the household chores thus. Paul = washing up, laundry, ironing, vacuuming. Me = cooking, cleaning (especially the toilet), dusting. In the garden now, Paul deals with the composter and the barbecue and brazier, and I deal with the plants (we flip for raking the lawn). It's a domestic arrangement that suits me just fine. I am not a Stepford Wife, and Paul would be horrified if I was.
And here's the kick in the teeth of good old-fashioned home values - when we eventually decide that procreation is a feasible and indeed desirable activity, Paul is going to be the stay-at-home dad. Why not? He's better with kids than I am. My friend's children think he's great. He's aiming for a career (writing) which enables him to work from home. I'm aiming for a career which will probably take me out of the country rather a lot. It just makes sense. So why not give prospective fathers homemaking classes too?
I took a bit of home economics at school, up to year 9 (8th grade). Can't say I remember anything from it. I had to relearn how to bake bread this time last year. I think I made burgers (to be honest I make it up as I go along with burgers now), and probably a flan. Anyway, the moment we could choose which "Craft, Design and Technology" option we wanted to take, I plumped for Technology, and was the only girl in the whole class (and I got an A* - boo yeah!!). I can remember pneumatics and electronics, and jolly useful they are too. A few girls took "Design and Realisation" (wood-bashing). Some more took "Design and Communication" (graphics). Even more took Home Economics and Textiles, but by far the most over-subscribed class was "Child Development" (it was open to girls and boys, but presumably all the boys were either far more interested in beating the crap out of a piece of wood/metal or they thought if they signed up for it they'd be called "gay"). It was looked down upon as basically being training for all those girls planning on getting themselves up the duff before GCSE results came out. And sure enough, most of them did so before their 18th birthdays.
But even then - the Child Development classes were three hours a week for two whole years, with coursework (it involved acquiring a relative's or neighbour's baby for a bit). This homemaking module is 23 hours altogether. GCSE Child Development didn't prepare my contemporaries for having children, so how on earth is a degree in homemaking going to work?
I don't think I'm angry about it. As long as I'm never expected to cross paths with a graduate of that class they may as well do a degree that's going to further segregate themselves from the rest of society. I'm a bit non-plussed by the fact that it is only open to women, but I assign this to the same internal directory as all that surrendered wife bollocks. But Jesus H Christ on a bike - what a thoroughly boring class to take when there are so many more useful and interesting subjects, even at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.
No comments:
Post a Comment