Who Will Raise the Kids?
Will your mother move in with you so that you can hold down a full-time job along with your husband? Many times this becomes the solution to a marriage that compels the wife to stay at home every day, raising her children, while her husband goes to work and makes the money necessary to pay the bills.
Beyond the question of whether this arrangement is best for the wife, is the broader question of whether it's even better for society and the whole world.
When men go off to work, collectively they are taking on the job of running the world in which we all live, politically and business-wise. But is there something in their nature that makes them less equipped to do this than their spouses?
Men have trouble concentrating on the things in life that are less important than their careers. The question is: what is a man's primary career? Is it his job? Often, it isn't. His primary career is making babies. It's what occupies his mind with more force and emotion than anything else, even success at work, money, and power.
This is why women are better suited to high political and business positions than men. Women can concentrate more fully on the job at hand. They are less distracted than men.
Assuming this highly volatile and arguable point is a valid premise, just for the sake of argument, then who will take care of the children while both parents are away at work.
The mother-in-law solution in the home is a sure-fire end to most marriages. The next option is a full-time nanny, which would be expensive. Still, it's better than having a mad housewife in need of a costly psychiatrist.
Another option is a good workplace that provides on-site child care, and good schools that provide excellent after-school programs. This sounds more plausible, but it isn't always an option. For something like this to become more normal, allowing mothers to make a move out of the house and into the world of careers, society would have to change.
Big changes in society take place only when the vast majority of the population vote for those changes. Getting men to advocate having their wives move into the business world would be a difficult task. This is why society at this point is reluctant to accommodate career-women wives.
Not only are men half the voters; they also are in charge currently and, therefore, wouldn't want the issue even put to a vote in the first place.
Having on-site daycare at work, and meaningful after-school programs, costs a lot of money, either taxpayer money, business expense money, or contributions made privately to fund such programs.
As men currently control not only the power and decision-making process in government and business, it's too much to expect an over-night change in how things work in society.
Such is the imperfect life into which all of us have been born. But compared to 100 years ago, progress has been made, in the progressive nations, that is. Hope springs eternal in the human breast, to quote Alexander Pope. Therefore, we should look to a future where the best decision makers actually will be making the decisions.
After that, we'll be faced to decide what to do about husbands. Since the stay-at-home husband nanny situation is pretty much out of the question for the majority of men, what will we do with all the men? Gentle persuasion and coaxing, women's specialties, are the answer.
Women then will have the task at work, in their oval offices, to take care of the emotional sensitivities of their male subordinates, which really is no more than what good managers are doing today anyhow.