Sister Wives, anyone???

[tlbwriter]

There are those (including my mother) who feel that I set back the women's rights movement when I catagorize DH's and my particular jobs around the house. I say certain things are "women's" work and certain things are "men's" work. She says women fought for years to get out of the kitchen and here I am putting us back into the kitchen when I say doing dishes or doing laundry is "women's" work.

What she misses, what EVERYONE seems to miss, is that this particular method works best between myself and my husband for whatever reasons that are known to us and us alone. I'm not telling every woman I meet that they should be doing the dishes and/or laundry because that's their work; I'm classifying that particular task for myself and identifying with it as a woman.

Well, if you really do say that, I can see why your mother is missing the point, because it's certainly misleading. If you're not classifying those tasks for all women, why don't you call them "Carly's work" and "Mr Roach's work" instead of "women's work" and "men's work?" If you don't mean all women, there's no reason to call it "women's work." "Women" is plural, you know.

 

[LiberalPrincess]

Well, if you really do say that, I can see why your mother is missing the point, because it's certainly misleading. If you're not classifying those tasks for all women, why don't you call them "Carly's work" and "Mr Roach's work" instead of "women's work" and "men's work?" If you don't mean all women, there's no reason to call it "women's work." "Women" is plural, you know.

Yet you didn't have an issue with the previous poster who said, "Clearly women are not valued the same as men in that lifestyle. It's like turning back the clock on the progress women have made." Are all women in that "lifestyle" not valued? Have all women made enormous progress in defending and establishing their rights? Of course not. Yet the general plural was used. Sometimes we apply general gender comments which apply to our own situation or a particular situation, but I find it edifying which posts are chosen to prove the point, and more directly, which ones are ignored. In Carly's house, women do certain jobs. In my house men's work is the cooking and cleaning for the most part while the women of the house do the repairs and the upkeep (and make the most money). I am not sure why the plural changes the meaning or if you were deliberately missing Carly's point.

 

[CaliforniaDreamin]

you know, depending on what kind of benefit program an employee is under it could be advantageous (if the wives would buy into it-which i kind of doubt because i believe there is a pecking order in these marriages wherein the first wife is accorded the legal standing with the valid marriage in the eyes of the law) to whom one designates AS their legal wife.

some employee health plans (including my former gov. employers) had it such that a step-parent could provide coverage to their step-kids so long as they were living in the home and claimed on the tax return as dependants. to that end-if one of the wives works in a job with a benefit package like that, and it was cheaper for her to carry all the kiddos (we paid the same for employee coverage no matter if you had 1 kid or 20) it would realy result in a cost savings to make her's the legal marriage.
i'm willing to bet that these (for lack of a better term) "main stream" polygamists are very attuned to how to structure their legal standing in order to best utilize employer sponsored benefit programs without tipping their hands (if they work for an anti pologomy employer). i would suspect they also have legal paperwork in place pertaining to granting guardianship of the children to their sisterwives/non legal standing spouses (in the case of the husband with regard to his children from one wife going to a one of his other wives in the event of the death of both parents).

Bingo. Family coverage usually doesn't have any limit or price increase regardless how many kids are on the plan. Korey could care one spouse and ALL children, or one of the working wives could cover Korey and ALL children. It just leaves 2 wives to find single coverage or receive Medicaid.

Like you said, they know how to exploit everything possible. Like the sister wife with 5 or 6 kids...she is not legally married, has no income and would therefore be eligible for welfare, foodstamps, medicaid...etc etc. That's why all these FLDS compounds are full of mansions. They get money from the government to "assist" all these unwed mothers and their "illigitimate children". They have a good thing going. I'm not saying this group is doing that, but they certainly have the legal right to do so.

 

[tlbwriter]

In Carly's house, women do certain jobs. In my house men's work is the cooking and cleaning for the most part while the women of the house do the repairs and the upkeep (and make the most money). I am not sure why the plural changes the meaning or if you were deliberately missing Carly's point.

Are there "women" and "men" in Carly's house? If so, it makes sense that they might divide chores according to women and men. But if there's only one woman and only one man, it's rather silly to refer to "women's work" and then get peeved when people think you mean "women's work."

 

[CaliforniaDreamin]

Is it hypocrisy to point out that someone else is a hypocrite, even if you are not a perfect person and exemplary, sinless Christian? I don't think so, but I guess some people disagree.

I'm not gonna get started on a religious rant, but I think Carly was making a good point. She never said she was a not a sinner, and she also never said she was Christian (not that I saw, please correct me if I overlooked this). So no, I don't think it's a hypocritical statement. And as a Christian, I feel the need to point out that a basic tenent of Christianity is that we are all sinners. Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

All Carly really said in her statement was that Jesus did not teach man to judge men based on looks and lifestyles. And that's not Carly's opinion. That's a fact (if you believe in the teachings of Jesus.) She also never claimed to be a perfect person, exemplary or implied that anyone else should. I don't see any hypocrisy.

 

[VickiVM]

Bingo. Family coverage usually doesn't have any limit or price increase regardless how many kids are on the plan. Korey could care one spouse and ALL children, or one of the working wives could cover Korey and ALL children. It just leaves 2 wives to find single coverage or receive Medicaid.

Like you said, they know how to exploit everything possible. Like the sister wife with 5 or 6 kids...she is not legally married, has no income and would therefore be eligible for welfare, foodstamps, medicaid...etc etc. That's why all these FLDS compounds are full of mansions. They get money from the government to "assist" all these unwed mothers and their "illigitimate children". They have a good thing going. I'm not saying this group is doing that, but they certainly have the legal right to do so.

Some states may require that ALL income generated in the household be reported as part of the qualifying pricess. I believe (may be wrong, though) that that is the case w/Texas.

 

[tlbwriter]

I'm not gonna get started on a religious rant, but I think Carly was making a good point. She never said she was a not a sinner, and she also never said she was Christian (not that I saw, please correct me if I overlooked this). So no, I don't think it's a hypocritical statement. And as a Christian, I feel the need to point out that a basic tenent of Christianity is that we are all sinners. Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

All Carly really said in her statement was that Jesus did not teach man to judge men based on looks and lifestyles. And that's not Carly's opinion. That's a fact (if you believe in the teachings of Jesus.) She also never claimed to be a perfect person, exemplary or implied that anyone else should. I don't see any hypocrisy.

I never said Carly was being a hypocrite. I felt she was accusing the other poster of being a hypocrite.

 

[pigletgirl]

Wow, I caught a bit of this while doing homework, and all I can say is I would be totally jealous. I want my man to myself only! I know that sounds really selfish, but its true. I can't imagine my husband loving other women besides me.

But I definitely know that I won't be tuning in every week to watch this.

 

[CaliforniaDreamin]

Well, if you really do say that, I can see why your mother is missing the point, because it's certainly misleading. If you're not classifying those tasks for all women, why don't you call them "Carly's work" and "Mr Roach's work" instead of "women's work" and "men's work?" If you don't mean all women, there's no reason to call it "women's work." "Women" is plural, you know.

I think you are making this a little more "controversial" than it needs to be. There is no debate here, it's just semantics.

 

[tlbwriter]

I think you are making this a little more "controversial" than it needs to be. There is no debate here, it's just semantics.

Just pointing out to Carly why her semantics confused her mother (and "everyone" else). No biggie. Carry on.

 

[CaliforniaDreamin]

I never said Carly was being a hypocrite. I felt she was accusing the other poster of being a hypocrite.

I must have misinterpreted it then, because it seemed to me she was calling the idea of plural marriage hypocritical because women were not allowed to have brother-husbands (LOL). I didn't read into it that she was directing the hypocrisy at one single poster. Carly, can you clear this up? My brain isn't on full function today.

 

[CaliforniaDreamin]

Just pointing out to Carly why her semantics confused her mother (and "everyone" else). No biggie. Carry on.

Again, I'm not really getting the same things out of Carly's posts that you are. Her mother isn't confused, her mother certainly seems to understand the concept of "women's work" and "men's work", as do most ( I know it's a big assumption, but I think most 4 year olds know who plays what role when they play "house". I believe, and correct me if I'm wrong, that Carly's mother feels it is an antiquated concept and takes exception to her using it in her house. I don't think she is confused by the semantics of traditional gender specific chores.

 

[tlbwriter]

Again, I'm not really getting the same things out of Carly's posts that you are. Her mother isn't confused,

See post 119. She says her mother (and everyone) misses what she is telling her. I say that's because of the way she's telling her. Really, it's no big deal, and I don't think you need to keep poking me about it. You've made it clear that you disagree with me, as is your right.

 

[scjo68]

Some states may require that ALL income generated in the household be reported as part of the qualifying pricess. I believe (may be wrong, though) that that is the case w/Texas.

I have been wondering about this, too.
DH thinks the non-legal wives (non-working ones) may be on Gov't assistance, since the are "unwed" mothers. But I disagreed with him that since they were living with others who were earning money, they had to report that as household income.

I have a family member who became pregnant and moved in with her boyfriend, who was earning quite a bit of money. He supported her, but they did not get married. She actually lied and said she was not living with him, and so was able to receive gov't assistance, free formula, etc. She would not have been eligible, had she told the truth about living with him, even though they were unmarried.

 

[CaliforniaDreamin]

See post 119. She says her mother (and everyone) misses what she is telling her. I say that's because of the way she's telling her. Really, it's no big deal, and I don't think you need to keep poking me about it. You've made it clear that you disagree with me, as is your right.

You keep poking at Carly, and that's ok?

I read her post. She never said her mother was confused. She misses the idea of why Carly chooses to use that wording to describe chores (and that's what Carly wrote. She never said confused). I say her mother is capable of understanding the concept of designating chores by gender. However, maybe you know Carly's mother personally and feel I am crediting her with too much intelligence.

You keep picking apart Carly's posts, you can't really ask someone to not pick apart yours. Why, that would be...umm, what's that word that starts with an "h" but I'm not allowed to use it because I'm a Christian???
You wanna call it a draw and move on? Fine with me. If you want to keep going, that works too.

 

[angie@dvcstore]

This show seems weird but I still wanna watch it for some odd reason lol

 

[CaliforniaDreamin]

And I am glad that, as a child of the 70's and 80's, women fought for my right to decide how I wanted to live my life. Unfortunately, it seems that we still have a long way to go to be able to actually live our lives freely without having to put up with other women telling us how we should live our lives. But I suppose that until we as women actually evolve to the point where we finally realize that how others live their lives has absolutely no impact on our lives unless we allow it to, we'll have to put up with the passing of judgment from others.

I didn't think this was an issue in this day and age, but I have been proven wrong.

 

[tlbwriter]

I read her post. She never said her mother was confused.

You're right. She said her mother missed what she was saying. Clearly I have drastically misinterpreted what that means.

You keep picking apart Carly's posts, you can't really ask someone to not pick apart yours. Why, that would be...umm, what's that word that starts with an "h" but I'm not allowed to use it because I'm a Christian???
You wanna call it a draw and move on? Fine with me. If you want to keep going, that works too.

If I say I was wrong and you win at the Internets, will you leave it alone? For the sake of everyone on this thread?

 

[punkin]

You're right. She said her mother missed what she was saying. Clearly I have drastically misinterpreted what that means.

If I say I was wrong and you win at the Internets, will you leave it alone? For the sake of everyone on this thread?

 

[CaliforniaDreamin]

You're right. She said her mother missed what she was saying. Clearly I have drastically misinterpreted what that means.

Yes, clearly confusion about definitions and not understanding why someone would use specific terms, are absolutely the same thing. My bad. Sorry I called you on taking her words out of context. Twice.

If I say I was wrong and you win at the Internets, will you leave it alone? For the sake of everyone on this thread?

You are the drama queen, not me. I told you I would leave it alone if you would. You chose not to. You can't leave it alone sweetie.

OH!! I forgot to ask you about the rule where you can pick someone's posts apart but I can't. I cannot wait to hear that answer.