So, what do you think?

(Uh-oh...I think this might be another soapbox moment.)

My sister has decided she wants to be a Stay-at-Home-Wife and her husband is totally on board with that. They are able to afford to have her stay home, if they cut back a little and they're both willing to do that. The problem (as she sees it): They have no kids. So, she feels she should be doing something valuable with her time and feels guilty for wanting to stay home. When we talked about this, so many things struck me at once that I had to ask you all your opinions.

1) Why isn't it valuable for someone (gender irrelevant here) to stay home and care for the home?

2) Isn't part of the problem with "home" these days is that no one has the time to care for it?

3) Doesn't everyone function better in a well-run home?

4) Why does she have to have children to make this choice more "legitimate"?

I've talked with Superman about this dilemma and we both agree that there is tremendous value in someone being home and actually, mindfully, caring for the home. I worked full-time for the first ten years of our marriage and I won't deny that there was a huge adjustment to be made when I came home full-time. It wasn't always easy, and like my sister I often wondered if I were not actually making a valuable contribution, but it was worth it. From being better organized and better fed, to being more self-sufficient and making a better use of the household's resources, we think there is tremendous value in having someone "managing" the home.

My sister and her husband moved into a new house in a new town in August or September and they both started working at new jobs immediately. Guess where all their energy and focus was directed? Not at home. Fast forward a few months and my sister had quit her job and run smack dab into the holidays. Guess where her focus was? Not really on her home...instead it was more on "pulling off the holidays when she felt like a crazy person". So, here we are in second week of February and she's begun to relax. She sees tons of things that need to be done in her house and actually starts thinking she can get them done. But, alas, then the ugly voice begins again: "You should do something important, something valuable. Go make some money instead of WASTING your time here."

When did having a well-run home become a waste of time? Or, even more absurd, when did it become accepted that she should be in charge of a well-run home and devoted to full-time employment? Why isn't being home, caring for your home and your community, an admirable pursuit?

Finally, why does she have to have children to want these things? No, I'm not being naive...I understand that many people think children are an "excuse" to stay home. No, they add a lot of work to the job of keeping a home running and many, many of us take years to figure out how to make it all work. I would have loved to have been home for a few years before I had children...instead, I did at-home training to learn to care for my home. It wasn't that long ago that no one would have expected her to go to work after she got married. (Yes, I know also that in many cases she wouldn't have been allowed to, but the point is, the time she would have been at home was considered too important to lose her contribution.)

Why would it be more legitimate for her to work full time for money she doesn't need, to buy things she doesn't need, so that she doesn't have time to care for and do the things she (and her husband) really want to do? When did this become the way things are done?

So, what do you think? Should my sister go back to work? Should she feel good about staying home and turning this new house into their home? What are your thoughts? Let me know...

"Have you read this book?" or "My small soapbox moment"

I read a lot. I read fiction, primarily, but lately I've been adding a number of non-fiction titles to my reading. After a long wait on the library list, I was finally at the top of the list for a book I'd requested a few months ago. I finished it a few days ago and I find myself compelled urge all of you (parents and non-parents) to read it, too.

The book is called "So Sexy, So Soon: The New Sexualized Childhood and What Parents Can Do" by Diane Levine and Jean Kilbourne. This books explores the hyper-sexualized society in which children are being raised these days. Television, radio, school, and stores are all pushing a level of sexuality on our children that is confusing and inappropriate and, frankly, that they are not equipped to deal with. If you think to yourself, "We didn't look that way when we were in Junior High!", you are absolutely correct. I would wager that my friends who are teachers would agree that the level of overt sexuality, inappropriate sexual behavior, and sexual awareness in the classroom is unprecedented and uncomfortable for everyone.

Let's face it...we live in a world where little girls in kindergarten know that being sexy is a good thing, even if they don't know what "sexy" actually means. They are body aware and younger and younger ages. Little boys receive their own confusing messages as they watch/listen to men degrade women and women parade around barely clothed. Even though these things might not be happening in your own home, your children are seeing and trying to process these things. Before you think your kids are too young or completely insulated, I urge you to think for a minute. Unless you live in a cave, they've seen these things. Anybody had their children ask them what "erectile dysfunction" is? What about, "What is an erection lasting more than four hours?"...we were watching History Channel this evening and my children heard and quesitoned both those things. What about that stupid Paris Hilton Carl's Jr. commercial that was on a few years ago? Remember that? She was writhing all over car squirting water on herself and moaning? Gee, what was the subliminal symbolism there? These are not "late night" commercials, either. These are commercials that are on during "prime time" for goodness' sake.

This book tackles children's exposure to inappropriate content beginning at preschool age (oh, yes, it is there) and moves on through high schoolers. Even if you are doing your very best to keep the children in your life insulated from these messages, it behooves you to understand why and how they are being transmitted to your children. Even if you feel certain your faith and your church are sending strong messages of what is appropriate, you must remember that your children are spending their days with children who might not be getting those same messages. For parents who've never really thought about combating it, or feel helpless in the face of the onslaught, the book concludes with techniques to help combat this exposure and its ramifications at every age.

Unlike some books of this nature, this book was a quick read and just reinforced my commitment to be vigilant protecting my children's right to be children. I am not a prude. I understand all human being have innate sexuality and my children are no different, but the pace at which they experience grown-up things should not be media driven.

Okay, that is my soapbox and I'm stepping off it for now. I urge you to read this book...it is worth your time. It is not preachy, it is practical.

Please let me know if you prefer me to stick to cooking and sewing and crafting. I'm not sure I'll be able to, but I'd like to know what you think.