Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What "traditional values?"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-23-04 12:52 PM
Original message
What "traditional values?"
I was watching "Mona Lisa Smile" on cable yesterday and then commented about the oppressed years of the early 50s (though I expect that these same young college women then led the Feminist movement).

"This is why I don't understand those who talk about 'traditional values.' What traditional values? there are none. It is only a way to play it safe" were the comments from my spouse.

Indeed, as the final credits scrolled on the screen, they were against a background of those old commercials showing women using vacuum cleaners while wearing high heel shoes and pearls... Another one, quite bizarre, of a man using something like large tongues to measure a women's breasts... all those ads pushing women to be obedient wives and homemakers and, of course, to please their husbands and finally a promotion for Levittown... But then, it was precisely this background that sent the baby boomers to the streets to march for Civil Rights, against Vietnam and finally for Women's equality.

"So how can today's young people wish for these old days, again?" Asked my spouse. It is obviously no longer younger people wanting to rebel against their parents' outlook on life, as was presented in a TV series from the 80s - cannot recall the name but it launched the career of Michael J. Fox - where he was a very conservative son rebelling against his flower kids parents. By now the rebels of the 60s should have grand children who, in theory, should rebel again..

And I was thinking that when people talk about "traditional values" - not only here but in closed societies around the world - they talk about life where everything and everyone has its place. Where there are no questions and doubts, no shades of gray - only black and white - and of course no nuances.

There was a story on ABC news about a young Amish woman who finally went to the local police after her community did nothing about her two brothers who sexually abused her for years. We do things our own way, said the mother of the three.

And while it may be comfortable to live life where there is a place for everything and every place, where, when we wake up in the morning we know exactly what to expect - some of us actually welcome the unexpected - the reality is that life is not like that. Perhaps this is why Bush ignored the August briefing about possible terrorist attack; perhaps this is why Bush does not read newspapers and likes to spend so much time in his ranch - he detests surprises. Perhaps even why he fell when he tried the Sageway people mover...

But if millions of people around the world choose this kind of life, isn't it up to the adults among us to plan for the unexpected even for them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
serryjw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-23-04 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
1. I miss the clarity
It was so much easier. "good girls & bad girls"...etc! In all aspects of our life it is so complicated. The rules have changed so much, communication has NOT made our lives easier BUT more complicated.In our current society everyone has to strive to be an over-achiever! What is wrong with just achieving and having a balanced life. In 1980 I was in the hospital for a problem they could not diagnose for 10 DAYS! Today you are in for maybe 2!
No I don't want to go back to the days when woman were stephford wives, BUT now being a middle age single woman is not easy. What is wrong with wanting a relationship and share your life with someone? Today that is NOT politically correct.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-23-04 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. The rules, indeed, have changes so much that you can choose your own
No, there is nothing wrong with wanting a relationship, with wanting a partner for life, with wanting commitment - with that "piece of paper." After all, this is why so many gays want marriage.

But today, at least in theory, you should be able to choose a partner and friends with whom you agree on how you treat each other. Today we cherish honesty in relationship, not offensive, brutal honesty, but a caring one that we all need to feel comfortable in such relationships.

Those days of clarity found many unhappy people - women, mostly - having to present a facade of happy marriages while in reality dying inside. This too, was one of the character in the movie "Mona Lisa Smile."

Living by your own rules does mean setting your own pace in life, choosing to be happy in your own achievement and not looking at the Jonses to compare yourself or your family members to others.

Little things. We are proud of not driving an SUV; we are proud of not owning an iPod (even though we have been Macusers for more than 15 years now). I remember going to a departmental meeting on a Monday and most would immediately ask: hey, have you seen the game (fill in the blank for your favorite team)? And at one point I replied: no, but we attended a wonderful concert at Orchestra Hall.

You can create your own clarity where you can decide how flexible you want to be on some issues, and how important to you are others.

The worst thing, if you don't mind me saying so - is for you to try to be what you are not in order to attract a life long companion. Because after a while you will feel a prisoner in that false identity and that companion will wonder what happened to the woman that was so attractive at the beginning.

There are many people in our world. The more you get to meet new ones - in campaign offices in your neighborhood for example - the more you will be able to meet new people who could become friends for life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
serryjw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-23-04 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. You mean I can't be a REPUBLICAN woman?
I will not date a rethug and unfortunately being in CO I would venture to guess 80% of the single man are rethugs.It gets lonely out there choosing between who you are and companionship.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Princess Buttercup Donating Member (71 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-23-04 01:35 PM
Response to Original message
2. I agree with you
I get so tired of the whole "traditional values" crowd too. You saw it rear its ugly head when Karen Hughes (a working mom) criticized Teresa Heinz Kerry for not "valuing" stay-at-home moms. You see it with the pro-lifers who get all sanctimonious on you about how much they "value" life (as if we don't). Meanwhile, many of these "pro-lifers" support the death penalty. I have seen plenty of people get really worked up about how life was so much better for everyone before prayer was banned from public schools (according to an e-mail I received, banning prayer from public schools led directly to everything from the increase in the crime rate to Columbine to the terrorist attacks). Because we (the liberal elite, LOL) don't "value" religion.

People make assumptions about other people's values and want to pigeonhole everyone. Take, for example, the attitude many Democrats have about Texas. Trust me, all Texans don't think * is the greatest thing to come down the pike. The <only> good thing about the 2000 selection is that it got him out of Texas (at least part of the time). People at my church make assumptions that all Christians naturally should support having prayer in the public schools. Some of them also assume that all Christians should support the pResident because he is a "Godly man." As if. Some of these people also tell me that because I work outside the home I am harming my children; that I don't "value" my kids enough to be there for them.

I refuse to be pigeonholed. I go to church. I teach Sunday school and go to Bible study. I watch NASCAR. My husband and I both are involved with various community activities. We live in a suburb and I drive a minivan. So some people have mistakenly assumed that because we have these outer trappings of so-called traditional values (other than that work outside the home thing) that we should support the * agenda. After all, don't we want our kids to be safe? Don't we want them to pray in school? There is a mindset that seems to say that if you live in this area and make this much money and drive this kind of car and send your kids to this school that naturally you must support the Republicans. Like it's a status symbol of sorts, a way to say you've moved up out of the ranks of people who don't get a tax cut (or to make people think you have).

It does have eerie echoes of the Donna Reed happy homemaker traditional family two kids and a dog way of life. Although if this "traditional values" crowd knew anything about the reality (oh, I forget, they don't do reality) they would know that even the fifties weren't as great as this nostalgic, TV-created, version that they have in their minds. One of my co-workers likes to tell nostalgic tales about her childhood and contrast it to how awful it must be for my poor overscheduled kids who are being raised by other people (that would be the public schools). Let me see, the "good old days" of the fifties--segregation, polio, no rights for women. Yeah, let's go back. Some places, it's like we already have.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-23-04 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. Welcome to DU and about prayer in school
First, the traditional "toast" that we offer new DUers :toast: I will be looking forward to many more posts of you.

Four years ago, right before Bush was elected, I ran into a wonderful article in the Los Angeles Times. I was so impressed that I kept it and now ran and found it. Here are selected paragraphs.

September 7, 2000

'No Pray, No Play' Trivializes Piety

By: CHARLES A. KIMBALL
Charles A. Kimball is chairman of the Department of Religion at Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, N.C

This summer's U.S. Supreme Court decision banning school sponsored or endorsed prayer before high school football games was not well received in many quarters. In towns and cities across the South, tens of thousands of evangelical Christians are organizing "spontaneous" recitations of the Lord's Prayer prior to Friday night games.

(snip)

Several leaders of groups like "We Still Pray" in Asheville, N.C., contend that they won't stand by while God is "excluded." They agree with those who suggest that God was removed from public schools in the 1960s. These folks are determined to bring God back into public life. What kind of theological understanding is at work here? Devout Jews, Christians and Muslims understand God to be omnipresent as well as omnipotent and omniscient. Is there any place--including high school football games--where God isn't present? Surely God's presence doesn't depend on human invocation.

(snip)

Many evangelical Christians these days wear a cloth bracelet with the letters WWJD prominently displayed. What Would Jesus Do is meant to remind the person to reflect continually on his or her behavior in light of the teachings of Jesus. Perhaps a little such reflection prior to reciting the Lord's Prayer at football games would help. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus had strong words for those who displayed their piety in public settings:

"And whenever you pray, do not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, so that they may be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. But whenever you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you." (Matthew 6:5-6)

(snip)

Imagine yourself in another setting where you are the neighbor, a part of the religious minority. Imagine yourself, for instance, as a Christian in the world's largest Islamic country, Indonesia. What message would you take away from a soccer stadium filled with Muslims chanting the first chapter of the Koran in unison? Would it make you feel better if a Muslim leader explained that they just wanted to be sure God's presence was not "excluded" from the event? Again, Jesus offers sage guidance in the Golden Rule: "In everything, do to others as you would have them do to you; for this is the law and the prophets." (Matthew 7:12)

(snip)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Princess Buttercup Donating Member (71 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-23-04 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Thanks for the welcome!
People so misunderstand the whole prayer/religion in school thing. It is ok for my daughter to read her Bible at school (she takes it in her backpack). It would not be ok for her teacher to read the Bible to her.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-23-04 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
3. Traditional values - The Taliban in a business suit and apron.
And a society in which everybody knows there "proper place". Women, blacks, Hispanics, children, everybody. White Males supreme the rest obedient.

Throw in the appropriate "Christian" (not the ones that Jesus spoke of) and it's heaven on earth for White Males...with money.

Reagan, the Bushes, Jerry Falwell's America. Complete with apple pie and the missionary position.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-23-04 03:42 PM
Response to Original message
7. Tradishunl valyooz = sexual repression, Jim Crow and Manifest Destiny
I can't wait for Toutatis to smack us in 2012.









Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
George_S Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-23-04 04:00 PM
Response to Original message
8. The Way We Never Were
Amazon.com
Did you ever wonder about the historical accuracy of those "traditional family values" touted in the heated arguments that insist our cultural ills can be remedied by their return? Of course, myth is rooted in fact, and certain phenomena of the 1950s generated the Ozzie and Harriet icon. The decade proved profamily--the birthrate rose dramatically; social problems that nag--gangs, drugs, violence--weren't even on the horizon. Affluence had become almost a right; the middle class was growing. "In fact," writes Coontz, "the 'traditional' family of the 1950s was a qualitatively new phenomenon. At the end of the 1940s, all the trends characterizing the rest of the twentieth century suddenly reversed themselves." This clear-eyed, bracing, and exhaustively researched study of American families and the nostalgia trap proves--beyond the shadow of a doubt--that Leave It to Beaver was not a documentary.

Gender, too, is always on Coontz's mind. In the third chapter ("My Mother Was a Saint"), she offers an analysis of the contradictions and chasms inherent in the "traditional" division of labor. She reveals, next, how rarely the family exhibited economic and emotional self-reliance, suggesting that the shift from community to nuclear family was not healthy. Coontz combines a clear prose style with bold assertions, backed up by an astonishing fleet of researched, myth-skewing facts. The 88 pages of endnotes dramatize both her commitment to and deep knowledge of the subject. Brilliant, beautifully organized, iconoclastic, and (relentlessly) informative The Way We Never Were breathes fresh air into a too often suffocatingly "hot" and agenda-sullied subject. In the penultimate chapter, for example, a crisp reframing of the myth of black-family collapse leads to a reinterpretation of the "family crisis" in general, putting it in the larger context of social, economic, and political ills.

The book began in response to the urgent questions about the family crisis posed her by nonacademic audiences. Attempting neither to defend "tradition" in the era of family collapse, nor to liberate society from its constraints, Coontz instead cuts through the kind of sentimental, ahistorical thinking that has created unrealistic expectations of the ideal family. "I show how these myths distort the diverse experiences of other groups in America," Coontz writes, "and argue that they don't even describe most white, middle-class families accurately." The bold truth of history after all is that "there is no one family form that has ever protected people from poverty or social disruption, and no traditional arrangement that provides a workable model for how we might organize family relations in the modern world."

Some of America's most precious myths are not only precarious, but down right perverted, and we would be fools to ignore Stephanie Coontz's clarion call. --Hollis Giammatteo

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0465090974/104-9967655-8091915?v=glance
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 04:00 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC