Saturday, 08 January 2011
-
The Stay at Home Daughter Movement
By Sharon at SheWorshipsLast month I received a link to the following article that ran in Time Magazine entitled Meet the ‘Selfless’ Women of the ‘Stay at Home Daughters Movement’. I had never before heard of the Stay at Home Daughters Movement (SAHD for short) so the information came as quite a shock. Especially given that the article was written in what I would call an uncharitable manner.
Since that time I came across another article on Christianity Today’s blog for women, Her.meneutics (if you aren’t following this blog you SHOULD be!), that offered an arguably more balanced perspective on the movement. The post was called What Is the Stay-at-Home Daughters Movement and it was written by Karen Swallow Prior, a professor at Liberty University. I also highly recommend it. She summarizes the movement as follows:
Essentially, adherents of SAHD believe daughters should never leave the covering of their fathers until and unless they are married.
Of the movement’s strengths as listed by Prior, she included their emphasis on non-traditional, higher education and their high regard for the father-daughter relationship. I agree with Prior, and was pleased to read a review of the movement that did not throw the baby out with the bath water. While I disagree with many of SAHD’s conclusions, we can still learn from this member of Christ’s Body.
However, along with Prior I also share some concerns. Fortunately, Prior said them better than I could have in the following excerpt:
But the real issue is less “to stay or not to stay” than the underlying principle for doing so. While SAHD advocates cite ample scriptural passages to support their orthopraxy (the practice of their orthodoxy), the principle underlying that practice seems to me to lack explicit scriptural support. This principle is what they claim is a clear divide between “public and private” (terms less connected to biblical language than to Enlightenment concepts) or separate “spheres of dominion” for men and women. Vision Forum Ministries states that “men are called to public spheres of dominion beyond the home,” and “the God-ordained and proper sphere of dominion for a wife is the household and that which is connected with the home.”
It’s possible that this bipartite division is more a social construct than a biblical one. If separate spheres were extrapolated from biblical language and principles, it is more likely such realms would fall along a more complex, tripartite division like family, church, and society. Such a trinity of spheres complicates neat alignments with the God-given binary of male and female.
Perhaps this helps explain some of the problem. For while the SAHD movement calls for daughters to “be helpers to their mother and blessings to [their] entire family,” their attentions appear largely focused on the ministry and business of the fathers. (By the way, none of the fathers, apparently, work at the local automotive plant.)
After I read that section the first time, I read it back to my husband word-for-word because I thought it was so dead on! The distinction between public and private spheres for men and women is indeed a liberal construct, not a Christian one. And as the last line implies, the SAHD ideology would be difficult to live out in a family living within a low economic bracket.
Now, I am always wary of setting up straw men that are easily knocked down, especially when the leaders of the movement aren’t here to defend themselves, so I must affirm that if these women feel led to stay at home with their fathers in preparation for marriage, then more power to them! Does that mean that ALL women are called to do the same? Certainly not. As mentioned above, we have to be very careful of belief systems that develop out of our financial privilege or personal convictions, lest they exclude entire populations within the Body of Christ.
What is the take-away lesson here?
In the face of these disagreements it’s important to remember that there are central issues to the Christian faith, but there are also debatable ones. Mark Driscoll refers to this difference as close-fisted and open-fisted issues. Some doctrines, such as the Trinity and the divine nature of Christ, are “close-fisted” doctrines. We do not let go of them. They are non-negotiables. On the other hand, there are also open-fisted beliefs, such as speaking in tongues or worship style. When it comes to the open-fisted beliefs, we can have union with other Christians even if we disagree with them.
I believe that SAHD is an open-fisted belief. I disagree with some of their conclusions (some very strongly!) but they are still my sisters in Christ. In contrast with the many articles that have slandered SAHD without mercy, a response of kindness and gentleness is, I believe, more faithful to the character of Christ.
RecommendRelated Posts
Post a Comment
- Back to revelife's Revelife Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in revelife's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
About the Author
-
- From: sheworships
- Name: Sharon
- About Me: Sharon Hodde Miller is a North Carolina girl, born and raised! She is originally from Charlotte, NC, and she received her undergraduate degree and Masters of Divinity from Duke University. Sharon has worked for Proverbs 31 Ministries where she was a contributing writer to the ministry’s daily devotions and radio broadcasts. She has written for Relevant Magazine’s online articles, Lifeway’s Collegiate Magazine, Ungrind Webzine, and she continues to write and minister to women all over the world about being a Christian woman in an ever-changing culture. Sharon currently lives in Durham, North Carolina with her husband, who is currently pursuing a Master of Divinity at Duke Divinity School. If you would like to contact her regarding a speaking or writing opportunity, if you have any questions, or would like to submit a blog topic, please e-mail her at sharon(at)sheworships(dot)com.
Stats: This Week All Time Posts: 1 320 Views: 220 245537 Comments: 2 2707 View all posts by sheworships
Comments (16)
I really like parts of this. And, I don't see it as at all unbiblical. In fact, I would think that it would be the case for people living in the time periods in which the bible was written.
For those unable to afford to do this, I could see that being an issue. But, some people are unable to afford to homeschool as well (although, I think if done right homeschool is probably cheaper…), and yet they manage to do it. It takes sacrifice for sure.
The problem I foresee, is what happens if the girl doesn't find a husband? Does she give up this ideal at 25? 30? 50?
I do think this is a better approach than the typical approach, which is that she goes to college, gets a career, and moves out on her own. Not that those are at all bad things, but if the father is a good Christian head of household, he may be able to provide for her a better situation.
One of the youth I've talked to is killing herself taking the hardest classes available, and going into every extra-curricular she can, so she can get into the best college and get the best degree, so she can get a good job. That way when her husband divorces her she has her career to fall back on. While doing those things isn't wrong necessarily, the motivation is disturbing. Don't go into marriage expecting to be divorced! Oh, and she was 15 when she told me this. Sadly, her Christian parents, have taught her to expect divorce. (And they are married, and have been for at least 21 years.)
God is ever transforming the earth (Rom 8). It seems to me that would require all creatures being released into the place that God has for them within the context of the creation...for their own joy...and God's glory. So here we are 2011 and doesn't seem to me that God is calling us to return to a lifestyle revealed in Biblical stories, but I can imagine something new and hope filled...including parts of what's revealed in the Bible, but also other stuff not revealed in the character there!
So what is the desire of a woman's heart that God wants to reveal in this season of our mutual existence? Women have the most status in society (at least western society) than they've ever had in all of recorded human history. That seems significant to me. I can imagine women being released into more freedom to explore their desires. Promoting a context of different 'spheres' for men and women seems less free, not more! But as you discuss well in your blogs women offer the world a unique gift, I can imagine it will be shared within the context of the entire world...not some corner of it.
@MagisterTom@xanga - I think that is a sensible thing to teach a girl to teach her how to rely on herself if she should ever need to, even if its sad. This advice should, of course be in addition to guidance to the girl on how to minimize the likelihood for divorce in the first place by making a good choice. But life doesn't always follow the ideal, and people die, recessions occur, disabilities happen, and spouses cheat or get divorced. Personally I think its more sinful to leave a daughter unarmed with self confidence and an education just because it may be "unbiblical".
OP - I never heard of this movement. I'm in my early 30s, am unmarried and haven't left my parents nor do I plan to. Part of the reason is I can't afford to do anything else, but another part is that I do see it as my responsibility and my pleasure to be with and help out my parents. I don't plan to leave them until I get married and even then I would prefer to be as near to them as possible.
For me personally this works, but I don't think I'd impose it on someone else or get involved in a "movement" about it. This kind of thing should really be the free choice of the woman. I doubt it would be very good for either the daughter or the parents if it weren't. LOL this reminds me of the novel Like Water For Chocolate, where according to "tradition" the youngest daughter is mandated to spend the rest of her life caring for her mother, and how this oppresses the daughter and actually causes all manner of sin to happen around her.
It's interesting. I'm sort of doing a version of this... going to college and living on campus (currently), and hoping to get a career, meanwhile living at home. I do have an interest in moving out, or moving in with friends when I'm finished with college... but I feel it would be better for me to stay at home until I'm married. But I also think my family's plan for me has avoided much of the hindrance that movements like Quivering Daughters are fighting against.
And Sharon, I am completely with you when you've said at the very end of your post on our differences with others - "a response of kindness and gentleness is, I believe, more faithful to the character of Christ." Indeed. You always hit it on the head of the nail.
@squeakysoul@xanga - I disagree with parts of your response to @MagisterTom@xanga (I don't think you should prepare her for the world so cynically) but I completely agree with you when you've said about it needing to be a choice. I am certainly no feminist.... unless you define feminist with providing positive opportunities for women; I think you're right that by taking away her choice to choose, you're defeating the purpose of why she's to be doing it at all. She'll just be taught to do it because she's deemed as "bad" if she doesn't.... not because of her enrichment in her family relationships, or more importantly in Christ.
Wow, this blog was very enlightening to me. I had never heard of this before. I will definitely find out more about this before giving a more involved comment. This is all very interesting.
Another point to consider is the culture in which the Bible was written and the culture in which many women live. There are some cultures in the third world countries where the woman is the breadwinner while the men tend the house. It is strange to Western thinking. However, lifestyles obviously differ by culture and one method of living can certainly not be imposed to such a complex and varied a world as our own.
But again, going to read up more about this as it is very interesting to me. Good post! Rec'd!
@Blessed_Enigma@xanga - In what cultures are the women the breadwinners? I've not heard of such a thing. Also, Paul talks about a man supporting his family. This would seem to go against that.
It's a personal decision between each individual and God. I was raised with this belief. As a teenager I really did plan on remaining under my father's protection until marriage. Now, at the age of 24 my father can no longer take care of me. I have had to rise above my traditional mindset and am not only caring for myself but my family as well.....
@MagisterTom@xanga - I am just going to give you some examples and links because otherwise, this comment would become an essay.
Women of post-war Gaza: http://rt.com/news/women-become-breadwinners-gaza/
Women in several places in Africa: [article about it] http://www.scribd.com/doc/9369861/Matriarchy-The-Power-of-Collective-Female-Leadership
Zapotecs in Mexico; women in Tuareg, West Africa, Iraq: [scientific article] http://www.universitadelledonne.it/english/matriarchy1.htm
my problem is this.. around the time I finished high school and the half year after I was in two very abusive relationships. My dad and my brother became smotheringly over-protective. And I became very cynical towards men. I HAD to get out of there so I went to Bible college across the country. For the first time in months I could breath and not have every male in my life hovering over me.
I learned that I could stand on my own to feet, when through some drastic heart healing (Praise God) and met the man of my dreams.
I would not be who I am today if I had stayed home.
I think for nieve young girls who have been raised very sheltered, this would be good. I know some girls that could have benefited from staying home.
But it is not for everyone..
I actually belong to a blog site for recovering quiverfull women, mostly because my LDS background was similar in some aspects. There are women taking their lives, living below poverty level, never using birth control, functioning at a high level of exhaustion while home schooling. There are those with money within the movement not suffering like that. Duh. I'm 57, and my parents gave me the option to go away to BYU for college, because, I was just going to get married anyway. Gratefully, I was able to support myself and my children because of my education, and get away from a violent and abusive man. These people are legalists, literalists, and there is also within the movement a hatred of any type of government activity for social programs, any other Christian groups, and many more things as well. The Duggars on t.v. have made this look like a haven for many conservative women, when in fact, their t.v. show has made them millionaires. I did and do have strong feelings about a parent having the choice to be at home with infants and preschoolers, but, this economy is not supportive of that, so we have to flow with the tide. I'll also mention that within these groups since10-15 kids are the norm, doctor visits are rare, dental visits never happen, and the health of the mother is overlooked by her forboding husband.
Eh, that's not for me but I guess it could benefit some women. I personally couldn't be doing anything to further the Gospel by sitting at home until marriage. (I'm a missionary in Northern Ireland now, and back at home in the States, I would be doing... nothing.) Besides that, I'm pretty sure I'd never get married because I wouldn't meet anybody. I would just... waste away at home. That coupled with the fact that I haven't really had a father since I was about ten years old.
But I guess some girls wouldn't just be wasting away at home. Some girls would actually have something good and beneficial to do. I'm not that type of girl.
Well, I think you have to do what's best for you. For me, leaving home for college better equipped me to deal with life and marriage. Infact, I left home because I felt that I was too dependent on my parents and needed to learn to stand on my own. I learned a lot, things I probably wouldn't have learned at home. Also, I'm not sure if I would have been allowed to "grow up" if I remained at home. Leaving home allowed myself to feel like I had the room to grow and I think it also allowed my parents to see me as an adult. I got married while in college, too.
In any case, I kind of feel like men and women must be humble and wise enough to recognize their talents and where they would function better. My husband and I discussed this and even though I would like to stay home if we decide to have kids, he is actually much more equipped to be the one to stay home. He is more patient, loves to cook (and is tons better at it), and actually cleans better than me. My ideal is to work from home, but if I can't, he would keep the house much more efficiently than me. I'm blessed to have a husband who will work and/or take care of the house. He'll do what he needs to.
The large, underlying problem with this movement is the assumption that women are absolutely made for marriage as their first priority. There is no room for single women in this movement, which suggests that they believe that God does not have a plan for single women (or married women) outside of the home. I think this limits the God I believe in far too much.
a little weird. but yay for theLLU prof shout out! best school evaaaaaaa. xoxo
I find this movement beyond insulting to be honest. Its paternalistic goal assumes that women need to be protected, living in a bubble until marriage. I see nothing wrong with living independently as a single woman before marriage. Is there a similar movement for sons? I highly doubt it.
www.quiveringdaughters.com
www.undermuchgrace.com
This is a creepy, pseudo-incestuous movement that has absolutely no Biblical reference.