Financial protection for mothers and daughters

chen

Thu, Nov 17 2005, 7:23 pm

Motek wrote:

SV wrote:

In our times one person's salary even if he is a doctor or a lawyer is usually not enough to support a family with more than one or two kids who are in yeshiva.

okay, that's what I thought and what Chen clarified.

please don't put words in my mouth. I neither said nor implied nor 'clarified" anything about doctors and lawyers. (although doctors and lawyers do on occasion die, become disabled, leave their wives, etc. etc.)

Motek wrote:

this is just another thread on working women and why they have to work and why they can't raise their children themselves

numero uno we were not discussing childcare at all. numero dos, we were not discussing why women who are currently working are working. we were addressing the issue of making it possible for women to work should the need arise.

Motek wrote:

I should have realized long ago that it wasn't about - just in case her husband dies, becomes disabled, or is abusive. That the thread is not about insurance for a tragedy.

OK, , you're absolutely right, we are all a bunch of wild-eyed women's libbers out to destroy the sanctity of the jewish family by forcing our daughters to become stevedores. glad we finally got that out in the open. Now I have a question I would like you to clarify:

what, in your opinion, are the benefits of ensuring that women do not acquire marketable skills? . that is not "what are the benefits of women staying home rather than going into the marketplace?" but "what are the benefits of making it difficult if not impossible for women to go into the marketplace?"

Edited by moderator, please lets keep imamother friendly

Motek

Thu, Nov 24 2005, 2:42 pm

chen wrote:

OK, , you're absolutely right, we are all a bunch of wild-eyed women's libbers out to destroy the sanctity of the jewish family by forcing our daughters to become stevedores.

cute, but aren't you putting words into MY mouth now?

I also enjoy your way with words, but let's keep the comments on the topic and impersonal, okay?

Quote:

Now I have a question I would like you to clarify:

you'd like me to clarify your question or would you like an answer? Wink

You have yet to respond to my question to you, asked many pages ago, more than once, since you quoted a Chazal to support your position, I asked you which rabbonim endorse your points including the one about girls getting married later.

But I will respond to your question anyway, and hope you will be so kind as to my respond to mine.

Quote:

what, in your opinion, are the benefits of ensuring that women do not acquire marketable skills?

the benefits are a strong message which is: Girls, you have the most valuable job of all, that of raising the next dor of klal yisrael.

Considering that the secular world so demeans women's role in raising their children, we in the frum world have to provide a strong counter-message.

If this message about the inestimable importance of a woman in her home is conveyed to girls in high school and seminary, I don't think it would be a contradiction to also provide them with some skills that could prove helpful to them in work situations. Skills like typing and computer proficiency.

When you say:

Quote:

every girl should have an education and a marketable skill. ( which is an excellent argument against teenage marriages.)

that sounds like you think that acquiring an education and a marketable skill cannot be done and still enable a girl to marry after seminary at age 18 or 19

why is that?

is it because you think all girls should have a college degree?

a COPE computer course, a real estate course, a sheitelmacher course - can be taken over a period of weeks or months

I think it would be helpful if mothers whose primary interest is their children who also run a business, could speak to seminary girls and tell them what it takes to run a business. No advanced formal education required and some store-owners make far more than those with degrees.