Tag Archives: Work

Commentary

James Dobson lists ten potential sources of depression for wives

22 Comments

I’ve been reading this interesting book by James Dobson, entitled “What Wives Wish Their Husbands Knew About Women“. In the book he asks the reader to rank the 10 common sources of depression for wives in order:

  • low self-esteem
  • fatigue and time pressure
  • loneliness, isolation, and boredom
  • absence of romantic love in marriage
  • financial difficulties
  • sexual problems in marriage
  • menstrual and physiological problems
  • problems with the children
  • aging
  • in-law problems

He has surveyed a whole bunch of Christian and the order above is the order that they gave him from most severe to least severe.

There is room in the book for ranking these and my ranking was like his, pretty much, except that I had two things reversed. I had the financial difficulties and in-law problems reversed, because I have this idea that women are really bad with money and that they care more about relationships. I also had aging and sexual problems reversed because I don’t think that sex is very important to women, and they are sort of unaware of how much of a problem it is for men. However, I think they are terribly concerned about aging.

Note: Commenter Maureen points out to me that women are better than men with money these days. I can’t go against this evidence showing that she is right.

So I thought I would post this to see if anyone else has any thoughts about this list. Does it seem right to you?

I noticed in this article that more and more women are suffering from depression, so it’s important to know why they do that.

Excerpt:

One in four women aged between 45 and 64 now experience some form of mental disorder – an increase of 20 per cent in the last 15 years.

This decline in mental health is greater than any other age or gender group, according to the research.

The study also found that women in general suffer more mental problems – or talk about it more -with 21.5 per cent complaining of stress or depression compared to 13.6 per cent of men.

Mental health charity Mind said women in their 40s and 50s were becoming increasingly affected by trying to manage the responsibilities of family, home and work.

The figures emerged as the independent psychiatric Capio Nightingale Hospital reported a 20 per cent rise in enquiries relating to depression since the start of the year, many related to financial pressures.

The NHS Information Centre report, entitled the Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey 2007, was carried out by the National Centre for Social Research and the University of Leicester and questioned 7,461 adults.

It followed on from two similar NHS studies carried out in England in 1993 and 2000.

The report concluded that the number of 45 to 64 year old women with a common mental disorder rose from 20.5 per cent in 1993 to 25.2 per cent in 2007.

The survey also found that the number of women aged between 16 and 74 who reported thinking suicidal thoughts in the previous year rose from 4.2 per cent in 2000 to 5.5 per cent in 2007.

Dr Peter Byrne, director of public education at the Royal College of Psychiatrists, said the role of woman had changed significantly in the last 15 years.

“This particular age group was probably reared by their stay-at-home mothers and they are almost certainly now working mothers, who face the financial pressure of being part of a two income family,” he said.

It’s also important to pick a woman who can be made happy by things that the man can do. I think the wise man has to be careful to choose a woman whose interests are not based on her emotions but on a plan with outward-facing goals. Someone who likes to work at projects and get things done, rather than be dominated by her feelings. Someone who tries to control her feelings when she sees that they are not rooted in reality.

I think it’s a better situation for a man where he is in a relationship with a woman where he can do things in the world and that will drive her emotions. The situation to avoid is where a woman’s emotions are not rooted in anything in the real world and she in’t impressed by what a man does that accomplishes tasks to achieve specific goals that she is passionate about. You want to avoid a woman who is concerns about Betty Friedan’s “the problem that has no name” and one who is impressed with the apologetics course that you are teaching at the church.

You don’t want a woman who says “I’m depressed and since I don’t care about anything except my feelings and victimhood, nothing you can do for me impresses me”. You want a woman who says “I’m depressed but if you do things in the real world that help to achieve goals that I care about, then I’ll feel better”. This is something that has to be tested for in the courtship. At the very least, women ought to know how to identify when they are being tricked by their emotions. They have to be able to talk it out and see that there is nothing specific that is bothering them, and then realize that their feelings are playing tricks on them.

Mentoring

Does the Christian life involve taking the initiative and executing plans?

2 Comments
Does God expect us to make plans and achieve goals?
Does God expect us to make plans and achieve goals?

I’ve noticed a disturbing view that many Christians seem to absorb who grow up in the church. Basically, the church view says that life is so unpredictable and unknowable that it’s pointless for Christians to make plans to achieve goals. In fact, the only thing that Christians can do, on this view, is to wait for God to provide whatever he’s going to provide, without the person having to know or do anything that they don’t feel like knowing or doing. On this view, it’s best not to know too much about how the world really works, because what God wants from us is not to produce a return on our talents, but for us to just muddle through on our prayers, intuitions and feelings.

Well, which view is right? Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason has an opinion on this question.

Excerpt:

In Matthew Jesus talks about prayer and says, “Ask and it shall be given to you.” But Jesus didn’t stop there. He went on to say, “Ask and it shall be given to you. Seek and you shall find. Knock and the door will be opened.” So it’s not just asking, there’s seeking and knocking as well. In the same passage Jesus gives us this famous promise. He tells us not to worry about food and clothing because food and clothing will be provided by Him. He says, Look at the lilies of the field, they don’t toil or weave. Look at the birds in the field, they don’t plant and harvest. The Father takes care of them. He’ll take care of you as well.

Now, are we going to read that verse and conclude that God doesn’t expect us to weave or till the soil? Paul says in 2 Thessalonians 3, “Anyone who does not work ought not eat.” It seems to me we could say to Paul, “Why should we work? Jesus has promised to take care of us.” We all understand that in a verse like there is a corporate effort. God has promised to take care of us, but we have to couple that command with other commands that God has given us to toil and weave, as well. To work, as well. And, I would say, to try and find ways to get pregnant that are morally acceptable. The same thing with dating and getting married. We have the liberty to find a mate, and I don’t see in any way, shape or form that that’s not trusting God.

Now, in any of these things there may be a sense of franticness in getting a job, or getting pregnant, or getting a mate that represents an attitude that’s wrong. It can be taken to extremes, but then our Christian ethic would inform our attitudes. The very act of taking the initiative in itself is not unbiblical.

In fact, the way I would put it is that it’s 100% God and 100% man. What does that mean? It means that God, even though He is in control and we must look to Him, still delegates a portion of active responsibility to us so that He can see to it that we’re fed and clothed, but it’s our responsibility to go out and look. You can do the act of looking with confidence that God will provide. I think that that obtains in all of these other circumstances, as well.

So there’s is not this sharp dichotomy between God working and our working. They go hand in hand. If God expects our initiative in the area of food and clothing, though He has promised to provide, by what standard do we disqualify taking initiative in the ares of reproductive technology and dating? It appears that He’s in control here, too.

I think that there are three places where the fatalistic view is most likely to creep up. Those are: 1) romantic relationships, 2) parenting and 3) money management. I think people really want to be free to do whatever “feels good” in those areas. Praying about these matters is a way of stealing God’s blessing for a decision that we are making based on feelings, because we don’t want to be bothered to take the initiative and do what we have reasons to believe will work. We don’t want to have to put in the work to study something and then bind our will to what our investigation shows is the most prudent course – even if it’s more difficult.

Some things aren’t going to work whether we pray about them or not, because of the way the world works. For example, buying lottery tickets instead of stocks as our retirement plan or marrying the buxom blonde stripper. Praying about a bad idea isn’t going to make it work, because our feelings don’t change the universe in any way. The universe is the way it is. My advice is to set specific goals, find out how the world really works, and then make informed decisions to achieve those goals. At the very least, don’t think that praying about something morally wrong gives you permission to do it.

I really recommend that people consider reading “Decision Making and the Will of God“. And, if you are male and you like fiction, then read “Rifleman Dodd“. In case you missed my previous post on decision making and the will of God, you should definitely click through and read it.

Commentary

Irony: the young men who voted for Obama now suffer from record unemployment

Leave a comment

This article from the Wall Street Journal explain why men are in decline. (H/T Mary, Tom)

Excerpt:

Few groups were hit harder by the recession than young men… The unemployment rate for males between 25 and 34 years old with high-school diplomas is 14.4%—up from 6.1% before the downturn four years ago and far above today’s 9% national rate. The picture is even more bleak for slightly younger men: 22.4% for high-school graduates 20 to 24 years old. That’s up from 10.4% four years ago.

[…]The share of men age 25-34 living with their parents jumped to 18.6% this year, up from 14.2% four years ago and the highest level since at least 1960, according to the Census Bureau.

Suzanne Venker comments on the consequences of this data for women for National Review.

Full text:

New data from the U.S. Census Bureau shows the percentage of men between the ages of 25 and 34 living at home rose from 14 percent in 2005 to 19 percent in 2011. Women, on the other hand, are doing just fine. Not only do they dominate today’s college campuses, they have little trouble staying away from mom and dad’s place. That’s because women are flourishing in the workforce while men are not. Writers and pundits blame this phenomenon on the economy, but the trend reflects a much larger sociological problem. America is in the midst of a sea change: Never before has it been more difficult for men and women to find their way to one another, settle in for the long haul, and build strong families together.

To read about it, you’d think the entire mess is out of our hands. You’d think the circumstances involving the roles of men and women in society have happened to us, rather than the other way around. The truth is that we created this new world — and while we may not be able to undo it, we can certainly stop the freight train from running off the tracks.

Hardly a day goes by that we aren’t made aware of this heartbreaking reality. It is so acute we now have not one but six new television series dedicated to men’s social demotion. In these programs, husbands are made to look like fools — while the wives wield a power so ugly it’s no wonder marriage has become so elusive. The modern generation has been sold a bill of goods about human nature, and the result is that men now have no idea how to be men. Why? Because women won’t let them.

There is a large and powerful group of women who see this shift in gender roles as a good thing. Hanna Rosin’s provocative piece in The Atlantic, called “The End of Men,” and Kate Bolick’s new piece “All the Single Ladies” (which may now become a TV series) make light of the demise of masculinity and the role men once played in society. They represent the kind of movers and shakers who help lead the feminist fight. Pointing to the latest statistics about men, they’d be likely to respond, “See how hopeless men are? Everything we’ve been saying about men all these years has proven to be true.”

But the laugh will be on them — if not for their own families, then for their children’s. The feminist policies that were put in place to help women flourish outside the home have suffocated men’s opportunities for economic self-sufficiency. In short, men’s desire to be good workers and family providers has been undermined. This is more than unfortunate; it is a loss of catastrophic proportions, for it is men’s consistent, full-time, year-round work that women depend on in order to live that ever-coveted “balanced life.” What too many women don’t understand (because they’ve been unduly influenced by feminist groupthink) is that male nature is ultimately beneficial to them, for women continue to put family — not career — at the center of their lives and are thus dependent on men to pick up the slack at the office.

It is a dangerous thing to create a society of frustrated young men. Feminists have no idea what a can of worms they’ve created — and what it’s about to do to our nation.

I think if we want men to marry, not only do we have to ask why the recession is affecting men disproportionately, but why the education system isn’t working for boys. We need to ask whether men learn better from female teachers or male teachers. We need to ask whether boys learn better in all-boys schools or in co-ed schools. We need to ask whether the promotion of sex education and contraception, which produces freely available sex, is the best way to encourage young men to prove themselves to women by trying hard to fit the traditional roles of protector, provider and moral/spiritual leader. We need to ask whether the denial of male-female differences encourages men to take on traditional male roles, and whether women are encouraged to prefer men who take on those roles. We need to ask whether our energy and economic policies favor job creation in areas dominated by men. We need to ask whether stimulus programs should be slanted towards industries dominated by women.  We need to ask whether affirmative action for women in education and at work helps men to be able to provide for a family. We need to ask whether men are well-served by no-fault divorce laws and biased domestic violence laws that promote false charges – especially during custody hearings. And lastly, we need to ask whether church serves men when it accepts or rejects postmodernism, anti-intellectualism and moral relativism.

But can’t we just tell men to “Man Up”?

The answer to the discincentives facing marriage-minded men is not a lazy, ignorant pronouncement for men to “Man Up”. That doesn’t solve any of the problems that cause men not to marry.

I think the desire of certain people to remove every incentive and capacity for men to perform as husbands and fathers – and then to nevertheless demand they marry and take on the traditional roles of men anyway without incentives or capacities – is the height of narcissism. Men are people too – we are not inanimate objects. We are not sperm donors and wallets. And if society decides to go in a direction where the traditional roles of men are replaced with  government social programs funded by high taxes and deficit spending, then marriage will die in this society.