When daughters are resistant to homemaking skills

[Arete]

My dad used to tell us there was no such thing as women's work and men's work, there was just WORK. So we all left the the house knowing how to change oil, tires, basic drain unclogging, cooking, basic sewing, this is what a checkbook and statement are for, etc. And wouldn't you know, these skills were still acquired even though we each had our own friends, our own library cards, and lived in a home with The Beast.

With the exception of fundie theology, there is nothing in the fundementalist world as unimpressive as the homemaking skills of the women.

[apple1]

I don't believe in this "marriage penalty tax thing" either. Most years we would save just under 4800 In taxes if I was married to my man. Our car AND health insurance would also go down.

In both my sister and my brother's marriages their taxes went DOWN after the weddings. I think its just one of those "middle class problems" that actually only happens in rare case but everybody likes to complain about to solicit attention.

It's not simple, and it does vary.

I live in Ohio, and - all other things being the same - in Ohio, you pay more state income taxes married than separate, because Ohio flat out adds the 2 incomes together and puts you in a higher tax bracket, and there are not Ohio deductions to make up for it.

The other piece that may be referred to as "marriage penalty" happens to some senior citizens who have social security benefits as a widow/widower. If they marry, I believe they lose their widow benefits. This can be a factor for older people who did not qualify for significant benefits based on their own employment (SAHWives, in particular).

The same thing can occur in my state for people on Medicaid/public assistance benefits. A woman and her kids might be receiving benefits - if she marries someone who is employed, the family income may push them out of the income range that qualifies for benefits.

Not excusing, just trying to explain some of the nuances.

[Nobodysdoormat]

I always wonder why it is that fundies think it takes years to learn how to cook, clean and take care of babies. I mean I pretty much taught myself to cook with a little input here and there from my grandma when I was in my early teens. She more or less just supervised and answered questions when I had them. Cleaning isn't exactly rocket science, most people can figure that out without years of lessons. Taking care of kids is pretty much trial by fire no matter how well prepared you think you are for motherhood. I had held exactly two newborns before my oldest was born, and somehow I still managed to raise a happy, healthy, well adjusted kid. I just don't understand where they get the idea that any of these things require years of practice.

So true! Every kid is different too! You raise a gaggle and have the next one throw you for a loop. Training is just an excuse for slaving.

[louisa05]

It isn't just the exemption amount. It's if you're both working full time it's quite possible that combining incomes on your taxes will drastically increase your tax rate. The tax advantages for marriage only really work if one person doesn't work.

We actually did have to give a copy of our marriage license for one insurance company, and the kids birth certificates. I think it was just the one time though, over several decades of working and changing jobs and insurance carriers numerous times.

Huge multi-national corporation husband works for requires the marriage license for insurance if names are not the same. I wouldn't be surprised if, in the current insurance market, more companies don't begin following suit. A woman working there had her partner on insurance prior to the change and he had to get insurance elsewhere.

In Nebraska, a marriage license is only $15. Our parish charges nothing for a wedding and only actually requires you to bring a witness. I know many churches, unfortunately, do otherwise. My husband's home parish--where I was employed at the time of our wedding-- charges $750 plus requires you to use and pay their musicians and their wedding coordinator. They generously offered us a $50 discount due to my employment. We decided to marry in our own parish instead.

Honestly, I don't think a lot of lower income people are thinking about taxes when they choose whether or not to marry. Half of my extended family lives in one of the poorest parts of Appalachia. Most of them do not even file taxes, let alone think about tax issues when planning their lives. The ones who delayed marriage--one cousin and her husband had their seven year old daughter for a flower girl--did so because they were waiting to pay for a "dream wedding" (dreams are a bit scaled down in Appalachia, though).

[mrs]

I didn't want to learn homemaking skills either because I considered homemaking skills grandmotherly and not very exciting. Once I married, I figured most things out by myself. I taught my children 'life' skills because I want them to be independent adults but I don't believe that knowing such skills has anything to do with gender. Girls should change tires and check the oil just like boys should know how to cook and clean a house.

I am surprised that the family allowed the oldest daughter to marry someone from India. Interracial marriages aren't common among most of the fundamentalists that we discuss. Although when you think about it, it seems like the families should be encouraging ties with cultures that have more traditional beliefs when it comes to gender and marriage.

It would make sense for the families to reevaluate their stance on marriage and women. Their daughters are unmarried and when one daughter followed her family's ideals, she ended up abused and divorced. Yet, it is the parents' emotions that decide what god wants them to do not anything to do with the actual situation. If there really was a god, nothing he could do would change these parents' minds about their lives.

Is the daughter Autumn? If so, her story is heart breaking.

[louisa05]

Lompoc, California. http://www.sbcvote.com/ClerkRecorder/ma ... enses.aspx

$100 for the license

$23 Non-refundable wedding ceremony reservation fee

$104 Wedding ceremony performance in Santa Barbara Hall of Records, Santa Maria & Lompoc offices

$51 if you don't have your own witness

Last time I looked into it since I didn't think even a license would be that much, the ceremony stuff was lumped as justice of the peace. So barebones is $227 as of today, $276 if you need a witness.

The federal personal exemption doesn't double if you get married. It goes from the 1 for each of you, to about 1.5 for both of you after you get married. Since they both work, the 1 exemption they each get now is more than if they got married and they lost half a point. They're both on his insurance, and claimed married, and were never asked for a coy of a license. I don't know of any married people who had to use it for insurance.

Incorrect. 2013 standard deductions included in this Forbes article about tax rates. They are $6100 for individual and $12,200 for married filing jointly. Head of household is $8950 and thus fits what you say. But a couple with two full time incomes would certainly choose the other filing option if they were at all smart or had a competent tax preparer.

Link: http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphilli ... -and-more/

[Jana814]

Interesting reading all of this. My cousin lived w/ his SO for 10 years. They have 2 kids. They finally made it legal summer of 2012 by going down to the courthouse & signing some papers. His wife didn't want a big thing so that is what they did.

[lawlifelgbt]

Getting married only cost my wife and I about $230 (license, wedding, party stuff). Our best friend officiated for free.

I think we'll get a tax benefit; I'm a student, and now that we're a household, legally speaking, we're both living off of her income because loans are not counted. Since that also means my parents can't claim me any more, we now qualify for a high EITC and Medicaid (she gets it, I've been thinking about it).

I really don't think you have to be well-off to get married. It's behavior that determines if you're respectable. Although, my situation may be different, since as a same-sex couple there's actually a TON of social pressure to marry as soon as it's legalized where you are.

[GenerationCedarchip]

I don't believe in this "marriage penalty tax thing" either. Most years we would save just under 4800 In taxes if I was married to my man. Our car AND health insurance would also go down.

In both my sister and my brother's marriages their taxes went DOWN after the weddings. I think its just one of those "middle class problems" that actually only happens in rare case but everybody likes to complain about to solicit attention.

Actually, there is such a thing. However, it does not affect everyone equally. If both parties make similar incomes, their combined income is often enough to push them into a higher tax bracket but their joint deductions are usually not enough to offset the increased tax. This happened when I got married. We both made just enough that we would have gotten refunds, but after marriage, the higher bracket meant that we had to write a check instead of getting our modest little refunds.

On the flip side, if you have a marriage where one party is unemployed or makes significantly less than the other, those folks will often come out ahead in terms of refunds vs. penalties.

With lower income people, what I hear in court much of the time is not concern over the marriage penalty (that's often more of a middle class thing - combining two police or teacher salaries can sometimes make the penalty kick in, depending on what the locality pays their employees; it certainly does in my area). With most of the lower income folks, the issue is one of losing benefits because the additional income to the household makes them ineligible. Sadly, the extra income at issue is usually less than the amount of the monthly benefits check, or the benefit being lost is Medicaid and the cost of private insurance is still out of reach.

[Palimpsest]

Is the daughter Autumn? If so, her story is heart breaking.

It is not the same story. Autumn was only 16 when she married and Jon was not from India.

Autumn's story was really heart-breaking. Thank god her parents got her out of that marriage! The last time her mother (Tracy?) updated us on FJ she was doing much better. I hope the whole family are doing well today. I think the family significantly modified their beliefs after Autumn's experience.

[ILoveJellybeans]

Autumn seems like she is doing okay on her blog, she has friends, a job, and is opening herself up to loads of new experiences. Im

glad she got out of there.

Why was it even legal for her parents to marry her off at 16? I thought the age of consent was 18

[roddma]

It's not a marriage penalty as conservatives like to screech, but more like a higher income penalty. A single person making the same amount of money would likely pay higher taxes. Tax codes are designed to encourarge certain behaviors.

Re age of consent: You can marry at 16 with parental consent in some states and even under 16. Maranatha Chapman married at 16 and married off their daughter at 16. I wish there were stricter laws to prevent marrying off under age kids.

[Jana814]

Can someone tell me Autumn's story.

[ILoveJellybeans]

It's not a marriage penalty as conservatives like to screech, but more like a higher income penalty. A single person making the same amount of money would likely pay higher taxes. Tax codes are designed to encourarge certain behaviors.

Re age of consent: You can marry at 16 with parental consent in some states and even under 16. Maranatha Chapman married at 16 and married off their daughter at 16. I wish there were stricter laws to prevent marrying off under age kids.

Why is this happening? As long as parents consent, you can get married when you are too young to consent to sex???

Maranatha Chapman's story is really creepy because the man was older than her and told her father of his interest in her when she was really young, about 13, and instead of freaking out and making him get the hell away from his child, he said that he was okay with it as long as he waited to propose to her until she was a bit older.

Marriage generally means that the couple will have a sexual relationship, so surely allowing someone underage to marry is encouraging an illegal activity.

[Palimpsest]

Autumn seems like she is doing okay on her blog, she has friends, a job, and is opening herself up to loads of new experiences. Im

glad she got out of there.

Why was it even legal for her parents to marry her off at 16? I thought the age of consent was 18

In many states you can get married at 16 with parental consent. In some states the age is even lower, believe it or not. Last time I looked, in New Hampshire the earliest age girls could marry with parental consent was 13. For boys - 14. Without parental consent the minimum age for marriage for both genders in NH is 18.

Sadly, in Autumn's case her parents gave consent to her marriage at 16. The whole family were snowed by Jon. It is a cautionary tale and I am glad she is doing well today.

[ILoveJellybeans]

Holy shit, 13 and 14???????? Is that to someone else under 18, or someone a bit older as well?

Seriously? A 13 year old and a 14 year old can get married in NH? Theyre just kids. Imagine marrying and spending your life with the person you had a crush on at 13. 13 year olds do not have the ability to be married, theyre just figuring out their sexuality and how relationships work.

[Palimpsest]

Can someone tell me Autumn's story.

The original thread on FJ yuku. http://freejinger.yuku.com/topic/706/Sn ... t-criminal

I think there are a couple of follow-up threads including one when Mom updated us that Autumn was recovering and thanked us for our concern. The older brother's courtship fell apart, IIRC.

[debrand]

Holy shit, 13 and 14???????? Is that to someone else under 18, or someone a bit older as well?

Seriously? A 13 year old and a 14 year old can get married in NH? Theyre just kids. Imagine marrying and spending your life with the person you had a crush on at 13. 13 year olds do not have the ability to be married, theyre just figuring out their sexuality and how relationships work.

I looked up NC marriage laws and found this:

Minors between the ages of 14-16 may lawfully marry if the prospective wife is pregnant, or has given birth, and intends to marry the father of her child. The marriage of minors between the ages of 14-16 must also be authorized by a district court. The court can authorize an underage marriage if the court determines that the minor is capable of assuming the responsibilities of marriage and that the marriage will be in the minor's best interests. If the minor's parents oppose his or her marriage, then it is presumed that it would not be in the minor's best interests to marry.

montylaw.com/north-carolina-family-laws/marriage-laws.aspx

[Palimpsest]

Holy shit, 13 and 14???????? Is that to someone else under 18, or someone a bit older as well?

Seriously? A 13 year old and a 14 year old can get married in NH? Theyre just kids. Imagine marrying and spending your life with the person you had a crush on at 13. 13 year olds do not have the ability to be married, theyre just figuring out their sexuality and how relationships work.

It probably hasn't happened NH in a hundred years or so. But if some blithering idiot of a parent gave consent to a marriage that young it would still be legal. Fundies test the boundaries and it may happen tomorrow though. See Maranatha Chapman. :(

As I said, I haven't checked NH Statute recently but here is a wiki link for marriage in the USA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_mar ... of_America

Laws always tend to be reactive not proactive. A test case of something awful but still legal will draw attention to an antiquated law and it gets amended -- too late for the victim.

FYI. There is a good and funny book on antiquated and not recently tested laws. I read it a while ago and remember that in the UK you can still legally be hung, drawn and quartered for taking a piss off Chelsea bridge. Not that such an offense would necessarily be prosecuted today or punished that way, but it is still on the books! I wish I could remember the name of the book...

[Dysfundamental]

I don't believe in this "marriage penalty tax thing" either. Most years we would save just under 4800 In taxes if I was married to my man. Our car AND health insurance would also go down.

In both my sister and my brother's marriages their taxes went DOWN after the weddings. I think its just one of those "middle class problems" that actually only happens in rare case but everybody likes to complain about to solicit attention.

It's about 50/50 currently, as the overview from the National Tax Policy Institute that I linked to upthread states (on the basis of analyzing large volumes of data).

So everyone's right. Those of us who got tax benefits from marriage are right, and those who got (or would have gotten, but avoided) tax penalties are right. Both things happen in roughly equal numbers at the moment.

[Peas n carrots]

Anyone remember the story of Matthew and Crystal Koso? Matthew was 22 when he impregated Crystal, who was 13 at the time. With her mother's permission she was able to marry Matthew in Kansas where it was legal for a girl as young as 12 to be married (at that time...this case and the international coverage prompted a change in that law to 15).

This young woman ended up having 4 kids before the age of 20!

http://journalstar.com/news/local/epilogue-koso-couple-still-in-love/article_9d7bfa6a-14c8-11df-981e-001cc4c002e0.html

[DGayle]

Many things you don't have to experience yourself. Maybe you have observed other people going through the same thing. I have never been pregnant, yet I could know those who experienced unplanned pregnancies and didn't grow up as sheltered as this young woman. I suppose there are plenty of never been married single counselors who counsel married couples.

I hope these young women realize they are adults who can leave anytime and their existence isn't defined by husbands and kids or homemaking skills. Really? Is God going to care that much about your ability to cook a three course dinner? Obviously, those things were not important to Jesus when he visited Mary and Martha.

Watching someone else be pregnant and happy about it isn't the same as having personal experience to know some of the things that could make someone scared. How many times do you think she's watched someone go through an unplanned pregnancy? Before I ever got pregnant, I thought I had a good idea about everything because I'd watched others go through it. When I got pregnant, I learned I didn't know half the shit I thought I did because there are some things you can't learn by just watching someone a few hours during the day.

I also wouldn't go to a couples counselor who'd never been married. Hasn't Gothard been criticized for acting like the authority on families without ever getting married or having kids? There's truth in the saying "everyone thinks they're an expert on parenting until they become parents." All the observing in the world doesn't take the place of personal experience.

I've observed young gay people come out of the closet and one of them tell her family and get rejected. This doesn't mean I know what they're going through or would be a good person to seek for counseling, and I'm not high and mighty enough to think that there's something so special about me that I have an intimate understanding of what it's like to be in such an intimate and vulnerable situation.

[DGayle]

It's not a marriage penalty as conservatives like to screech, but more like a higher income penalty. A single person making the same amount of money would likely pay higher taxes. Tax codes are designed to encourarge certain behaviors.

Re age of consent: You can marry at 16 with parental consent in some states and even under 16. Maranatha Chapman married at 16 and married off their daughter at 16. I wish there were stricter laws to prevent marrying off under age kids.

If the reason you're paying more is because you got married, whether because of a higher bracket, a loss of social services, or anything else, it's a penalty for being married. I'm as far from a conservative as can be, and still call it that.

[DGayle]

It's about 50/50 currently, as the overview from the National Tax Policy Institute that I linked to upthread states (on the basis of analyzing large volumes of data).

So everyone's right. Those of us who got tax benefits from marriage are right, and those who got (or would have gotten, but avoided) tax penalties are right. Both things happen in roughly equal numbers at the moment.

When we got married, we both had to go on insurance for both the cars we had, even if we weren't driving each other's cars. Medical insurance stayed the same since his employer's plan covers partners too. He couldn't file head of household anymore on the kids, so our standard deductions went down. There are limits for other deductions that don't double, so we were more limited. From $10k refund between us to $4k. I'm a SAHM now, so our refund is back up to $6k, but our income is also a lot less than when we were both working, but more than he made when single. If we divorced now, he'd go back to the head-of-household, and we'd take a hit. It's really dual-working couples that get fucked.

My parents had to divorce so they could save a couple G's a year that we needed to keep out of poverty.

Draco, you're wrong about this being a middle-class problem, and it doesn't matter if you believe in it or not. It happens. A lot of poor households that are already just scraping by with a couple income-earners and state aid, and if their incomes are combined because of marriage, that aid is gone. I have a friend desperately wanting to marry her boyfriend, but with the way their housing is, if they get married, they're over the threshold and have to leave. But they can't afford anywhere else. As long as they're not married, only part of the other partner's income counts for a lot of things. Her boyfriend's income is counted only to the point that child support would be assigned, and without that aid, none of them are eating. Poorer people are affected more. We middle-class people are going to get by. The poor are the ones fucked fifty ways from Sunday. If you'd save so much, why don't you do it?

[salex]

raisinghomemakers.com/2013/when-daughters-are-resistant-2/

and a comment on this post

and the response

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Nothing ever really changes....from The American Frugal Housewife, by Lydia M. Child in 1832.

.gutenberg.org/files/13493/13493-h/13493-h.htm

And this is the way I have often heard mothers talk! Yet, could parents foresee the almost inevitable consequences of such a system, I believe the weakest and vainest would abandon the false and dangerous theory. What a lesson is taught a girl in that sentence, 'Let her enjoy herself all she can, while she is single!' Instead of representing domestic life as the gathering place of the deepest and purest affections; as the sphere of woman's enjoyments as well as of her duties; as, indeed, the whole world to her; that one pernicious sentence teaches a girl to consider matrimony desirable because 'a good match' is a triumph of vanity, and it is deemed respectable to be 'well settled in the world;' but that it is a necessary sacrifice of her freedom and her gayety. And then how many affectionate dispositions have been trained into heartlessness, by being taught that the indulgence of indolence and vanity were necessary to their happiness; and that to have this indulgence, they must marry money! But who that marries for money, in this land of precarious fortunes, can tell how {96} soon they will lose the glittering temptation, to which they have been willing to sacrifice so much? And even if riches last as long as life, the evil is not remedied. Education has given a wrong end and aim to their whole existence; they have been taught to look for happiness where it never can be found, viz. in the absence of all occupation, or the unsatisfactory and ruinous excitement of fashionable competition.

The difficulty is, education does not usually point the female heart to its only true resting-place. That dear English word 'home,' is not half so powerful a talisman as 'the world.' Instead of the salutary truth, that happiness is in duty, they are taught to consider the two things totally distinct; and that whoever seeks one, must sacrifice the other.

The fact is, our girls have no home education. When quite young, they are sent to schools where no feminine employments, no domestic habits, can be learned; and there they continue till they 'come out' into the world. After this, few find any time to arrange, and make use of, the mass of elementary knowledge they have acquired; and fewer still have either leisure or taste for the inelegant, every-day duties of life. Thus prepared, they enter upon matrimony. Those early habits, which would have made domestic care a light and easy task, have never been taught, for fear it would interrupt their happiness; and the result is, that when cares come, as come they must, they find them misery. I am convinced that indifference and dislike between husband and wife are more frequently occasioned by this great error in education, than by any other cause.

Same song, different day