FS, are you trying to tell me that the name HOH is just a figure head title and he can't actually exercise any of his rights? If so, that's even more absurd to me.
Lets say that a man decides to move his family. He can provide for them at the same level, the woman will have plenty of other women to socialize with, there are no elderly parents to deal with etc etc etc. The woman likes where she lives and the man doesn't so he decides they move. Do you believe he has that right to force his family to move?
If you do, then it doesn't matter whether or not he chooses to wield that power over you (that would be a bad marriage), but he has the power. Why would I want to live in a marriage where I do not have equal say and only have it because my husband grants it to me???
As to playgroup for a 2 year old SAHM? Ridiculous unless there are extenuating circumstances.
I disagree. My two year old was extremely sociable and going crazy at home. I sent him to playgroup, which I was only able to do because I WASN'T working. It was the best thing I could have done for him. Had I been working, the playgroup hours would not have been suitable for me and I would have sent my son to a babysitter, as I did with my older son. My next son was too young for playgroup at the beginning of the year and he suffered for it.
I'm not sure what the distinction is between playgroup and babysitter.
Around here, they are the same thing with different hours.
In most places, there are plenty of free activities for kids (story time, local mom groups etc) or low paid activities (indoor soccer, tumbling class, music class) that playgroup is not necessary. Its just a harder option on the mother because it requires being more proactive.
A babysitter watches your kid, maybe other kids. There is no strict routine.
A playgroup has more of a routine/schedule to it, more educational foundation. It isn't a matter of just watching the kid and keeping him/her entertained, but structure.
FS, are you trying to tell me that the name HOH is just a figure head title and he can't actually exercise any of his rights? If so, that's even more absurd to me.
Lets say that a man decides to move his family. He can provide for them at the same level, the woman will have plenty of other women to socialize with, there are no elderly parents to deal with etc etc etc. The woman likes where she lives and the man doesn't so he decides they move. Do you believe he has that right to force his family to move?
If you do, then it doesn't matter whether or not he chooses to wield that power over you (that would be a bad marriage), but he has the power. Why would I want to live in a marriage where I do not have equal say and only have it because my husband grants it to me???
That's pretty much how I'm reading it.
The man in the head of the household. He is entitled to make all of the decisions, from the color of the walls to the clothes you wear to where you live. If he decides that you should quit your job, shave your head, never speak to your best friend again, for good, bad, or no reason at all, you are halachically obligated to do as he tells you. If you live any other way, then you are not a frum Jew.
Wait a minute. You let your husband order you around like that? What are you, an idiot? Why would you marry a guy like that.
IOW, the man should have absolute power, but he should make his underlings feel like they have some say.
The problem is that if the man has that sort of power, then the woman is always being ordered around like that, whether or not she thinks she is. The husband may be a benevolent despot who listens to others, but however much he claims to take others' positions into account, his opinion, in the end, is still the only one that matters, and if he says do it, the only acceptable response is Yes Sir. And if he does it your way, its because HE decided, not because YOU had any say.
No the point IS he could make that decision if he wanted to. Why should one spouse have the ultimate final say over the other one? How is that a partnership?
I just came into this interesting discussion now (I rarely come on here) and didn't have a chance to read thru every single reply. But I think I get the gist of things and would like to comment. As a full time working woman for the past 12 yrs and mother KAH for almost 6 yrs (3 children BAH), let me tell you, that working full time is HARD AND NO PICNIC!!! And I'm BH very capable, geshikt, with lots of kochos and Hashem should keep giving them to me. I didn't choose this lifestyle, it fell into my lap, and I take it one day at a time. But there's NO WAY I would still be sane if I wouldn't have tons of my husband's help, cleaning help twice a wk for 4 hrs each, and a teenage girl helping me in the evening with my kids here and there. I have friends who are the ultimate martyrs and try to do it all alone and then brag about it too bec I guess they need validation on how amazing they are. But let me tell you, it's VERY VERY TOUGH and I so respect the chassidish way of life more and more bec it so caters to the very basic needs of each gender.
I grew up more litvish and have the highest regard for full time learning and BH was zoche to have husband learning full time for around 10 yrs but it's very tough and I'm not so sure that the end justifies the means always.
Kalsee said it right.
What kind of normal man would just pick up his family and move because "he doesn't like where he is living"???
That kind of stuff doesn't happen, simply because moving is no picnic and he would have to really really hate where he is for a very good reason to be willing to do that, to move jobs, to have the expense and the exhaustion of moving.
You are trying to say that he "just doesn't like" so he picks everyone and everything up and moves? That's not real. Give me something real as an example.
So let's say we are talking what I mentioned above. That he hates where he lives so much that it is affecting his physical or his mental health. And he is aware that to continue to function he had better get out. Or he is being offered such tremendous upward mobility on a new job that it makes it crazy to stay where he is on so much less money. Or...or what? Find me another REAL reason that someone would move. As Kalsee said, normal men don't move their whole families to Honolulu for no reason or on a whim.
Now you say that wife doesn't want to move. Why? You say that it has nothing to do with leaving parents or family or having responsibilities towards them. You say that it has nothing to do with money, it's just that "she likes it there".
Well, let's look at it this way. Her husband is becoming either physically or mentally ill from the pressures of living in a place he really hates. That kind of situation obviously takes a toll on a family. Is she having a good time watching her husband get sick or deteriorate? Under such circumstances she doesn't understand that if they don't move she might find herself a widow eventually from the strain?
What kind of a selfish woman under those circumstances, when she doesn't have an equally potential stressful situation coming up if they WOULD move (let's say that such a move would put HER under the exact same mental or physical stress so that SHE would get sick...but hey, that's not what we are talking about, are we, just that "she likes it there" stam)...would not be willing to move to keep her husband alive and well? And not under physical or mental stress?You just said that he is the major breadwinner right? So it's not a question of that she has to stay to make money.
So now, even without mentioning the "head of the household" business...let's look at the equation. A man is the main breadwinner. He is terribly unhappy living where he is. So much that it is taking a toll stresswise on his life and/or mental health. He wants to move to a place where they won't be any further from his wife's family or family responsibilities and he will have an even better living or at least as good a one as they have now. She isn't going to be losing her livelihood by moving which would be necessary for the family finances. But..."she likes where she is".
Sumary of equation:
husband. breadwinner. getting sick from stress. hates where they live. wants to move. Will be able to make just as good a living and no longer be under that terrible stress that is taking a told on his physical or mental health. That toll is naturally also taking its toll on the entire family (how could it not if he is human?)....versus....other side of equation....wife. not main breadwinner. not living near family. not responsible for caring for elderly family members where they live. is promised as high a standard of living as she has now if not higher. Plus without the husband's stress her husband will be healthier mentally and physically. As a result the family will not have the toll of his stress...but..."she likes where she is"????
Need I say anything more? Under such circumstances is moving the family the best thing for the family as a whole? Yes. If the husband is the main breadwinner does he have the right to demand this of his family to keep his physical and mental health? Yes. Does the wife have the right to say she doesn't want to move? Yes. Would she be extremely selfish as a wife to do so? Especially if she won't be losing her livelihood, family etc. by moving? I would say do without a doubt.
So...who do we go by. The husband who wants to stay alive while doing the best he can for his family or the wife who "likes where she is"???
Get the picture?
Just because a man is "head of the household" it doesn't mean that women have no choices.
Head of the household is not dictator. It means using your sechel.
Because in the final end, someone will have to decide. Who'se it going to be. If it is the wife here, she is one he$$ of a klafte I would say. A wife who would rather risk her husband's health or even mental health for her "liking it where she is"???To me that's a pretty poor specimen of what a wife is. And that's even without "head of the household".
FS, lots of people simply decide to move on. You posit a situation where the man is being reasonable, and the woman isn't. Let's switch it. Attila the Hubby is restless. He likes new adventures. He has a good job, making good money. Wussy the Wife is settled, has friends, a community, a good job, excellent schools for the kids. She's happy. But Attila isn't. He wants adventure. He wants to live in Borneo. Sure, there's no kosher food, but they can be raw food vegans, so who cares. No frum community, so Wussy will have to home school the little ones, and send the older ones to board. That will be fine, since Wussy won't be able to work. And neither she nor the kids speak the language, so they can all just be at home together.
Or maybe its just that Attila has a great opportunity in Boston, but Wussy doesn't want to leave her job, her friends, her home, or her community.
In any case, a benevolent dictator is still a dictator.
FS, lots of people simply decide to move on. You posit a situation where the man is being reasonable, and the woman isn't. Let's switch it. Attila the Hubby is restless. He likes new adventures. He has a good job, making good money. Wussy the Wife is settled, has friends, a community, a good job, excellent schools for the kids. She's happy. But Attila isn't. He wants adventure. He wants to live in Borneo. Sure, there's no kosher food, but they can be raw food vegans, so who cares. No frum community, so Wussy will have to home school the little ones, and send the older ones to board. That will be fine, since Wussy won't be able to work. And neither she nor the kids speak the language, so they can all just be at home together.
Or maybe its just that Attila has a great opportunity in Boston, but Wussy doesn't want to leave her job, her friends, her home, or her community.
In any case, a benevolent dictator is still a dictator.
I agree. And just look at other threads to see how many different reasons there are for one spouse wanting to move and the other not. And usually, they both have excellent reasons. Middle age crisis vs need for stability. Good schools vs nice house. Near his family vs near her family. Etc, etc.
I honestly don't see why one spouse should defer to the other in such cases, just because the latter spouse is male.
FS, lots of people simply decide to move on. You posit a situation where the man is being reasonable, and the woman isn't. Let's switch it. Attila the Hubby is restless. He likes new adventures. He has a good job, making good money. Wussy the Wife is settled, has friends, a community, a good job, excellent schools for the kids. She's happy. But Attila isn't. He wants adventure. He wants to live in Borneo. Sure, there's no kosher food, but they can be raw food vegans, so who cares. No frum community, so Wussy will have to home school the little ones, and send the older ones to board. That will be fine, since Wussy won't be able to work. And neither she nor the kids speak the language, so they can all just be at home together.
Or maybe its just that Attila has a great opportunity in Boston, but Wussy doesn't want to leave her job, her friends, her home, or her community.
In any case, a benevolent dictator is still a dictator.
I agree. And just look at other threads to see how many different reasons there are for one spouse wanting to move and the other not. And usually, they both have excellent reasons. Middle age crisis vs need for stability. Good schools vs nice house. Near his family vs near her family. Etc, etc.
I honestly don't see why one spouse should defer to the other in such cases, just because the latter spouse is male.
FS the scenario you painted has nothing to do with husband or wife, it has to do with health. If a woman, sahm, homeschooling her kids, with a husband who has a career where he earns enough to support the family in comfort, easy commute, close to a Shul he feels great in, develops an illness that requires her to move to a drier area or a moister area or whatnot, the family shouldn't move even if it means the husband may have to take a job he isn't thrilled with, or a longer commute or whatever?
FS, lots of people simply decide to move on. You posit a situation where the man is being reasonable, and the woman isn't. Let's switch it. Attila the Hubby is restless. He likes new adventures. He has a good job, making good money. Wussy the Wife is settled, has friends, a community, a good job, excellent schools for the kids. She's happy. But Attila isn't. He wants adventure. He wants to live in Borneo. Sure, there's no kosher food, but they can be raw food vegans, so who cares. No frum community, so Wussy will have to home school the little ones, and send the older ones to board. That will be fine, since Wussy won't be able to work. And neither she nor the kids speak the language, so they can all just be at home together.
Or maybe its just that Attila has a great opportunity in Boston, but Wussy doesn't want to leave her job, her friends, her home, or her community.
In any case, a benevolent dictator is still a dictator.
I looked hard here but couldn't find any benevolence...
I also think you're missing a major point here. Society today agrees with you. A husband is not the head of the household in today's society. There is no such thing because people find it outrageous. Hence all the outrage on this thread. Now, if a frum couple does consider the husband the head of the household, chances are it's an outgrowth of their frumkeit. Such frumkeit is not found with the desire to find adventure in Borneo. It goes with the desire to serve the creator by growing in ruchnius and that necessitates fostering the wife's needs and fostering conditions for the children to grow up with a good chinuch.
Past societies have been different. Sometimes the wind blows such that Attila can drag Wussy to Borneo on a whim without societal objection. That's not to say it's wonderful to be dragged off to Borneo. Hashem brings in different eras as he weaves a background tapestry of different challenging influences. Different generations have different internal conflicts as they battle the infuence of the society in the effort to align themselves with Hashem's Torah.
The point is that if you married a normal person he WON'T decide to pick up your family and move to Honolulu one morning if you don't want to.
Who's talking about moving to Honolulu? (Although even normal people do sometimes decide to do something drastic).
Normal people move all the time. For normal reasons. And normal spouses often disagree on this issue, even if they were both exactly on the same page when they got married. Circumstances change. Children change the picture. Elderly, aging parents change the picture. Rising prices of real estate change the picture.
I don't see why people are taking this to extremes, as though any dh (or dw) who wants to pick up and move the family is doing something crazy. As though a 'mensch' wouldn't reach such a situation. A mensch might think it's crucial that his kids grow up near nature, and want to move to the country, whereas his wife might think it crucial that the kids grow up near their cousins and good schools. Each is insistent. In most marriages, at some point a compromise is reached, or one person 'gives in' to whoever is more affected, or one spouse gets to decide this, the other gets to decide which house they buy. Etc. In the HOH marriages you are describing, the dh would have the final word. OK, OK, we understand the dh should be a mensch, he should take his wife's perspective into account, but still, he has the final word. Maybe a few true menschen would 'let' their wives make the decision (how condescening that is at heart, the verb 'let'), but most regular guys would want things to go their way. That DOESN'T mean they're not good guys. It means they are normal. People tend to think their opinion is the really valid one, and if they have the power to 'gently' enforce it, why not.
Honestly, though, I have yet to see one household where this is the way things are run. I have the feeling that even among posters here this is all theory. I'd love to hear specific examples of women who just handed over huge, life altering decisions to their dhs, and let them decide because they were HOH. I'm not talking about cases where the wife really didn't know what to do or was indiffferent. But I'd love to hear from a poster who really and truly wanted to do or not do something big (like move) and just let her dh have the final say because he's the dh (not because he convinced her he's right - that happens in all marriages).
The point is that if you married a normal person he WON'T decide to pick up your family and move to Honolulu one morning if you don't want to.
Hey, wait a second, MY husband picked our family up and moved us to Honolulu (albeit just for the summer). I guess I wanted to go (he has proposed trips which I have vehemently opposed, and he went along with my decision)
Is he normal??
Honolulu Yael (at least for another week and a half)
