Some random notes at Thursday lunch time:
1. I thought I had the market to myself on the topic of men, women, and domestic obligations when I posted yesterday. But there’s been a lot of talk in the blogosphere about this Linda Hirshman piece, particularly at Bitch Ph.D, Pandagon, and Majikthise. All good and thought-provoking.
2. For reasons that I’m not ready to blog about yet, I updated my CV today — something I haven’t done in many, many years. One of the things about tenure is that I don’t apply for jobs very often! I’ve got something in the works that may or may not pan out, so I’m keeping it quiet — but I do have cause to fiddle with the old resume. (Neither fear nor rejoice; I am not leaving Pasadena City College). The last time I wrote a CV, it was 1993 and I was banging it out on a first-generation portable Mac (pre-Powerbook).
3. At Christianity Today, Sarah Sumner has an interesting point about how we read Ephesians 5. Great stuff. She writes the article I wish I had written when I quickly banged out this post back in February: NIV, TNIV, and Ephesians 5.
4. I can’t decide whether I’m rooting for UCLA or USC this weekend. As a Golden Bear to my core, it’s easy to say "a pox on both your houses." On the one hand, I did spend years and years of my graduate career at UCLA, and they did pay me to tutor their athletes. On the other hand, my wife is devout Trojan fan and a proud alumna. She cares a great deal, and I want to see her happy. On the third hand, UCLA has lost six in a row to ‘SC, and are due a win. I’ll wear red and blue on Saturday and enjoy the game. In my days as a Berkeley student, I hated both schools — and I was fond of saying that I would "root for a tie, marred by significant and demoralizing injuries to both squads." I’ve become a more charitable fellow in my old age!
5. Last night in youth group, we asked the kids to name their favorite Christmas carols. We got several "All I want for Christmas is you" responses, (perhaps thanks to Love, Actually) . Of the traditional carols, several of the choir kids backed "Masters in this Hall" (because they sing it each year). We got one vote for Dar Williams "Christians and the Pagans" (a song I love, by the way), two votes for "Santa Baby" (how do they know such an old song?), two for "Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer", and a few "Jingle Bells". No "Rudolf the Red-Nosed Reindeer".
I cast my vote for "Joy to the World", but my real favorite is one my mother sang to me as a child in German: "Oh, du froehliche". I am singing it to myself now.
Sarah Sumner is an amazing professor, author, and speaker! She is definately someone you should check out if you enjoy her article! I had the priviledge of having her as a professor for 2 classes and they were life changing! Sarah does an amazing job of balancing her faith and reality and a great job of representing both sides of the spectrum! Yeah for Sarah Sumner!
I didn’t even see that she was at APU… I may have to have a chat with her, Carissa. And I’ll correct the spelling of her surname pronto.
My family carol book has everything translated into German - including Jingle Bells, which makes truly giggle-inducing use of the word “fahrt”. Unfortunately, it doesn’t include either the Gloucestershire Wassail or the Holly and the Ivy, which are my two favorites.
“I Want a Hippopotamus for Christmas.” My all-time favorite. As for the young’uns knowing “Santa Baby”, I bet they’re thinking of Madonna’s version, and not Eartha Kitt’s.
Hugo, thank you for your work. I wandered over here a few weeks ago, and you’ve become an indispensible daily read.
I had no idea Madonna recorded “Santa Baby.” Wonders — or something like wonders — never cease. Thanks, trailhead.
I love “O du froehliche.” I sing it all the time.
Good luck with #2, whatever it is. You got me thinking about Christmas carols and all the favorites I can come up with (other than the French translation of “Jingle Bells”) aren’t really the fun, upbeat ones, except perhaps for “Winter Wonderland.” Despite my lack of religion, “O Holy Night” will always be my favorite.
Christmas Carols? “O Holy Night” is number one, followed by “O Come, O Come, Immanuel” (incidentally, I have a version of that done in the original Gregorian Chant). Carol of the Bells and Adeste Fideles also make the final team.
Thank you for linking to our site at ChristianityToday.com.
We greatly appreciate it!
sorry to ruin the christmas cheer mood here, but i just have to say that your mean little quip “root for a tie, marred by significant and demoralizing injuries to both squads” made me laugh :) i am very often uncharitable, especially when it comes to teams i hate (i’m looking at you yankees, cubs, jets, colts…), and should two of them ever face each other, i might have to plagarize!
Gonz, I love “O Come O Come Immanuel” — the All Saints youth choir nails that one every Advent.
I went to the link for Linda’s article and have a few comments. I see the ideal world as one in which men and women each work no more than 30 hours a week and spend the rest of the time with their families, taking care of the domestic realm equally. Linda point blankly states that “housekeeping and child-rearing in the nuclear family is not interesting and not socially validated” and encourages women to find “jobs where they may occassionally wield real social power.”
I can’t believe it, but I take issue with some of that. Not least of all is that I think the notion that men by virtue of being men, have interesting, fulfilling jobs. I would venture to bet that MOST men don’t have jobs that they really love. Linda’s article is entirely focused on upper-middle class folks. People with Harvard MBA’s and Law degrees. And those women do have a choice economically. Middle and lower-middle class women don’t have the “choice” to stay home. Their families depend on their income.
I agree that housekeeping and child-rearing aren’t all that interesting. But you know what, despite getting a Bachelor’s and Master’s Degree, I get paid relatively well, but my job is BORING! And there are just some jobs that are always going to be that way but have to be done, whether it be housework or janitorial work.
The mismatch is that women still don’t have the economic power that men have and that men (and feminism as demonstrated by Linda’s article) still don’t realize the value of child-rearing. If child-rearing is beneath women as well as men, as Linda suggests, who’s gonna do it? My assertion is that it may be dull sometimes, and more difficult than Linda may realize, but that doesn’t mean we leave it to androids or something. It means that men and women need to take on the task more equally. But neither one of us is going to do that if we turn our noses up at it like taking out the trash.
Middle and lower-middle class women don’t have the “choice” to stay home. Their families depend on their income.
Actually, yes, we *do* have that choice. It’s just more difficult to choose that option. At one point, when Chewy was working as a medic (medic pay is worse than public school teacher pay!), I went back to work part-time. The family was miserable. When Chewy and I finally sat down and talked about what was going on in the house, we realized that *our* family is one where I need to be home with the kids. So now I work part-time from home (exchange student program), and Chewy and I work together to get the farm to pay for itself. Of course, that choice is much easier now that he’s programming again instead of working as a medic.
If child-rearing is beneath women as well as men, as Linda suggests, who’s gonna do it? My assertion is that it may be dull sometimes, and more difficult than Linda may realize, but that doesn’t mean we leave it to androids or something. It means that men and women need to take on the task more equally. But neither one of us is going to do that if we turn our noses up at it like taking out the trash.
A part of me wants to be highly offended at what you wrote here. But the pragmatic part of me feels that if people are going to equate childcare with taking out the trash, then perhaps they should pay those who enjoy and wish to care for children a wage equivalent to that of trashmen (which is more than medics make).
Here’s the Latin for you, Hugo. Have them try it in that. “Haunting” is the only word to describe it, especially if done a capella.
Veni, veni Emmanuel,
Captivum solve Israel,
Qui gemit in exilio
Privatus Dei Filio.
Gaude, gaude! Emmanuel
nascetur pro te, Israel.
Veni, o Jesse Virgula;
Ex hostis tuos ungula,
De specu tuos tartari
Deduc et antro barathri.
Gaude, gaude! Emmanuel
nascetur pro te, Israel.
Veni, veni, o Oriens
Solare nos adveniens;
Noctis depele nebulas
Dirasque noctis tenebras.
Gaude, gaude! Emmanuel
nascetur pro te, Israel.
Veni clavis Davidica;
Regna reclude caelica;
Fac iter tutum superum,
Et claude vias inferum.
Gaude, gaude! Emmanuel
nascetur pro te, Israel.
Veni, veni Adonai,
Qui populo in Sinai
Legem dedisti vertice,
In majestate gloriae.
Gaude, gaude! Emmanuel
nascetur pro te, Israel.
On Ephesians 5:21-23
These ideas have been around for a while…
Pope John Paul II wrote in 1982:
“In fact we read: “Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord” (Eph. 5:22). In saying this, the author does not intend to say that the husband is the “lord” of the wife and that the interpersonal pact proper to marriage is a pact of the domination of the husband over the wife.”
and simply…
“Love excludes every kind of subjection whereby the wife might become a servant or a slave of the husband, an object of unilateral domination.”
in summary…
Love makes the husband simultaneously subject to the wife, and thereby subject to the Lord himself, just as the wife to the husband.”
Full text:
here
Traditional teaching?