Where traditional gender roles largely for the sake of the children?

More for the family unit ,but most certainly for the benefit of the kids.

I view it as a form of specialization, Dad specialized in running the farm or ranch ( while after industrialization) working outside the home and bringing home money.

Mom, specialized in managing the home, kids and food.

Now, no one manages the home, kids are managed by strangers and food is microwaved or picked up at a window.

Take a look around, kids have been suffering from the lack of a traditional family unit since the 70's.

If your family resembled a traditional unit feel fortunate.

Louise C & Ericktra raise some valid points. Modern Society has disdain for the Traditional Family, but have yet to replace it with a superior alternative. If new alternative familes are better if not equal to the traditional one. Why has there been a deterioration in family morals? It has been said that families function on two virtues, "love & loyalty". Both of these are in short supply. What people fail to undersatnd or accept is that America was founded on Christian beliefs. That isn't an opinion, it's a fact. Gender roles were established by the Bible and have been around for at least 2000 years if not more. Modern women give men too much credit to think that we could raise children as well as you. Women have instincts that men just don't have. My mother taught me love and kindeness. My Father taught me taught me honor, respect and gave me my manhood. Everything we know about raising children, we learn from you. Children have been the biggest losers of these new type of family units. My answer is from my Mexican Roman Catholic backdround.

Many of the problems modern children face probably have more to do with lack of parenting rather than non-traditional roles, but I do think that some things are best taught by the same-sex parent.

There's still a debate going on about whether or not children need a parent at home to look after them; my personal belief is that they develop best with a strong attachment figure, and I also think that if you have children you should also be around to raise them if you can. That parent doesn't necessarily have to be the mother though; I think a SAHD could be just as good at the job.

I just feel that the only people who are never included in the debate are children, even though it affects them most.

Just realised I was the one to say that... lol!

My grandmother was a very creative person who was forced into a traditional housewife role. She grew despondent and depressed and was an angry, unsupportive mother to her children.

My own mother learned from this mistake and worked when I was growing up, and shared equal child-rearing responsibilities with my dad. As a result, I had a wonderful childhood and am close to both my parents.

I think that it just depends on the person. If being in a traditional role works, well, the beauty of modern society is that you can do that. If you don't want to fill a traditional role, it's better for everyone if you don't. Just do what works for you and makes you happy.

As far as kids being neglected, part of shifting gender roles is that while women don't devote their entire day to raising kids, men in turn spend more time with them. I think that a healthy balance of both parents is best, myself (my dad was a great cook!).

Traditional gender roles were there because that's the way it was, and no one had any nerve to do anything about it. It was a way for men to keep control. For, whoever has the money, also has the control. But times have changed. Now both parents are working and still having to be parent and employee. I think that if they are still taking care of their kids, there should be no problem.

But the majority of kids nowadays are lacking in basic manners, and knowledge; such as respect your elders, and say please and thank you. It doesn't take that long to teach your kids the things they need to learn; whether you are working or not. Parents are just using work as an excuse to be lazy in disciplining and guiding their kids. They can do both, and both can be done. Seems like parents nowadays don't want to.

edit: It can. Me and mine do it, and so do many others. If we concentrate on "how?" and not "we are doing it", then it will never happen. Positive minds think on what can. Yes, it can be exhausting at times. But so is the whole "stay at home" thing. That's dreadfully exhausting. But we gotta do what we gotta do. I'm not trying to judge anyone here, just telling my point of view, and how I do it.

There are a lot of women who can throw a football very well. You'd be surprised. And they're hot too.

Well, the era when there were a high number of wives staying at home while husbands went out to work appears to me as a golden age. I cannot remember my mother or any of her friends being at all oppressed, in fact they seemed to enjoy their lives, and have a lot more time to enjoy themselves than today's 'juggling' women. And I would have liked to hear anyone call my mother weak and stupid and get away with it.

The idea that women never had to work in pe-feminist days is one of the more bizarre ideas that modern feminists seem to have. of course women worked, but those whose economic situation improved so they didn't ahve to were generally glad to give it up. Honestly, to hear the women on here talk you'd think no woman ever lifted a finger before the 1960s.

However, in The Feminine Mystique Betty Friedan informed us that the reason why men were divorcing their wives was because they were sick of supporting them, and the stay-at-home wife was also to blame for homosexuality, juvenile delinquency and child battering. The curious thing is, none of these things seems to have decreased since married women all started rushing out to work, so i can't help feeling that other factors must have some bearing on the matter.

The truth is, traditional gender roles aren't as traditional as we may think they are. They started with upper middle class people during industrialization. Before industrialization, everyone worked. A mother would take her children with her to the fields, and once they were old enough, they worked too.

So, no, children won't end up becoming depraved if a mother chooses not to stay at home. People have been raising their children different ways for millennia.

I believe that there are some things in life that only a woman can teach and do for a child and there are some things in which men are better suited, but when you have a woman trying to teach her boys how to play football and a man trying to relate to a little girl who is dealing with puberty and her first period, things are bound to get messy.

edit: No one said women cannot throw a football i was just illustarting that such advise would seem better coming from a man when it relates to boys...there are things a boy would go through that only a man would understand just like there are things that girls go through that only a woman would understand, it's not such a difficult argument S.A.N.D

no, they were (not where) because men thought women too weak and stupid to do "men's" work. if a person can do the work, why should they be denied because of gender?

If everything still gets done, how would they be hurt..

I'd like for you to elaborate..