Beach Haven

On occasion I consider my blessings. So many of those thoughts can easily turn to worldly things. Quickly overshadowing such ideas is recognition of all of my family. More joy and challenge comes from them, and the way Heavenly Father has chosen to bring each of them into my life.

I want to point to something I am particularly thankful for. It is my testimony of the influence of the Holy Ghost. Here is why. Over the years of my academic, work, and church life, and just my life-life, I’ve heard so many ways of thinking, so many ideas about what evidence is and what it shows. I’m convinced we can be convinced about almost anything when we rely solely on logic and reasoning. Which facts are actually factual becomes more and more in question when one turns them around from many angles. I’m thinking about the lyrics to a Doobies Brothers song that says “The wise man has the power to reason away what seems to be.”

This is where the Holy Ghost comes to be so important to me. When it comes to the most important issues, those that have to do with the eternal, knowing truth from ideas is critical. There are plenty who question whether truth is real or just a social construct. Is truth independent of us? Can ‘your truth’ and ‘my truth’ in some way coexist? I put these words in quotes because the idea of relative truth is so prevalent in American culture these days. The plea for us to coexist more and more becomes ‘you should just accept me as I am.’ Many of these same coexist-proponents become the opposite of tolerant when others express opposing views. I’m not necessarily talking about politics here, though it certainly plays out in that arena. Rather, I’m talking about just about every idea in any arena that people hold dear to themselves. I’m also not considering in this short note ways we can all get along.

What I’m more focused on here is how I try to ferret out truth. Understanding ideas implies taking the time to understand them; study, not shallow study. I personally don’t expect the Spirit to testify about every idea I hear in order to know if it’s true or false. When I stack up ideas about what I already know to be true, then I don’t need constant reassurance, though occasional reassurance is welcome, and it happens. When I consider ideas that are interesting, but not overly important from an eternal perspective, then I don’t seek spiritual confirmation. I also don’t assume that God wants me to gain all knowledge in this life. My mortal capacity is just too limited. I take that to mean it’s ok that there is way more that I don’t know than I do know today. There is time for much of that learning later. All that said, I regularly seek and receive truth affirming guidance from a loving and living Heavenly Father by way of the vitally important gift of inspiration that comes through the Holy Ghost. At this point in life, I believe without that comforting, still, small voice I would be lost in many ways. There are too many conflicting ideas purported by apparently reasonable people using apparently sound reasoning. One can’t even judge ideas solely by the people who advance them, meaning ‘good’ ideas come from ‘good’ people. That puts one in the difficult position of deciding who or what is ‘good’ or ‘bad’. For example, the founding fathers of the United States are favorite targets these days, yet the ideas of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights are strongly persuasive if one actually takes the time to read them.
​
For me, I’ve learned to discriminate truth from ideas in terms of the gospel through study, living the precepts, and listening to the whispering of the Holy Ghost. I see this as building on a sure foundation.

Back in 2019 I posted a review of this book. I'm reposting it here as the entire work is a testament to when the stated outcome of a technology in fact has the opposite effect. As technology entered the home with the intent of making work for mother become easier, in fact all the it tended to do is lower work for everyone else in the home. While 'mother's' work surely changed, it did not abate. In deed, work may have increased for her with each new invention. Below is what I published back then.

MORE WORK FOR MOTHER
By Ruth Schawartz Cowan
Free Association Books, 1989, 257 pages

​Most Significant Arguments

In More Work for Mother, author Ruth Schwartz Cowan links changes in domestic work with changes brought about by technological advancements. She speaks to the separation of labor into work for women, men and children. As technology makes tasks easier, or even not needed, Cowan notes how most of the advancements replaces work done by men and children. Those technologies that do help with “woman’s” work removes the “need” to keep other women help in the home.

Examples of taking away work by men and children are often around cooking stoves and ovens. As gas and electricity replaced wood and coal, the need for gathering and preparing wood dissipates. The cooking work still exists, but the help to mother by father and children is lessened, or even eliminated. Washing machines are another example. As machines came into the home there was no longer a perceived need for sending laundry out or having a laundress come into the home. Although doing a load of laundry was less strenuous, at the same time expectation for cleanliness also increased so the amount of laundry work increased. The effect of both of these examples was that work eased, but for mother workload increased.

In the post-war era of the 1960’s and 1970’s work for women outside the home became more normal. Unlike when this happened during the depression when poor women worked outside the home out of necessity, women in general felt either need or opportunity to do so. In this case not just poor women began to work outside the home, but so too middle-class women. Despite this, the housework did not shift off of mother and onto the rest of the family. Cowan argues this is because the division of labor, masculine and feminine work, has been firmly entrenched in American culture. Entrenchment of the single family home and self-sufficiency in America also keeps alternate arrangements from succeeding such as communal work sharing.

Comparison with Other Readings

Jesse Adams Stein addresses the idea of masculine and feminine work in the piece Masculinity and Material Culture in Technological Transitions. She points to the government press operations in Australia to show how cultural assumptions mold division of labor. Unlike the Cowan work looking to the home, Stein is looking at work outside the home, in the printing press. There was a division of “men’s work” in the press at the time of the letterpress. Generally the argument was that running a letterpress machine took physical strength and the ability to know a machine’s quirks so well as to be able to run it properly. Both of these aspects were thought to be beyond a woman’s ability. In fact a few women here-and-there did run these machines, but found other ways of approaching the need to load type if the weight was too much for them. Then the disruption came was letterpress was supplanted as a technology by offset lithography. Male machinists fought moving from the heavier manual process as they defined themselves in that role. Even when offset lithography became the norm, pressmen still defined their role in masculine terms. Less skill was needed to run the machines, but the tradition of working a press had been masculine and change was slow. Similar to Cowan’s argument that housework was primarily looked at as feminine culturally, Stein argues that press work was primarily looked at as masculine culturally.

Strengths and Weaknesses

Cowan’s arguments are well laid out. The technical migration and the corresponding correlation to changes in housework seem natural and logical. Even her arguments about why some technologies or processes were chosen over others seem to work.

One area I question was her depiction of the shift from mother as consumer of services to mother as producer of services. The “products” of mother were keeping the family fed, healthy and clean. As the specific work to accomplish this shifted from others to mother, and the quality and quantity expectation rose, the result was increased work for mother. Cowan gives examples of the shift from consumer to producer such as less delivery to the home with availability of the car. Mother now had to go to the supermarket to get the food rather than having it delivered, or going to a local market by walking there. The supermarket came about because increased use of refrigeration allowed for more variety of food out of season. As expectation to deliver health and food to family included a more varied diet, mother produced transportation of food stuffs by driving to a supermarket that was not close enough to walk to, and would not deliver. She also needed the car to allow for larger loads of foodstuffs required by the increased variety in diet.

I would argue that it is a little more complicated. For example when mother walked to the local market to pick up food, that act is not unlike driving to the supermarket. She was a consumer of delivery before the car (delivery to home, delivery to local market). She is a consumer of delivery after the car (delivery to the supermarket). Like drawing lines in a system between what is in and out of the system, the line between consumer and producer can be difficult. Mother was, and is, both consumer and producer of food delivery both pre- and post-car. The question is where does one draw the line? One could pick at similar arguments given by Cowan on healthcare (doctor home visits vs mother taking a child to the clinic), education (home schooling vs getting the kids to a public school), etc.

The ideas in this work could appeal to students of history, technology, sociology, gender, etc. I think there is appeal here to lay readers as well. The conversations sparked between my wife and I were interesting. My helpfulness with Thanksgiving preparations certainly increased, but I found her unwilling to allow me to get involved in some of the work which seem to support Cowan’s culture entrenchment arguments. Spouses and children should be more aware of the burdens on mothers whether they work outside the home or not.

This post relates to the Sunday morning October 2022 conference talk by President Nelson titled, “Overcome the World and Find Rest”. There were probably four parts to the text. I will focus on two that linked together. The fist was about power. I’ve always felt uncomfortable with the idea of power as it relates to the gospel, because I always thought of power from the world’s perspective, as in gaining power over others. After reading the book Infinite Atonement by Tad R. Callister I've changed my mind some. Callister wrote of power from a Godly perspective. He notes how God has all power, and part of why we are here is to learn to be like Him. He notes how spiritual gifts are forms of godly power. Callister encourages each of us to seek spiritual gifts as a way to become more like Heavenly Father. President Nelson’s talk lasted eighteen minutes. In that time, he used the word ‘power’ or a derivative fourteen times.

What is God’s power? To what power should we aspire? I argue it is faith. Hebrews 11 for example gives a long list of miracles wrought through God’s power, the power of faith. Obtaining faith in this life is so important that our memory of pre-earth life has been removed specifically to help us develop it. President Nelson encourages us to overcome the world through Christ. Overcoming something implies gaining power over it. President Nelson equates overcoming the world with 'putting off the natural man'. Those of you who have read former blogs may remember some time ago when I gave my way of thinking about doing just that. Here's the link: 

​https://bhaven.org/blog/natural-man

President Nelson's talk could be framed in the language of ‘will’. The natural man says, “I do my will because is it my will.” In putting off the natural man, we say, “I do His will because it is His will.” In this case we recognize the difference between Him and us, and we want to change. So, we try. Trying is repenting, failing at times, and repenting again, pinning our hopes to the power of the atoning sacrifice of the Lord, Jesus Christ. So long as we try and repent, we are in the act of putting off the natural man. This is my understanding of ‘enduring to the end.’ At last, Christ lifts us to the Celestial in which we can say, “I do His will because it is my will.” At this point we are not putting off the natural man, but have come to put on a different nature. A godly nature. A nature no longer to be ‘put off’.