The myth of neutrality in women’s education

The modern line is that the true feminist values choice above all else. Whoever a woman wants to be, she can be a total feminist if she accepts whoever every other woman wants to be. This development seems to be largely driven by the swarm of women who identify strongly as feminist yet conspicuously find themselves fulfilling frightfully domestic, stereotypical roles as mothers without full-time work outside the home. What the full implications of being “feminist” entail is a story for another day.

With this mixed-bag of outcomes—some women pursuing professional careers and others focusing their energy on raising children—there is no universal understanding of what the purpose of women’s education is. This is not necessarily negative. As ever, Temple Grandin’s wise admonition to apply “bottom-up thinking” applies. It would be ludicrous to attempt a centrally-organized system determining how individual girls should be educated. The parents of each girl should decide.

However, the potential pitfall of lacking a widely accepted understanding of the purpose of women’s education is widespread confusion. Most parents, if they even consider the issue, fall into the myth of neutrality. Most assume that a good, strong feminist education will prepare their daughter for anything. The educational systems in place caters to the good, strong feminist model, which, it turns out can be a bad fit for women who want to be mothers.

What should education be?

Certainly, primary education can be largely universal. Mothers should have strong literacy and math skills. However, in the higher levels of education, the actual day-to-day life the student will inhabit should be taken into account and often is not. If, like millions of other women, a young lady desires to have and raise children, she should be encouraged to consider how her education should prepare her.

The conventional American school system, so biased toward girls’ skills encourages many girls to stay in the system. Many girls excel at sitting still, following instructions, regurgitating information, and aiding classroom harmony. Just because she’s good at these things, should she stay in the artificial ecosystem of school right up to the MD, JD, or PhD?

The tragedy in all this are the people who appear to have no choice (Likely, they still have a choice, but it may be hard to see). Supporting a family on one income in an economy that often assumes dual-income can be challenging. If the mother is saddled with debt from a superfluous degree, it is one more impediment to the sanity-making arrangement of having a mother at home.

But wait. Aren’t fathers clamoring to realize equity and take up their share of the “stay-at-home” life? It’s rare to find a man enthusiastic to be the nurturing, full-time caregiver to young children. Certainly, there are exceptions, but they are just that: exceptions. There is a reason that the acronym for stay-at-home dad (SAHD) looks an awful lot like SAD.

Working backward from full maturation, clearly many women eventually decide to be fully dedicated, at-home mothers to their own children. They shouldn’t be barred from institutions of higher learning or banned from professional pursuits. However, people who know them and love them should advise young ladies on the long-term consequences of certain educational choices. If you really want to be a doctor with a specialty, when would having and raising children become feasible? If you intend to accomplish an obscure PhD, how conducive would this arduous path be to managing a household?

Speaking of a household, the skills required do not come from nowhere. A young woman who has been bred for the professional class may struggle mightily, even with the immense array of conveniences afforded by modern appliances. The art of homemaking, even with all the shortcuts available to us, requires skill. If so very many women are still, despite virtually no encouragement, drawn to the practice of this art, perhaps it’s worth considering if we can foster that skill in her education instead of constantly shooing her away from them with all our “feminism.”

The next objection will undoubtedly be that such considerations will render women helpless and dependent on abusive men who will have total power over her. There are, in fact, ways of encouraging positives outcomes. It will never be perfect, but people rarely are. A woman who expects her husband to be the sole provider may even be more inclined to find a husband who can be.

In sum

Claiming neutrality on the subject of your daughter’s education is a fallacy. The outcome we expect is baked into the education we provide. There’s no reason to prevent women from advanced degrees and professional careers, but there is every reason to help the young woman in your life discern how her education and career facilitate or hinder her thriving.