Say what now?

Yesterday morn I accompanied a few other Provians to Southland Church in Steinbach, Manitoba. I'd been to this church once (albeit a year ago, on the advice of the hairdresser who put blue streaks in my hair last fall), and for the most part, I liked it. So I had good hopes for this week's service.

The worship service was better than I remembered, although I also was reminded of why I don't like electric drum kits. But that's a rant for another day.

It appeared that we had arrived in the middle of a long series on the church's core values. Today was the beginning of a four-week or so series on Value #10, "Marriage". Now, I was rather intrigued- being a nerd of the feminine persuasion who has watched most of her friends her age get hitched and preggers, it's understandably a thought that is rarely far from my mind (Never minding that I'm hopelessly single. This blog will not be discussing my consistently lacking love life.). So I wanted to hear what this pastor had to say about it.

The pastor began with explaining how God created marriage when He created mankind and womankind. I rather liked his points on how men and women were created very differently from each other and from the animals they commanded. And I appreciated the points mentioned on how marriage is lifelong and mutually beneficial, especially when the pastor began to bring up statistics done by various groups over the last however-long.

Did you know married men are more successful than unmarried men, even the ones living with someone? And did you know that the mortality rates for singles are higher than for the people married?

Some of you "forever single" types might want to Google the actual stats before deciding to pursue everlasting bachelorhood.

That was all well and good, and the pastor continued by explaining why exactly this is. Using the example of his own life, he said this was because the wife would focus her attention on the household management, leaving the man to focus solely on his career, which would result in a bigger pay cheque, which would make both the man and the woman happy.

That's when my fellow Provians and I did a double-take. Say whaaaa?

Now, I get that perhaps that is the sole goal of some women- to become happy, successful homemakers, raise a bunch of kids and cash in on their husband's earnings. And I think the pastor was trying to get the point across that married people can trust their spouses enough to step down from their careers and boost the other person in reaching their goals. That's cool enough.

However, that came across to some of us as more than just a little bit chauvinistic. Why? Because, believe it or not, that is not enough for some women, to be able to put aside their own successful careers, step into the background as the stereotypical housewife and watch their husbands leave every day for some profitable job.

This is the 21st Century. Women can be the money-makers in a family more than the men, in some cases. It's not uncommon for both the husband and wife in a family to be working- and, with today's economy, it's become more normal for both spouses to be working full-time.

Not to mention that, even if this pastor's ideas were good and sound and applicable to everyone, no woman would want their husband to come home at the end of the day and be unable or unwilling to help her in the house, as the pastor seemed to indicate men were wont to do in successful marriages.

I can more easily see a scenario such as this: Instead of the man working for money and the woman working for free to keep a happy home, both spouses work for money and work equally in the home. I, personally, don't care if the guy I eventually marry is the CEO of an international company, a world-class pilot, or a guy with an average job (I draw the line at "flipping burgers at McDonald's". I do have standards.). Money is not the most important factor in a marriage- equality and mutual love and trust are better.

Thoughts?