I was offended by the interview regarding Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary offering courses in homemaking, but not for the reasons that women do choose to stay at home and pursue a degree in homemaking, but for the reason that women "shouldn't" choose to have a degree in it.  With parents who both working outside the homne and daycare as the mainstream, girls are not growing up being 'taught' how to keep a home.  I am a product of working parents and did NOT learn how to keep a home.  My parents struggled raising us and so in turn I struggled and was overwhelmed with the prospect of children and staying at home.  I had NONE of the skills needed and muddled through making so many grievous errors that my current family suffered because of it.  I'm offended by groups that say that women should have a degree that 'could' sustain them "IF" anything ever happened that they would need it.  What about the homemaking degree that actually applies to their everyday life and not the "if" factor.  I'm offended that women's groups would shun this type of degree when so many women would benefit from having an knowledge base BEFORE the experience of homemaking.  I am one voice, but a voice in support of our nations professionals putting their effort into teaching our future generations the one thing that the working world is fazing out of our everyday life.  A Mom to come home to.

Michelle
Rochester, MN

I have been a viewer of The Today Show for years...when my family visited New York City in 2001, we went to the plaza, and Ann Curry hugged our youngest son who was 9 at the time...not only have we been viewers of the show for years, we've been fans of both The Today Show and Ann.  This morning, I was troubled by this interview.  Ann and Ms. Hamman interrupted Mr. Williams and would not let him finish a single point he attempted to make.  I got the feeling they were both very biased on the issue, and I was very disappointed with the one sided way the whole interview was handled.  I'm not going to mention any of my feelings about the topic of discussion...I just feel that The Today Show and Ann fell short on this one.

I am a man. I am divorced.  I find this course sexist.  I agree with Ms. Hamman that this course and courses like it only keep woman "bare-foot and pregnant."  However,  I am not surprised that a fundimental group like the Southern Baptist would want to keep the power male-based.

It was disturbing to me that Mr. Williams was basically walked(talked)all over. I happen to get sick of complaining women, who seem to think this could in any way "set women back". I am a stay at home mom, and would give my right arm to have the opprotunity to learn these things. My mother was unable, as many are, to teach me the simple things. This is goes to show why Martha Stewart and shows alike are such great success. The only thing I saw setting women back, was a rude and opionated Ms. Hammond distorting the issue and Ann allowing it. I have no problem with men also having the class, but I am personally sick of being forced to allow men in my classes. I can't even go to a womens only gym. Please allow us to have space. We don't have to do every thing together.

I watched this segment with great interest.  I think this course is a great idea.  Yes, it does exclude men, but at least someone is doing something to help future generations.  Maybe a daddy course is in the works.  
I do feel the interview was very slanted.  Rachel was allowed to constantly interrupt the gentlemen from Focus on the Family and Ann seemed to continually interrupt his answers with more questions.  Let's be fair and allow both side equal time without interruption.  I noticed the gentleman from Focus on the Family sat quietly while Rachel continually talked and watched her picture on tv.

I earned a degree in general Home Economics in the mid '90's and I strongly disagree with Ms. Hamman's statements, especially that taking a course in homemaking does not prepare a woman for that role.  There are thousands of women (and yes, men) who have absolutely NO IDEA about how to go about preparing meals, shopping, organizing a home, etc.  While they are skills that can be learned "on the job", they are skills that can be taught before throwing a woman into the fire and having her figure them out on her own.  

I also strongly disagree with her statement that this type of degree is a waste.  My degree allows me to go into numerous viable fields - extension outreach programs, child care and development, research, nutrition education - and many, many more.  For five years I chose to use my degree as  Junior High and Senior High School Home Economics teacher.  I have first hand knowledge and experience that our youth are NOT being taught the necessary skills to provide a solid home for their future families (even if that family is just them with a partner).  

We have moved into the 21st Century but the role of homemaker continues to fall more on the shoulders of women than men.  Let's prepare our women to develop a home that does make the family stronger and which can then prepare her own children to make such a home for their families.

I have no problem at all with this kind of program.  There are many women who choose a life for themselves to be the best homemaker that they can be.  Ms Hamman makes the argument that one can pick up skills better at the source, for example, learn to cook from your mother, learn to sew from another seamstress, etc.  This may be true, but then, where is her degree?  This way she is getting an education and expanding her mind and experiences, which will only serve her well as she does whatever comes her way in the future.

I know that many women choose to go to this school on their own, but another reason that this program may be in place, and that I have no objection to it is because there are many women accompanying their husbands to seminary.  They can take this course of study if they desire (or others) while their husbands are enrolled in seminary.

Just saw Ann's interview on the new college curriculum homemaking 101.  It really surprised me that Ann would be that narrow minded to make sure that the Focus on The Family representative had less than a minute of actual time to speak due to the interruptions not only from Ms Hamman, but Ann herself.  Before this interview I used to think that Ann would have made a better replacement for Katie, but now it is clear that she cannot conduct a fair and impartial interview and needs to stick with just the news.  
I could really care less if a college wants to offer this type of program, if women like it, it will succeed, if not it will fail and fade away.
It is just so disappointing that Ann is either incapable of conducting a fair interview or that she is more interested in promoting her own views.

First of all, I would like to commend Ann on the way she handled the interview. As a homemaker, I usually feel like the media does not promote homemaking as a valid life choice. My brother actually attends Southwestern and although his wife has also chosen  to be a homemaker, does not agree with the "homemaking class". I disagree. The women's movement has widen the field of choices for women in every area EXCEPT those who choose to be homemakers. They have taken that choice away from women by implying that it is a step back into the 1950's. Homemakers today make this choice inspite of everything they hear from our society today. If a class will give women the validation and courage to choose the unpopular and not poitically correct option of homemaking then go for it!

As I watched this, again I was amazed that when Ann asked, "Shouldn't women be given a choice to take this course? There are women who have choosen this course," that your female guest discounted any woman who chooses to take this course.  I guess we have choices, but only choices that are mapped out for us by NOW or other feminists groups. When will choice in America really be choice without someone telling me what I must choose? If some women are intimidated by women who choose to become homemakers, they should  deal with their lack of understanding that mind-set, don't tell those women they are wrong.

In the day of choices for women being such an issue, it is very interesting that Ms. Hamman is so concerned about the offering of this program.  If a young woman CHOOSES to take such a curriculum, who am I (or you, or Ms. Hamman) to come against such a decision? It is as if women whose focus is their future family are being discriminated against!  

We live in a country in which freedom is still a right.  As far as I am concerned, the school has the freedom to create a curriculum, and women have the freedom to say yes or no to it!

As far as the men are concerned, perhaps a like curriculum should be established for them, although I do not object to men taking this course of study.

I feel that with war, poverty, and other huge issues, focusing on this one is a bit absurd.

I was a bit frustrated listening to the interview, it seemed that A. Curry & Ms. Hamam barely gave Mr. Williams a moment to speak.  Whenever he opened his mouth he was over powered by interruptions.  Personally, I feel a good interview, especailly one on such a hot topic should involve a fair blend of questions & answers.  I really wanted to hear what he had to say as a mom who has worked outside of the home with children & now home as a homemaker, both being tough jobs!!!

Commenting on the program for women on homemaking -- many schools have eliminated the home ec. requirement for students, male and female, in high school and we are seeing more people overweight because no one knows how to cook proper meals, people in debt because they are not taught how to manage their money, a throw away society because no one knows how to sew up a rip in a seam or patch a knee.  I realize that there are women who feel that these courses aren't necessary but it is a choice of the women at this university to take the program and we should all be able to make our own choices.  I believe that is what women have fought for.

I am 31 and the mom of two children (6 yrs and 17 mos).
I was disappointed to see that you did not have on a woman who choose to be a homemaker from the start.  I remember in HS talking to my classmates about our future majors and wondering what I was going to do.  I never had dreams of being a Dr. or a CEO of a major company or anything like that.  For as long as I can remember all I wanted to be was a mom at home with my kids.  I did go to colloge for 3 yrs and majored in Early Childhood Education b/c I thougt that would have info that could help me in the future - and it did.  (I think that a class in early childhood development should be required of all expecting parents!)

If I had been able to take these courses I would have - b/c as hard as it is for some 21st century women to beleive, there are women who don't want to do anything else except be the the COO of their own household.  While there are days when I think it would have been easier to be an astronaut- in the end I wouldn't trade it for anything.

I was disappointed in the uneven handling of the discussion concerning homemaking classes for women.  Mr Williams could barely get a word in to answer the front-loaded questions asked of him by Ann Curry. Ms. Hamman usually cut him off. If women choose to benefit from the information provided in the classes in a women-only environment--that is their choice. It doesn't prevent classes in other subjects to broaden their education. Having classes for women doesn't preclude having parenting/homemaking classes for men as well. Education in one's chosen area is what the women's movement was all about.

In regard to the segment on a degree in homemaking, I think education in homemaking is a great idea.  I've met so many families who can't budget, have homes that are a mess and let their children run wild.  Some of these are families where the wife chose to stay home and take charge, and others are of working mothers.  Some of these women are well educated, yet they struggle daily in managing a home and supporting their family members. In one instance, it reflected poorly on her husband and cost him a promotion and possibly his job.  I've never thought lowly of my grandmother or other women who chose to serve in this way.  In fact, I looked up to my grandmother with high esteem.  Staying home also allowed them to be creative and innovative in other ways.  If men want to learn more about homemaking, they certainly can, just not at the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.  

I completely agree wtih Michelle. Isn't it obvious, with so may step parent households, single parents, working parents, daycares, climbing divorce rate, etc. that perhaps we need to help the generation currently raising our next generation? It is incredible to me that the comment was made on the program this morning to the effect that this generation has 'good' role models in the form of mothers, grandmothers, and other family members. How many kids have been taken FROM their families for drug abuse, spouse abuse, child abuse? How many have basically been abandoned? SOMEBODY NEEDS TO WAKE UP! Thank you for shining a light on just ONE of a growing number of such programs that will HELP our future, not tear it down!

I, too, was offended by much of the story on Homemaker 101 this morning.  As a professional woman who has a degree in Home Economics, now Family and Consumer Science. I was disappointed when comments were made about women getting what sounded to me like a much more appropriate degree that would, to paraphrase, help a woman support their family IF something happened to their spouse.  My career in Family and Consumer Science has included experience in business, as well as in the classroom, and HAS supported my family.  I have been supported by my husband and family as well.  It is unfortunate that SW Baptist fails to see the importance in home management, child care, time/energy management, etc. for BOTH men and women.  Understandably, there should be an issue with no degree encouraged, no men allowed!  With more than 30 years experience in the Home Economics/Family and Consumer Science sector, I have found a frightening number of individuals who have no idea about how to maintain a home, raise a child, select nutritious food, to name just a few important issues.  Perhaps SW Baptist should stop by FACS classrooms and see that what once female dominated courses are now filled to capacity with an equal number of males and females.  In these classes, students learn to value their family and relationships, read a lease, choose blueprints, manage money, raise children, buy a car, select a lending agency, reconcile bankstatements, raise their children, chose daycare, start a business, manage a busy schedule, prepare nutritious meals... and the list continues.  Careers that spin off from a background in Family and Consumer Science is unbelievable...for both men and women.  SW Baptist needs to look beyond their campus and realize that this information isn't just for women anymore!

I was raised with the "feminist" myth that I only needed a good college education, not a 'man,' to succeed in life. I was taught the so-called mundane and degrading, old-fashioned things of life- such as being a content stay at home mom, knowing how to run a house, how to do laundry and how to cook and clean (we all need to know that whether we marry or not!) - were beneath education women and now I find myself highly educated and don't have a lick of sense of how to plan meals for my family or grocery shop with a budget, how to run a household (we are not talking merely dusting here!) or how to teach my 5 girls how to cook! It's embarrassing and apalling that these feminist women think loving and marrying a man and creating a family with him is a setback to women (!!!!) and raising a family is mentally unchallenging. Shame on them! I was originally very interested in watching the Homemaker's segment because home ec was not encouraged when I was in High School- I had to take 'shop' to prove I was just as good as a boy. But today, I found the same feminist myth spewing from Ann Curry's mouth and that of the guest she DID agree with (ie not the fellow who had a different perspective I wanted to hear but never did because of the obvious and continual biased interruptions). I guess it goes to show that if you watch an obviously biased news media, they will only run roughshod over anyone who might be able to shed light on another perspective. God forbid I have the chance to learn how to cook and clean, I might actually be good at it! This show would rather have me in fear that I had better learn a 'real' education because obviously my wonderful husband is going to turn into a jerk like all men of the world and divorce me and leave me to rely on myself. PLEASE! If you call this honest journalism, then I guess I had just better pack it all up and let a daycare worker raise my children, go back to work and hire a housekeeper who was smart enough to learn these things before they became detrimental to women!

The biggest misnomer when it comes to stay-at-home education is that because a person is studying how to raise a family, they are not intelligent.

We should embrace the fact that a homemaking student does have a skill set, and that we need to expand the curriculum.  This could a minor of studies to supplement the student's major.

A Homemaker could also study nutrition, psychology child development, education courses, art courses, business entrepreneurial courses, literature courses - maybe something in even existentialism or similar - because how many kids ask the big questions, mathematics courses for at least when the children need help with school, social / political courses discussing gender roles in society, and be required to mentor children for the experience.   If there were courses for after the children are grown, I would suggest those too. There should also be seminar courses with personal homemaking experiences - why and why not they were chosen.  
The more information you can give a person, the better, because let's face it: no one chooses to be a homemaker and thinks divorce and having to start over are a possibility for him or her.  If it does happen, the person should know what to do.  While we are at it, let's also require self defense and battered spouse education.

People are going to choose to stay at home.  To some degree, it is considered a luxury.  We, as a society, have to offer this person the best education possible.

With dysfunctional families out numbering functional families (note, the word happy is not being used), maybe we all need some homemaking courses.

We create a problem for ourselves when we judge what a person should or should not learn.  It is the role of the educator to lay out all the facts.  My concern with the speakers this morning is if they think darning socks is the only skill you need to be a homemaker, then they are limiting the education.

I was frustrated with the interview about the 'Homemaker' degree.  I am bombarded with women's advocacy groups claiming women should have a 'right to choose', but apparently that only means if that choice is to get a degree they approve of just in case.  Ms. Hamman actually compared staying home with children to putting money in a garbage disposal.  The poor guy from Focus on the Family wasn't able to get in a comment.  It amazes me how little we value our children in this country.  The talk is big, but in reality if people can pawn them off on someone else at the cheapest price in the name of a paycheck and the earlier the better!!!  I wonder if society actually thinks it was an easy process to choose to give up a hard earned career with a pretty good paycheck to take a job I had no training for, with no respect where I lost every friend I had, cutting our income by 40%.  It wasn't a question when that baby was put in my arms because I knew I loved him more than myself.  Maybe we need a little less self love and to remember it is ok to put others before ourselves.  It is very pc to always watch out for yourself.  I am tired of hearing people tell me how they had to socialize their child in daycare - really???  I am not buying it, but I do buy that our society has gotten really used to instant gratification and buying what we want when we want it.  I am guilty of it, I think most people are.  The question is are we doing this at the expense of our kids???  Really, who comes first?

I was also offended when I watched this.  In part because this man (not from the college) has to defend this course rather then tell people what it can offer them.  First of all if there is going to be debate, then a more appropriate choice should have been made on the side of the college. Perhaps an actual educator from the college that knew the questions being “thrown” at the man from Focus on the Family.  And second, shouldn't a debate have opinions from both sides?  All I heard was having to defend this course and not being able (having time) to discuss any of the possible positives that this could have for young woman.  He appeared to be getting beating up by both the other person and Ann Curry.  Isn’t the new caster supposed to be neutral?

I am a stay at home mom of four now and in the beginning it was tough and continues still to be a challenge.  I wish I had a chance to learn from a source like that and be even a bit more prepared for the path in life I happened on.  I would say that was my "if".  If I decide to get married, quite my job and raise four girls!  Yea, I could have uses several of those courses.

Speaking of the "if factor", in the world today if you have a degree in theater you can get a job in accounting.  The person with the degree gets the job over someone without it even though that's sometimes not fair.  If a woman winds up needing or wanting to provide financially for her family, she will be prepared there as well.

I just wish the Today show would allow the other person a chance to debate the pros of a program like this.

I also noticed the same thing happened with the interview with the congressman who was trying to keep the boys pants up.  He was forced to spend all his airtime defending/explaining himself and had no time given to him to share any of the pros of a move like this.  

Lets be fair to both sides when “starting the debate” as Ann puts it.

Monica
Richmond, IL

Couple points:

#1) No time given to the Focus on the Family representative.
#2) Southwestern Seminary is a school that prepares ministers, and their families, for the role of ministry to their local churches and/or communities.  Not sure the N.O.W. representative can speak on that with any certainty.
#3)  This is a course, not a major, or even a concentration.  I'm sure it's not intended to turn every woman into Martha Stewart or Rachel Ray, instead to discuss these homemaking issues as relevant to ministry.  Pastor's, in various roles, and their families live in "glass houses" to the people in their ministry.  A careful family in ministry tries to represent Christ in the pulpit, in the grocery store, everywhere they go and including the home.  I'd like to explain this more, but it certainly isn't the forum.
#4) Below is the link so you can see what this course covers:

http://www.swbts.edu/catalog/page.cfm?id=97&open=9_area

Housewives 101 is a welcome change for young women. Today young women are introduced to so called "new ideas" and don't have the option of learning some solid everyday life skills. There are many young people who don't have parents, family, friends, (myself included) that have the ability to teach these skills as was suggested by Ms. Hamman.  I am not surprised that  Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary was brave enough to take a step forward in this forgotten concept. I am not a Baptist but they are to be applauded and other secular schools should take note. As for men learning these life skills? Absolutely! To be honest, I feel in some cases, men need it more than women! Also, I felt Mr. Williams was probably not the best candidate for your discussion - even though his credentials may reflect it. Because someone is a VP doesn't make him qualified to debate with 2 women who obviously didn't agree with the Housewives 101 program. I love you, Ann but there was a little bit of verbal bulldozing with your male guest. He had very little time to say anything at all!

I was annoyed with the sexist bias that was exhibited by Ann with this interveiw. I had believed her to be more balanced than that. But the two women showed that they could run over a gentleman who was deprived of ever having a moment to speak. They could not have been more arrogant nor ignorant of in their rude display.

I agree that Ms. Curry and Mrs. Hamam ganged up on Mr. Williams and barely let him get a word in. I came from a home in which both my parents and grandparents worked, but my wife is a full-time homemaker, and I wouldn't want to trade places with her for one moment.  That being said, the one thing we're overlooking here is this course is being taught at a Seminary, whose students possess traditional values and gender roles that many modern Americans dismiss as archaic. It's funny how everyone preaches tolerance these days, and yet it is the same exact people who are the most intolerant of those who choose to follow a traditional lifestyle. The image of the American housewife is one of a strong, organized and resourceful individual. I fail to find how that is sexist.  

I would like to comment on the issue and not the way the interview was handled. As a mother of two, part-time Baptist minister and a former student of Southwestern Seminary (1985-87), my opinion is that the "Homemaking class" is less about learning how to run your home, and more a reflection on the gender-biased state of Southern Baptists today. The development of this course came too close to the addition in the "Baptist Faith and Message" of the line stating that wives were to "joyfully submit" to their husbands. Many Texas Baptists still stand for freedom of belief and not fundamentalist specifics about defining male/female roles. Unfortunately, the fact that SWBTS will not allow men in the course confirms the seminary's trend towards gender pidgeon-holing.

This story, or more appropriately, the handling of this story is yet another example of how entitled we all feel to weigh in on what is right and wrong with this world as if any of us has all the answers. I'm really surprised at Ann for her obvious bias on this. Here's the point...it's OK to have only boys in the Boy Scouts,  it's OK to for little girls to have princess parties and not invite the boy next door, and it's really OK for there to be available education to women who choose to want to study this.  Why in the world is this an issue?  Slow news day? For the record, I work full time, own my business and raised two children while I worked so I'm not biased to stay home moms.  This is just a matter of "it's not really any of our business if this is important to someone"!!!

I am more than a little disappointed (but not surprised) in the way Ann Curry handled the segment on Homemaking 101.  Ann and Rachel both made sure that Glenn Williams wasn't even able to answer one question without being interrupted.  Frankly, I was offended that Rachel couldn't keep her hand off Mr. William's knee.  Her attitude was both dehumanizing and patronizing.  Had Mr. Williams touched her knee and used the tone she used with him, she would be screaming he was harassing her sexually.   This is a new century and freedom of choice goes both ways.  No one is holding a gun to anyone else's head forcing them to take this course.

It is my opinion that homemaking encompasses all aspects of living a great life.  Learning and becoming efficient with finances, good nutrition, child rearing, human relations, time management, community involvement are a few of the basics homemakers deal with on a daily basis.  Many women lack the skills necessary and would find the coursework at this university to be a great help.  I am sorry it is looked at as such a unnecessary course of study.
  Our society is suffering!  Women such as Ms. Hamman must live in a bubble of high society money where the effects of the neglected families are not as readily seen.  Money can buy nanny's etc,.  The majority of the nation needs to do all these things on their own and are lacking in knowledge and skills.
Why wasn't the actual cirriculum presented?  I am sure it was more than cooking and cleaning.

As a 27 yr. old southern baptist, I am supportive of such a major. Although this is not a major in high school, they teach us these fundamentals in home economics at high school. Why not offer this options to adults? I think it can be a different point of view to women, even from the ones who can learn from their family members. I am even sure this would be useful for women that have a job outside the home. How wonderful this would be for daycare workers.
 Nonetheless, I think this would be useful for men, too. Everyone needs to learn such things.

What is wrong with offering a course that women have asked for? The comment of "throw back to the 50's" does not reflect the progress women have had in the last 50 years. {Maybe not as far and as fast as some women would like.}If women want to be better mother's and learn how to better juggle their lives, there is nothing wrong with that.
Men approach parenting in a different way, sometimes, so focusing on women narrows the study.
Today we pay health care people to teach "at risk" mothers. Maybe we could reduce some of this problems ahead of time with the courses.

I am a woman & attend Southwestern's seminary, but I am not the college or majoring in homemaking.  As I look at the program it is just as academically challenging as the other undergraduate degrees.  If secular colleges offer homemaking degrees, then why can't southern baptist colleges offer it?  Give people a choice that is all I am saying!

I also don't think of myself as "uber-conservative" at all, in fact I am quite liberal!  I have found there is still room for me in a southern baptist instituation, and no one ousts me for my views.  I don't think this program has political affiliations, nor does it teach women to be "barefoot and pregnant", instead it teaches women what to after that stage & any program that encourages reading about child development and philosophy is a great asset to our global community!  I'm sure we all wish that our children (the future generation) could be nurtured by men and women who are educated in these fields!  This kind of interaction is surely more useful than others!  Maybe I wouldn't be in therapy if I had such ideally trained parents!

As an employer, a four year degree in "Homemaking" on a resume would immediately make me pass on hiring them.

Offering electives is fine, but your Major defines your degree.  As for cutting off the Focus on the Family guy, he really was not saying anything relavent to the topic.  I wanted to hear an opinion not his resume.

I thought they made a very good point in that this course is not offered to men.  How can it not be sexist then?

I'm surprised that no one seems as infuriated as I am that women are expected to have homemaking skills in our society. The woman who wrote "the role of homemaker continues to fall more on the shoulders of women than men" seems to think we should accept this "responsibility" rather than rallying against it. I have always been messy and don't know how to cook, and I will stay this way to help dispel these stereotypes. Yes, I am intolerant of traditional lifestyles, because it casts women as second class citizens. Let's turn things around and require men to take these courses. If only one parent is needed to run a household, why can't it be the father?

Who is the most influential person in your life? Probably your mother. It seems appropriate to train women who choose to stay home to be better homemakers. I learned many life skills from my mother,cooking, ironing shirts, child care, etc. This has been a great help in my life. By the way my wife appreciates it also.

As a person who majored in Home Economics when it was part of an important career, I feel they are missing the boat by not inviting men to take this class also.  
We are all a product of Homemaking!
I feel that some of the important aspects of these classes are sometimes missed in todays society.  How many young people know how to cook or know the basics of nutrition?  How many of us and them make budget decisions that are unwise? (over spending)  All of us have to purchase and wear clothing - Sometimes this clothing is discarded becausing of a simple alteration or simple sewing techniques that could be used to make this garment last longer thus saving money to invest.  All of the aspects of Homemaking will be used if we are mothers, fathers or choose to live alone.  This is an important learning experience in our society today and always.

You owe professional homemakers and Home Economists across the country an apology. As a Iowa State graduate in Home Economics Education it's degrading to turn on the television and see a woman put down my choice in careers.  Our society needs the skills offered in a degree in home economics course work. Nutrition, child development, home management, finances, textiles....Which of us would not benefit from learning more about these topics. We don't aspire to be Martha Stewart, just good at what we do each and every day  You acted as though a degree in Home Economics was something new.  ISU has offered this a degree for over 125 years!!!!  Ann needs to do her homework. If we cared more about life skills and worried less about how much money we can earn, we could would create a brighter future and healthier families.  Maybe we have learned something from the homemakers of the 1950s!!!!!!!!!!!  What's really important at the end of the day - our career or our FAMILY.

I agree with Mary from Texas. A Homemaking 101 class should be a critical examination of what it means to be a homemaker and not just a class teaching a basic skill set.  

I think the homemaking program is a great idea.  Women need to know that staying home to take care of home and family is a good option, and not be mocked for it.  This world does not easily allow women to make that choice - my husband has been mocked at work for "making his wife stay at home," and asked, "Why don't you allow your wife to get a job?"  

I am a homemaker, as are my mother, my four sisters, most of my aunts, and all of my grandmothers before me.  Luckily, I had lots of homemaking education in my home, but many girls don't have that opportunity these days.  I worry that my 5 sons will not be able to find a wife who wants to raise a family, and has the beginnings of knowing how to do so properly.  I want my grandchildren to have mothers who know how and want to stay home and take care of them, not turning their raising over to strangers.  We are doing our best to raise our daughter to be a strong woman, who is able to do anything she wants to do, and who knows how to do all the important things required in running a household, no matter how rich or how poor her family ultimately is.

My biggest complaint about the interview is Ann's question, asking if the course teaches women to be submissive.  Submissive is not a bad word, except as the world sees it now.  A good homemaker does not necessarily submit to her husband's will at all times.  A good homemaker is an equal partner with her good husband, who should also be submissive to her.  A family needs to be willing to compromise, work together, and occasionally give in to each other's ideas and inspirations.  The way I see it, we should all be submissive in one way or another.

Oh, and our two older sons have been taking home ec in junior high, and it is so fun to see them learning how to cook, clean, sew, etc!!!  I hope all my boys learn these skills, through me and possibly home ec classes, so that they can grow up to be good, helpful, understanding husbands and fathers.

I am an everyday avid watcher of the show and love Ann, but today I was so dissapppointed that she did not give a good interview with of the Focus on the Family rep.  She was very interputive of everyone of his comments.  We need to remember that these are voluntery classes and the degree, just as any other.  I do feel that if men really feel that it is unfair and want to take this sort of classes, then take it up with the school and ask for it.... we need good daddys that can cook and help with the household chores too. And as for Ann, well she should take a lesson from this interview and be more neutral on future similar interviews, or not do them, if she can't give both sides equal time without interruptions.

To Bill in NC -
If you pass on the resume of a person with a home economics degree you are missing out on a potential employee that knows what's important in life.  Grounded in management skills, communication skills and an understanding of how to deal with adversity.  Oh well, your loss!!!

The world is so full of hypocrisy, we are all so silly. Why do we(in this case, women), bother picking on women who take classes to become better at what they choose to do with their life, when all the activists say women need to have a say in their choices? Why do women preachers complain about what a seminary teaches its students about the different roles God created men and women to do? And clearly their is hypocrisy in the fact that a woman claims to know and believe the bible but yet will discount the fact that she is not allowed to teach or have authority over a man(1Timothy 2:12), not because she isn't as intellegent because the Bible clearly states women are equal to men in this area, and she rebells and teaches men anyway?? It was clear that the 2 ladies on the Today Show today completely disregarded the male guest and what he had to say, yet he graciously sat and listened. It's just all interesting to watch and hear what we all have to say about such things.

As a stay at home Mom, raised by a single Mom, I would love to have a degree in homemaking!

I am a new female OB/GYN, just finishing residency. As you can imagine, finding a balance between work and home life will be a challenge. I feel it is important to be doing something that makes you happy thereby making those around you (family) happy as well. There are unhappy stay at home moms and children are very good ay sensing discontent.

On another note, I was very disappointed with Ann and her female guest. They practically attacked the male guest's point of view. Part of being a good reporter (and interviewer) is to hear both sides of the story, and not let your emotions and opinions overshadow its purpose.

I was fired up with many emotions while watching the interview; disbelief and frustration almost brought me to tears.
I am a new stay at home mom of 4 boys for 3 months now and am overwhelmed by doubt and fear that I am not giving my family everything they need.  I wish I had the opportunity to take some classes on the topic.
I feel disbelief that STILL there are women who look down upon those who choose to stay at home.  I thought that those who were against the 'domesticated woman' were a thing of the past.  We are in a time where it should be okay for any woman or man to live a life that they choose, without scrutiny.
I feel frustration over those women who do not support their fellow woman.  We are supposed to be our greatest supporters girls, but end up being our own worst enemy.  It's frustrating to know that I will only get the support of some women if I'm choosing a career outside of my home.  I did it for 14 years and this new life of mine is 10X harder emotionally and mentally.
I love Ann and still do.  I felt the FOF gentlemen made his point, but that Ms. Hamman needed all the  time in the world to drive hers home.  
Based on the comments above, Ms. Hamman, you are a dying breed... good riddance to your way of thought!

To Ann Curry and the Today show producers,

First of all I have to tell how I love waking up every morning and having you guys there. And don’t tell any one, but Ann has always been my favorite because she comes across as so caring and delivers a story or interview very well. With this said, I have to tell you that I was quite upset this morning (August 24, 2007) when I watched a slaughter to a Focus on the Family representative and a program that wasn’t even given a chance to be defended.
It’s a sad day when we can defend teaching sexual education to our fifth grade children, but not defend a program that will encourage a parent to be there to do it themselves when his or her child is an appropriate age. Why is so much negative emphasis focused on things that are good for our families and, in turn, our future?  It’s a sad day when we can have children and not know how to fix their ripped clothing or cook them something other than mac and cheese. It’s also sad that we’re going on four generations that don’t know the art of knitting and sewing, how to make a house a home all by ourselves and without the help of Martha Stewart. We don’t know proper etiquette, the very thing that made us civilized in the first place. I know that that may sound like an extreme pull to get a point across, but it’s true because it’s what I see and hear all around me. Homemakers aren’t what they used to be because there has not been a true homemaker to teach them. My next question is why is it “1950’s” to want to have a nice place for our spouse to come home to?  My husband, Dave, works really hard everyday to take care of us and, as a woman I find joy in my career choice. I love being home and being the one to mold my children to be good, loving, and fair people. And because I love it so much, I want to show appreciation to Dave for working hard so I can do that. That, I’m sure is the basis for girls taking this course.
Can you imagine having so many skills that not only will make your job easier, but because you’ll know and understand more, you wouldn’t be so frazzled at the end of the day? Of course I’m not an idiot and I do know how to do the dishes, but I haven’t been able to figure it out how to do them quickly and efficiently with a 1 year old attached to my leg and a three year old running around destroying the room I just work so hard cleaning. Moments like that happen more than once during the day and they mostly include a lot of noise from my two ADORABLE kids. Like as I write this, my cat has knocked over my coffee making a mess on the floor I just cleaned, my three year old has informed me that his one year old sister has taken off her diaper in the living room where I had put a movie in for them, and now she’s tapping my leg because she wants to eat again. I love my kids dearly, and I love my husband, and I think many women that stay at home feel that way, but how are they supposed to find time for themselves or feel good that they were able to take care of something themselves like fixing the leaky faucet or hooking up the dryer vent when a big load shakes it off? That’s the empowerment that should have been fed to us after the “1950’s.” What should have been shoved down America’s throat is not “we can be just like men,” but that men and women were created differently and that’s a very cool thing!  I get to unveil beauty and have a nurturing spirit. I wouldn’t want to put up with emotions like a man but I’m glad Dave is there to help me with mine. Now don’t get me wrong, I think there’s a big balance, and I totally respect woman CEO’s for their accomplishments, and dads that take care of the home front in their respective situations.
I also would like to hit on a point that the other lady said about learning skills from grandmothers and mothers. When do I have time? Those things should have been taught to us before we endeavored on this journey. And more importantly, what generation after my great-grandmother (who was raised before the feminist movement) truly understands these skills? I know my mother doesn’t know as much in that department, or she just didn’t teach me. I sadly think it’s because we, as girls, were taught that it was a great offense to other women to not attend college and to learn how to sew and knit, or “darn socks.” It’s at least true for me. I want to continue my education, but I’m breaking right now for my kids. How cool would it be though to have a degree that could get you the best of both worlds? If something awful happened, those girls would have a degree and a wide variety of skills, thus many job choices and even perhaps a stay at home business. The whole “darn socks” comment was the one that pissed me off the most. That is not what this program is about and it was completely unfair. It was also an opportunity to ruin the reputation of homemakers, this program, and Focus on the Family. I respect and appreciate FOF more than you’ll ever know. They help more families than you’ll ever know. They ARE experts on families and do you know where they become experts? They learned it in their college educations, the lives/experiences of others, and most importantly, in their own families.  Next time, could you at least let their representative answer one question? Even if you don’t completely agree? Please?
Now one last thought, and please let me say that I appreciate you taking time to read this. My thought has to do with the thought that this program will help lower divorce rates. Yeah, it does sound bold, but it makes sense to me. I’ve been there. If a woman isn’t stressed out, if there’s balance in the home, then there will be a better relationship between a man and a wife. If a man feels appreciated, loved, and has a place to relax with his wife and children, there’s balance in his heart and he can fulfill the needs his wife has. That all sounds very general and trust me, we’ve had little tweaks into that system, but the funny thing is that it’s proven itself effective in our marriage and our family. We went from the verge of divorce (looking back it was because I was living out the feminist bull hookey and Dave wasn’t fighting me on it) to the best part of our marriage yet! Guess what else we did…we listened to focus on the family, I quit my job, put school on hold, and I devoted every part of myself to my family and the home we live in and Dave committed to providing everything financial, supporting me in my endeavors at home, and my ideas to make money from here when I’m ready (and can do it without a one year old attached to my leg…she likes me  ).  He also has been great at getting home, chilling out for a few minutes and then taking the kids for me so I can have a break. That’s not “1950’s” that’s a family. And yes, I’m very happy and content.
I hope my point was made clearly, and I, again, appreciate you taking time to read this. I’m not anyone famous, but I do have a voice and I feel that you could have done a better job allowing this voice to be heard (I’m very positive that this is the thought behind the program). I appreciate journalism as long as its fair and this definitely wasn’t. In fact it was damaging, I’m sure, so if you can do something to fix it, then it would be appreciated as well. And Ann, I have to say that “you’re so pretty.” That’s what my three year old wanted to tell you  Thanks again.

Respectively yours,
Robin Morehouse

I applaud the school for offering classes that value caring for a family.  The only flaw in their offering is that men are not encouraged to particpate.  Why on earth wouldn't a man be interested in child care and nutrition for his family?  Open it up for everyone!

As a homemaker of 31 years, I am tired of being told that my choice of occupation is a default occupation.  I trained to be what I am because I wanted to be successful at it.  I graduated with a degree in Family Life, 30 years ago and I have been gaining practical experience ever since.  I did not learn how to parent toddlers and teenagers just by being one once, nor did I learn how to run a home by growing up in one.  On the job education for one of the most important, long-lasting, far-reaching, difficult occupations is a sad commentary on where our nation places its priorities.  Is it possible that with more focus on the home and family, we might need less mental-health care professionals and institutions, and less prisons.  I am the mother of 6 children and grandmother to 4, and I feel that my job is the most important job in the world.  You don't often hear someone on their deathbed say, "I wish I had spent more time/money/resources in the boardroom."  I do not demean other's choices in occupation and I wish they would extend me the same courtesy.  
    I enjoy 'The Today Show' and I realize controversy is a big part of it.  Please hear my voice for anything that helps us be better spouses and parents, that strengthens families.  Good job, Southern Baptist, and maybe they will add mens classes when they hear of so much interest.  

I agree with most of the posts here. Ann and Ms Hamman were disrespectful to Mr. Williams (honestly, the way they interrupted you'd think Matt was the interviewer.)But what appalls me the most is how feminist women are constantly touting a woman's right to choices but are the first to take away a woman's right to choose a tradfitional path. If this college sees a need for a class like this and women want to take it, more power to them.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):