The Christchurch Star. FRIDAY, JANUARY 3, 1930. DO CHILDREN BRING DISCORD?

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18959, 3 January 1930, Page 8

The Christchurch Star. FRIDAY, JANUARY 3, 1930. DO CHILDREN BRING DISCORD?

IT IS AN ASTONISHING THING that mothers should declare that children bring discord. Yet they do declare it in correspondence in the “ Daily Chronicle,” and a goodly number of them, too. It brings one seriously to consider whether, in turning our children over more and more to The care of institutions, with their efficient administrators, who are experts in child psychology, parents are growing impatient of their remaining responsibilities to the young in the home. When the care of the children becomes irksome, it is a sure sign that the family is deserting the hearth-stone. It would look as if we are turning into a generation that forgets that we are but “ children of the larger growth.” Modern life is very complicated, and its complications extend even to the home. But the child demands simplicity. Its frolics, though picturesque, are apparently meaningless to the adult. But by strange ways parents are drawn together in common worship when they can gurgle out their ecstasies over pretty pink toes at bed-time with: This little pig went to market, This little pig stayed at home; This little pig got roast beef, This little pig got none; This little pig cried Squeak! Squeak! I can’t find my way home. Such is its charm, that one might recommend this formula as a panacea for matrimonial ills. It is certain that where the parents fulfil their maternal and paternal obligations in the right spirit their reward is not estrangement, but a tightening of the bonds that unite them. They share a common ambition, and their lives are filled with interests and influences that keep them young at heart. Someone has remarked “ Commend to me on all occasions the man or woman who, with lyart haffets wearing thin and bare, can sing: “ Och hey! Gin I were young again, Ochone! Gin I were young again; For chasin’ bumbees owre the plain Is just an auld sang sung again.” SHOULD WOMEN RULE? ' I ''HE QUESTION of whether men can w ork under women -*• is agitating the minds of a conference of women teachers at Canterbury, England, and like women still filled with the crusading spirit, they are passing resolutions and unfurling their banners for battle. The cry of equal rights in England is still sufficient to rouse feminism and antifeminism to heat. Few women have yet developed the sense of humour sufficiently to expostulate, “ But good sirs, what indeed is all the fuss about? In the dim ages, in certain places, when the world was young, you obeyed us, you worshipped us, or at least our attributes; we ruled and carried on our business in the world of affairs while you were relegated to a subordinate position. We honoured you by giving you our name when we chose to marry you. If you doubt what were our capabilities, go, read the last chapter of Proverbs. It may be that we did not enjoy it as much as we think we must have. At any rate variety is the very spice of life. We did a little change over from matriarchy (o patriarchy. But now you have had a good innings and we are growing a little weary of your ways. All this is rather an amusing experiment.” Visionaries—male visionaries—have indeed conceived a period, not the day after 10-morrow, when society will be so organised, and women so developed, that we shall accord the leading role to them. It were unchivalrous to deny the ladies this gleam of hope. In the meantime mere males will have to muddle through and adjust themselves to changing conditions as best they can.