👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 YES!!! As always, you get to the heart of the matter.
I have a friend in Florida who lives in a large apartment building with her husband and three children that I would consider "trad" because her family and moral values reflect it. She doesn't homestead for obvious reasons, and she doesn't wear dresses or bake sourdough. 😄 But like you said, IT ISN'T AN ESTHETIC!!! Would she love to have land one day where she can raise some of their own food? Yes! She's told me she would. But she is rocking the "trad" lifestyle because she holds very strong traditional values.
I think you may be confusing people who have “traditional values” (Christian values) and those who define themselves (and call themselves!) as “Trad” and also play the part in an online setting. In the case of the first, it *does not look a certain way.* In the case of the second, it *absolutely* is all about the aesthetics, and if you don’t adhere to whatever the current definition of what “trad” *looks like* then you’re out of the club. It’s so easy to see through that it’s laughable.
It gets murky though because some of the people who are focusing on the *look* (aesthetic) of traditional values may also adhere to the *actual* values themselves, and may even believe that you cannot have one without the other. So. I think it’s important to distinguish that the actuality of traditional values has very little to do with the “trad” aesthetics that we see pushed in our ever-increasingly visual online world today.
Thanks so much for your honest comment! I have a few questions. First of all, I’d love to hear you elaborate about what precisely I wrote that leads you to believe I’m confusing people with an idea. I am distinguishing between people and traditional values in what I write, or at least that intention was there so it would be so helpful to know.
Also, just want to mention if you haven’t read the whole piece, it addresses some points you raise here so please do if you haven’t finished it!
Also, I’m wondering who these people are you’re talking about? Your description of them appears to assume disingenuous intentions (as though there is a facade that you are able to “see through”). What evidence do you have of their actual intentions? I ask because this sounds dangerously like a presumption rather than a reaction to messages they’re sending or behavior they’re endorsing or evidently engaging in. At what point is what we assume about someone’s heart a valid basis to make a judgment like this? I know of no creators at all I would describe the way you do, and I’d be very hesitant to make such a judgment on someone else, so I’m also very hesitant to agree with you that this is an observable dynamic we can accurately assess in this manner. Assumptions and misunderstandings about why people are into “trad” is the inspiration for this post.
I am responding to an oft-dismissed claim that trad is “mostly an esthetic movement” and most often cites sourdough, homesteading, and dresses; lifestyle and personal choices that are very broadly popular right now and (as I’m trying to argue here) for a reason. These cozy, traditional things are appealing in a world that has glorified the sexually suggestive and postmodern. The esthetic *has value* and is not merely empty, regardless of what we may think of someone who is into it “just” for the esthetics. You can be a totally fashion-phonic, denim-jumper wearing fundamentalist, head covering Christian who deliberately avoids looking a certain way and your intention would still be superficial. So simply focusing on the esthetic is not necessarily in and of itself superficial. In my life, learning to cherish and cultivate everyday simple beauty has brought me tremendous peace, healing, and spiritual growth, for example.
You bring up a great point about how we can't know the intentions of someone's heart. However, when people post videos of their lives online, it *immediately* changes the action: it becomes performative; it is no longer someone just happily living their private life, it is now, by it's very nature, a *show*. Inherent in posting photo/video of one's life on the internet is the superficiality of it. The substance just isn't there because it can't be.
I'm not saying that posting photos/videos of one's life online is wrong (although that is a separate, and worthwhile conversation; I happen to think that our private lives should remain mostly private), but that there is a real difference between the substance of traditional values, and the aesthetic of it. The trendy "trad" aesthetic" will most certainly go out of fashion, as all fashions inevitably do. But the *substance* of traditional values will always be what we should seek out, regardless of fashions or aesthetics. It seems like we agree on this point though?
Yeah, we do indeed agree on this point! This post is touching on a lot of topics that deserve further elaboration, but it is meant to underscore the importance of not separating esthetic from the value. I can’t control/always tell to whom this is a mere esthetic. But the reason it IS appealing and the fact that it is are both really important to acknowledge. I share a lot of my life and it’s really not performative. It’s such a small part of my life. Yes, how I choose to present my life will always have an aspect of self-consciousness. But in the same way I dress or choose my words or what I choose to share about my personal life does.
You're right, there are definitely a lot of ideas that this is touching on. I think where we differ, though, is that I believe that aesthetic doesn't always equal value. It absolutely *can* equal value, but that isn't always the case.
My wariness of the "trad" trend is that I wonder how many women will see trad content online, decide they love the look of it, and start down the performative road of "doing all the things" the "trad" women tell them to do, without thinking it through. Sure, I grind my own wheat, bake sourdough everything, and grown my own flowers, But that doesn't mean other women should also automatically do those things. Traditional values can (and should!) be applied in numberless contexts, and will naturally have many different aesthetics. They should absolutely not be stuffed into a list of things to check off. Real life is far more varied and vibrant than that. That's the problem I see with the (very) prevalent trend of "trad" content.
The "Trad" trend has turned traditional values into a costume one can put on and take off on a whim. That is a lie that I will always stand up against.
Well yes but what I’m wondering is why you think this has been the case? I don’t see evidence of this personally. There are people who simply like the esthetic and make a big fuss about how they have #vintagestylenotvintagevalues. But I actually don’t accept that the trad movement has made traditionalism a costume. Why do you say this is the case? Who has done it? I just don’t see this. I hear a lot of women express that they feel this way, but usually what’s brought up is these people who do it just for the esthetics and don’t have the values but again I don’t think that’s who is giving the impression that you “have” to dress/perform this way.
Perhaps a succinct way of summing up my thoughts is this: are we more concerned about "looking" a certain way, or are we working towards "being" a certain type of person?
Late to reading this, but thank you! Thank you! I am often at odds with the feminist think pieces that critique but also express envy over tradwives. I am also not at home in the Christian discussions that hold up the trad movement as an unattainable equating aesthetics with faith or dangerous foray into fundamentalism. However, I am pleased by how beauty remains a motivator, curiosity, and captivates us all. What a reminder of a God who creates man and woman in His image and the siren call of family life even in the midst of modern society.
Also, as IF there is something wrong with aesthetics?! There is a reason there is such an emphasis on the aesthetics. Us trads are drawn to beauty in the midst of a culture that literally promotes ugly- ugly fashion, ugly art, ugly architecture, etc. We want beauty and femininity, okay! Sure, that's not ALL the movement is about, but it actually is important to us and it makes me laugh that THAT'S what they choose to demonize 🤣 Even if it's not their style if they were honest they would admit that it's pretty hahaha
There is currently a debate going about the Redpill movement and something was said that I think really fits this conversation as well.
People are seeing the issues going on in the modern world but they are coming up with the wrong solution. For those who are trad and see submission and the family unit as a good thing, their solution bumps right up against Christianity but doesn’t quite cross the finish line.
Brendan and I started off in the trad movement and I am so thankful for it. It opened up my eyes to what was wrong in the world, a solution and warmed me up to biblical values before being exposed to Christianity. When I was exposed to Christianity, I was able to be like “oh wow, these “trad values” are actually biblical and I felt much more open to exploring Christianity and eventually accepting the gospel and being saved.
Eve in exile is a great book that touches on this topic!
This is SO important. The "biblical womanhood not trad" movement misses this! This movement perfectly aligns with Christianity in so many ways and so many people find Christianity through this "movement"
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 YES!!! As always, you get to the heart of the matter.
I have a friend in Florida who lives in a large apartment building with her husband and three children that I would consider "trad" because her family and moral values reflect it. She doesn't homestead for obvious reasons, and she doesn't wear dresses or bake sourdough. 😄 But like you said, IT ISN'T AN ESTHETIC!!! Would she love to have land one day where she can raise some of their own food? Yes! She's told me she would. But she is rocking the "trad" lifestyle because she holds very strong traditional values.
I think you may be confusing people who have “traditional values” (Christian values) and those who define themselves (and call themselves!) as “Trad” and also play the part in an online setting. In the case of the first, it *does not look a certain way.* In the case of the second, it *absolutely* is all about the aesthetics, and if you don’t adhere to whatever the current definition of what “trad” *looks like* then you’re out of the club. It’s so easy to see through that it’s laughable.
It gets murky though because some of the people who are focusing on the *look* (aesthetic) of traditional values may also adhere to the *actual* values themselves, and may even believe that you cannot have one without the other. So. I think it’s important to distinguish that the actuality of traditional values has very little to do with the “trad” aesthetics that we see pushed in our ever-increasingly visual online world today.
Thanks so much for your honest comment! I have a few questions. First of all, I’d love to hear you elaborate about what precisely I wrote that leads you to believe I’m confusing people with an idea. I am distinguishing between people and traditional values in what I write, or at least that intention was there so it would be so helpful to know.
Also, just want to mention if you haven’t read the whole piece, it addresses some points you raise here so please do if you haven’t finished it!
Also, I’m wondering who these people are you’re talking about? Your description of them appears to assume disingenuous intentions (as though there is a facade that you are able to “see through”). What evidence do you have of their actual intentions? I ask because this sounds dangerously like a presumption rather than a reaction to messages they’re sending or behavior they’re endorsing or evidently engaging in. At what point is what we assume about someone’s heart a valid basis to make a judgment like this? I know of no creators at all I would describe the way you do, and I’d be very hesitant to make such a judgment on someone else, so I’m also very hesitant to agree with you that this is an observable dynamic we can accurately assess in this manner. Assumptions and misunderstandings about why people are into “trad” is the inspiration for this post.
I am responding to an oft-dismissed claim that trad is “mostly an esthetic movement” and most often cites sourdough, homesteading, and dresses; lifestyle and personal choices that are very broadly popular right now and (as I’m trying to argue here) for a reason. These cozy, traditional things are appealing in a world that has glorified the sexually suggestive and postmodern. The esthetic *has value* and is not merely empty, regardless of what we may think of someone who is into it “just” for the esthetics. You can be a totally fashion-phonic, denim-jumper wearing fundamentalist, head covering Christian who deliberately avoids looking a certain way and your intention would still be superficial. So simply focusing on the esthetic is not necessarily in and of itself superficial. In my life, learning to cherish and cultivate everyday simple beauty has brought me tremendous peace, healing, and spiritual growth, for example.
You bring up a great point about how we can't know the intentions of someone's heart. However, when people post videos of their lives online, it *immediately* changes the action: it becomes performative; it is no longer someone just happily living their private life, it is now, by it's very nature, a *show*. Inherent in posting photo/video of one's life on the internet is the superficiality of it. The substance just isn't there because it can't be.
I'm not saying that posting photos/videos of one's life online is wrong (although that is a separate, and worthwhile conversation; I happen to think that our private lives should remain mostly private), but that there is a real difference between the substance of traditional values, and the aesthetic of it. The trendy "trad" aesthetic" will most certainly go out of fashion, as all fashions inevitably do. But the *substance* of traditional values will always be what we should seek out, regardless of fashions or aesthetics. It seems like we agree on this point though?
Yeah, we do indeed agree on this point! This post is touching on a lot of topics that deserve further elaboration, but it is meant to underscore the importance of not separating esthetic from the value. I can’t control/always tell to whom this is a mere esthetic. But the reason it IS appealing and the fact that it is are both really important to acknowledge. I share a lot of my life and it’s really not performative. It’s such a small part of my life. Yes, how I choose to present my life will always have an aspect of self-consciousness. But in the same way I dress or choose my words or what I choose to share about my personal life does.
You're right, there are definitely a lot of ideas that this is touching on. I think where we differ, though, is that I believe that aesthetic doesn't always equal value. It absolutely *can* equal value, but that isn't always the case.
My wariness of the "trad" trend is that I wonder how many women will see trad content online, decide they love the look of it, and start down the performative road of "doing all the things" the "trad" women tell them to do, without thinking it through. Sure, I grind my own wheat, bake sourdough everything, and grown my own flowers, But that doesn't mean other women should also automatically do those things. Traditional values can (and should!) be applied in numberless contexts, and will naturally have many different aesthetics. They should absolutely not be stuffed into a list of things to check off. Real life is far more varied and vibrant than that. That's the problem I see with the (very) prevalent trend of "trad" content.
The "Trad" trend has turned traditional values into a costume one can put on and take off on a whim. That is a lie that I will always stand up against.
Well yes but what I’m wondering is why you think this has been the case? I don’t see evidence of this personally. There are people who simply like the esthetic and make a big fuss about how they have #vintagestylenotvintagevalues. But I actually don’t accept that the trad movement has made traditionalism a costume. Why do you say this is the case? Who has done it? I just don’t see this. I hear a lot of women express that they feel this way, but usually what’s brought up is these people who do it just for the esthetics and don’t have the values but again I don’t think that’s who is giving the impression that you “have” to dress/perform this way.
Perhaps a succinct way of summing up my thoughts is this: are we more concerned about "looking" a certain way, or are we working towards "being" a certain type of person?
Late to reading this, but thank you! Thank you! I am often at odds with the feminist think pieces that critique but also express envy over tradwives. I am also not at home in the Christian discussions that hold up the trad movement as an unattainable equating aesthetics with faith or dangerous foray into fundamentalism. However, I am pleased by how beauty remains a motivator, curiosity, and captivates us all. What a reminder of a God who creates man and woman in His image and the siren call of family life even in the midst of modern society.
Also, as IF there is something wrong with aesthetics?! There is a reason there is such an emphasis on the aesthetics. Us trads are drawn to beauty in the midst of a culture that literally promotes ugly- ugly fashion, ugly art, ugly architecture, etc. We want beauty and femininity, okay! Sure, that's not ALL the movement is about, but it actually is important to us and it makes me laugh that THAT'S what they choose to demonize 🤣 Even if it's not their style if they were honest they would admit that it's pretty hahaha
Love this Isa.
There is currently a debate going about the Redpill movement and something was said that I think really fits this conversation as well.
People are seeing the issues going on in the modern world but they are coming up with the wrong solution. For those who are trad and see submission and the family unit as a good thing, their solution bumps right up against Christianity but doesn’t quite cross the finish line.
Brendan and I started off in the trad movement and I am so thankful for it. It opened up my eyes to what was wrong in the world, a solution and warmed me up to biblical values before being exposed to Christianity. When I was exposed to Christianity, I was able to be like “oh wow, these “trad values” are actually biblical and I felt much more open to exploring Christianity and eventually accepting the gospel and being saved.
Eve in exile is a great book that touches on this topic!
This is SO important. The "biblical womanhood not trad" movement misses this! This movement perfectly aligns with Christianity in so many ways and so many people find Christianity through this "movement"