Can the Traditional Family Survive Feminism?

issues, etc. ^ | none indicated | Carolyn Graglia

[independentmind]

Can any feminism which ignores the critical role of motherhood rightfully be considered conservative? I don't think so.

[independentmind]

"We all engage in deception," she says, and "that deception is the modern Big Lie that women find fulfillment in their careers," but "we have allowed the media to so flavor our goals and views that we continue down a path we despise."

And who does this modern Big Lie really benefit?

[gcruse]

                Yup.  Keep 'em barefoot...
                                ...by killing the sexual revolution...
                 ...pregnant...      
                                ...providing larger child credits...
                 ...and in the kitchen...
                                ... replacing no-fault divorce laws

                               

                               

[independentmind]

Yup. Typical liberal propaganda.

[Scenic Sounds]

"My message is that the domestic life is not a sacrificial life and that one's education is never wasted--you can use it every day."

That's a wonderful message, as true today as ever.

The dramatic social changes that she desires, though, are simply not reasonably achievable goals. Men and women haven't changed over the last 50 years; men and women haven't changed much in the last 50,000 years. What has changed is our technology and our standards of living.

If we really want to move toward her goals, though, we can change some of our laws. We can experiment with tougher divorce laws. We can less aggressively intervene in domestic disputes. And although it might take a Constitutional amendment, we can even tax women who work at a higher rate than men who work. Hell, with a Constitutional amendment, we could even make it illegal for women to work outside of the home.

But how could we uninvent modern devices for contraception? Unless we also uninvent all of our modern means of communication and travel, how could we even sensibly try to outlaw them?

[Mr. Jeeves]

I believe feminism as the social arm of the Marxist class struggle peaked in the late 80's and early 90's and has been declining ever since. Its leaders' hypocritical defense of Bill Clinton shredded all of its already waning credibility among Middle America.

[independentmind]

But how could we uninvent modern devices for contraception? Unless we also uninvent all of our modern means of communication and travel, how could we even sensibly try to outlaw them?

Did I miss something? Where does Graglia mention outlawing contraception? In fact, if you read her book, she is quite supportive of contraception within the boundaries of marriage.

[Crusader21stCentury]

We can experiment with tougher divorce laws.

Please keep your ridiculous experiments out of my life thank you very much. I can't think of anything that would kill off Marriage quicker than for some pompous politician to start playing with these socialist experiments.

[Scenic Sounds]

Did I miss something? Where does Graglia mention outlawing contraception? In fact, if you read her book, she is quite supportive of contraception within the boundaries of marriage.

I didn't say she did, but I believe that the invention of better contraceptive devices is the most important reason for the social changes that we have seen in the last half century regarding the role of women. I don't believe for a minute that these social changes were caused by any books that were written by feminists.

So, I think if you want to unwind all of these changes, you're going to need to eliminate the freedom that women enjoy because of birth control devices.

And I don't think that's doable. ;-)

[MrNatural]

I strongly recommend her book Domestic Tranquility.

[Scenic Sounds]

Well, that's why I prefaced that paragraph with "[i]f we really want to move toward her goals." I don't support changing divorce laws. ;-)

[independentmind]

I didn't say she did, but I believe that the invention of better contraceptive devices is the most important reason for the social changes that we have seen in the last half century regarding the role of women. I don't believe for a minute that these social changes were caused by any books that were written by feminists.

I am unwilling to let this thread become a discussion about the wisdom of using contraceptives. I will not pursue why you decided to raise the issue in this context.

Your assertion, however, that the Pill has been the primary engine for recent social changes is false. Women made the choice to use contraception. A closer examination should be made as to why those choices were made.

So, I think if you want to unwind all of these changes, you're going to need to eliminate the freedom that women enjoy because of birth control devices.

Freedom is very odd word to describe the effects of the Pill on women.

[independentmind]

Thanks; I've read it.

[Scenic Sounds]

Freedom is very odd word to describe the effects of the Pill on women.

Well, like you say, "Women made the choice to use contraception." ;-)

[independentmind]

And as we all know, choices can often be misguided.

[Scenic Sounds]

And as we all know, choices can often be misguided.

LOL. We certainly agree on that.

Thanks for the exchange. ;-)

[elk]

I agree with you on your observation about feminisim/Marism (e.g., doesn't Betty Friedan have a communist background?), and I do hope you are right about the loss of credibility of that fringe group called the feminists.

I am glad that there are people writing books exposing feminisim for what it is, and for its lack of true concern for women. I've gotten quite tired of these people (like NOW, etc.) purporting to speak for all women-- then again, the media only goes to these leftist organizations for comments on issues affecting women. I'm still waiting to see comments being solicited from Concerned Women for America, for example, whose membership rolls can run circles around the NOW membership of fringe activists or brainwashed collegians who haven't waken up yet.

What hypocrites. I dare anyone to belittle me for my choice to be a housewife -- I like that word, it has a ring to it, in fact. I would have to be delusional to mistake all the joy, satisfaction, fun, hard work, challenge, excitement, and thrills of being a full-time wife and mom for what "they" claim it is. What a housewife does is not parasitic -- it's priceless.

[Coleus]

The Dark Soul of Feminism
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/772738/posts

Feminism and Abortion
http://www.abortiontv.com/Feminism.htm

http://www.savethemales.ca/

The Dark Soul of Feminism:
Profound Contempt For Life
http://www.dadi.org/darksoul1.htm

Feminism has NO moderate Side
http://www.nypress.com/14/36/taki/perspectives.cfm

Why Feminism Is AWOL on Islam
http://www.nypress.com/14/36/taki/perspectives.cfm

[Tokhtamish]

Placing this all on feminists is absurd.

An excellent book called "The Hearts of Men" showed the situation more realistically. Around 1950, labor saving devices made it possible for a man to have a clean home, clean clothes, and hot meals without needing a wife. Because of these technological changes, white collar professional men no longer needed to marry as early as they had. And without a wife they had a lot more disposable income for the swank apartment in the city, the hep new stereo, and the double martini lounge life. You now had a new demographic of upscale men enjoying the freedom of the new urban swinging single life, the whole Rat Pack lifestyle. The Thunderbird, "Playboy", and the later pony cars were aimed at this new market. So marriage began unravelling not because of feminism, but because men were now freer than they had ever been and no longer needed "the old ball 'n chain". The balance of power was shifting decisively to men.

And with no fault divorce with the equal property split, men were now free to dump frumpy wives during their peak earning years. Since the beginnings of time upscale men have had mistresses. Privileged men have always fooled around. Now, with easy divorce you could shed the wife and keep the mistress.

The growth of divorce had nothing in the least to do with feminism. It was men who wanted out to taste the new freedom their money could buy.

[Scenic Sounds]

Well, I ain't takin the rap for any of these changes. LOL.

And if I could put all of the people who don't like our modern world into a 1957 Chevy and send them back to the 1950's, I'd pay for the gas and I'd even hire Frankie Avalon to drive.

But I can't. ;-)