Replies

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. ;-)

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.

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.