Category: feminism

And the Real Feminism Steps Right Up

I’ve written for years on the damage I believe feminism has done to society though feminists are always ready to jump in and say I’m ignorant and don’t understand anything about feminism.

Thankfully, we don’t even have to “peel back the layers” of real feminism anymore. It gets uglier all on its own. Matt Walsh covered the recent shock-tactic by a t-shirt company/activist site and portrayed perfectly the deception of the feminist movement and how it’s hurting us. Be sure to read Feminism Has Nothing to Say But it Still Won’t Shut Up. (Warning: video has explicit language by children)

Why I’m Seeking Softness, Not Sameness

It might seem like an odd trait to cultivate, but I’ve been thinking lately about how “softness” is missing in a lot of today’s women, why it’s a powerful trait, and why I’m purposing to become a softer woman.

The pursuit of equality has robbed us of more than it gave. With all the hear me roaring going on, and the clawing our way up the corporate ladder, proving that “anything you can do I can do better” to all the men who want to “hold us down”, we’ve become hard, tough, independent women, and in our own delusion, we applaud ourselves for these qualities instead of mourning the death of our naturally-powerful attributes.

Equal doesn’t have to be the same. That’s where we got sorely misguided. To become more like men doesn’t make us equal any more than wearing a wig makes them more able to bear children.

We are already equal. Just different. That difference is (was?) incredible! Femininity is a unique gift that only we were given. Our softness and all that encapsulates is a powerful force and it is a strength we already possess and don’t have to fight for.

I have found that even those of us who would never think of ourselves as trying to act like men, have still been subtly influenced and tempted to throw off our feminine traits in favor of tougher, more manly ones.

Realistically, and ironically, true femininity is strong. A woman can be soft and strong, tender and tough, deferring and dignified, all at the same time.

She can “laugh at the time to come”, live fearlessly, be in shape, be a sharp business woman, manage her home with wisdom and be her husband’s most trusted companion, all while seeking to be soft, feminine and lovely.

I think a woman’s countenance reflects her heart’s attention. That is, what she studies, reads, thinks about and seeks after is an innate part of her and will manifest itself even in her physical demeanor. In the way we dress, carry ourselves, the words we use and even in the volume of our voices.

Now for a bit of confession. I am writing this post to myself more than for anyone else, I’m just hoping it may resonate with you too. I struggle, and always have, with a reactionary personality, raising my voice and answering harshly. I overreact to things more than I should and do not choose gentleness when I should.

It is deeply rooted and I know each day when I get up I am fighting a battle against myself. One in which I will likely lose a couple of wars.

But just like weeding a garden, I will not stop pulling the weeds and cultivating the soil of my heart.

My aim is gentleness and softness. I want to be known as a woman who had “the law of kindness on her tongue.”

I want to be known as a woman who spoke well of others, honored others even if they weren’t present, found the beauty even when it was hidden, and inspired those around me to live more intentionally.

I want to be a steady mom, expecting much, forgiving much, leading my children into adulthood with firmness and resolve, love and laughter, determination and perseverance.

I want a constitution as strong as steel, and a demeanor as soft as a dove.

I’m thankful God didn’t make me the same as my husband. I can assure you, our husbands are thankful too.

Equal but vastly different. Praise Him.



Do You Pity the Girl at Home? Feminism Lies Again.

The young woman, fresh out of college, caught the eager listeners up to date on her life. Approving nods confirmed her choice: Early Childhood Development. She had spent four years earning her degree and was now employed at a Montessori Preschool Academy where, she admitted, she has learned more than most of her classes taught her.

What didn’t come up in the conversation was how much debt she accrued getting her degree and how much it was costing her to live in an apartment with her roommate.

Interestingly, another young woman shared her experience at home, part of which is specializing in early childhood development too. With more education than four years of textbooks could ever provide, the high school graduate helps from time to time in different areas of her siblings’s education, especially enjoying teaching the younger ones and watching their miraculous development.

Somehow, her choice doesn’t get nearly the approval the one the first woman made.

“How can it be a large career to tell other people’s children about the Rule of Three, and a small career to tell one’s own children about the universe? How can it be broad to be the same thing to everyone, and narrow to be everything to someone? No. A woman’s function is laborious, but because it is gigantic, not because it is minute. I will pity Mrs. Jones for the hugeness of her task; I will never pity her for its smallness.”― G.K. Chesterton

And approval isn’t even the point. The point is how the distinction exposes our misunderstanding of the importance of home and family, and, as Chesterton points out, how confused our definition of success is.

Ironically, the second woman is doing what the first woman is doing, only with her own siblings–children she has good reason to invest in–and get this: without debt and without the burdening monthly expenses of rent, utilities and food.

And also get this: the girl at the preschool is stuck there, eight hours a day, with no freedom of her own until after work hours. The other girl only works part-time, with a great part of the day free to pursue other things.

She is paid in boarding, food and utilities, among many other ways and is even able to save money because she has the time to pursue extra income possibilities. The other girl spends almost all of her income to pay for those things with little freedom (and don’t forget the debt).

The second woman has made a smarter choice. It’s a mathematical and practical fact. Yet not only is that not acknowledged, but the more expensive, encroaching choice wins the approval while the smart choice garners pitying looks. There’s nothing condescending in that; it’s no different than saying “it’s smarter to pay cash for something than borrow money for it.” That doesn’t mean the one who borrowed money is bad, just that one choice IS inherently smarter than the other. And I’m making a statement about the two women in my example, as a general observation. That doesn’t make college always bad for everyone.

Interestingly, the knee-jerk reaction is to defend the career position, missing the point entirely. I’m not criticizing the first woman, I’m defending the second one. I just want to see some honesty in the discussion. Feminism has tried to say “It’s all about freedom and women choosing whatever they want, career or home.” We all know that’s a lie; at least the girl on the receiving end of the pitying faces does.

I don’t know how we got here.


Women, Work & Freedom: One Big, Fat, Suicidal Error

Nicholas Farrell nailed it in his piece, Women, Work & Freedom, exposing the truths that most of us are too afraid to say out loud, regardless of the damage we’ve all suffered from ignoring it.

“Women in Europe and America have made one great big fat suicidal error as a result of modern feminism since the movement’s inception: They have confused work with freedom. This confusion has had catastrophic consequences for all of us because it has fatally infected the core activity of any healthy civilization: the creation and upbringing of children….

The truth is the precise opposite….Nearly all work, if we mean the work that most people in the West do day after day in exchange for money, is a life sentence in prison. It is dull, repetitive, and soul-destroying. It does not liberate.” -Nicholas Farrell

I have always puzzled at the claim of “freedom” in the demand of women to work outside the home when it is apparent they haven’t been liberated from anything, but rather had a burden added to their already intensive, full-time job. Not liberation, but stress, anxiety and exhaustion seems to be what women really fought for and won.

I have said before, I’m not trying to be oppressive by saying that women should focus on their roles at home instead of clamoring to get out; I’m trying to illumine the truly liberating life that so many have forsaken for a false promise. (That’s a nice thing, right? And every time I still get harassed for it…go figure.)

And yes, bringing up children had to be villainized, on some level, before feminists could convince the masses of women that they were somehow being short-changed. They were too…distracted, maybe? to realize, as Farrell said, that the secret to a “healthy civilization” is having children and investing, full time, in their upbringing. And, the results are in. We’re splitting at the seams and no one seems to make the connection.

And then there’s this–oh how did we miss this:

“If women stopped work tomorrow it would solve the West’s chronic unemployment crisis overnight. Due to the dire shortage of workers left, salaries would rocket.”

The “can’t afford it” argument? Sometimes that’s true (although usually not), but we created that monster too. If one-income families were the norm, the income would rise to meet it. It’s just so simple: women have an incredibly important role to play (THE most important, perhaps?) and men are sufficiently ready to take care of us and do the grunt work of providing an income. We all have a wonderful, specific cog in this wheel that makes the world go ’round, one just as important as the other. But it takes us all, content with our cogs, to keep the wheel turning.

Read the rest of Women, Work & Freedom

Click here to get my blog posts delivered right to your email box!

New Wave of Feminist Giving up Careers to Stay Home

“because they want to“, the rest of the title reads.

This article fascinated me simply because the conversation contained the same conventional points anti-feminists have been making for years (and getting scolded for) but yet they were made as if it were newly discovered information. And somehow, because these are self-acclaimed feminists who are choosing to leave a career, their decision seems to be more validated by the public.

This, of one woman who left her career as a financial adviser and “has no plans of returning”:

“Rather than a sacrifice, she feels it is a privilege to oversee ‘not just what they do, but what they believe, how they talk to other children, what kind of story we read together. That’s all dictated by me. Not by my nanny or my babysitter.’”

Even Anne-Marie Slaughter, still pushing for work-place programs so women “can have it all”, admits:

“…this new breed of women could be on to something. ‘Are there characteristics inherent in sex differences that make women more nurturing and men more assertive?’ she asks in Lean In. ‘Quite possibly.’”

I am greatly encouraged, whatever way it comes, that the obvious, natural pull to nurture one’s children is returning, even among the feminist-minded. God be praised and may the peace that these women speak of confirm their conclusion that home is worth their all.

“Family is what is important in life – not pushing papers at some crap job.”

Well, that’s one way to say it.

Read the rest of Rise of the Happy Housewife

Feminism: The Real War Against Women

Though feminism has been touted as “all about protecting women”, feminism has killed more women than the holocaust and all other wars put together. Feminism has brought a steady increase in violent crimes against women. Feminism has attempted to stamp out the importance of motherhood, mothers raising their children and the stability of home life, evidenced in an ever-increasing cycle of individual break down, marital breakdown, family breakdown and societal breakdown.

And we’re happy about this?

And now, still not content with the damage they’ve done, we’re on the brink of erasing all protective measures of our women in the military. Because seeing our daughters drafted to war one day would be the final triumph and ultimate celebration. (*sarcasm)

In Sweden, you can send your child to a gender-free preschool so he, I’m sorry, so “your child” can be de-brainwashed from the “dangerous indoctrination” that there is a difference between male and female.

A mom of a preschooler in NY is outraged because her son’s teacher encourages “gentlemanly” behavior, specifically, encouraging boys to let girls go first. “This adorable little boy, who is only beginning to learn the ways of the world, just got his first lesson in sexism…” Without even defending why I think she’s wrong, here’s a tip: if you aren’t willing to teach your own son what you want him to learn about the world, don’t complain about his teacher’s worldview.

If feminism ever had, somewhere within its core, a sincere desire to protect women and prevent abuses (and I think some at least thought that was what they were fighting for), it has gone badly awry, scoffed at the Creator in the most disgusting way, and we are reaping the judgement of our own foolishness. While I’m not naive to the real abuses women have suffered, the feminist answer was the wrong one.

Steven Wedgeworth, in Women at War said something profound–something of which we must ALL remember and remind ourselves:

“We need to make this message plain: Feminism is chauvinism. It shares the belief that traditional “women’s roles” are undesirable and second best. As such, it seeks to make women as much like men as possible. The irony in all of this is that it is almost always a step down….It should also be obvious that this means a net loss for humanity. (Emphasis mine.) Whereas we previously had more, man and woman, we now have less, man and man-aping woman.”

and, this is key:

“The home used to be a center of agriculture, economic affairs, and education. For the woman to be a “homemaker” was to be an executive over the central nervous system of society. It was to be a master of arts. It was to be a farmer. It was to be a maker. It was to be a temple, a sacrament, a superlative. Perhaps I’m idealizing things a bit, as the past could indeed be quite dull and gloomy for all genders. Still, I don’t think I’m saying anything that Dorothy Sayers didn’t already say. The home used to be the place of oikonomia. As it lost that function, the notion that anyone would be stuck there became torment. To combat self-alienation, we’ve got to recover a true sense of “the home.” In what ways can it be that place of central affairs today, or perhaps more importantly, what analogous locations (and vocations) can we emphasize as especially important for “home” life?”

Our view of home changed our view of women. The true view of women never needed to be defended. We only needed to go back to the original design, glory in our created differences, and let the Creator, who knows how to best run His universe, tell us what is best for us.

“To win the war against women, we have to prioritize women.”

Home must be revived and restored to mean more than “a place people sleep and sometimes eat.” We must persuade the masses, again, that shaping the next generation is a pretty big deal and needs a full time, devoted, intelligent, powerful, wise mother to do the job. We must find and relish our real power–that the Lord has given us–for ruling the world.

Also, don’t miss this excellent article, by Col. John Ripley. on The Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces.

WordPress Themes