The Thinking 
Housewife
 

Protesters Abreast

April 5, 2010

 

crop_topless_0404

 

CHRISTOPHER ROACH WRITES:

I found this story about women protesting different standards regarding male and female nudity quite funny in its earnestness, and the simultaneous demand to (a) show off sexual power while (b) castigating men for being victims of the same.

Read More »

 

Marriage and Trust

April 5, 2010

 

MRS. PILGRIM WRITES:

Your continuing conversation with Ms. Fox has raised some points in my mind.

Ms. Fox is quite, quite adamant that “power corrupts,” and this is why she so vehemently opposes male authority; it might, maybe, could possibly be abused at some point to the detriment of some dumb woman who was fool enough to trust the fellow. This seemed like an interesting line of thought, so I proceeded along with it: Any situation in which one person has another at a disadvantage, requiring that the latter rely on the former for his well-being, must be eliminated in the interests of avoiding abuse of power.

Thus, we must bid farewell to the lawyer, the surgeon, the teacher, the psychiatrist, the architect–anyone who, by virtue of having greater knowledge of a subject than others, might abuse the trust that others would place in him. After all, what if the lawyer sells you out to your opponents in exchange for a healthy bribe? What if the surgeon performs an unnecessary procedure on you? What if the architect designs your house badly? What if, what if, what if? What if we started treating any specialist with the same kind of mistrust as Ms. Fox seems to demonstrate for her own husband (or at least advocates that every woman share)?

I submit that, not only would the economy come to a screeching halt, but our government would utterly dissolve — because, after all, aren’t those “representatives” we elected in a position to abuse the power we just handed them?

Extreme, is it? Ah, but it’s all the same attitude. Where does it stop, this fear of being snookered?

Ms. Fox basically proposes that trust somehow reduces or removes one’s capacity for love, and this proposal should boggle anyone’s mind. What, precisely, does she think “love” is, if relying on someone else to provide something needed can only destroy it? How does she square this “love” with the need to maintain permanent defensive walls against the possibility of being had? She claims that traditional wives “have difficulty relaxing in their own homes as they struggle to care for everyone else,” but how can the egalitarian wife ever relax if she must be on her guard against her own husband?

I think you are certainly correct, Mrs. Wood, to point out that she accuses traditional wives of being mercenary, but the question still remains why she, a very obvious egalitarian feminist, thinks that an emotional response to hormonal fluctuations heightened by temporary infatuation ranks higher in morality or self-interest than a careful consideration of the character of a prospective husband. She is saying, in effect, “Since I have my own paycheck, I can feel free to take up with any jack-leg who makes me giggle when we’re drunk“–and that this is superior! (Also, it raises the question of whether feminism is really about equality, and not about making men into lapdogs and women into wards of the State?)

I submit that, for all her talk, she cannot bring herself to trust Mr. Fox, and rationalizes it as normal and even desirable. I further submit that she undercuts her own feminism by arguing that diversity is not merely unproductive but detrimental to any functional relationship (“We understand each other’s problems at work because we have both had similar experiences”). Read More »

 

Stop the Presses! Scientists Discover that Breasts Feed!

April 5, 2010

 

Jennine writes:

I saw this and immediately thought of you since you have the gift of pointing out the absurdities of our society. I love it when the news, and science, states the obvious as if it is some great revelation.

This article must mean that God intended breasts for some purpose other than being photographed, stared at, operated on, and squeezed into Miracle bras?

Read More »

 

The Love-Starved Society

April 5, 2010

 

ELDER GEORGE WRITES:

Western society suffers from a lack of nurturing, and is love-starved; it has attempted to supply through institutions and material means the non-material qualities necessary for the development of life.

A growing factor in creating a love-starved society is unwed motherhood, which now accounts for 40% of births in America and for 50% in France. Unwed motherhood results in a non-conducive environment for providing nurturing love, thus it exacerbates the downward spiral of love-starved Western society. Their children are dumped into after school programs when still in diapers and at best receive nurturing love on an installment basis.

….  a proper life comes from the unseen inner qualities of men and women, not from institutions. Paul said there is no single gift that you have not received. Matthew contains the words “There is nothing covered that shall not be revealed; and hid that shall not be known.”

In the duality of the physical universe there are two poles or powers. The first is the masculine principle, which is the assertive influence of the universe and supplies the structure, direction, and environment necessary for the second, the feminine principle—the receptive entity—to provide the nurturing love necessary for all of existence. These two poles working together provide a unity of purpose in the physical world as humankind progresses on its spiritual journey.

 

The Case Against Traditional Marriage

April 5, 2010

 

OUR INDEFATIGIBLE defender of feminism, Maggie Fox, responds to comments in the previous entry. She argues that traditional marriage, in which a woman relies on a man for financial support and the man relies on a woman for non-financial support, “thwarts romance” and should not be publicly promoted. I have interspersed my comments with hers because she makes so many points.

Mrs. Fox, a corporate manager who has been married since 1997 and has no children, writes:

I stand by my statement that power corrupts.  I have personally experienced the temptations of power.  How easy it is in a position of power to arrange matters to suit one’s own convenience! How easy it is to become arrogant, or give short shrift to people who need things from you!  Read More »

 

Power Corrupts the Corrupt

April 5, 2010

 

Kristor writes:

The contrast you drew here between the adversarial concept of human relations exemplified in what Maggie Fox has written, versus the Christian notion that human relations are founded upon love, got me thinking. All the talk of egalitarianism emanating from the left side of the aisle – and, nowadays, from most of the right side of the aisle, too – presupposes that power and authority are necessarily, automatically wielded not in love and self-giving sacrifice, but in self-seeking use of others as means to ends. Read More »