Well, this is maddening, and yet, at the same time I wonder if it’s even worth it to take this woman seriously as she just sounds bitter and stupid:
I have to admit that when I meet a woman who I know is a graduate of, say, Princeton — one who has read The Second Sex and therefore ought to know better — but is still a full-time wife, I feel betrayed. I’m not much of a moralist — I have absolutely no right to be — but in the interest of doing what’s right both for me personally and for women generally, I have been strict with myself about earning my keep. For the longest time I would not date anyone who would now be called a one-percenter because money and power are such a potent combination, and if I am going to be bossed around, I don’t want that to be the reason. When it’s come up, I have chosen not to get married. Over and over again, I have opted for my integrity and independence over what was easy or obvious. And I am happy. I don’t want everyone to live like me, but I do expect educated and able-bodied women to be holding their own in the world of work.
Her whole diatribe reminds me of something Dr. Alice Von Hildebrand said in her book The Privilege of Being a Woman:
Unwittingly, the feminists acknowledge the superiority of the male sex by wishing to become like men. They foolishly want to alter inequality rather than to achieve truth or justice. Femininity is a linchpin of human life; once it is uprooted, the consequences are disastrous.
You see, the problem with radical feminists like Ms. Wurtzel is not so much that they hate men, but that they hate women or, at least they dislike the chief feminine characteristics. That women have been mistreated and considered less than men throughout history cannot be denied. But the modern feminist response has not been one that, I think, has been a great benefit to women or society as a whole. Instead of building women up, their goal seems to be the destruction of authentic woman-hood altogether.
I mean, can someone please explain to me why it is a “war on women” to not want to provide them with something that suppresses the very thing which makes one a woman? Should it not rather be the other way around — that convincing women that they need this kind of poison is the real war on women (a phrase I’m starting to get equally as sick of hearing)?
And then there’s this: Women are more unhappy, despite 40 years of feminism.
I am by no means saying women should never work. But, when young women are encouraged to think about their future and what they want to do with their life, being a wife and mother is never anywhere near the top of the list (neither, it goes without saying, is dedicating one’s life to Christ as a consecrated religious).
Quoting MJ, whose video “Careers vs. Baby Making” I posted here a few weeks ago, “If you’re not a bulldog about your career and that’s not your thing, it’s almost like you’re marginalized.” Indeed. Which reminds me…
This weekend, my local paper highlighted all of the Pensacola area’s high school valedictorians. Out of 15 valedictorians, 11 of them were female. When asked to complete the sentence “in ten years I expect to…” ten of them answered that they wanted to be finishing grad school and starting various careers (lawyer, doctor, physical therapist, orthodontist, etc…) with no mention of marriage or children. One girl, however, actually said that she wanted to “be married and starting a family. I really have no idea what career field I want to go into yet.” Ick! Splitter! What a waste of brains, amiright?
I do have to say, though, I agree with Wurtzel’s final point (which I’ve expressed here before) – while parenting certainly involves a lot of hard work, being a mother, or a father, for that matter, is not a “job.” It is much, much more than that. It’s a vocation. It’s who someone is. They don’t get paid for it and there’s certainly no “quitting time.”
Also recommended: The Bride Who Was Groomed for a Career.