Feminism makes women unable to relate to men in healthy ways
Here are two non-negotiable beliefs of third-wave feminists.
- Feminists want women to believe and act exactly like men because they think there are no sex differences
- Feminists believe that romantic love, chivalry and motherhood are all bad because they involve sex differences
Consider this post on how men perceive feminism as being opposed chivalry, (which is a prerequisite for romantic love).
Last summer I polled college guys from across the country and abroad at the National Young America’s Foundation Conference in Washington, D.C. Ninety-three percent of them said that chivalry has decreased in current times, and 84 percent of that group attribute this decline primarily or at least partly to the rise of radical feminism in society.
One man stated that feminism “devalued chivalry and made it seem sexist.” Another man proposed that the “‘I-don’t-need-a-man culture has crippled chivalry in the public sphere.” Yet another said that it was “difficult” to be chivalrous because some women portray chivalry as “subordinating, disrespecting, and devaluing.”
It seems that men are lodged between a rock and a hard place. If they try to be chivalrous, feminists call them sexist. Yet if they treat us the way the feminists say we want to be treated—the same as a man—we complain of not getting enough respect.
How do guys define chivalry? Three out of four responded that it had to do with respect, honor, and courtesy towards women. One man spoke openly: “Chivalry is the notion that a man has the duty to respect and serve women.”
Another man affirmed: “It is a set of manners and respect a man should show to a woman as a demonstration of respect towards her.” Another guy said women “need to understand that chivalry isn’t being put down like feminism would like you to believe, but rather is a way a woman can command respect from a man.”
Too often, however, these same men lamented that their efforts to be chivalrous were met with scorn.
If you’re wondering where all the “good men” went, and why men are so “unromantic”, blame feminism. Women in the secular feminist West have been taught to rush into physical activity, (like men), instead of being taught how to judge a good man, and how to recognize and relate to good men. This leads to fewer good men because men respond to women’s expectations of them. Today, women don’t know how to evaluate a man to see if he is capable of marriage and parenting. Feminism’s strategy of “act like a man” is an epic fail – it just produces a lot of guilt and hurt for young women.
In Theodore Dalrymple’s book “Life at the Bottom”, he explains how nurses in his hospital pursue violent men because they are physically attracted to them, only to be beaten, impregnated and abandoned by them, again and again. When he asks the women why they cannot recognize bad men, they explain that its wrong to make moral judgments about men. One nurse believed that men were all the same, and that she could not know in advance if the relationship would “work out”.
Women learn how to relate to men by watching how their father treats their mother. Are men encouraged to marry and to become involved fathers by the secular feminist state?
Feminism has resulted in children being raised without fathers
Feminists favor socialism because the higher taxes force women to leave their children and home to work, and because a massive government reduces the need for women to marry a good man. Big government is there with social programs to cover up the choice of a bad man, so that choosing a good man becomes unnecessary. Women no longer value men for their ability to protect and provide, so men stop exhibiting those behaviors and instead become lazy and aggressive. Children are born out-of-wedlock and are raised without fathers, which has terrible effects on children.
Consider this research paper from the Heritage Foundation.
For decades, radical feminists depicted marriage as an oppressive institution that was injurious to women and children. In reality, facts show exactly the opposite: In general, marriage has profoundly beneficial effects on women, children, and men.
Foremost is the positive impact of marriage in alleviating poverty among mothers and children. On average, a mother who gives birth and raises a child outside of marriage is seven times more likely to live in poverty than is a mother who raises her children within a stable married family.70 Over 80 percent of long-term child poverty in the United States (where a child is poor for more than half of his or her life) occurs in never-married or broken households.71 Moreover, the economic benefits of marriage are not limited to the middle class; some 70 percent of never-married mothers would be able to escape poverty if they were married to the father of their children.72
The erosion of marriage is also a principal factor behind the growth of the current welfare state. A child born and raised outside marriage is six times more likely to receive welfare aid than is a child raised in an intact, married family. Each year, federal and state governments spend over $200 billion on means-tested aid for low-income families with children through programs such as Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, food stamps, public housing, the earned income tax credit, and Medicaid. Of this total, some 75 percent ($150 billion) goes to single-parent families.73
Marriage has profound positive effects on the well-being of children. Children raised by single mothers are 14 times more likely to suffer serious physical abuse than children raised in intact, married families. Children raised in single-parent homes are much more likely to be depressed and to have developmental, behavioral, and emotional problems; such children are more likely to fail in school, use drugs, and engage in early sexual activity. They are also more likely to become involved in crime and to end up in jail as adults.74
While radical feminists condemn marriage as an institution that foments domestic violence against women, in fact, the opposite is true. Domestic violence is most common in the transitory, free-form, cohabitational relationships that feminists have long celebrated as replacements for traditional marriage. Specifically, never-married mothers are more than twice as likely to suffer from domestic violence than mothers who are or have been married.
Early sexual activity and criminal behavior are serious problems.
7 thoughts on “How feminism is opposed to chivalry, marriage and fathers”
I’m a Texas boy originally. Half way through high school I moved from Texas to Michigan (which is a bit more Liberal) where I was first exposed to true feminism. I’d hold the door open for girls and get yelled or snipped at. “What, I cant do this for myself?” was usually the response. I got sick of sick of doing things like holding doors for girls, even for the good ones unfortunately, and got out of the habit. It took me quit some time to get back into the habit. I like your article one complaint though.
Feminism did kill Chivalry, this is true. I think we need to be careful when discussing feminism not to conclude “women killed chivalry because of their feminism, or else it turns into a gender war. Feminism might not have arisen if men were doing their jobs in one respect or another etc.
If I sound that way it’s because I kind expected that women would be interested in what these feminists are doing to undermine the project of love, marriage and parenting.
Let me ask you a few questions.
1. Is it okay if women want to work instead of having children or staying home with them and get the same pay and benefits as men?
2. Is it okay if the man wants to stay home with children instead of the woman?
Feminism. n. Belief in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes.
Feminists are not trying to “undermine the project of love, marriage and parenting.” Rather, we are trying to impress upon a patriarchal society the importance of equality, regardless of sex and gender. As a feminist, I respect the institution of marriage. I respect a woman’s right to be a mother. I do not respect men who insinuate that a woman’s only place is at home taking care of the kids, and men who decry and suffocate a woman’s potential to succeed– socially, economically, or otherwise. I am every man’s equal; I am not better than him, and he is not better than me. If the “project[s]” (really, isn’t there a better term?) of “love, marriage, and parenting” can acknowledge and honor the equality of both partners regardless of their sex, then huzzah. :) But until that happens, I am proud to challenge the patriarchy and embrace my identity as a happy, healthy, romantic, well-adjusted, intelligent, and friendly feminist.
Then you’d be the first romantic, well adjusted and friendly feminist in history.
You prejudice against feminist and ignorance of history are both mind boggling.
Please brush up on your history so you can speak a bit more intelligently on the subject.
(following written by a Christian, stay-at-home, homeschooling mother who defends the rights of homeschoolers in her state by lobbying, passing on information, and other activities.)
The solution here is simple, treat feminists like men (equal to men – if you wouldn’t open a door or pay for a meal, etc. for a man,, don’t do it for a feminist) and treat non-feminists with respect and chivalry.
That way, feminists get the equality they want and we can enjoy the company of ladies who enjoy being treated as such.