Tag Archives: Relationships

Commentary

What is the real issue in the push for legalized abortion?

3 Comments

I think the main cause of the desire for legalized abortion, is that women and men do not want to take responsibility for their actions.

The sexual act always has a chance of making a baby. If people who are having sex are not ready to take care of a baby, without the government’s help, then they should not have sex. We should not take chances with other people’s lives just so we can do risky things that make us feel good. The needs of grown-ups to feel good does not trump the right to life of another (unborn) human being. We have to sometimes give up things that make us feel good in order to avoid harming others.

I think the reason why people push abortion is because they want to believe that pre-marital recreational sex is normal. The people who push these policies are often those who had sex themselves before they were married, perhaps because it was fun (men) or perhaps because they wanted attention from the opposite sex (women). They wanted the recreational sex to feel good, but didn’t want to be saddled with the consequences of their desire for happiness.

I think the solution is to replace recreational pre-marital sex with chastity, courting and marriage. Men need to learn to control their desires, and make good decisions to prepare for being a husband and father, and get married, before they have sex. Women need to learn to do without male attention, to prepare themselves for having a husband and children, and to have sex only after they are married. Pre-marital sex isn’t an appropriate way for a woman to get attention from a man. There are other ways. And we should be training men to respond to those other ways. We should also be encouraging fathers to stay married and model love for their children by loving their wives.

We should not have any laws or policies that discourage men from preparing for their role of protector/provider/moral-and-spiritual-leader in a marriage. Sex education should not be subsidized or promoted by government because it makes children learn about sex outside of the context of marriage. And we should likewise not have any laws or policies that discourage women from preparing for marriage, by making husbands seem unnecessary to having and raising children. For example, we should end welfare payments for single mothers to make it clear that men are needed to provide for children, and that men should be selected by women for that role.

Children need a stable relationship with their married biological mother and father. So government has to promote marriage. Government may have to give up promoting third-wave feminism so that we can strengthen marriage, since third-wave feminism is opposed to marriage. We may need to to roll-back to first-wave (equal opportunity) feminism and give up the misguided quest to equate men with women in every area of life.

And we shouldn’t be pushing sex education as a way of removing the moral prohibitions on pre-marital sex. Those prohibitions were there for a reason and people who have pre-marital sex SHOULD feel bad. The solution is NOT to tell everyone that there is nothing wrong with it just because the people who do it want to feel better about themselves by making everyone agree with them. I think the left uses the public schools to beat down moral standards so that they will feel better about their own immorality. But immorality is harmful – and it’s better for young people to abide by traditional moral rules and avoid harming themselves and others than for grown-ups to avoid feeling bad for breaking those rules. Sorry grown-ups, but maybe it feels bad because it is bad – and stop trying to tell everyone that what you did was fine. It wasn’t fine. It was wrong.

Related posts

Commentary

Do men have a responsibility not to marry feminists?

29 Comments

I want to highlight three posts that I found on The Thinking Housewife.

Here’s the first one, that explains what a non-feminist is.

Excerpt:

It appears to be increasingly common for women to superficially disavow feminism. That means, when asked if they are feminist, they say, “No, I’m not a feminist.” But saying so doesn’t necessarily make it so. I can say I don’t notice cold weather, but if I wear a coat, obviously I do.

What does it take for a woman not to be a feminist? She must explicitly and publicly reject feminist principles. A woman who is not a feminist would openly criticize and judge women who unilaterally divorce their husbands. She would not remain silent. She would criticize the glorification of career and the glorification of absentee mothering (even a woman who has a career can in this sense be anti-feminist). She would denounce hiring preferences for women and support preferences for men. She would never criticize her husband publicly, even to her closest friends, because to do so is to show disrespect for him and contempt for his authority. She would, within her own social context, encourage and approve of femininity.

I’m not saying that a woman would do nothing else but harp against feminism, but that all this would be part of her life. Saying she is not a feminist means nothing. If a woman tolerates feminism everywhere, she is wearing the feminist coat.

Here’s the second one by a Thinking Housewife reader, that explains what can happen when a man foolishly chooses a feminist to take on the roles of wife and mother.

Excerpt:

My husband and I are always sad when I go to my brother’s home. My sister-in-law is the typical “modern woman” and her marriage to my brother is a microcosm of the feminist absurdity you write about. She never cooks, and as a result her son is a very poor eater and is overweight, even though he is only three. It makes me sad to know that he never gets to make cookies with his mom and he hasn’t learned how to sit through a meal. They just give him juice all day to keep him quiet. The whole family was recently at a hotel together for an event, and when we were in a gift store, she found a gag-gift apron that said, “When I said ‘I do,’ I didn’t mean the cooking.” She showed it to my brother laughing, and I turned to my mom and said that apron is only funny if it isn’t true.

My sister-in-law works full-time, and the children have been in daycare since they were three months old. My nephew is a sweet boy, but his only interest lies in television and movies and what’s more disturbing is that when he is hurt or sad, he seeks comfort from males because his dad is the only one who really takes care of him. While his sister was being born, he stayed at my mom’s. My brother and I went to help. My nephew got upset and asked me to pick him up, but after I picked him up he reached for my brother saying, “I want a man.” My brother and I were really disturbed by this. His mother is a woman who did not change her name when she got married, did not combine bank accounts, and claims that because she carried her son for nine months, it is now the responsibility of my brother to do the rest. My mom saw her knowingly leave her son in a soiled diaper for over an hour, waiting for my brother to come home. My mom didn’t do it because she got into this stalemate where she thought it might appear rude if she did it herself.

My brother is a nice guy, but he seems sad all the time. It seems like these “modern” marriages that claim to be about partnerships are really just about exploiting men. The woman gets to work if she wants, she gets to have as many or as few children as she wants and then she gets to have someone else raise those kids. She doesn’t have to cook or clean, but gets the benefit of having a working husband. They seriously seem to be more like roommates than spouses.

[…]One time my sister-in-law kept telling me about all these movies she likes, and I kept telling her I don’t really watch much TV these days. Finally, I said, “Look, I’m home with the kids all day and when my husband gets home and the kids are finally in bed, we really just want to have some quiet time to talk.”

Her response was that my brother often wants to talk when he gets home, but she just ignores him and watches “American Idol.”

Here’s the third one, which explains why men do stupid things like marry feminists.

Excerpt:

Emily D.’s story is indeed very sad. In my experience, however, hardcore feminists are pretty outspoken about it, or they express opinions and attitudes that give away their position quite clearly to those around them. Didn’t her husband observe any of these characteristics when they were dating? I find it hard to believe that her attitude was a total surprise to him. Either she had certain extraordinary qualities (great physical beauty, perhaps) or, more likely, offered certain “benefits” that he valued so much at the time that he was willing to overlook her extreme feminism.

When I was at university (mid-to-late 1990’s), I remember that the girls with the most active social lives were the liberal feminist types. My more conservative friends and I rarely ever got asked out on dates even though we were average-to-pretty in terms of looks. There were times when I was tempted to turn liberal feminist too. They had all the fun and the male attention.

This is a truism, but maybe it needs to be said: Men who are serious about marrying women who will make good wives and mothers need to look for and date women with those qualities and practice the self-restraint that such women require of them. My experience at university has given me little sympathy for men who take advantage of the sexual license feminists offer and who then later complain about how they ended up with a feminist wife.

I am chaste. I am telling you men – be chaste until you marry. Do not compromise your judgment with sex. A woman’s physical beauty is no guarantee of her ability to be a good wife and a good mother.Willingness to hook-up with you is  no guarantee of her ability to be a good wife and mother.

Maybe we should review some courting rules to help men to avoid becoming miserable.

Do not believe anything they say to you, because women adapt to men and say what men want to hear. Demand that she read hard books on complicated things like astronomy and economics and education policy. Demand that she write about what she reads. Demand life experiences that show that she has sympathy with things like capitalism and apologetics. Demand a track record of past activism in defense of marriage, the unborn, parental rights, Christianity and small government. Make moral judgments of her constantly and tell her the judgments so you can see how she responds to being judged. Hold her accountable for every mistake she makes – demand that she have a plan to change so that the mistake isn’t made again. Push all kinds of moral obligations onto her. Put her in charge of taking care of your pet, your garden, your car, and anything else that can be used to test her to see if she can handle responsibilities. Talk constantly about your desires and feelings. Complain about feminism and female nature all the time. Burden her up with the stories of your hard work day and how hard it is to be a man. Express your concerns about women who withhold sex, put on weight, and spend too much, after they get married. Demand that she engage all of her non-Christian friends and relatives so that they make progress towards better worldviews. Monitor her performance in debates to see how well she can reason and research evidence for her views. Harp on something you like to take care of, like your car, your pet, or your garden – and watch to see whether she shows an interest in it or considers it a rival to be taken away so that she is the only thing to get your attention.

The only way to test a woman for marriage and parenting is to… test a woman for marriage and parenting. And physical attraction is not a good way to test a woman for the roles of wife and mother.

As always, I think the default position for men in this society, given where things stand legally and financially, is not to marry at all. The only women you should even think of marrying are women who are actively opposing socialism, feminism, Darwinism, atheism, and any other -isms that are hostile to authentic Christian living. You will probably be miserable and wretched, but at least you can be miserable and wretched together – and you won’t have to worry about her stabbing you in the back and undermining your enterprises.

I wrote before about my views on who is to blame when a relationship goes wrong.

Commentary

What does the common practice of withholding sex reveal about women?

310 Comments

Dennis Prager features a lot of discussions about male-female relationships on his show, particularly during the male-female hour. I think this is one of the parts of his show that I really like best, because he knows what he is talking about.

He did a two part series a while back on 1) male sexuality and 2) what women should do about it within a marriage.

Part 1 is here.

Excerpt:

It is an axiom of contemporary marital life that if a wife is not in the mood, she need not have sex with her husband. Here are some arguments why a woman who loves her husband might want to rethink this axiom.

First, women need to recognize how a man understands a wife’s refusal to have sex with him: A husband knows that his wife loves him first and foremost by her willingness to give her body to him. This is rarely the case for women. Few women know their husband loves them because he gives her his body (the idea sounds almost funny). This is, therefore, usually a revelation to a woman. Many women think men’s natures are similar to theirs, and this is so different from a woman’s nature, that few women know this about men unless told about it.

This is a major reason many husbands clam up. A man whose wife frequently denies him sex will first be hurt, then sad, then angry, then quiet. And most men will never tell their wives why they have become quiet and distant. They are afraid to tell their wives. They are often made to feel ashamed of their male sexual nature, and they are humiliated (indeed emasculated) by feeling that they are reduced to having to beg for sex.

When first told this about men, women generally react in one or more of five ways…

He then explains the 5 ways that women respond to this.

Here’s one:

1. You have to be kidding. That certainly isn’t my way of knowing if he loves me. There have to be deeper ways than sex for me to show my husband that I love him.

And this is the common mistake that some feminist women make because they think that men are just hairy women with no feelings and desires of their own that are distincly theirs. In the past, all women understood how men are different than women, but today almost no younger feminist women do. In fact, many younger women today struggle with the idea that there is anything different about men that they need to learn. The only thing that they need to know is what makes women happy, and that it is everyone else’s job to make women happy, so that women can then behave nicely (whatever that means). Younger feminist women today often think that they only need to be in touch with their own feelings – and that men and children simply have to get used to the idea that they have no right to make any demands on a woman – she has no moral obligations in a marriage.

Here’s another from the list:

4. You have it backwards. If he truly loved me, he wouldn’t expect sex when I’m not in the mood.

I think this whole problem of feminist women not understanding men, and of demeaning male feelings and values, is very serious. In my opinion, there is a whole lot of work that needs to be done by feminism-influenced women in order to fix this problem. The best place to learn about this is in Dr. Laura’s book “The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands”. It’s like an application form for a serious relationship. Sex is one thing, but a serious man should insist that a woman take him seriously – and take marriage and children seriously. Pre-marital sex, having fun, getting drunk, and going out, etc. are not the right foundation for a relationship that is defined by the need for mutual self-sacrifice. There is no such thing as a “feminist” marriage – marriage is not about selfishness and playing the victim.

I actually had a conversation with a Christian woman once who said that women should not be obligated to do things that they didn’t feel like doing. I asked her if men were obligated to go to work when they didn’t feel like going. She said yes, and acted as though I were crazy for asking. I just laughed, because she didn’t even see the inconsistency. Many young feminist women today just don’t understand men, and they don’t want to understand them. They just want what they want and in the quickest way possible. Understand the needs of men and children, or how feminist-inspired laws discourage men from committing to marriage and parenting, are of no interest at all.

Part 2 is here.

Excerpt:

Here are eight reasons for a woman not to allow not being in the mood for sex to determine whether she denies her husband sex.

He then explains the eight reasons.

Here’s one of them:

7. Many contemporary women have an almost exclusively romantic notion of sex: It should always be mutually desired and equally satisfying or one should not engage in it. Therefore, if a couple engages in sexual relations when he wants it and she does not, the act is “dehumanizing” and “mechanical.” Now, ideally, every time a husband and wife have sex, they would equally desire it and equally enjoy it. But, given the different sexual natures of men and women, this cannot always be the case. If it is romance a woman seeks — and she has every reason to seek it — it would help her to realize how much more romantic her husband and her marriage are likely to be if he is not regularly denied sex, even of the non-romantic variety.

This makes the point that many young feminist women today do not really understand that they are, in a sense, capable of changing their husband’s conduct by the way they act themselves. I think that younger feminist women seem to think that their role in the relationship is to sort of do nothing and wait for the man to serve them. But relationships take work, and they take work from both participants.

At the end of the article, Prager makes a general point about women that I think needs to be emphasized over and over and over:

That solution is for a wife who loves her husband — if she doesn’t love him, mood is not the problem — to be guided by her mind, not her mood, in deciding whether to deny her husband sex.

I think that is an excellent question to ask a woman. What does it mean to love a man? I was forwarded one amazing response from a Calvinist woman recently in which she explained several things that she wanted to do to meet a particular man’s needs and make his life easier, and what she was prepared to do now in order to show him that she really could do handle the role. I think that she said these things out of sympathy and understanding of that man, and that was very encouraging.

But I think that kind of seriousness about taking of someone else as they really are, self-sacrificially, is rare. And it makes me wonder what people think that marriage is when they get into the church and make vows that, ostensibly, will require self-sacrifice. What do women think that marriage is? What is the goal of it? What makes a marriage successful? Why do women think that men marry? What do men get out of marriage? What are the woman’s responsibilities to the man in a marriage? I think these are questions that men should ask women. And the should not be satisfied with glib answers. Men should demand that books be read, that essays be written, that skills be developed, and that the woman’s life experiences show that she has understood what will be expected from her and why.

I think that it’s a good idea for men to try to get married, but they should be careful to make sure that the woman they choose is sensitive to their needs, just as men ought to be sensitive to the needs of women.