The Pendulum: (1) Introduction

The pendulum is once again swinging towards the right and after having witnessed the effects of sixty or more years of decline in culture and morality. More and more women have studied their upbringing and the experiences they needlessly experienced as young adults and are intentionally improving the odds of living a better life by using a different approach to dating, marriage, parenting and family.

The deliberateness that has driven our recent shift in thinking and behavior is based on an understanding that the ramifications of ideologies and dogmas, that informed the most recent generations, have produced incredibly damaging results in the lives of women, men, children and families.

One such ideology has and is fueling the 2nd, 3rd and now 4th waves of feminism. To achieve its goal, in the 60s, the thought leaders of these movements understood that it was particularly important to subvert the original premise of the women’s suffrage movement by infusing it with radical political activism. They did this while still arguing that their motivation was to speak for the betterment of ALL women’s conditions, in hopes of sliding in the truth of their mission undetected.

Their radicalization of the women’s movement was based on the simmering unrest amongst women which began bubbling in the 40s. For a wonderful pictorial review and explanation of the ingredients of their unrest in the US in the 40s, please read this article entitled, ‘Operation June Cleaver’.

In addition to what was happening socially after the 40s, many of the thought leaders of the radical activist arm of the 1960s and 70s movement, such as Betty Friedan, were inspired by writings published by the likes of Simone de Beauvoir, author of, The Second Sex in 1949. To sum up much of her thinking on why the politicization of feminism was essential to societal progress, I share this verbatim commentary that she provided in this video:

” I think that what has to be achieved from women is total, radical emancipation, which would truly make them equal to men, and this can only be achieved through work. It is necessary that women work exactly in the same universal way, and for it to be just as normal for them, so that intellectually, psychologically, and morally they can feel profoundly, from within, equal to men. And also to have equivalent economic, political and social responsibilities. But at present, there’s a movement in France, that I’d call a regression because it aims to increasingly lock up the woman in the home, to her family and children and deny her the possibility of a career equivalent to that of a man’s”

She goes on to explain her thoughts on the reason for the regression, (which is in my opinion, firmly nestled in socialist ideology) I will cover in a different post, however for the purposes of this discussion, I’d like to focus our attention to her argument’s lack of respect for the very important and most fundamental role of 1) the woman’s work in the home as well as 2) an overall devaluation for the home itself.

While I would never deny the value to society of a woman’s work or profession outside the home, if we were to honestly review the effects as opposed to the intention of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th wave feminist movement, we would have to take into account this ideology’s toll on every facet of life including women’s physical, emotional and psychological health, male-female relations, abortion as well as families and the rearing of children.

Of course, in their zealous goal to push the envelope even further, the proponents of the idea that gender is arbitrary also tend to feel that the family unit as we have known it for millennia is nonsense and should be dismantled. We can certainly see the genesis of this thinking in de Beauvoir’s analysis on the position of women in society. The very idea that a woman must prove she is valuable by competing with men is what separates radical feminists from the women who are turning their backs on it all and returning to a more fundamental approach to life that values women as intrinsically equal to men and that both are powerful though differently powered. I will definitely explore this and many related topics in future articles.

When thinking about feminism’s ideological lack of respect for the very important and most fundamental role of 1) the woman’s work in the home as well as 2) an overall devaluation for the home itself, I am reminded of a wonderful speech Phyllis Schlafly gave in response to the premise of the National Women’s Organization’s mission and goals for ERA in the 1977:

I couldn’t have said it better myself!

The key for women who want to understand the root of ideologies that have not served them is to study the cause (psychological premises) and the effects (dissolution of the family unit, the rise of the babymama/daddy culture and astronomical numbers of abortions, to name a few).

Because, it is women and children, and yes also men, paying the high cost of an agenda riddled with holes. The good news is that women no longer want to be pushed to compete with men in order to prove their worth. Women no longer want to held at emotional gunpoint to use their lives to prove the premise that women can do it all, work outside the home, inside the home, and do it all at 100%, all the time. Women are tired of the idea that it is okay to push their rearing of their children on to non-parental adults in the ‘pursuit of equality’!

I can’t think of a better topic to continuing exploring! Please subscribe to my newsletter. The link is below.

Never Miss New Posts
Please Subscribe to My Weekly Newsletter

Let’s Connect!

Visits: 582

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *