Divorce, feminism, some connections between them, etc.

[JayneK]

Second-wave feminism is outdated. I think most women in their twenties and thirties would only have a hazy idea of who Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinam are. (I only know about The Feminine Mystique from the scene in the movie Ten Things  I Hate About You.) I'm not saying the serious side effects from early feminism aren't around; obviously things like birth control and abortion are very much present. But overall among young women the kind of "clipped haired lesbo" feminism that many people on this board rage about really just doesn't exist. In fact, in the past decade or so there has been a movement of women giving up their careers to care for their kids full-time because they see the benefits of it and the bad effects of spending a childhood in daycare. Many of them probably grew up in households like that and don't want to put their own children through it. I honestly believe that "feminism" is word that has lost it's meaning. Whether for or against it, people use it to mean what they want it to mean. If it means anything at all now, it's that women are supposed to be good at everything--feminine and kind, educated, successful, good housekeepers, beautiful, financially independent, maternal, self-sufficient, etc. etc. This is the "perfect woman" that modern men expect to have for the asking without expecting to give anything in return, and until they find it, they have no interest in settling down or "committing." That's feminism. It is and has always been a cover for men to shirk responsibility and increase their sense of entitlement. 

Feminism is still around and still evil. I agree that current feminism is more subtle than the earlier forms, but it is very much alive and not just in birth control and abortion.  Look in any women's magazine and, woven throughout the fashion and diet articles, you will find the underlying assumptions of feminism.  "Women are victims."  "Men are a threat." "Men are losers."  "Women should have it all -career, family and everything they desire. " 

Feminism gives women unrealistic expectations of themselves and of men, leading to great unhappiness. Women don't get to live the perfect dream lives they think they deserve and can't find the perfect men they are looking for either.   While I can see how it does give men an excuse to shirk responsibility, in my experience, it leads to a sense of entitlement in women far more than in men.  Women influenced by feminism see themselves are entitled to some sort of pay back from men because men have allegedly oppressed women in history.

[Iolanthe]

Feminism is still around and still evil. I agree that current feminism is more subtle than the earlier forms, but it is very much alive and not just in birth control and abortion.  Look in any women's magazine and, woven throughout the fashion and diet articles, you will find the underlying assumptions of feminism.  "Women are victims."  "Men are a threat." "Men are losers."  "Women should have it all -career, family and everything they desire. " 

Feminism gives women unrealistic expectations of themselves and of men, leading to great unhappiness. Women don't get to live the perfect dream lives they think they deserve and can't find the perfect men they are looking for either.   While I can see how it does give men an excuse to shirk responsibility, in my experience, it leads to a sense of entitlement in women far more than in men.  Women influenced by feminism see themselves are entitled to some sort of pay back from men because men have allegedly oppressed women in history.

I wonder if you've read any magazines lately. I don't read them all the time but I have never seen an article about women being victims or men being a threat. Most of them range from "How to be sexy for your boyfriend" to "How to tell if he's going to propose" to "How to appear like you're not interested when you are." Most of it is pretty mind-numbing but it's not at all the kind of thing you're describing. In fact, far from women being told expect a "payback" there is a lot subliminal pressure to expect NOTHING AT ALL from men "because guys are guys and hate it when girls are clingy and there's nothing you can do about this."

I think you believe magazines have the messages you're talking about, and maybe they did in the past, but it's not the reality any more.

I did a quick look of articles on MSN to show the kind of thing I mean. This is pretty froo-froo stuff, but people read it, and I don't see anything about women being told that they're victims. The first one is particularly interesting because it deals with male-and-female arguments. These are the kinds of things women are being told: “Women are perceived to be more emotional, so we sometimes try to be taken more seriously by acting more like men. That was my approach when I first started debating: I would wear suits to tournaments, even though I’m more of a dresses kind of girl. But when I finally decided to start wearing colorful dresses, my mood lifted, I was more comfortable and I started winning more often.” Also, “Whether you’re talking to your boyfriend or 10 guys in a locker room nothing you say will matter if a bad reputation precedes you. You can give the best rah-rah rah speech in the world, and if you’re not trusted, guys will just roll their eyes.” I don't know if I necessarily care what they have to say but this is hardly the kind of the anti-male brainwashing you seem to expect.

http://www.glamour.com/sex-love-life/2010/11/7-ways-to-convince-any-man-youre-right#slide=1

Lots of opportunities for male-bashing here, none of them taken.
http://www.glamour.com/sex-love-life/2010/11/the-dos-and-donts-of-handling-your-best-friends-breakup#slide=1

This doesn't sound like women being told to expect it all.
"You’ve heard this from your mother/grandmother/Oprah, but we’re going to say it again: You might be able to train him to pick up his dirty laundry or turn off the Xbox, but attempting a major man-over is not a good idea. “Don’t go into situations looking for a man who doesn’t exist but could exist with a little bit of help,” says Nowinski. Look for someone who makes you happy just as he is and expect the same from him!"
http://www.glamour.com/sex-love-life/2010/03/how-to-stop-dating-bad-for-you-boys-for-good#slide=1

I do agree with you that women are still being told "you can have it all" with regard to career and family, and it sets up a lot of unrealistic pressures and goals, but that is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. Women are being expected to do everything.

[JayneK]

I don't buy women's magazine's but sometimes I'll look at them in waiting rooms.  Most recently, I read one last week.  I'm not claiming that these attitudes I've identified are stated explicitly, but that they are underlying assumptions.  Most people aren't going to notice it unless they know to look for it.

It isn't just that women are expected to do everything.  It's that people who say that women should not do everything are portrayed as oppressing women.  There is an attitude that women have a right to do everything and anyone who stands in the way of this is evil.

[QuisUtDeus]

Magazines like Glamour tell women how to catch men. Dating advice is never going to say "Tell him he's a chauvinist pig."  It's going to tell you how to put lipstick on.

Read some career advice columns and see what they say.

But the underlying message is still there even in the glamor magazines.  "Hide your brains and show your ankles."  In other words, it reinforces the message that men are pigs.

"Whether you’re talking to your boyfriend or 10 guys in a locker room nothing you say will matter if a bad reputation precedes you. You can give the best rah-rah rah speech in the world, and if you’re not trusted, guys will just roll their eyes."  Translates to pretty much the same thing: i.e., men don't value women properly and act unfairly towards them.

In fact, Iolanthe, you said it yourself:  "there is a lot subliminal pressure to expect NOTHING AT ALL from men".  Would you find it offensive if the contrawise were stated subliminally: that men should expect nothing at all from women because, well, you know how girls are.

[JayneK]

But the underlying message is still there even in the glamor magazines.  "Hide your brains and show your ankles."  In other words, it reinforces the message that men are pigs.

Exactly.  What's missing, almost everywhere, is the idea that men (or even some men) are worthy of respect and admiration.  There is a loss of the sense that we need men.  Independence from men is constantly shown as good thing.  While there is acknowledgement that most women would like to have a man around, it is not because men are necessary.  Men are treated as a sort of pet - a nuisance to clean up after, but we put up with them because they are cute and cuddly.  We don't see men portrayed as heroes or leaders. 

And women growing up now think this is normal.  They don't know that something is missing or there is another way to think of men.  They just take this sort of disrespect for granted.

[LaramieHirsch]

Since this thread is about divorce and feminism, I choose this quotation to reply to:

I know of tons of guys who would make great husbands (even now) and they are all, down to a tee, single. 

Then why aren't they married? My guess is they can't support a family or don't want to, an especially common problem among traditional Catholics.

In any case, since most men have low standards for how men should act, I'm not going to take your assessment of you single friends too seriously. The definition of a great guy these days seems to be one who's not a drug addict and on welfare. Sorry to burst your bubble but there's a lot more to it than that.

She's dating the wrong kind of guy? How so....since you know so much about it? What would you recommend?

Why aren't these men married?  Because all the women were either married right out of high school, or the remaining women are busy riding the alpha train, convincing themselves to "have a little fun" before they get too old for it.  Unfortunately, these lushes will turn 31 some day, and realize that good men don't want them anymore.  ...At least, not for a relationship.

While there is acknowledgement that most women would like to have a man around, it is not because men are necessary.  Men are treated as a sort of pet - a nuisance to clean up after, but we put up with them because they are cute and cuddly.  We don't see men portrayed as heroes or leaders. 

And women growing up now think this is normal.  They don't know that something is missing or there is another way to think of men.  They just take this sort of disrespect for granted.

Thanks JayneK.  Means a lot to a fella.


Here's an article I found from Dr. Laura talking about the feminist expectations of a man in a marriage.

http://www.drlaurablog.com/2009/08/10/unbelievable-feminista-hogwash-about-quality-husbands/


Unbelievable Feminista Hogwash About Quality Husbands

August 10, 2009 on 12:00 am | In Attitude, Family, Feminism, Gender, Marriage, Masculinity  Email This Post
A female professor from Oxford University in England, in an article published in the Journal of Population Economics, has decided that American and British men (who don’t mind lending a hand when it comes to housework), make the best husbands, while Australian men are the worst.  She’s also “decided” that Norway, Sweden, and Northern Ireland, where men “lend a hand in housework,” are egalitarian countries which produce better husbands.

I say:  unbelievable feminista hogwash!!  The professor’s definition of a good husband is ridiculous.  Men who are sexually faithful, who work hard to provide for and protect their families, who take care of the plumbing and the lawn are not good husbands, because they don’t do what used to be called “women’s work.”  This is just one more salvo in the war against masculinity, in which men are completely emasculated because they’re told that they’re neither good men nor good husbands unless they fold the laundry.

When women call me complaining about such things (usually women who are at home), I ask them if they drive their husband’s route in traffic every day, or if they deal with difficult bosses or co-workers, or if they aren’t able to take breaks whenever they choose or take care of all the car and house repair issues.  They say “no,” but expect him to do housework in addition to all his other responsibilities.

In those situations where both husband and wife have full-time jobs, and there’s a “war” about who’s going to take care of household chores, I say they should budget and pay for part-time housecleaning help, or one of them ought to reassess their life and decide if having no one at home to make a nest is worth the money they both make.

There are biological and psychological imperatives in females for nesting/child care, and in males for conquering/protecting.  When these are turned inside out, there is usually (but not always) a reaction in the female to feel less respectful and sexual toward her mate.  Women don’t stare at skinny guys with spectacles when they walk by, but they do stare at Bowflex-toned commercial male actors with huge pecs and biceps.  Why?  It’s the animal attraction of a male who, potentially, is sexually healthy enough to produce offspring and then provide and protect.

Women who want emasculated men generally have huge hostility issues with masculinity (which they got from their mothers or the feminist teachers of their women’s studies courses), and want to be able to control the man (never as much as their mother could) or are just too scared of their normal natural dependency on a real man.

A better study would be to find out what household situations make MEN happiest, because those are the ones which, overall, are going to attract the men who make the best husbands.  Happy husbands spend more time with their families, and would swim through shark-infested waters for them.  This particular study?   Just another piece of feminist propaganda flotsam.

[Underdog]

My $.02 on the topic.

I think romanticism is the source of feminism...and since romanticism is a reaction against enlightenment...it has its origins in the enlightenment...kinda.  It's basically the pendulum swinging too far in the opposite direction...an over correction of sorts.

Below is how I believe romanticism begets feminism.  (The novel Madame Bovary is an excellent example of this effect.)

Romanticism→idealized notion of what life is/should be like→unrealistic expectations→disillusionment→self-destructive behaviors→ruined life

And this is how it works for many modern women.

Various sources that romanticize life (media, parents, school)→idealized notion of what life is/should be like (woman gets college degree, career, neglects to prepare for the realities of married life)→unrealistic expectations of courtship, marriage, motherhood (woman realizes that being everything to everyone all the time is an exhausting insanity)→disillusionment→self-destructive behaviors (overspending, filing for divorce, contraception, alcoholism, compulsive eating)→ruined life (bankruptcy, break up of family, loss of faith in children, illness, depression, etc)

It's not always media that push the romantic notion of life...sometimes it's parental attitude...where girls are taught to be overachievers in all areas of life except home economics (which she is told comes natural to women...so no need to prepare)...which means that even if she wants to leave her career to bring up the children...she lacks the skills to cope with the sundry duties of a housewife (plenty of women have never been taught home economy, meal planning, cooking, cleaning, etc. etc. etc...and yet...many young women think that a housewife's job is easy...or at least should be...to pick up at the drop of a hat...and can wait until after the first baby comes along...which just isn't true).  That's why you have women who file for divorce because the man isn't helping out enough at home...she finds herself overwhelmed...and has no one (usually) to turn to for help except...her helpmate...who often shares a similarly absurd romantic notion of life (and thus does not understand why she is having trouble adapting and performing the tasks required of her).

The Church could certainly help out in this situation...by setting up women's groups to help prepare women for the duties of married life...which would give women of all ages a constructive social outlet, help women to bear burdens as a community, and allow for the development and sharing of skills needed in managing a household & child rearing.  I doubt it would cost much...and would bear much good fruit.  It would also likely counteract the ever dipping fertility rate...by making motherhood much more fulfilling.  However, it doesn't seem that many churchmen have given this much thought...which is a bit disheartening.

I welcome discussion...and please...if I got something wrong...do point it out...but please, do it nicely.  

[LaramieHirsch]

...Romanticism→idealized notion of what life is/should be like→unrealistic expectations→disillusionment→self-destructive behaviors→ruined life

And this is how it works for many modern women...

I find your post to be largely true.  Yeah, I wish that parishes would have programs to help set young women up for domestic life.  They seem completely unprepared for it. 

When I was younger, before marriage, I found the homes of many young women to be unkept and absolutely disgusting. 

If a female doesn't take the individual initiative to get her crap together in her late teens and early twenties (learning domesticity), then she's doomed.  Such a woman could end up marrying a guy who would get overwhelmed with having to do simpler duties in the house (instead of focusing on repairing that fence, fixing the doors, remodeling the closets, or something like that).

And, of course it's not all her sole duty, and of course the guy should help out when necessary.

But to be with a woman who doesn't understand domesticity, thanks to an embedded feminist philosophy that dates back to Romanticism--yeah, that could cause problems in a marriage.  But I don't think divorce is an answer, of course.

[Satori]

I think Underdog is spot on, as she usually is when discussing marriage and motherhood. I'd love a group like that. I wish to heaven I knew how to manage my household better -- I'm so spacy and have no practice in meal-planning or organizing household chores.

Laramie: I got engaged at 31 and married at 32. I do not recommend that most people wait that long, but neither can I approve of you insinuating that no man -- or no good man -- would want to marry a woman that age.

Now, this is my own observation about how feminism has affected Christian society: I grew up in a conservative Protestant environment (I'm 38). Women weren't being abused in our little culture, but they weren't particularly respected, either. Husbands had a sense of entitlement. They weren't beasts, but they didn't do that much for their wives beyond bringing home a paycheck and mowing the grass on Saturday -- you know, they didn't talk to them much or do things with them. They expected to be "served" and to get their way in every little thing. I could see how women would want to rebel against that. But now, what I see is women who pay lip service to the headship of men but feel entitled to act like divas with their husbands. He's supposed to work two or three jobs so they can live very comfortable lives, he's supposed to do the laundry and load the dishwasher and put the kids to bed when he comes home, he cannot expect anything from them, and he is treated to a self-righteous tirade if he slips up or does something horrible like expecting dinner when he comes home. Not all of the women I know are like this, probably not even most, but it is common enough to be noticeable, quite a contrast from what I saw growing up. We humans of both sexes seem very good at slipping into self-entitlement and always letting the pendulum swing too far in one direction or another.

[cgraye]

Romanticism→idealized notion of what life is/should be like→unrealistic expectations→disillusionment→self-destructive behaviors→ruined life

Various sources that romanticize life (media, parents, school)→idealized notion of what life is/should be like (woman gets college degree, career, neglects to prepare for the realities of married life)→unrealistic expectations of courtship, marriage, motherhood (woman realizes that being everything to everyone all the time is an exhausting insanity)→disillusionment→self-destructive behaviors (overspending, filing for divorce, contraception, alcoholism, compulsive eating)→ruined life (bankruptcy, break up of family, loss of faith in children, illness, depression, etc)

I think that's true, but you could make the exact same argument for the romanticized "trad" notion of marriage and family as well.  Romanticism in general leads to unrealistic expectations and disillusionment.  It's important to be realistic about things no matter what.