Tuesday, November 30, 2004

Concerned Women for America -- Honest!

Okay, there are some targets one should not pick on – as its says in the Torah, you don’t go tripping a blind guy, or making fun of total morons – but these women from the CWA are stepping up to the plate, and even if they are too ignorant to live, that makes’em fair game in my book.

In this essay, and I use the word loosely, Rachel Mafaffey and Eva Arl attempt to explain to us why mothers really ought to stay home with their children. (http://www.cwfa.org/articledisplay.asp?id=6606&department=BLI&categoryid=commentary)

Let me note, for the record, that while I don’t see any pressing need for mothers to spend all their time at home with their children, or home-school them, or sew all their clothing, and make all their own bread, and preserve all their own fruit, meanwhile running a successful business out of the garage, if women want to do that sort of thing, it is perfectly cool with me. Because (here’s the deal, Ms. Mafaffey and Ms. Arl) that’s what feminism is actually about: women get to do whatever it is they want to do with their own lives.

Can I repeat that one time?

Feminism means that a woman’s life is her life. It means her body is her body. She gets to decide what to do with both of those things. If she decides she wants to spend her life raising a passel of kids, that’s her decision. If she decides she wants to be a professor of anatomy, that’s cool too. If she wants to be a stripper, a law professor, a snowboarder, a rock star, a veterinary assistant, whatever. It’s up to her. <-- This is the actual feminist position.

Ms. Mafaffey and Ms. Arl, however, in their essay, state the traditional anti-Feminist strawman position:

“Feminists tell us that we don't need a man to be successful and that traditional marriage is the ultimate oppressor of women. Groups like the National Organization for Women (NOW) claim women need a career to be fulfilled. To them, it is demeaning for women to care for their babies, and therefore we should reject the roles of wife and mother for work outside the home.”

Okay. What feminists said that? Can you cite them? It may be true that feminists mainly agree that women don’t need “a man to be successful” – but come now, Ms. Mafaffey and Ms. Arl. Are you going to argue that women do need men to be successful? That without a man in her life a woman cannot be counted as succeeding?

And, depending on how you’re defining “traditional marriage,” the second part of your claim may or may not be something a feminist at some point may have said.

But everything after that is just balderdash made up about feminists by groups such as the CWA.

And that paragraph is just the one of the many problems with this essay.

Take, for example, their dubious assumption that women are working outside the home in order to “be fulfilled.”

Take that claim and tell it to the woman that fill my classrooms – the ones working 36 hours a week at Wal-Mart and Goody’s and Wendy’s. Ask them just how fulfilled they are, when they get home to their passel of children every night, and how happy they are about their “choice” to work outside the home.

No, Ms. Mafaffey and Ms. Arl, despite what you have learned from Dr. Laura and from your minister and whoever else it was, most women aren't working to "be fulfilled" or because they are evil, selfish critters, or because the feminists have brainwashed them into thinking it will make them happy, or because they hate babies or whatever. Most women work for the same reason most men work, you idiots: because they need the money.

Here's an idea: Why don't the two of you get a job one time, earn yourselves few bucks, and buy yourselves a clue?

Just a suggestion, mind you.


Anonymous said...

These girls write about something of which they know not; they are young interns who obviously do not know the interior life of their mothers (or father). If only parenting was as simple as they make it out to be!

zelda1 said...

This is what totally pisses me off about men and especially women who think that a woman's place is in the house no matter what. Where were those idiots when I was working two jobs to buy clothes and food for my ever growing children? Do they really think anyone (man or woman) would rather be out of the comfort of their own living room, out of that place where things are nice and familiar, to leave their children with people that are not related, to go and work a job where you are on your feet all day having bosses evaluate your performance and the public form opinons about you based on how happy they are about the policies of the institution where you work? Don't get me wrong, I loved my job but it was necessary. Today, my children are grown and I could stay home and be a housewife, if I wanted to but what is the point? Why not use the world as my osyter and if school is what I want then do it, if work is it then do that, but if YOU, EVA, want to stay home and tend to those kids, rub the little man's feet, and put yourself last, hey sounds a little like the dark ages but that's okay. But don't think you or anyone else can dictate to other men and women how to live their lives or how to raise their children. This is, after all, or sadly enough, America, and if we know one thing about America it is a trend setter and a trend follower, and I'd hate to wake up one morning and find out that Bush, after sleeping with the ARabs, was trying to make a new law based on how his oil buddies are treating their women and their children. So, all you women who sing the praises of being a stay at home mom (and if you really like that it's fine) but don't criticize, moralize, or trivialize women who by choice or necessity have a career, or a profession, or a line checking out groceries at Safeway.