Dana Milbank
Opinion Writer
Conservatives to women: Lean back
The conservative minds of the Heritage Foundation have found a way for Republicans to shrink the gender gap: They need to persuade more women to get their MRS degrees.
The advocacy group held a gathering of women of the right Monday afternoon to mark the final day of Women’s History Month — and the consensus was that women ought to go back in history. If Facebook executive Sheryl Sandberg’s mantra is “lean in,” these women were proposing that women lean back: get married, take care of kids and let men earn the wages.
“We’re gathered to celebrate Women’s History Month but I don’t celebrate Women’s History Month,” announced writer Mona Charen, one of the panelists. “It doesn’t interest me whether a person who happens to share my chromosomes sits in the Oval Office. It doesn’t interest me how many women members of the Senate there are.”
What interests Charen and the other women on the stage is their belief, as Charen put it, that “feminism has done so much damage to happiness.” And the solution to this damage, it turns out, is matrimony — the same thing that will solve problems such as income inequality and the Republican Party’s standing among women.
“We should show concern for everybody by extending the marriage franchise to everybody,” panelist Mollie Hemingway proposed. “Everybody go out, right now, go get married if you’re not married,” she said to laughter, “and we should be able to solve all these problems.”
“If we truly want women to thrive,” Charen concurred, “we have to revive the marriage norm.”
This, they argued, also would have the felicitous effect of making women more Republican. Charen argued that “it is the decline of marriage that is the lodestar for why people’s voting behavior is what it is,” and Hemingway asserted that “we do not have a sex gap here in voting. We have a marriage gap.”
So, ladies and gentlemen, would you agree or disagree with the statement that “feminism has done so much damage to happiness”?
What really is feminism? Are women happier married and being homemakers? Can women have it all? How about Superwoman? Is there such a person?
The entire opinion piece by Milbank can be found HERE.
I don’t know that I disagree or agree with what appears to be the main thrust of what is said. I think the sexes are predisposed to different sorts of behaviors that provide different strengths to their families (whatever those look like). However, before you get the torches and pitchforks, allow me to also say that I don’t think that there is any reason whatsoever to deny women equal treatment with men. So, has feminism “damaged” happiness? I don’t think so. I think it’s always tough for the early goers and pursuit of that equality may have put some women in positions they might not otherwise have occupied but it’s tough sledding when you’re out front. Would my wife be college educated and a 50% partner in our company if not for her sisters 50 years ago? Probably not. Do I want all of those options available to my kid? you know it.
In all things people of different sexes, orientation, races, etc must be afforded equal access. If a woman wants to go to college and be a senator, great. If she wants to get married, have a family and never enter the workforce, great. Superwoman? tough act to pull off but then so is the “equivalent” superman. There are sacrifices for both.
Hope all of that makes sense.
@Andy,
It made perfect sense and I agree with you. I think I was on the cusp of when things really changed. I am not sure who really did the battle royal. Maybe it was those women who did “men’s work” during WWII. They returned home and produced a whole bunch of daughters who simply weren’t disposed or satisfied to have 4 kids and have dinner on the table by 6.
I think I just came along resenting that I didn’t have equal rights and assumed I did have them. I always had an air of bucking the system. Not sure where it came from. For instance, I never understood why women couldn’t work in the ABC store. I never understood while women weren’t hired right along with the men.
I know this. I know I worked a full time job and then came home to another one because I had a family. I thing men coming along today share much more of the family responsibilities than older men do. Older men skated, if you ask me. I still see that freaking sense of entitlement in Mr. Howler occasionally. I promptly slap it down also. I can barely watch Mad Men because of it also.
(Mona Charen always was a pinhead …)
The breakdown of the illusion of lifelong marriage has made the world more complicated. Has it actually reduced happiness? Clearly not, or it wouldn’t have happened.
Anything that makes the world more complicated and less childlike upsets the Mona Charens of the world.
Long-term here’s what’s going to happen – and it’s already started. Men are going to become more like women. Women are going to become more like men. The “sex boundary”, which generally exists because of social reinforcement more than anything else, is going to dissipate.
Marriage is a fine idea if you are trying to raise kids. Other than that, it’s a pointless ritual.
There are economic advantages propped up by govt.
The whole concept of marriage should be restructured to orient it around children, and the idea of providing a stable environment for children to grow up in. Not the illusion of everlasting love and personal satisfaction for the two adults. That’s chasing a phantom. In this day and age the undeniable truth is : at least one of the two people will probably bail on that marriage, and it only takes one.
The idea that society is going to return to the 1950’s and then we’ll all vote Republican and everything will be great is … amusing. Mona Charen exists on a different planet from you and I.
I think it is up to society to make kids who are growing up in non traditional families to not feel stigma. Not everyone has married parents. Not everyone has 2 parents. Not everyone has parents at all. Some folks have grandparents. Not all people have parents who are male or females as in one of each. Some have to fathers and some have 2 mothers.
Regardless of how we feel, kids need to grow up in a secure environment. That’s why we have to remove the shock and awe any time someone deviates. There also need to be no more father/daughter dances etc. How about parent/daughter dances. I have grandchildren who aren’t in traditional marriages. I have felt their pain because of some pompous old bitches and bastards.
And while I’m on the subject, my advice to anyone considering marriage is … get a prenup. This should be the social norm.
If you don’t get a prenup, you’re basically risking a whole lot of income just to pay for the temporary illusion of timeless love. And odds are that you’ll regret it. Marriage without a prenup makes about as much sense as Russian roulette.
Totally agree. It is just a wise business decision. Too bad my mama didn’t make that as part of her advice package….
So that’s how repugs intend to draw more women to their side? By encouraging them to marry? Heh heh, best of luck
I don’t know that men and women are going to become “more alike”. I wonder what the means, exactly? I know using yourself as a test group is bad policy but I don’t want to live with a woman who is “more like a man”. If that means that traditional gender roles are blurring that’s great and has been going on for quite some time but other than that…:)
Androgyny … it’s scientifically logical. And it’s been happening already. Unlike 100 years ago, we all wear similar clothes and we mostly do similar jobs.
Increasingly, it’s not the man’s role to protect the woman. Nor does he possess means to dominate.
I always like to take my posts a little past the comfort zone, so here’s another piece of evidence … the increasing popularity of “tranny porn” or other sexual entertainment that mixes up gender roles. Men pretending to be women and vice versa … it’s becoming increasingly common I believe, and less something considered odd to look at. (So I understand from my limited interactions with younger people, to include references in popular entertainment). I believe the gender lines are literally blurring before our eyes, and that I could cite a host of examples of this.
http://www.csmonitor.com/Books/chapter-and-verse/2014/0326/Jimmy-Carter-s-new-book-A-Call-to-Action-receives-positive-reviews
That’s according to Jimmy Carter in his new book which hits shelves Tuesday, “A Call to Action: Women, Religion, Violence, and Power.”
In it, the 39th President writes of his belief that “the most serious and unaddressed worldwide challenge is the deprivation and abuse of women and girls.”
Elena! Gasp! There is NO war on women!!!!
I guess if by “wearing similar clothes” you mean pants and shirts I guess we dress similarly although that’s pretty generic.
Tranny porn? You’re on your own dude.
I was not speaking for myself about the tranny porn.
Women and men are becoming more alike, and society generally applauds when they do. It’s generally considered a good thing that a woman can be confident and assertive or that a man can be sensitive.
“Ru Paul’s Drag Race” is another point of evidence … there’s an emerging hunger out there for gender confusion.
If you look at the (mostly sexually charged) pop icons of today you see it big-time. Mylie Cyrus loves to dance with strippers … Justin Bieber looks like a girl … Nicki Manaj’s raps as often as not are about her imaginary penis.
Rihanna looks more or less like a dude.
Uh huh. Riiiight.
http://m.wikihow.com/Come-Out-of-the-Closet
Tranny porn? My gosh, somebody outside of the USA must have seized control of the internet already. You try to tune into Moonhowlings.com and you wind up at the Hustler site.
Wolve, I am just reading along…not commenting…..
Sorry … I could have made my point without bringing up tranny porn.
I recall some organization which studies world population trends opining some years ago that, if the Italians didn’t start getting married and producing children again, there would soon be a time when there would be no more Italians in Italy. How does Verdi sound in North African Arabic?
Just kidding, Mr. Bentley.
if there was ever a bullshit stream, this has to be it. ‘Nuf said.
There’s no question that we have a major marriage problem in this country, but that’s being used as a reason to try to set the clock back on women. It’s very subtle, but the direction is clear.
Whether the reduction in married couples is a symptom or a cause of the problem, the problem remains. People aren’t getting married as much, and they aren’t staying married. Are people not getting married because of societal issues, or are those societal issues because people aren’t getting married? Whatever the answer, there’s no question that children fare better in a two person household. Not to say that a single parent can’t do a good job, but I think most will agree that two is the ideal.
What we do know is that it would be wrong to lay the blame for marriage failure on women. When you look at the demographics, it’s the men who are absent in large numbers. Would the problem be helped by women being more subservient and less aggressive, as Heritage suggests? The idea that the feminist movement has a disdain for family life is ridiculous. The vast majority of women work because they HAVE to, since wage-earners haven’t shared in productivity gains over the past 30 years. This is a classic case of GOP blame-shifting and misdirection. Blame the victim.
If you look at demographics, the one-parent household issue skews worse in the inner-city and lower-income areas. Ironically (or not), these are the areas impacted most from the “drug war” laws such as three-strikes and mandatory minimum sentences. Many fathers didn’t just leave- they were removed from the family by the government. You can get more prison time from a third-strike marihuana conviction than murder!
We obviously need to address the family issue, but groups like Heritage aren’t helping in any coherent way- they’re trying to push the same old agenda.
Just think of the google hits when people type in “tr*nny p*rn” and get Moonhowlings.
I spelled it that way as to NOT help the google algorithms.
So let me add my personal experience. When a woman chooses to stay home, she relinquished some of her power, in fact, I would say, a significant amount. For many relationships, this imbalance is often time unhealthy in my opinion. I don’t know the perfect solution, but to suggest that women are now being screwed because they work outside the home is the height of stupidity and ultimately degrading to women.
Ergo, the reason the room was full of men as opposed to women, their target audience.
“Are people not getting married because of societal issues, or are those societal issues because people aren’t getting married?”
Part of what happens is that as the divorce rate increased, more and more of succeeding generations are children who saw their parents divorce. They don’t grow up aspiring to a 40 year marriage, or have it as their model for living; they know it’s likely to fail.