Wednesday, November 24, 2010

Feminism Q&A

I received an email from a young lady who is studying in college; she asked me several questions about how I regard feminism, and I decided to post my reply here, since I thought it could be interesting to my readers.

“What, in your opinion, is feminism?”

Before I get to answer this rather complex question, you must keep in mind that I’m an Orthodox Jew, and therefore believe men and women are inherently different, and have different roles as outlined in the Bible. These roles are easy and natural for most men and women to assume, and indeed throughout history men have been doing most of the outside pursuits, leading their families and providing for their wives and children, while women were centered on their role as wives and mothers, took care of the practical and spiritual aspects of family and home and leaned on their husband as leader and provider.

Now, I know feminism is a vast movement and not all of it can be tarred with the same brush. Some feminists accept the fact that men and women have different inclinations and capabilities in various fields (though I must say most do not realize the extent of the difference), and claim their only goal is equal opportunities for people of equal capabilities, disregarding their gender. Some are egalitarians and deny that men and women have any inherent differences at all, and claim that the different inclinations we see in men and women are merely the product of social stereotypes (I do have to say I find it striking that some people actually think the dramatic differences in our biological structure bear no influence on our minds).

Some are radicals, such as a certain group of Israeli feminists who infiltrated the army and conducted biased research, on the base of which women were entered into combat units which were previously men-only. The fact that combat training did irreversible damage to the health and fertility of some of those young women, and that the presence of women acted towards the lowering of standards and the detriment of military performance, was apparently of no concern to them. They didn’t care that they are basically putting their own country at risk, as long as their ideals were promoted. Fortunately some sane people woke up and spoke against it.

For the sake of the discussion, I’ll say that feminism is any movement that detracts a woman from her natural role as a wife, mother, nurturer and guardian of the home. Even those movements that claim they only speak about the creation of “equal opportunities” practically continue the damage to the social structure which was caused by feminism. For example, once efforts are done to make entering the work force more feasible for mothers (such as, by lowering the cost of daycare), it becomes expected of women to take advantage of this marvelous “opportunity”.

“Where did you learn about feminism?”


You don’t have to take a special course in feminism to know about it. All you have to do is observe how things are done in all aspects of life today, compared with past generations. I’m 25 years old; for me, feminism was the norm – I grew right into it, thinking women should go into battle and sad and furious when I heard a woman gave up her career for the sake of her family, without even thinking it was feminism. For me, it was simply the right direction in which “women’s rights” were evolving. It was not until later that I realized just how different men and women are and how beautiful and harmonious is the plan of G-d, which includes men and women complementing each other in their different roles. So I suppose you could say I didn’t learn about feminism, but rather, I un-learned it (still in the process of it) later.

“Do you think a young girl could benefit from some aspects of feminism these days?”


I think the key here is to look at what feminism has actually done. Has it promoted the overall happiness of women, stabilized the social structure of families, created a healthier (both physically and mentally) generation of children, contributed to economy, reduced the levels of stress and anxiety for both men and women? No, no and again, no. Feminism robbed countless women of the fulfillment they could easily and naturally have had as wives and mothers, leading them to the false belief they must do something “greater” to be happy, and causing the average “modern” human being to believe that the existence of a woman as “just” a wife and mother is illegitimate. This is now ingrained very deeply in us. Even many of the women who do stay behind to guard the hearth and home, often fret about proving they are “doing enough” at home in order to justify their presence as homemakers.

Of course, I realize that feminism as a social movement did not spring out of nowhere. There was a deep grain of social injustice and therefore dissatisfaction, but was it because there were flaws in G-d’s design for men and women? No, but rather, it was because faulty human beings failed to keep up with what was so beautifully outlined for them. I firmly believe that, had all husbands treated their wives in the fair and kind way they were supposed to, the utter concept of feminism would seem laughable. And I must say that at least in the Jewish tradition, men were never permitted to abuse their wives and were required to treat their wives with respect and affection, and provide for their wife to the best extent of their abilities.

I often hear, “but there were always some who did not feel inclined to marry, and they found themselves in a terrible situation because there were no other options for them. Isn’t it so much better now, when a woman can do meaningful things such as work or study, and support herself in the absence of a husband?” and to this, I’ll say that humans are complex and lives are complex, and I cannot attempt to cover any and every scenario here – but overall, I’m speaking of social trends. Staying single was not a trend, it was more of an oddity. With the onset of feminism, what happened was not that going into the man’s world of academic competition and work was secured as a valid option for the few women who didn’t marry. Rather, it was turned into the expected path for the many, many, many more who wanted to, and did marry and have children, and were then expected to juggle it all so as to “enjoy the best of both worlds” (side note: without truly being able to fully dedicate themselves to either path, as human resources are limited after all).

So, when a young girl today enters university or starts a promising career, it may be said that she is “taking advantage” of the opportunities feminism provided for her, but we mustn’t forget that she is also doing what is now expected of her – again, thanks to feminism. Academics and career are not a “treat”, they are now an obligation, and the reason why this is not fair to women is easy to see when you observe women juggling career with marriage, motherhood and homemaking.

It goes without saying that not all women have “careers”, just as most men do not have careers, but simply jobs aimed at putting bread on the table (and many feminists who hold themselves aloof don’t realize just how snobby and elitist it is to talk about “self-fulfillment” and “self-realization” and “empowerment”. Only a select few can afford that!). Many just work because it is now the expected norm for a woman to be doing “at least something” outside the home, and also because the flooding of the market with female labor force caused a sharp drop in salaries, so that living on one income immediately became much less comfortable than before (though certainly still feasible). Husbands began to feel that it is their right to expect the wife to generate an additional income, forgetting that it is their obligation to provide (again, in the Jewish tradition).
All of this created a vicious cycle, the breaking of which requires conscious decision and quite a leap of faith.

All of this is just the tip of the iceberg and in no way a full account of why I see feminism as nothing short of a tremendous social disaster and the cause of terrible tragedies in countless families and society as a whole. Truly, I could continue talking on and on about rampant divorce, promiscuity, abortions, the downfall of the father’s authority, and general confusion and misery that sadly, now plague the women of my generation. But perhaps I’ll leave that for another day.

31 comments:

Tracy's corner said...

Great post. Well said.

The Stay at Home Wifey said...

What a wonderful and articulate description of what feminism has really done for us women. I hope you don't mind if I put a link of this post on my blog, as I don't think I could put it any better myself.

Analytical Adam said...

Mrs. Anna wrote>Before I get to answer this rather complex question, you must keep in mind that I’m an Orthodox Jew, and therefore believe men and women are inherently different, and have different roles as outlined in the Bible. These roles are easy and natural for most men and women to assume, and indeed throughout history men have been doing most of the outside pursuits, leading their families and providing for their wives and children, while women were centered on their role as wives and mothers, took care of the practical and spiritual aspects of family and home and leaned on their husband as leader and provider.

I have to disagree that Orthodox Judaism feminism is not part of the religion. I am 37 years old and single because of feminism in Orthodox Judaism. Orthodox Judaism never gives credit to men. On the Sabbath men have to sing Eshet Chayil (written by a man who married 1,000 women which he wasn't suppose to do) but women don't have to appreciate their husbands and most women have in Orthodoxy have a sense of entitlement and are NOT the helpmate of their husbands and have no compassion for their struggles or trying to make a living in a decent way.

Second of all, Orthodox Judaism has accused Jewish men of various sin that only they which I have looked up in the bible and it is not true and in addition men stopped the sin. So Orthodox Judaism teaches women to think they are better then men. Worst of all I am having this discussion on my blog on Ruth and that she was from moab and that is your nationhood is defined BY YOUR FATHER. Yet Orthodox Judaism has no respect for fatherhood. THey play a SPIRITUAL role as well in their children which is why we have the Sabbath and they are suppose to teach the children certain values which of course if they make money in an immoral way they really can't do. This is why the Rabbi's outlawed intermarriage by men and not women because there WAS NO NEED with women because clearly their nation is defined by the father and if the father isn't Jewish they aren't part of the Jewish nation from everything you read in the bible but because Orthodox Judaism has become feminist this issue has become lost. Jew means from the tribe of Judah which can only be through the father.

So feminism and distorting the role of father and marginalizing it is very much a part of Orthodox Judaism and let us not pretend otherwise Mrs. Anna. IN fact most secular Jews get their idea's of feminism from Orthodoxy despite what you think Mrs. A because I have read some secular people who point out that Judaism needs the women to be respected but see no where in Orthodox Judaism where men should be respected.

Analytical Adam said...

By the way Mrs. Anna, since you are suppose to be the husbands helpmate what does your husband do for a living? Does he share with you his struggles? He should.

It isn't easy making a living and most men have struggles and should share with their wives their life and struggles otherwise a woman can't be a man's helpmate if they don't want communicate and they end up being the helpmate of other men which sometimes it seems you are more the helpmate of Rabbi's then your husband and in todays time Mrs. Anna being a Rabbi is how the Rabbi's support their wife and children so they really should rely on their wives to help them with their job which is being a Rabbi and not another man's wife.

Analytical Adam said...

Anyway from being on Facebook and other place some Orthodox and on the right (seems to be quite a few) have no issue with Jewish women in the military and believe the propaganda which is very prevalent about IDF women. I was reading of Orthodox women joining the IDF after getting married.

Anyway I discussed this on my blog.

Women in the Military Part 1

Women in the Military Part 2

This is from a book women in the Military flirting with disaster by Brian Mitchell which these two posts discuss Israel's experience with women in the military which Israel according to Brian is much more conservative in how they use women which you should give Israel a little credit Mrs. Anna. Orthodoxy had little to do with this and in fact they seem to be pushing that there is no problem with women in the military as for them the only problem is that Orthodox Jews shouldn't be in the military at all.

Jenny said...

Are you saying that each and every woman should strive to do nothing more than marry and raise a family? That our world should be devoid of female doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc., - what about nurses and teachers? - and that women should stay at home whether they want to or not?

Not every woman is designed to be a stay-at-home mom. Plenty of SAHMs were leading lives of quiet desperation long before feminism took hold.

And contrary to popular belief, being a SAHM was more or less a post-WWII phenomenon. Before WWII, it was quite common for women to work outside the home. The whole SAHM movement was a post-WWII cultural wave, and specifically a cultural kick-back against the America of 1890-1940 progressivism, radicalism, and general left-wing-ism.

If a woman never gets a college education or a job, and instead stays at home, what is she supposed to do when the kids grow up and move away? (Or what if she can't have kids at all ... or what if she never finds a husband in the first place? You sort of dismissed this argument, but these things happen more often than you think.) And what if God forbid the husband becomes incapacitated or dies, and the woman is forced to support herself (and maybe her children). Without an education or job experience, that will be very difficult.

Thanks to feminism, women have options available to them- they can take care of themselves if need be instead of having to go on welfare (some people have no family to take care of them).

Suppose your family's circumstances suddenly necessitated your getting a job- wouldn't you be glad that feminism had paved the way for you to be able to get a well-paying job, or to study for a degree that would allow you to have a career in a field that interested you, instead of being forced to take a low-paying job that you'd hate?

Feminism is about having choices. Why should every woman be forced into the exact same mold?

Anonymous said...

Beautiful Post. I don't think I ever read such an honest post on Feminism in a long, long time. I only hope more people read this, and at least think about what they are reading. Not everyone needs agree, of course, but just think about it.

Bless you, and Happy Thanksgiving.

April

Miu said...

"So, when a young girl today enters university or starts a promising career, it may be said that she is “taking advantage” of the opportunities feminism provided for her, but we mustn’t forget that she is also doing what is now expected of her"
- I like this part. I'm thinking of what to do when finished with school and I'd really like to marry and get children, but everyones looking oddly at you when you say you're not sure at all if you want to study and get a job.

Lady Anne said...

For better or worse, I had no choice but to work outside the home for a while - my first husband had some strange ideas about what "providing" meant, but when he died I was certainly glad I was already in the work force. I did remarry - 36 years this coming Sunday! - and was a stay-at-home mom during our girls' teen years. All three of our daughters do stay at home with their children, and our oldest grandchildren have the same intentions. Our grandson has already bought a house, and his sister fully expects her future husbnad to be able to support her and their children.

neuropoet3 said...

Well said... as always, my friend... I know you're a very busy woman now with your two little ones... just wanted to let you know I appreciate the fact that you're still finding time to post every once in awhile. It's such an encouragement to know there's someone else out there who thinks like I do :) - even if you are on the other side of the world from me! :)

~Jenny

Analytical Adam said...

Mrs. Anna Wrote>Husbands began to feel that it is their right to expect the wife to generate an additional income, forgetting that it is their obligation to provide (again, in the Jewish tradition).

A woman is suppose to help Mrs Anna as the man's helpmate. Leviticus Chapter 27 does give woman a valuation in the supply and demand world. Women had jobs that kings employed women for if you read Samuel 1.

Analytical Adam said...

Last comment. Mrs. Anna I still think your husband and you don't believe people have property and intellectual rights unless the Rabbi's give them that right.

Your husband and you have never said anything nice or given credit to any idea by a man. I'm sure you may not agree with them on all issues but does not mean they have no rights Mrs. Anna and you should just take their idea's and never give them credit Mrs. Anna. That is classic socialism/feminism.

Yet you use services provided by these same men don't you Mrs. Anna. Doesn't your husband?
That shows you really don't believe in property rights as this is given by Rabbi's or else you have no rights. That is very wrong Mrs. Anna and classic socialism/feminism.

It seems you want a little too much but don't understand it is a two way street growing up always getting the attention.

Many women do work to help their husbands and they always did so when there were farms and other activity. They didn't do the same activity as the man but they had some role in working Mrs. Anna to HELP their husband. The women in the bible many of them fed the sheep. They didn't sit around claiming a man should do it all for them Mrs. Anna. If your husband wants him to help you with his job you should as his helpmate and not claim you don't have to. You aren't the helpmate of a Rabbi Mrs. Anna. I know you don't mind if Rabbi's abuse men and steal their idea's and steal their property and what have you which most do I am sorry to tell you and it is classic socialism/feminism.

Julie said...

Thank you for posting! It was very good!
Growing up in the States I've often felt torn between the two worlds because, like you said, it is expected now.
I LOVE what you wrote in the past about being a help-meet for your/my husband! I always thought I'd always thought that in the case that I ever got married I would insist on staying home, but finding a husband who agrees with that would be rare!
Thanks for ALL your great posts! I'm so glad I found your site!
JulieAnn

Anonymous said...

I'm a long time lurker, but wanted to say, very nicely written post and thanks for sharing your thoughts. Great use of examples and easy to understand. I appreciate that you do recognize there are of course exceptions, just as you stated, humans are complex. I agree!! :)

Mrs. Anna T said...

I see this post has generated an interesting discussion - thanks for your input, everyone! I do wish I could respond to each comment, but unfortunately, time doesn't allow.

Adam, I do have to say I find your thoughts not very well articulated, and I'd like to ask you to refrain from personal insinuations, as I'm discussing things in general and not the way they are in our family. We like to keep our affairs private.

PhDCow said...

I'm a little shocked at the judgmental tone of your post. There are several points that upset me, so I'll limit my comment to a few.

First, if you're going to draw conclusions about the role of men and women in contemporary society, you need more than an anecdotal sample and you need a comparison group.

Second, you wrote "Academics and career are not a “treat”" and that's just not the case. Perhaps among those who can afford an education that's unfunded, it may be a "treat," but the majority of college students leave college with debt. Who willingly wants debt as they start their careers at 22? Because they have a desire to learn and explore and ask questions. In my several years as a college professor, I've found that the students who go to college or don't do well are the ones who viewed college as a "right" or the logical next step. If their hearts aren't in it, neither will be their minds.

Finally, you wrote "And I must say that at least in the Jewish tradition, men were never permitted to abuse their wives and were required to treat their wives with respect and affection, and provide for their wife to the best extent of their abilities." I'm neither Christian nor Jewish but these are certainly the expectations and vows that I said to my husband and my husband said to me 11 years ago. The only difference: we vowed to be mutually kind, mutually respectful and affectionate, and mutually create and provide for a household of love. Again, the only difference was the word "mutual." He's not just my husband. He's my partner in life and I his.

I understand that you'll disagree with most of my comment and that's fine. I hope that someday your tunnel vision will be removed so that you can base your arguments and opinions on more than just theory and hearsay.

Homemaker said...

Great post, I love your blog! I am a stay-at-home-wife with no kids yet (and unfortunate health limitations), and reading your blog empowers me in my husband and I's decision for me to stay at home, when everyone surrounding me is rather insulting. People will say that women have the choice to stay at home nowadays, but it sure doesn't seem like it. It seems like the norm is to work, which makes us homemakers feel insecure at times, but shouldn't!

Amy said...

This was a great post. Thank you for taking the time to write it!

Monica said...

Your definition of feminism is right on the money. In fact, I'd say this is one of your best posts - and I've been following your blog for years (mostly lurking). I wish people would just wake up and smell the dysfunction of it all, but, alas, I know that's simply too much to ask.

sibyl said...

I'd just like to respond to the comment above about stay-at-home mothers being a post-WWII phenomenon -- no, really that's not true.

It is certainly true that most married women pre-war stayed home to "keep house" after they were married -- witness the fact that, here in the US anyway, a woman could not be a domestic servant or a teacher if she were married, going back to at least Civil War times.

Before the Industrial Revolution, not only women, but most men were home-based too. In some ways I think that industrialization is the real culprit in the rise of feminism. When human work begins to be commercialized, then humans become more and more interchangeable. If machine-maintenance or assembly-line work requires "man-hours", you can see how pretty soon women would wonder why they couldn't provide "woman-hours" just as well.

Industrialization in the US did much to undermine the nuclear and extended family. The truth is, women have ALWAYS worked; women have always contributed financially to family life, whether through thrift and conservation, or through material help to their husbands (not only child care and house-work, but also help in the household industry, agricultural, artisanal, craft-work, or whatever). There have been many cases in which women did the lion's share of the work which brought in the money in a household (for example, in families that ran bakeries, sold butter, eggs, cloth, provided embroidery or dressmaking, etc).

The difference after WWII was that so much of life had become mechanized and specialized that men's work and women's traditional work had diverged greatly. Women became more and more like men because mechanization made it possible. But the problem of who would take care of the children remained. And modern feminism was born.

So of course it is no accident that day care, contraception, and abortion on demand are central to feminist philosophy. As the kind professor said above, it's all about choice. And you can't choose to be a CEO if you find yourself still at the mercy of your fertility.

As a mother who does not earn a salary, I would say that life in our family would be much more healthy and our children's upbringing much more balanced if my husband were home-based too. Men are none too happy in the current state of affairs either, remember. And children -- well, let's not pretend that children overall are doing that great.

Carol said...

I have taken some time to think about your post. It is well written and I applaud you for tackling a complex issue. I agree that feminism, in part, is a reaction to mistreatment of women by men. Sadly, feminism has not solved this relational problem but instead made it worse.

The Bible provides instruction for husband/wife relationships. A man is instructed to love his wife the way Jesus loves the church (people). A woman is instructed to respect her husband. This is found in Ephesians 5:25-33.

But of course we are human and sin. The Bible teaches repentance. Jesus completes the teaching by redeeming us with his sacrificial love.

Our fulfillment as women comes from our relationship with God and obedience in following His ways.

Anonymous said...

You seem to take the viewpoint that women are obligated to have children and a husband; that all women WANT to, and that is our duty. Along with that, you seem to think that all men and women perfectly fit into this perfect male-female dynamic. And honestly, it doesn't always work the way.

In a lot of ways, I'm a masculine girl. I swear (when in company that is comfortable with that). I'm independent. I'm quick to get angry, and I'm crazy stubborn once I've got my mind set on something. I don't care much about how I look, or how other people think of me.

My current romantic interest is the opposite. He's, well, a whole lot more feminine than I am. He's a lot more picky about being clean, a lot quieter.

So...what about that? What about relationships that don't fit the perfect man-woman relationship all the time? What about a masculine woman and a feminine man who are in love? Should the masculine woman take a feminine role just because she's got the body parts for it? What about two people who feel they are equal in those roles? What if a woman does not feel that her natural role is as a "wife, mother, nurturer, and gardian of the home"? What if she, like me, hates children?

Just some food for thought, I s'pose.

MarkyMark said...

Mrs. Anna,

That was MASTERFULLY done!

Now, with the compliment out of the way, as a US Navy veteran, I'd like to weigh in on the question of women in the military, especially in combat roles. In short, I think it's a BAD idea! Even putting women in support roles should be done with care.

When I served in the US Navy back in the 1980s, we had women on support and supply ships. When we'd tie up next to these tenders, the guys stationed on them would tell me stories of prostitution, unwanted/unexpected pregnancy, unnecessary drama caused by putting men and women together, etc. We NEVER heard about this in the news media-never! Then, the Clinton Administration put women on combat ships in 1992. The people pushing these policies have never served; they have no idea what their policies do to harm unit morale, nor do they know how their policies will harm unit effectiveness.

Whenever someone over here objected to putting women in combat roles, guess what the retort always was? Guess what the feminists always said? They replied that Israel does it, and their military is fine! They could always be counted on to say that. Of course, we were never told of the PROBLEMS the Israeli military services had because women served in combat units...

Let's face it: war is not only a man's business; it's a YOUNG man's business. When a man ages beyond 30-35, he becomes cognizant of his mortality; he realizes that he's no longer indestructible anymore. As a result, he'll start asking himself a question like, "If something goes wrong while doing X, what will be the consequences? How long will I spend in the hospital if I do that?" Young men don't do that. Hence, war is a young man's thing.

MarkyMark

Anonymous said...

It seems like most of disagreeing comments miss the part about Anna coming from an Orthodox Jewish perspective. Based on that viewpoint or a Christian one, what she says is spot on.

"Why should every woman be forced into the exact same mold?"

Because from a Christian/Jewish perspective there only is one mold. ONE mold for males and one for females. I know you think that is awful and oppressive, but we see it differently.

"Because they have a desire to learn and explore and ask questions."

Learning and asking questions is not confined to a university. If you can read, all you need are books and more books. There are enough people in our lives to ask questions with and get into discussion, especially so online with blogs/forums. Would you say that those who skip college don't care enough to learn or ask questions?

"I hope that someday your tunnel vision will be removed so that you can base your arguments and opinions on more than just theory and hearsay."

In other words, that she will renounce her faith and follow a wise professor's arguments and opinions. Also, she is not gathering her opinions by hearsay, but by direct experience. Anna writes about her life experiences, which leads to the conclusions she shares here.

Jennifer said...

Hi there, Anna. I've seen you around extensively but have not, until now, read one of your articles in detail. I avoided you because I got, somewhere along the line, the impression that you were a conservative too constrained in thinking for me. I'm happy to say I was wrong; your article (and others here) seem very well-written, coming from the heart of a gently wise woman. I thought you outlined your thoughts about feminism very well, and remained extremely humble and open-minded about the differences in both feminism and different women/families! We do disagree in some areas. Since each individual is different, I don't believe all people are called to be parents or all women called to be without jobs (especially single or childless women) nor do I believe that the husband's views are more important. But we're alike in our realization of the importance of family, the treasure of children, the sacrifice in marriage and the harms of feminism. I am an egalitarian, not a feminist; I believe men and women are rarely limited in their scope of serving God, and I am also aware that male and female are remarkably, beautifully and incredibly different. Together, we make an amazing picture of God (though of course not a complete one, since He's far beyond any human scope). In harmony, we serve God properly; it's harmony that feminism attacks. I can't believe the harm, the insanity and hatred so many have sunken to. THANK you, though, for pointing out the truth that the early feminists did have legitimate issues to be upset over! And they won. Problem is, they don't seem to know it; now that we have a largely egalitarian society, they're still fighting to uplift women, and the only thing that will do now is lift them OVER men.

I would like to say, the Jews of olden times did have many unfairnesses to women. There was the treatment of daughters like possessions that many fathers practiced, the act of "putting away" a wife that some hubsands did, polygamy (though in some cases this may have been necessary for reproductive purposes,) and of course the old Jewish prayer thanking God that He didn't create the man praying as a Gentile, a slave, or a woman. Still, when Jews had God in their lives, that was when they became great parents and spouses, like they are today.

Thanks again, Anna!

Mrs. Anna T said...

Jennifer,

That part of the morning prayers (thanking for not being created a woman) is very much misunderstood and misinterpreted. I would love to do a post about it but don't know whether time will allow in the near future.

Anonymous said...

"Because from a Christian/Jewish perspective there only is one mold. ONE mold for males and one for females"

Sorry honey, that IS oppressive and not in the least the perspective of every Christian or every Jew. Everyone's different, but what God makes unique and special, patriarchy makes mandatory and one-size-fits-all. Or rather, the kind of patriarchy that YOU espouse. Our God is far from that boring.

Jennifer said...

Hi Anna. If that prayer is indeed misunderstood, I'd be very happy to hear thoughts on it if you ever do have the time. Thanks for the heads-up!

Mark, didn't someone say on your blog (or maybe here) that women in Israel are NOT, in fact, put in physical fighting units?

Jennifer

sestamibi said...

@Jenny

Yes, it is true that SAHMs were a post-WW2 phenomenon, but did you ever stop to think that perhaps that was a goal of society prior to that which was finally achieved? The economic prosperity of the 50's finally allowed women to stay at home.

As for your maundering about "choice", and since this is a blog about Jewish issues, consider that our numbers continue to dwindle due to intermarriage and acceptance of homosexuality and feminist "choice". Compare Yitta Schwartz, an Orthodox woman in Brooklyn who had 18 children and has over 2,000 living descendants, with the barren and sterile Elena Kagan, for example. If there are any Jews left in America in 50 years, they will all be Orthodox and very patriarchal.

Maybe women shouldn't have that "choice."

Anonymous said...

Very good post!
You are a free thinker for this day! Following this way is not easy with all those rabid feminists allways calling you names for not following the official dogma they decreted. Allways trying to culpabilise you to push You to follow their insane way.

Rebecca said...

Hi Anna, thank you so much for your encouraging post. I am a victim of feminism, too. Has anyone ever counted the victims? No social studies about that, well I thought so ...

I live in Germany and here women are psychologically and financially pushed to leave their children in daycare (to create standardized, peer-pressured citizens of course). This is nothing but the tactics of a state that becomes more and more totalitarian. Feminists do not create personal freedom, they just replace individual male authority by collective state authority.

@Analytical Adam, I think your posts are confusing and do not really have much to do with Annas life or opinions at all.