EMILY D. writes:

My husband and I are always sad when I go to my brother’s home. My sister-in-law is the typical “modern woman” and her marriage to my brother is a microcosm of the feminist absurdity you write about. She never cooks, and as a result her son is a very poor eater and is overweight, even though he is only three. It makes me sad to know that he never gets to make cookies with his mom and he hasn’t learned how to sit through a meal. They just give him juice all day to keep him quiet. The whole family was recently at a hotel together for an event, and when we were in a gift store, she found a gag-gift apron that said, “When I said ‘I do,’ I didn’t mean the cooking.” She showed it to my brother laughing, and I turned to my mom and said that apron is only funny if it isn’t true.

My sister-in-law works full-time, and the children have been in daycare since they were three months old. My nephew is a sweet boy, but his only interest lies in television and movies and what’s more disturbing is that when he is hurt or sad, he seeks comfort from males because his dad is the only one who really takes care of him. While his sister was being born, he stayed at my mom’s. My brother and I went to help. My nephew got upset and asked me to pick him up, but after I picked him up he reached for my brother saying, “I want a man.” My brother and I were really disturbed by this. His mother is a woman who did not change her name when she got married, did not combine bank accounts, and claims that because she carried her son for nine months, it is now the responsibility of my brother to do the rest. My mom saw her knowingly leave her son in a soiled diaper for over an hour, waiting for my brother to come home. My mom didn’t do it because she got into this stalemate where she thought it might appear rude if she did it herself.

My brother is a nice guy, but he seems sad all the time. It seems like these “modern” marriages that claim to be about partnerships are really just about exploiting men. The woman gets to work if she wants, she gets to have as many or as few children as she wants and then she gets to have someone else raise those kids. She doesn’t have to cook or clean, but gets the benefit of having a working husband. They seriously seem to be more like roommates than spouses. I wonder how many other marriages out there are like that. The more I see marriages like this, the more I am happy that my husband and I are choosing to live the way we do, even if it means we are quite poor at the moment.

One time my sister-in-law kept telling me about all these movies she likes, and I kept telling her I don’t really watch much TV these days. Finally, I said, “Look, I’m home with the kids all day and when my husband gets home and the kids are finally in bed, we really just want to have some quiet time to talk.”

Her response was that my brother often wants to talk when he gets home, but she just ignores him and watches “American Idol.” It broke my heart to hear that. Oh, and I’ll let you take a wild guess as to what is my sister-in-law’s opinion of the book Eat, Pray, Love.

                                                                                        — Comments —

Brandon B. writes:

In regard to the woman mentioned by Emily D., I just wanted to say that I’ve known many women like this, young and old, married and unmarried. And, God help me, if anything were to provoke in me a misogynistic animosity for all womankind, the way these women act would do it. But I know better because it wouldn’t be womanhood or feminity I’d be hating, but really the faux masculine narcississtic psychotic perversion of personality that characterizes the modern “womyn.”

Also, I found your thoughts in your “Letters from the Living” post to be beautiful. You’re right, modern life is so impersonal and as a result, there’s so much brokenness and alienation. So many people have no where to turn. Thank you for being there for these people. It’s something I try to do as well in my daily life.

God Bless and a Merry Christmas to you.

Laura writes:

Thank you. A Blessed and Merry Christmas to you.

Kristor writes:

I have known many women who are full-time professionals and mothers, and not one of them acts like Emily D.’s sister-in-law. On the contrary, they are all totally engaged with their kids, and want desperately to spend more time with them. The fault with that sister-in-law lies not with her employment (although that may well exacerbate the problem), but with the sister-in-law herself. If that woman were not employed outside the home, I would nevertheless expect her to be a terrible mother and wife. Expecting women to work outside the home is pernicious, no question about that; but this is an example of a deeper problem, that afflicts all of us, and always has, and always will: selfishness.

Laura writes:

Emily’s sister-in-law still might be a lousy wife and mother if she was unemployed, but she would not have the excuse and the shield that is provided by her professional life nor would she possess the economic power to leave her husband at any moment. Her children would be spared daycare and would probably be healthier.

This woman’s behavior is an example of a form of selfishness that is actively encouraged, even glorified, by our culture.

Most professional women are engaged with their children and love them. Many face conflict, as Krisor mentions. But there are negative consequences that go beyond the conditions in their own homes. An atmosphere of moral relativism and indifference is fostered by the narrow busyness of women in professions. Manners and morals suffer with the diversion of women to work. This is especially disastrous, on a cultural level, with the diversion of the energies of the most intelligent, those who can best defend our culture, rituals and common understandings. Society needs generalists and the counterbalancing force of restraint and reflection that non-working women provide. In short, the selfishness we see in Emily D.’s sister-in-law is inevitably more common in a world of women too exhausted to uphold standards of conduct.

As an aside, our intellectual life has also gravely suffered with this demoralization of society.

Nora writes:

Emily D.’s story is indeed very sad. In my experience, however, hardcore feminists are pretty outspoken about it, or they express opinions and attitudes that give away their position quite clearly to those around them. Didn’t her husband observe any of these characteristics when they were dating? I find it hard to believe that her attitude was a total surprise to him. Either she had certain extraordinary qualities (great physical beauty, perhaps) or, more likely, offered certain “benefits” that he valued so much at the time that he was willing to overlook her extreme feminism. [Laura writes: Yes, this is a very important point.]

When I was at university (mid-to-late 1990’s) , I remember that the girls with the most active social lives were the liberal feminist types. My more conservative friends and I rarely ever got asked out on dates even though we were average-to-pretty in terms of looks. There were times when I was tempted to turn liberal feminist too. They had all the fun and the male attention.

This is a truism, but maybe it needs to be said: Men who are serious about marrying women who will make good wives and mothers need to look for and date women with those qualities and practice the self restraint that such women require of them. My experience at university has given me little sympathy for men who take advantage of the sexual license feminists offer and who then later complain about how they ended up with a feminist wife. Ever wondered what becomes of those men who love to repeat that illogical proverb, “Date bad girls but marry nice ones?” My guess is that a good many of them find themselves in Emily D.’s brother’s shoes. Or not married at all.

Please follow and like us: