EMILY HALL writes:

I found this article on WSJ.com and immediately thought of you. The author did a study of 75 very successful (by modern, feminist standards) women and was surprised by ” how deep (and surprisingly traditional) the bond” between father and daughter is. She goes on to point how ‘how far’ women have come from the days of hunter-gatherer livelihood and is, again, surprised that no matter how successful, business savvy or high-up in the corporate hierarchy a woman is a large percentage base their perception of success off of “the reaction of their father.”

Maybe we could get some of the father’s to start reacting a bit more enthusiastically when their daughters choose to be mothers, instead of CEOs. Then we might redeem a few more of our families and “surprise” a few less journalists.

Laura writes:

Just in case Father’s Day makes us wistful or nostalgic for the time when fathers were fathers, Peggy Drexler reminds us there’s no going back. For the liberal, even Father’s Day – or I should say, Dad’s Day – becomes an occasion to celebrate the superiority of women and to delight in social upheaval. A day that honors the family becomes a day to celebrate its disappearance. Drexler tells us that women are now much more competent and intelligent than men. They earn gobs of money and besides they are already so entrenched in positions of power, there’s no turning the clock back.

But there’s still a place for dads. It may be hard to believe, but the father-daughter bond is surprisingly still important. “Clearly independent” women even have dads of their own. See how enlightened they are!

Ms. Drexler unfortunately cannot dredge up an example of a decent father. Fathers are “cold and disinterested,” “neglectful or abusive,” “prone to severe mood swings and frightening behavior,” “indifferent,” “absent,” and the cause of “grievous harm.” One of the powerful, “clearly independent” women Drexler interviews was positively influenced by her father even though “while separating from her mother, he made a ‘statement’ by dragging furniture from the house to the front lawn and setting it on fire.” He also told his daughter “that he never really wanted her.”

Nevertheless, fathers are “potent and enduring” (about as potent and enduring as a congenital disease.) They also function as what Drexler refers to as a GPS, or gender positioning system.  You weren’t sure what dads were for? Now you know. They help women navigate the pathways of power and love. Dear Dad, I just knew you had some use. You help “clearly independent” women orient themselves in a world without, I mean with, men. 

Laura writes:

A father who truly oriented his daughter in a world of men would encourage her femininity. He would exhibit all the hopes for her that William Butler Yeats did in his poem, “A Prayer for My Daughter:” 

 In courtesy I’d have her chiefly learned;
 Hearts are not had as a gift but hearts are earned
 By those that are not entirely beautiful;
 Yet many, that have played the fool
 For beauty’s very self, has charm made wise,
 And many a poor man that has roved,
 Loved and thought himself beloved,
 From a glad kindness cannot take his eyes.

 May she become a flourishing hidden tree
 That all her thoughts may like the linnet be,
 And have no business but dispensing round
 Their magnanimities of sound,
 Nor but in merriment begin a chase,
 Nor but in merriment a quarrel.
 O may she live like some green laurel
 Rooted in one dear perpetual place.

[….]

 And may her bridegroom bring her to a house
 Where all’s accustomed, ceremonious;
 For arrogance and hatred are the wares
 Peddled in the thoroughfares.
 How but in custom and in ceremony
 Are innocence and beauty born?
 Ceremony’s a name for the rich horn,
 And custom for the spreading laurel tree.

                       — Comments —

Diana writes:

I didn’t find anything particularly anti-father in Drexler’s WSJ article. It’s a fact that some fathers are quite bad and this has nothing to do with feminism. In the article, Drexler was simply pointing out that the relationship with the father was very important to a positive sense of self in a woman.

Having said that, the name Peggy Drexler rang a bell. She is the author of a bogus book about the non-importance of fathers in the lives of boys. On page two of this article, you’ll see that she bases her conclusions on 32 familes, 16 of which are lesbian-headed. Yep, 16 families. All is hunky dory!

Drexler is a fervent same-sex “marriage” proponent.

Although she is habitually referred to as a “research psychologist,” PubMed indicates she has one, count ’em one, peer-reviewed article to her name. Well, I guess that’s enough to get her foot in the
psychologist door.

Meanwhile, a peer reviewed article concludes that children raised in homosexual environments are more likely to grow up to be homosexual. Who’da thunk?

Meanwhile, she is married, and her kids have got a father. Enough. She disgusts me. The society that elevates her to a position of authority and which rewards her is shameful and contemptible.

Laura writes:

I didn’t find anything particularly anti-father in Drexler’s WSJ article.

It was not anti-father so much as a very lame defense of fathers. Would a male journalist get away with calling mothers “gender positioning systems” or with noting maternal abuse and neglect several times in the course of a Mother’s Day article?

Alissa writes:

Meanwhile, she is married, and her kids have got a father. Enough. She disgusts me. The society that elevates her to a position of authority and which rewards her is shameful and contemptible.

It’s interesting how some people who advocate single fatherhood, single motherhood, IVF for homosexual couples and any other ills imaginable and yet seldom practice it themselves in their own lifestyle. Reminds me of some white liberals (SBPDL calls them SWPL whites or DWLs) and their fervent advocacy for diversity, miscegenation and multiculturalism while living in gated communities in their own segregated schools and neighborhoods, homogenous families and denouncing the “racist conservatives”. I believe you did a post about the cost of white flight in destroying the white family? Well white liberals keep the housing prices extremely high which naturally locks minorities out (save some Jews and a couple of Asians). Lawrence Auster showed a picture of the rally by Jon Stewart, a hero to young white liberals, almost a year ago I believe, which shows how racially segregated they are. Now this is true hypocrisy, not the “conservatives are hypocrites” mantra that liberals are fond of to dishing out at conservatives while scolding Weiner. I would prefer a total liberal advocating liberalism with no exceptions and personally suffering the consequences instead of the “walk like a conservative, talk like a liberal” of some establishment liberals.

Please follow and like us: