JAMES N. writes:

I am often reminded when reading your site of how, at the end of Tolkien’s The Return of the King, Frodo is thinking out loud about his memories of the Shire, and Sam remembers “Rosie Cotton dancing. She had ribbons in her hair. If ever I was to marry someone… it would have been her. It would have been her!”

Here, at what looks like the end of all things, after an enormous, draining quest and ultimate victory over the evil of Sauron, Sam’s thoughts are of a happy woman, dancing, “with ribbons in her hair.”

I don’t think most women know that about us (men). And if they were told, I don’t think most women would believe it.

But it’s the truth. To the ends of the earth, even to death, for that smiling woman who thought to put ribbons in her hair. For me. Read More »

TRACY writes:

I came across your site and read several of your posts. I am assuming that you are a white female, probably middleclass/upper middleclass. Quite frankly what you were writing and your opinions are appalling. I seriously, seriously suggest you see a therapist. No one can live with that much hate and negativity in their soul. 

Seriously.

Read More »

JAMES P. writes:

This Daily Mail article states that running marathons permanently damages the heart.

Just look at this picture of female runner Paula Radcliffe — she looks like a medical specimen, her breasts have all but disappeared, and she’s grimacing in pain. What a fine role model for the young women of today!

Laura writes:

This is an extreme manifestation of the compulsive athleticism of Western women. It’s the Vitalist Woman’s fruitless, frenzied, feverish expenditure of energy. Energy for the sake of energy. Pointless and nihilistic and vain. The West slides into demographic oblivion while women exercise their fertile years away.

Read More »

CATHERINE RAMPELL of The New York Times reported yesterday that almost four million women left the labor force in November: Read More »

NATASSIA writes:

I have written to you before on the topic of domestic violence and came across that old entry (September 2010) again today. I especially appreciated the wisdom of Jesse Powell’s comments, particularly his last one in that entry.

I have been facilitating for a Batterers Intervention and Prevention Program (BIPP) for nearly two years now, but I feel compelled to stop volunteering for this particular community program due to recent discoveries that give credence to the claims of a corrupt justice system. I also am disgusted with the Marxist feminism that has weaved it’s slimy way into everything in the domestic violence “industry.” I can’t attend a training seminar without being reminded of my inherent privilege due to my whiteness or heterosexuality or financial security. Read More »

KB writes:

Thanks for recommending Robinson Crusoe, I’m reading it on my iPad tonight. I’d read an abridged version of Crusoe as a schoolboy and it remained one of my favorite adventure stories. Nonetheless, its message passed over my head. Today, reading what you wrote in reference to Crusoe reached into my heart. “He did not pity himself…or lose sight of how much his own stubbornness had misled him. He came to realize that his trials were his salvation.”

I am not a housewife, simply an unmarried 25-year-old, male immigrant, now an American citizen. For almost eight years, I’ve been on my version of Crusoe’s island, cut off from society and my family. Read More »

I sometimes make serious mistakes in wording in the course of producing this site. Here is one example. In this post about a female reader’s anti-feminist awakening, I spoke of Robinson Crusoe’s gratitude and humility. I said, “Crusoe fell to his knees and thanked God for his island.”

But this leaves the entirely wrong impression. It suggests that Crusoe was simply grateful that he was saved after his ship went down in a storm. That was not my point at all. Crusoe was obviously glad he was not killed, but more importantly he was grateful for being shipwrecked. On the second anniversary of the day he swam ashore, Crusoe writes in his journal: Read More »

RITA JANE writes:

My father (the one who raised me) was rendered sterile from a teenage illness, which happened to many young men in the fifties and sixties. After he and my mother married, they pursued artificial insemination. My brother and I are biological half-siblings, conceived from two different donors. I grew up in a home with a happily married and functional mother and father, which is something many, probably most, donor children do not have. I can not stress enough how much I love my parents, but there is still a palpable loss at not knowing half of my own biological history.

This has been brought to the forefront of my mind because I recently moved to a new city. In setting up care with my new doctors, there is always the inevitable form where I am asked to fill in my family medical history. I write what I have written dozens of times before–“Conceived with donor sperm. No medical history for father’s side of the family.” None. I’m 23 years old, married and my husband and I are looking to have children. Some day, I will have to explain this to them, so they too can have a little asterisk on their medical records. Read More »

JOHANNA writes in response to this post:

I am another woman in the same position as Mrs. M: misguided by feminism, burdened with student debt, and looking for a way to develop a healthy family. I am 27 now, but I feel that I have to put off marriage and children a little longer for both financial and emotional reasons. It wasn’t until this year, largely with the help of this site, that I could finally see the problems inherent in feminism. 

I have always been a very conscientious person, which is why I pursued a university degree as everyone told me to do. I didn’t know myself, and I didn’t know how the world worked. I trusted my parents and other authority figures to lead me down the right path. It was this same conscientiousness that wouldn’t allow me to accept an ambitious career, and I went through several years of confusion. I couldn’t access the contradictions between my thoughts and emotions before because I accepted that having a career and financial independence were basic requirements for a successful life. I was conditioned very deeply to believe that I should never be dependent on anyone else, and had to look after myself. My desire to be a responsible person and find security trumped everything else. This completely ruled out the idea of being dependent on a husband in order to support children physically, emotionally, and spiritually.  Read More »

JESSE POWELL writes:

I just finished watching the 1981 movie, The Incredible Shrinking Woman starring Lily Tomlin. The movie is rich in metaphor, the overarching theme being the diminishing role of the housewife, who shrinks and disappears with the introduction of all the new conveniences and household products of the modern age. 

As the movie starts out, Pat Kramer (the character played by Tomlin who becomes “The Incredible Shrinking Woman”) lives an idyllic family life as mother to several noisy rambunctious children, who are busy playing with their toys. The busy day ends in a happy scene in which Pat tucks her children in bed. 

The husband, who is the bread winner, is an advertising executive. His job is to come up with names for new products and put together the commercials peddling all sorts of wonders to the modern housewife. The fakeness of the new products and the fakeness of the ads are emphasized. Read More »

MRS. M. writes:

Thank you so much for your site. It is proving to be a great source of courage for me as I plan my transition to homemaker in the future.

Robin commented on your last post: “It would take a radical leap of faith on the part of this mother to reverse this situation.”

This struck a chord with me, as I wish it was not such a radical leap of faith. Even on your own site, I find that the situation of women like me is not often addressed. I am yearning to be a homemaker, but we cannot afford it. Read More »

AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE reports:

Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Kozak on Friday backed a controversial regional bill proposed by the ruling United Russia party to issue fines for “propaganda of homosexuality.”

Speaking in Saint Petersburg, where city lawmakers have backed the bill in its first reading, Kozak said he supported the bid to introduce fines for “disgusting activity,” the Interfax news agency reported. Read More »

FATHERHOOD was elemental to the ancient Mediterranean peoples. To the Romans, paternal piety, judgment and self-sacrifice were the ground upon which civilization was formed. This famous 16th century painting by Federico Barrocci of Virgil’s Aeneas fleeing a burning Troy with his father, Anchises, on his back and his son and wife at his side depicts a mental outlook that was deeply familiar to the Roman nobility. The idea of father’s being so indifferent to his lineage that he would hand over his sperm to a technician in a lab, and just walk away, would have been not just technologically foreign to Romans, but barbaric and spiritually alien. Virgil would have considered us primitives.

FATHERHOOD by anonymous sperm donors is considered so unethical in other parts of the world that many countries restrict it or ban it altogether. In 2005, Britain ended the practice of anonymous sperm donation. Yet in the United States, the market is essentially unregulated. Only in a country that sanctifies the whims of adults over the immaterial needs of children could such an inhuman practice take hold as an acceptable way for an unmarried woman or lesbian to conceive.

Here is the powerful 2006 piece in The Washington Post by Katrina Clark about her unknown sperm donor father. Clark wrote:

When she was 32, my mother — single, and worried that she might never marry and have a family — allowed a doctor wearing rubber gloves to inject a syringe of sperm from an unknown man into her uterus so that she could have a baby. I am the result: a donor-conceived child.

And for a while, I was pretty angry about it.

I was angry at the idea that where donor conception is concerned, everyone focuses on the “parents” — the adults who can make choices about their own lives. The recipient gets sympathy for wanting to have a child. The donor gets a guarantee of anonymity and absolution from any responsibility for the offspring of his “donation.” As long as these adults are happy, then donor conception is a success, right? Read More »

JANE writes:

Do impersonal settings prepare a child for real life? Absolutely not! The most obvious deficit I see in these children is the way they act the same no matter where they are. They can’t differentiate.

I was a substitute teacher for seven years. Without fail I could determine who was a “day care kid” within the first hour of being in the classroom. I described them as “Islands unto Themselves.” So sad. It really is. I’d say it is the number one misfortune a child could bear. Read More »

BUCK writes:

Readers who watched the Zach Wahls speech may have noticed and viewed one of the rotating videos that popped up afterwards: “The Greatest Speech Ever Given” or “The Great Dictator Speech.” Charlie Chaplin, in his 1940 Hitler-spoof, dressed as Hitler [or the “Phooey” (Fuhrer)], gives a dramatic, rousing and well-delivered speech in which he pleads for the end of conflict, the unity of all mankind, social security for the aging, world democracy, and the end of national borders. Read More »