LARRY B. writes: 

The right to vote is treated as an inseparable part of the American person today, as if it is the one and only guarantee of the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness that so many Americans hold dear. Never mind that well below fifty percent of the population votes in any presidential or congressional election. Equality is the most important thing. Today, young Americans are trusted with the vote, that hallowed right, before they’re trusted with alcohol or rental cars.

We recognize that persons have an inherent dignity, and that the unique manifestation of the divine in each person, the soul, entitles them to certain inviolable rights. These ideals were essential to the founding of the American nation and the derivative voting power apportioned to persons within the framework of the American republican system. However, the undeniable dignity of persons did not entitle all to equal representation in the government. (more…)

  THOUSANDS of state marriage licenses have been issued to homosexual couples in Iowa since April, 2009, when the state Supreme Court upheld a lower court's decision legalizing same-sex marriage despite majority opposition by voters. In last November's elections, three of the judges who made the controversial ruling were removed from office.  Freshmen legislators have vowed to introduce impeachment proceedings against the remaining four justices this year as a purely punitive measure. Republican Gov. Terry Branstad does not support the impeachment drive and it  appears to be a long shot with voters.  Impeachment would not restore traditional marriage. GOP legislators intend to propose a constitutional marriage amendment this year that would bar homosexual unions. The earliest the amendment could become law would be 2013. By then, same-sex unions will have been a reality for almost four years. Voters face the extra burden of denying "marriages" that already exist. The situation is bleak in Iowa. Yet freshman state senator Kent Sorenson has called the fight against same-sex unions "my generation's defining moment."

What magic is there in the rule of six that compels the snowflake to conform so rigidly to its laws? Here is a gem bestrewn realm of nature possessing the charm of mystery, of the unknown, sure richly to reward the investigator. 

These are the words of Wilson A. Bentley, a self-taught Vermont farmer who from early childhood was fascinated by the crystalline structure of snow and was the first person to photograph the snowflake. Born in 1865 and educated by his mother, he taught himself the craft of microphotography so that he could document the snow crystals that fell outside his home in the rural town of Jericho, which typically received about 120 inches of snowfall a year.

Bentley would gather snow on a black wooden tray, removing the excess with a feather duster. He then separated the crystals with the filament of a broom. Having attached a microscope, his only serious piece of scientific equipment, to a bellows camera, he glued the snowflakes to microscopic slides and photographed them inside in an unheated room, with light from a window for illumination. He washed his negatives in a nearby brook. He eventually amassed more than 5,000 microphotographs, starting with his first, made in 1885 when he was 20 years old. They appeared along with his explanatory articles in journals and in a book, Snow Crystals, published the year of his death in 1931. (more…)

THE situation of the woman who is forced to abandon her children, her duties to her husband and her home under pressure from a husband who wants the income she can earn is sad and all too common. This occurs routinely. It is understandable if a family is faced with absolute destitution with no food or roof over their heads. But typically that is not the case. A husband may out-and-out demand that a woman work even though the family can get by with less or he may place constant subtle  pressure on a wife by denying the value of her job at home and never praising or recognizing her work. He may invisibly destroy her morale.

What can a woman do in this situation? Lydia Sherman has excellent advice. She writes: (more…)

READER N. writes:

There are a number of things in the modern church that are appalling, and one of them is applause. I first encountered this back in the 1990s at a friend’s wedding in a Protestant “Bible-church.” Upon completion of the ceremony, the pastor turned to the rest of us and said, “May I present, Mr. and Mrs. R. J.,” which seemed a bit odd, but the burst of applause that greeted this was stunning.

Why is applause in any Christian church heresy? Because applause is a sound that people make in order to send the following message:

“I am pleased with your performance for me.”                     (more…)

KILROY M. writes:

 A commenter at VFR had this to say about the behaviour of people at a solemn ceremony: 

FITZGERALD writes:

I also cringe when I hear the term “headship” used to describe what is natural male leadership in the family and society. To me, this word represents a perversion of the proper role of men which is husbandry.

The natural role of men isn’t dictatorship, but a careful and loving interplay with family and community. The man leads and tends a garden, whether it be wife and children, a congregation, or an entire people. Headship seems to be a misappropriation of terms with far too much emphasis on the wielding of power, and not enough on the cultivation and interplay between the parties. Men are called to be leaders, but “headship” smells of tyranny not leadership. Sadly, when I hear the term headship used it is almost always in the context of some thug of a guy who is pushing his wife and children around in an incoherent and selfish manner. (more…)

THOMAS F. BERTONNEAU writes:

Nick, reviewing the characteristics of women who advertise for mates through Internet matchmaking enterprises, amusingly observes that, “The supreme goal of women my age appears to be to start an NGO in a Third World country.” (more…)

JAMES H. writes:

Every time I hear the term “headship” I cringe. Not that I disagree with the idea (I wouldn’t be at your site were that the case), but that so unartful and clumsy an expression is employed to capture the essence of what you are saying. 

I have an ex-brother-in-law who used to employ “headship” as a battering ram to oppress my wife’s sister. He convinced her to place her entire net worth at his disposal and ultimately in his name in the name of “headship.” He insisted on her disconnecting from her family in the name of “headship.” He objected to her developing friendships outside of those he specifically approved in the name of “headship.” He insisted on building, with her money, an extravagant home including an infinity edge pool in the name of “headship.”  (more…)

NICK writes, in response to this entry:

And so was born The Thinking Housewife Matchmaker Service! I am most grateful, but do not pass the “Christian” requirement. (Which doesn’t mean I wouldn’t still be interested, of course….)

Since I wrote you last, I have decided to sign up for a few online dating sites, mostly out of curiosity. I could not imagine finding a serious mate on, say, OKCupid, but anything is possible. In poring over many hundreds of profiles in the past few days, a few things stand out to me. (more…)

DRINA writes:

I just wanted to say I enjoyed your post on Oliver Twist. I read the book for the first time when I was substitute teaching sophomore literature a few years ago. I couldn’t believe I hadn’t read it before then, and I was surprised at how much I enjoyed it. Since then, especially over the last year, I just can’t seem to get enough of Charles Dickens! My favorite so far is David Copperfield. The subplot concerning the old professor and his young wife was just as good as the main plot of Copperfield himself. I’m taking a brief hiatus to read some other things, but one of my goals is to read all of Dickens’ works. (more…)

EXPATRIOT writes:

I’ve long thought that coeducation is one of the major factors behind the dysfunction of the modern world. Just as important as the academic problems it causes are the socio-sexual ones. (more…)

  THE TRULY interesting thing about Oliver Twist is that no matter how much brutality and common vulgarity he encounters, his exquisite sensitiveness remains unchanged. This unfortunate bastard is raised under the most heartless of conditions in a parochial poorhouse, sold as an apprentice to an undertaker and then waylaid by a band of thieves, living in London's "foul and frowsy dens, where vice is closely packed." Yet through it all, he radiates a persuasive charm, sweetness and innocence. He possesses unshakable innocence. This is why Mr. Brownlow loves him and Mrs. Sowerberry hates him. His vengeful half-brother Monks senses his goodness, which makes Monks all the more determined. That is the compelling theme of Charles Dickens' immortal tale: a sensitive creature in a coarse world. A bureacratic world. A thieving world. A world where Mr. Bumble and Noah Claypole feel at home. Oliver's youthfulness and sensitiveness are such that he cannot assert himself. He can only be good. Who can save him? Will it be great public projects of reform? Will it be new political parties or social movements? In the end, the thing that saves Oliver is other sensitive individuals. Who but Oliver would motivate the martyrdom of a shabby whore? Nancy has no real reason to give her life for Oliver other than his goodness, which calls to mind her own lost innocence. Though she has been mistreated all her life, though she has lived "in the midst of cold and hunger, and riot and drunkenness," Nancy is conscious of her own complicity. She is sensitive in a way that is…

 NICK writes:

I am donating to thank you for your very important work at The Thinking Housewife.

I’m a young, unmarried man (31), so I am beginning to feel the effects of the malaise you so meticulously describe. Meeting a family-oriented woman in the world of “young professionals” (where I find myself) is nigh impossible. Why don’t women want families anymore? What’s so great about that which they would have instead? (more…)

LAST MONTH, a Congressional panel recommended that the Defense Department eliminate all restrictions on women serving in combat units. In doing so, the panel ignored the real-life experiences of women in the military. Here is an interesting description by one woman of her stint in boot camp in 1999. Catherine L. Aspy writes:

Combat is about war-fighting capacity and the morale of the unit. Here physical strength can be a life-and-death issue. And that is why the physical disparities between men and women cannot be ignored.

Physical differences in strength and endurance are not, of course, the only reason women should be barred from combat in any country serious about its defense. No amount of engineering or training can prevent men and women from forming exclusive bonds that interfere with group morale and cohesion. Why does this even need to be said? This is a phony debate. How can one sustain a debate when one side refuses to ackowledge basic realities? (more…)

ALAN writes:

Regarding lowered standards in public libraries, which were discussed here , here, here and here:

James Hilton’s 1941 novel Random Harvest stands today on library shelves next to a book called 10 Crack Commandments.   

Why is that?  It is because rubbish like 10 Crack Commandments is an example of the “diversity” Americans are now commanded to celebrate.  It is because people who now run public libraries are appeasers and acquiescers.  Literature and garbage are equivalent – that is what they are taught in Marxist-dominated colleges and universities and what they swallow whole.  By design or default, they now agree to accept trash fiction that would not have been purchased by any American library in 1959.    (more…)

MODERN EDUCATION is based on a false assumption: that boys and girls learn at the same rate and in the same way. In fact, the sexes develop differently and possess distinct ways of viewing reality from an early age, as anyone with the slightest experience with children knows. This common sense has been so stifled we need major research to tell us what we refuse to acknowledge from experience.

Simon Baron-Cohen, the British psychologist who specializes in sex differences, recently wrote:

We know that the male brain is on average 8 per cent bigger than the female brain, even at as early as two weeks of age. But probably more important is that girls’ brains tend to develop faster than boys’. We know from studies using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) that girls peak about four years earlier than boys in terms of when they reach their maximum total brain volume and about two years earlier in terms of when they reach their maximum amount of “grey matter” in the brain. This important discovery tells us that, on average, girls mature at very different rates from boys.

(more…)

A FEMALE READER writes:

I just wanted to chime in regarding the article “Regrets of a Stay-at-Home Mom” that was discussed here. I cried while I read it. I had a “career” that paid a large salary, my husband also makes much more than the average income. When we had our daughter, I returned to work – not for money, but for “security” and “having a cushion of savings.” It was the very definition of a disaster. I was depressed and angry and felt like I never had enough time with my daughter. The time I did have with her was when I was tired. I really didn’t have any time for my husband or for me. (more…)