In the ultimate denial of last week’s victory for Scott Brown in Massachusetts, some liberals are attributing the outcome to bias against women.

The state has already had a female governor (briefly), female lieutenant governors, and four women in the House of Representatives. A woman is currently president of the state senate. But Massachusetts lingers in the dark ages, longstanding prejudice holding women politicians such as Martha Coakley back, according to this story in today’s New York Times. Katie Zezima writes: 

“Welcome to liberal Massachusetts — we’re not,” said Mary Anne Marsh, a Democratic political consultant. “And if you didn’t believe it before, anyone who thinks that Massachusetts is liberal in light of Tuesday’s results need only look at the record and lack of success women have had in Massachusetts politics. That should just put it away for good.”

Brown ran a “macho, testosterone campaign.” Hormones determined the election results.

(more…)

Why are many middle-aged women today lonely, unhappy and childless? Because when they were young they were told they could have it all. Female fertility peaks in a woman’s twenties and her attractiveness to men does too, but they weren’t informed of these basic facts of nature.

Feminists continue to feed young women the myth that they can get married and have children whenever they want. Look at Sarah Palin’s words to her daughter Bristol on Oprah last week:

“I’m telling her, don’t think she has to find a man and marry young. The world is her oyster and she’s going to be able to pursue an education and career and avocation opportunities without a man.”

Some people have said that Mrs. Palin had her own children young because she saw through feminism and believed a woman’s commitment is to her family first. But this obviously is not the case. Here she is advising a daughter who already has a child to not form a family of her own right away or feel any need to get married young. When even supposed conservatives are stating these falsehoods, it is likely that the loneliness and unhappiness of the modern woman will continue to be nourished for many years to come.

  (more…)

One of the great conceits of feminists is that they introduced female sexual pleasure to the world. Before the sex experts of the 1970s, human beings were entirely in the dark about female anatomy and the nature of womanly pleasure.

Feminists must maintain their claim over this discovery. It’s a subtle form of blackmail. Women are told they cannot possibly enjoy sex unless traditional sex roles are overturned. (more…)

  Do modern women seem to you either desperately unhappy or manically triumphant? Do they seem to be hopeless or filled with the most unreal of hopes? Perhaps we need look no further for light on these strange contradictions than Dr. Laura Berman, the famous expert on female sexual health. Dr. Berman, who proves that wearing a white lab coat gives almost any statement an air of authority, openly advises women to have sex. She advises them to have sex with themselves: Exploring your body alone allows you to discover new sensations and retrains your mind to focus on pleasure rather than self-conscious or self-defeating thoughts. Masturbation is the best way to reach orgasm for a lot of women, not just those who struggle with orgasm ability. This may also be something to discuss with a therapist, if you’re not comfortable going through it on your own. If you are, check out Betty Dodson’s book on the subject, Sex for One: The Joy of Selfloving. Though it may take some work, the odds are that you’re capable of having the orgasms you want. Some people sincerely believe the sexual revolution has led to more pleasure overall for women. I disagree. A woman living in the lonely chamber of  "self-pleasuring" is not enacting her deepest dreams. It used to be promiscuity was sinful in a woman. Now sexual reticence is.

Hannon writes in the entry on women and romance:

I would be genuinely shocked if there are many women out there who could feign disinterest on being given these tender attentions. This can be tested in the platonic world also. Try giving a simple flower (not a bouquet) to a woman at work and experience her reaction. The absence of such civilized and kindly gestures– from fear of harassment charges or simply the effects of post-modern autonomy– strips life down to a level that is abnormally disconnected. (more…)

Kidist Paulos Asrat writes:

Have you heard about this horrible incident on Oprah yesterday, where Sarah Palin and Oprah discredit Bristol’s brave attempt to reconstruct her life by advocating and practicing abstinence?

It was a terrible moment in modern feminist history.

A young girl tries to go back to traditional (even religious, which I think is Bristol’s confident basis for her choice) principles, and two modern “career” women, one her own mother, shoot her down.

Bristol was brave, uncompromising, and silently suffering.

(more…)

Here’s an amazing fact. It is illegal in Quebec for a woman to officially adopt her husband’s last name. The Canadian province is so far advanced toward a socialist definition of family it’s surprising children aren’t taken from their parents at birth.

Jean Paul writes:

Reading about the current American struggles against the Marxist-feminist agenda, may I submit some amusing tidbits from Quebec, the most socialist part of a socialist country? Your readers may find them of interest and they might be the future news for the U.S. (more…)

Alex A. writes:

I remember reading in your blog once or twice that women, in contrast to men, crave romance. I have some questions I’d like to ask about what women mean by “romance” because, like many other men, I just don’t get it.

(more…)

If you visit Walden Pond in Massachusetts, it does not take much of a look around to realize that Henry David Thoreau, the famous author of Walden, was a fraud. His retreat in the woods was not a retreat at all, but right smack in the middle of nineteenth century suburbia. For an excellent look at Thoreau, the brilliant contemplative, see Leon Edel’s work Henry D. Thoreau. Edel wrote:

Of the creative spirits that flourished in Concord, Massachusetts, during the middle of  the nineteenth century, it might be said that Hawthorne loved men but felt estranged from them, Emerson loved ideas even more than men, and Thoreau loved himself. Less of an artist than Hawthorne, less of a thinker than Emerson, Thoreau made of his life a sylvan legend, that of man alone in communion with nature.          (more…)

   If there was any doubt that The New York Times is an enemy of the American people, it should be dispelled by the newspaper's analysis of the victory of Scott Brown in Massachusetts. There are three basic reasons Brown won: a mysterious lack of energy by Democrats; the deceptions and "stealth" of Republicans; and the petty materialistic concerns of Americans. Only ruthlessness and selfishness could possibly explain resistance to socialism. The relevant pieces can be found here and here and here.

  The Rev. James Jackson writes: I looked around for an image which would express a little of what you said about the clergy [here and here], and came up with this. It's a Carthusian monk entering the door of La Grande Chartreux. The picture is worth a thousand words I think.    Laura writes: Thank you. That's the perfect image of brutal force and oppression. It does nicely capture what I was saying. Think of all the women outrageously beaten back from the gates of monasteries where power-hungry men like this fellow observed extreme solitude and labor. This truly is where the idiocy of the male conspiracy theories is exposed. It's one thing to say women are oppressed because they're not presidents or Nobel Prize winners. It's another thing to say they're oppressed because they're not poor celibates.

“In the duel of sex, woman fights from a dreadnought and man from an open raft.” 

“A bad man is the sort who weeps every time he speaks of a good woman.” 

“A man may be a fool and not know it, but not if he is married.” 

“Love is the triumph of imagination over intelligence.” 

“No matter how happily a woman may be married, it always pleases her to discover that there is a nice man who wishes that she were not.”

(more…)

  Massachusetts is the most beautiful state in the union. Its hills, its harbors, and its homes; its whalers and sailors; its history and erudition; its tea - all are part of the colossal greatness of Massachusetts. The Boston accent is music to the ears. Harvard still retains some sense. Lexington and Concord reverberate with revolution. The cod is out of this world.  Stand on the dunes at Truro or tour the alleys of Edgartown, walk through Boston Commons or hike the Berkshires, take the ferry to Nantucket or eat lunch at Faneuil Hall. Tell me there are any finer sights in the world. How could we ever have forgotten its majesty and love of liberty? The Pilgrims landed in the right place. We are all Massachusettians now.

When a beautiful woman is photographed often enough, and her picture appears everywhere, she becomes a powerful cultural force. Such is the nature of female beauty.

Two women who typify this phenomenon are Princess Di and Michelle Obama. The deceased princess had spectacular clothes and the current first lady does too.

Interestingly, they are both viewed as women of great feeling,conspicuously compassionate and supportive of a politics of emotion. There seems to be an inexorable law of fashion under modern socialism: Power women dress with heightened exuberance, glorying in their vitality, while dress standards overall deteriorate. Children look much worse, as if they rolled out of bed in their pajamas, and most women and men do too. This is an age of the horribly dressed. But elite women are triumphantly feminine and wear some genuinely fantastic threads.

(more…)

  The centuries-old tradition of half-day schooling in Germany is breaking down as more women go to work. The trend will likely accelerate as a tipping point is reached. More women are likely to feel forced to work by changes in prices and wages and by a shift in cultural norms. Unless there is conscious social policy to resist the loss of the male breadwinner, this shift cannot be prevented in the modern world. This cultural revolution in one country relatively resistant to advanced feminism is presented by the New York Times as it is presented everywhere. The change is necessary for the larger economic good. But the departure of women from the home leads to economic losses and social decay in the long run. Birth rates fall, education and manners decline, marriage rates decrease, and divorce increases. The workforce of the future grows weaker. Any economically vital society cannot be sustained at high levels over the long term by absentee parenting and childlessness. Already, one third of German women in their mid-40s do not have children.

You’ve heard of marriages between Christians and Jews, but what about between those who believe in recycling yogurt containers and those who do not. That’s an interfaith affair too.

The New York Times explores marriages and romantic relationships across denominational lines in the environmental movement. It’s not pretty:

Linda Buzzell, a family and marriage therapist for 30 years who lives in Santa Barbara and is a co-editor of “Ecotherapy: Healing with Nature in Mind,” cautions that the repercussions of environmental differences can be especially severe for couples.

“The danger arises when one partner undergoes an environmental ‘waking up’ process way before the other, leaving a new values gap between them,” Ms. Buzzell said.

(more…)

A former president and major journalist claim that religion is oppressive to women and unless women are allowed to break into the remaining all-male clergy, the major organized religions will continue not just to oppress women religiously, but to indirectly cause the full-scale oppression of women in all areas of life. Any act of foul play by a man against a woman – and the implication is that there are many such acts of foul play – reflects this injustice. 

Now let’s examine the facts. Ever since the apostles abandoned their fishing nets by the Galilee, millions of men have followed in their footsteps, taking vows of relative poverty and often celibacy, consigning themselves to austerity and reproductive oblivion, and performing spiritual and material services, at all hours of the day, for their followers, at least half of whom have been women.

A small percentage of these men acquired power and tasted luxury. Popes and bishops fathered children and drank from vessels of gold, with the full imperial regalia provided by an established church. Anglican ministers lived in genteel and undemanding circumstances, able to pursue fossil collecting and literary studies. Televangelists became rich celebrities and famous theologians altered the intellectual landscape. But, by any measure, these men represent a minute fraction of the whole. The life of the average Christian cleric is not taken up by most Christian men for good reason. It is too hard. 

Now how is it possible to conclude that men have, out of animus, excluded women from this life, forcing them instead to taste the relative freedom of being mothers or daughters who were cared for by their fathers? It is only possible if one ignores the truth. Like so much of the prevailing opinion regarding male power, it is a myth. The exact opposite is true. Men have been the play things of anti-male prejudice, the widespread expectation that they must assume tasks women do not want or cannot perform and that they must give way to cultural prerogatives whatever they may be. Not only must they assume these tasks, they must perform them well, sometimes spectacularly well. (more…)