She’s demonstrated she can think and see reality as it is (at least in part). Which probably means she won’t be a feminist for long.
How did this actually get published in Huffington Post? I guess the editors weren’t really paying attention; they must not have even read the title: “When I Became A Mother, Feminism Let Me Down: We are functioning in a society that pretends women don’t grow up to become mothers” by Samantha Johnson
I am also a mother, and when it it came to preparing for motherhood, feminism let me down.
From the beginning, we tell young girls they can do anything they want to do, they can be anyone they want to be. They are given access to great education, encouraged to further their studies and attain higher degrees. We push them to push themselves, to break boundaries, to achieve what seems impossible, to break through corporate glass ceilings and professional roadblocks.
We tell them they can have it all. And they can.
Until they have a baby.
In the fight to ensure equality, as we preach to girls that they can — and should — do anything a boy can do, we are failing to prepare women for one of the greatest challenges so many of them will face; motherhood. We are teaching our young people that there is no value in motherhood and that homemaking is an outdated, misogynistic concept. We do this through the promotion of professional progression as a marker of success, while completely devaluing the contribution of parents in the home.
We then wonder why, when these girls become women who turn into mothers, they suffer from depression, anxiety and struggle to find a sense of self or identity. Are we truly helping women get ahead, or are we instead setting them up for a future of self doubt and a sense of failure?
For many women, their journey will naturally lead them to a period of stay in the home, caring for children. Whether that time is only a few months, or for several decades, they need to be prepared. They need to be given the skills they need to succeed and they need to be taught that their work is valuable.
We need to stop acting as though when we provide women with these traditional skills, we are taking away their power. Teaching women to care for children and a home empowers them. It prepares them for a path that may lie ahead. What really takes away their power, is telling them that doing so is worthless.
Feminism, it’s time to catch up. Our women deserve better.
Let’s tell them they can be anything they want — including a Mum, and let’s start telling them just how important that is.
Finally at least one feminist group has woken up to the insanity of supporting the “rights” of “trans-people” to use the bathroom of their choice. Girl Power on Girls’ Showers:
If you think a partnership between PETA and the red-meat eaters of America would be odd, try this one on for size: the Women’s Liberation Front (WoLF) and the Family Policy Alliance. That’s right. If there’s one thing President Obama’s outrageous bathroom mandate has accomplished, it’s bringing together all kinds of unlikely viewpoints. Feminists and Christians aren’t exactly natural allies, but when it comes to protecting the safety and privacy of America’s girls, count them as comrades. The idea that men and boys should be able to walk right into girls’ locker rooms, showers, and restrooms is so offensive that the two sides are teaming up to topple the Obama policy.
On Fox News’s “Tucker Carlson Show,” WoLF Board Chair Kara Dansky explained how objectionable the idea is. “We think that ‘women and girls’ are a meaningful category worthy of civil rights protection. If we define sex, under Title IX, to mean gender identity, what we’re essentially says is that ‘woman and girl’ can mean anyone who self-identifies as ‘woman and girl,’ which makes the category ‘women and girls’ meaningless…” Then, in a bit of irony, Dansky went on to talk about the unreasonable labels LGBT activists put on them for defecting. “We’re called transphobic bigots because we ask questions about gender identity,” Dansky said. “We’re asking questions and we’re standing up for women and girls. And that seems to be not permitted.” Welcome to our world! Without the facts and biology stacked against them, liberals have to resort to distractions and name-calling.
Several years ago I might have thought this seemed far-fetched, but it’s hard to ignore the mounting evidence. Steve Jalsevac outlines the “surprising real reason for the hate against Donald Trump,” tying many entities and movements together as a concerted effort to destroy what’s left of Western Civilization and Christianity. Is he right? What do you think?
Can Trump and his administration endure this near satanic, on-going assault? Many prayed for him during the election and he astonishingly prevailed. It is clear, despite the president’s personal flaws, that he is doing many right things. He would not be so intensely hated by all these people if he were not.
Even more prayers are needed to protect, guide and inspire Trump and his administration to stay the course and serve the Will of God. Prayers are needed for his continued conversion – especially on the homosexual/transgender rights issues.
There is also great need to pray for the physical safety of President Trump and his leadership team.
The election of Donald Trump has caused the decades-old war that has been waged on what is left of Christian civilization to be suddenly revealed for the ugly and evil war that it has been all along. Until now the war has been very one-sided, with the one-world progressives generally being the only ones fighting, as the relatively passive Christians and their non-Christian allies have given naive, timid and disorganized resistance.
The election of Donald Trump has suddenly brought everything into the open that was already underway. It has forced a necessary climax in this world-wide culture war.
This is good. But the “good” must now respond by finally starting to earnestly wage a defensive war to completely defeat the one-worlders. It is time to wake up to the reality of our collective and individual responsibilities in this international conflict between good and evil.
It is not possible to overstate the gravity of the situation.
Keep in mind that in 1976 (showing how long this has been on-going) Pope John Paul II, as then Cardinal Karol Wojtyla, warned,
“We are now standing in the face of the greatest historical confrontation humanity has ever experienced. I do not think that the wide circle of the American Society, or the whole wide circle of the Christian Community realize this fully. We are now facing the final confrontation between the Church and the anti-church, between the gospel and the anti-gospel, between Christ and the Antichrist.”
Donald Trump did not start the conflict. He has merely brought it all out into the open for us to respond to.
Finally a reasonable voice in the sea of hysterics over Trump’s immigration policy: Why Catholics Need to Take a Deep Breath Over Trump’s Migrant Ban
“Yes, every country has the right to control its borders, who comes and who goes,” [Pope] Francis said, “and those countries at risk —from terrorism or such things— have even more right to control them more.”
In a remarkably apt passage of his Summa Theologica, Aquinas noted that the Jewish people of Old Testament times did not admit visitors from all nations equally, since those peoples closer to them were more quickly integrated into the population than those who were not as close.
Some hostile peoples were not admitted at all into Israel due to their historical antagonism toward the Jewish nation and the threat they posed to Israel’s security.
Immigration policy can take a variety of forms, and Catholic teaching has never sought to canonize a particular arrangement as the best or only one. The underlying moral principles guiding such policies are an openness to the stranger and the foreigner, balanced by attention to the common good of the nation, its ability to fully integrate immigrants into its culture and in a special way the security and safety of its citizens.
Whether President Trump’s executive order is the best prudential decision in contemporary circumstances is a matter of legitimate debate. Should the number of temporarily banned nations be seven or five or twelve? Is a three-month moratorium the ideal time frame to get America’s leaky vetting procedures shipshape? These and many other questions can and should be asked and people of good will may disagree on the answers.
But this is a far cry from treating the executive order as an evil or reprehensible act. Such summary judgments have absolutely no basis in Catholic teaching and merely reinforce prejudices against Catholic prelates as too quick to make pronouncements that overextend their competence and expertise. They also risk appearing to proceed from personal or partisan concerns rather than the good of the nation.
The President’s first duty is to protect the citizens of the country. Doing so responsibly can entail sacrifices and demands courage and prudence. If Catholic leaders wish to disagree with the way President Trump carries this out, they should do so respectfully, appealing to principles of Catholic teaching and the natural law, and not through innuendo, accusation and insult.
To all those people crying about how the only way to show Christian love for refugees is to open our borders and let them flow in unimpeded, maybe you should stop judging those who disagree and take a look at the facts? Take a look at how little even the most liberal immigration policy affects the world’s poor and suffering.
Refusing to look at the facts does not make one compassionate, and neglecting to weigh the risks does not make one brave. If you think truly demonstrating love for our neighbor requires ignoring the truth, then you forget that not only is God LOVE, but He is also the TRUTH. The best way to help those in need is to accurately assess the situation and use your reason to find the most effective way to help the most people. Rushing in blindly because it makes you feel like you’re doing good, isn’t helpful; it’s stupid.
You know the scene in movies and books, where some well-meaning fool rushes into danger to save others and is immediately killed, thus saving no one and only wasting his own life? He’s not the hero of the story is he? The hero is the guy who pauses and assesses the situation, even if that means bad things keep happening while he gets his bearings and he seems cold and uncaring for a time, but then goes on to save the world. Sometimes the hero even ends up sacrificing his life to achieve this end, but not in a stupid, meaningless, and ineffective way.
Actually, this is beginning to sound a bit like God. Why didn’t He rush in to fix everything right after Adam and Eve were kicked out of the Garden? Or at least soon afterwards? But the He didn’t. He left his people wandering for years, sometimes in slavery, in sin, in darkness. He waited until just the right moment to sweep in and save His people by sacrificing Himself for their sake. Maybe everyone quoting the Bible to support their political views on immigration should take a closer look.
“Immigration can never be an effective or significant way to deal with the suffering people of the world. They have to be helped where they live… Let’s help them there”