Watching the democratic party protect their desire to do as they will with their female loyalists has brought about a couple of different articles. I found Klavan’s “The Sad Fate of Democratic Women” interesting. Here is a quote:
So in other words, Democrat women are willing — even eager — to abet the bad behavior of men as long as those men support the Democrats’ theoretically pro-woman agenda of legal abortions and taxpayer-funded health care.
But isn’t it possible that the agenda and the behavior are connected? That is, ladies, maybe it’s not a coincidence that the same men who want to ensure your unborn child can be turned into medical waste — or who feel your vote (not to mention your sexual favors) can be bought in exchange for “free” birth control … The Kennedys, the Clintons, the Weiners, the Spitzers — maybe they have a natural home in a party that is always thinking of ways to transform female sexuality into a meaningless mechanism, and devising ways to fund that transformation with other people’s money.
I have come to realize that in the world we live in to find a woman who would forego career and independence to be a biblical helpmate to her husband as well as making her family her prime exercise of her abilities and love is to truly find what the bible describes as a woman whose “worth if more than rubies”.
I dare say that most women have traded the value of rubies for cheap costume jewelry. Therefore, the question starting the section of the proverbial woman in Proverbs 31: “Who can find a virtuous woman?” becomes ever so relevant in the day we live in.
The other article I read was about a German named Spengler. David Goldman would write under the name of “Spengler” for the Asia Times for years before identifying himself. I found his writing insightful an penetrating and continue to read him now that he writes under his real name. Spengler had written “The Decline of the West” in 1918. It was a study of the rise and fall of civilizations and I found it interesting that David Goldman would write in a similar vein in his “How Civilizations Die (and why Islam in dying too)”.
So I had a reason for all of this and it was this; Spengler described the evolution of women from women of the earth (homemakers) to women of the air (independent) as a marker of the descent of the civilization, or a precursor to the dictatorial control of a dying civilization. Here is a quote:
(This from the article) He also predicted the West’s coming decline in birthrates brought about largely by the advent of feminism, also a feature of Spengler’s civilizational phase. Whereas the advent and success of feminism in the West is heralded in our time as a sign of civic progress, Spengler’s study of other civilizational cycles convinced him that it was just the opposite—a reflection of cultural decline, largely because it curtailed the production of children. As he puts it:
The primary woman, the peasant woman, is mother. The whole vocation towards which she has yearned from childhood is included in that one word. But now emerges the Ibsen woman, the comrade, the heroine of a whole megalopolitan literature from Northern drama to Parisian novel. Instead of children, she has soul-conflicts; marriage is a craft-art for the achievement of “mutual understanding.” It is all the same whether the case against children is the American lady’s who would not miss a season for anything, or the Parisienne’s who fears that her lover would leave her, or an Ibsen heroine’s who “lives for herself”—they all belong to themselves and they are all unfruitful.
Here is an article that describes Ibsen women with this quote:
This becomes more evident if you look at the characters and story lines from both plays. Susan Torrey Barstow best summarized Ibsen’s characters in her article “Hedda is all of us: Late-Victorian Women at the Matinee“. She writes,
…the contemporary, middle-class heroines of Ibsen and his followers seemed to live not in a fantasy realm, but in the spectators’ own world. Ibsen’s heroines do not face starvation, shipwreck, or attack by wild animals; instead, they struggle against the thralls of domesticity and the confines of traditional femininity. Their trials are the ordinary, familiar trials of pregnancy, childbirth, the double standard, sexual frustration, and, perhaps above all, boredom. When strong men appear, they tend to threaten the Ibsen heroine rather than offering her rescue and security.
The all defining verse of the war between men and women:
16 To the woman He said:
“I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception; In pain you shall bring forth children; Your desire shall be for your husband, And he shall rule over you.” NKJV
My marital advise has always been to make love, not war but that requires the parties to put their weapons down, forgive each other and…and…maybe I am being foolish in thinking that a man and woman can love each other for a lifetime emulating the biblical models of a husband and a wife. Oh, that’s right the world does consider the Word of God to be foolish. I guess I will continue on in my foolishness.