Liberating Motherhood

SolomonVII · Feb 22, 2011

When looking for a life partner, if you chance upon a woman who is merely 'open' to the idea of marriage as one of many equal options to happiness, or who has no deep and abiding warmth to the ideal of motherhood as the most natural state that there could be, then run like hell in the other direction.

A good businessmen would never hire someone who is merely open to the idea of work under the optimal condition and if something good enough happens by, and neither should a man consider marrying anyones whose primary urge is not toward her husband and her family.

Meepy · Feb 22, 2011

Antigone said:
That's kind of insulting towards stay at home dads.

Not every woman has a natural drive to stay at home and take care of the children. Popular theory put aside, we don't really think with our uterus.

yea, but mothers have a special maternal connection with their children that is instilled in nature. They have nurturing instincts that are specifically designed for the raising of children.

A mother chick who leaves her babies in the nest alone for too long will die. The babies need her warmth and feeding. They have an instinctive connection. Its not much different in mammals.

Blackwater Babe · Feb 22, 2011

Antigone said:
That's kind of insulting towards stay at home dads.

Not every woman has a natural drive to stay at home and take care of the children. Popular theory put aside, we don't really think with our uterus.

Obviously if those evil, selfish women were'nt taking the jobs that are rightfully men's there wouldn't be any stay at home dads. What dad would want to devote himself to raising the children and running the household? REAL men don't do that! Real men go out to work, and hunt, and kill the mammoths!

Blackwater Babe · Feb 22, 2011

SolomonVII said:
When looking for a life partner, if you chance upon a woman who is merely 'open' to the idea of marriage as one of many equal options to happiness, or who has no deep and abiding warmth to the ideal of motherhood as the most natural state that there could be, then run like hell in the other direction.

A good businessmen would never hire someone who is merely open to the idea of work under the optimal condition and if something good enough happens by, and neither should a man consider marrying anyones whose primary urge is not toward her husband and her family.

And if a young lady meets a man who is merely "open to the idea" that she should be free to pursue her own interests, education and career beyond being a baby factory chained to the stove, then boy howdy sweetheart, I sincerely council her to run in the opposite direction as well.

Blackwater Babe · Feb 22, 2011

Meepy said:
yea, but mothers have a special maternal connection with their children that is instilled in nature. They have nurturing instincts that are specifically designed for the raising of children.

A mother chick who leaves her babies in the nest alone for too long will die. The babies need her warmth and feeding. They have an instinctive connection. Its not much different in mammals.

How wrong would I be in guessing that, if confronted by someone saying, for instance, that homosexuality is natural because it is observed in animals and birds, that Meepy is precisely the sort of person who would instantly go into a diatribe about how humans are more than mere animals
and should strive to rise above their base animal instincts, or words to that effect?

Meepy · Feb 22, 2011

Blackwater Babe said:
Obviously if those evil, selfish women were'nt taking the jobs that are rightfully men's there wouldn't be any stay at home dads. What dad would want to devote himself to raising the children and running the household? REAL men don't do that! Real men go out to work, and hunt, and kill the mammoths!

The same false teachers who try to dim the luster of conjugal faith and purity do not scruple to do away with the honorable and trusting obedience which the woman owes to the man. Many of them even go further and assert that such a subjection of one party to the other is unworthy of human dignity, that the rights of husband and wife are equal; wherefore, they boldly proclaim the emancipation of women has been or ought to be effected. This emancipation in their ideas must be threefold, in the ruling of the domestic society, in the administration of family affairs and in the rearing of the children. It must be social, economic, physiological: - physiological, that is to say, the woman is to be freed at her own good pleasure from the burdensome duties properly belonging to a wife as companion and mother (We have already said that this is not an emancipation but a crime); social, inasmuch as the wife being freed from the cares of children and family, should, to the neglect of these, be able to follow her own bent and devote herself to business and even public affairs; finally economic, whereby the woman even without the knowledge and against the wish of her husband may be at liberty to conduct and administer her own affairs, giving her attention chiefly to these rather than to children, husband and family. - Pope Pius XI "On Christian Marriage"

SolomonVII · Feb 22, 2011

Blackwater Babe said:
And if a young lady meets a man who is merely "open to the idea" that she should be free to pursue her own interests, education and career beyond being a baby factory chained to the stove, then boy howdy sweetheart, I sincerely council her to run in the opposite direction as well.

Yes, marriage as a form of slavery has been the message of feminism for over a generation now.

Feminism has freed the sisterhood from marriage and motherhood. That is why abortion is the primary and non-negotiable right that defines the preponderance of the movement. Biology is no longer destiny for womankind.

There is perfect clarity now. Carreer and individual self-expression and self-fulfillment can be a woman's primary identity, or wife and mother can be the primary way that she identifies herself.

Motherhood is too awesome and too difficult for any woman who places her own need for happiness and self-fulfillment over the relentless demands of family.
Motherhood is something that requires passion and committment that comes from the depths of one heart and soul. If it something that is considered as only optional, the committment required of it is obviously not going to be sufficient for the task at hand.

SolomonVII · Feb 22, 2011

Meepy said:
I agree partly, accept with woman needing a man to be fully happy. A husband is a great component in a wifes life and is the role of a helpmeet towards him. However, marriage is considered secondary to virginity. As Paul says a married person is partly considered witht he needs of their spouse which can sometimes hinder attention to God.

I do agree with the pill and the rebelling against monogamy and anger towards men. I think that Sex and the City show is a great example of women trying to act like men out of an anger for them. Especially that older blond one that always messes around. She always thinks shes liberating herself with all the men she goes out with. I cannot stand her.

Virginity is considered the pinnacle ideal within Christendom. Of which marriage makes a close second.

Paul said something to the effect of better to marry than to burn.
It would also follow that the necessary foundation for marriage and motherhood would be a burning desire for these.
Anything less is not reason enough for marriage.

Gwendolyn · Feb 22, 2011

For us women who are physically incapable having children - who have had hysterectomies, for example, or who have had to have their fallopian tubes removed - many of us won't be ordered toward child-rearing because we simply can't have children. We are not bound to adopt, so it is not necessary that we do. What else would you have us do than support society through working and building a better tomorrow? Motherhood is not ultimate fulfillment in this case, because motherhood is not physically possible. We are not lacking, we are not cold, and we are not selfish or evil or anti-man. We simply strive toward living good Christian lives while dealing with the lot that we have been dealt.

benedictaoo · Feb 22, 2011

You redirect your "motherhood" in another way that can be equally fulfilling.

benedictaoo · Feb 22, 2011

SolomonVII said:
Yes, marriage as a form of slavery has been the message of feminism for over a generation now.

Feminism has freed the sisterhood from marriage and motherhood. That is why abortion is the primary and non-negotiable right that defines the preponderance of the movement. Biology is no longer destiny for womankind.

There is perfect clarity now. Carreer and individual self-expression and self-fulfillment can be a woman's primary identity, or wife and mother can be the primary way that she identifies herself.

Motherhood is too awesome and too difficult for any woman who places her own need for happiness and self-fulfillment over the relentless demands of family.
Motherhood is something that requires passion and committment that comes from the depths of one heart and soul. If it something that is considered as only optional, the committment required of it is obviously not going to be sufficient for the task at hand.

I don't know about all that.

First- I thought it was the men folks out there that refers to marriage or their wives as the "ball and chain"

and have you ever watched the "biggest loser"? The somewhat older mothers on there can attest to how unhealthy (literally) it is to not put your self first. They go there not just to lose weight and win $250,000 but to repair their relationships becuase the didn't take care of themselves.

You can not meet the demand of the family if you are not caring for yourself, physically as well as emotionally.

Even Mother Theresa found out early on that she would be no good at feeding the poor if she did not feed herself first.

and Solomon, how open are you to at least considering what I have to say and not just reject it out of hand , just "becuase" or write me off as a feminist?

SolomonVII · Feb 22, 2011

benedictaoo said:
I don't know about all that.

First- I thought it was the men folks out there that refers to marriage or their wives as the "ball and chain"

and have you ever watched the "biggest loser"? The somewhat older mothers on there can attest to how unhealthy (literally) it is to not put your self first. They go there not just to lose weight and win $250,000 but to repair their relationships becuase the didn't take care of themselves.

You can not meet the demand of the family if you are not caring for yourself, physically as well as emotionally.

Even Mother Theresa found out early on that she would be no good at feeding the poor if she did not feed herself first.

and Solomon, how open are you to at least considering what I have to say and not just reject it out of hand , just "becuase" or write me off as a feminist?

Waht kind of rabbit hole are you taking me down, Alice?

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, or how in the world it adresses even in the slightest anything that I have said.

I am not talking about women either starving themselves or stuffing themselves until they bloat up to the size of whales.
What a ridiculous way to address what I am talking about.

"A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle".

Address that first, and then maybe we will see where we disagree.

SolomonVII · Feb 22, 2011

Gwendolyn said:
For us women who are physically incapable having children - who have had hysterectomies, for example, or who have had to have their fallopian tubes removed - many of us won't be ordered toward child-rearing because we simply can't have children. We are not bound to adopt, so it is not necessary that we do. What else would you have us do than support society through working and building a better tomorrow? Motherhood is not ultimate fulfillment in this case, because motherhood is not physically possible. We are not lacking, we are not cold, and we are not selfish or evil or anti-man. We simply strive toward living good Christian lives while dealing with the lot that we have been dealt.

Unchosen barrenness is normally a crushing blow for both the woman and her husband. As I have mentioned already, sacrificing ones sexual life to the cloth, or for homosexuals to sacrafice it in the name of righteousness is a huge sacrafice. There is a terrible price to be paid.

That would not be the case if marriage and motherhood were no big deal to ones ultimate personal happiness and fulfillment, if a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.

SolomonVII · Feb 22, 2011

Antigone said:
Two conclusions can be drawn from this reply:

1) you either can't or won't talk your way out of the situation, even when kindly asked for clarification, which therefor either invalidates your self-proclaimed mastery of the subject or makes you simply obtuse in a very existentialist way that I always thought was unbecoming to anyone identifying as Catholic.
2) you no longer get to comment on any lack of seriousness in my posts.

Your serious answer was in post 111.
You never even noticed.

Gwendolyn · Feb 22, 2011

The Church doesn't demand that infertile people either remain perpetually single or enter religious life. They may still marry. They only have to find spouses who understand that there are other ways to find authentic fulfillment, aside from parenthood.

SolomonVII · Feb 22, 2011

Gwendolyn said:
The Church doesn't demand that infertile people either remain perpetually single or enter religious life. They may still marry. They only have to find spouses who understand that there are other ways to find authentic fulfillment, aside from parenthood.

Does the name Sarah ring a bell?

Being open to new life is what is the teaching.

SolomonVII · Feb 22, 2011

SolomonVII said:
"... an old joke about Calvin Coolidge when he was President... The President and Mrs. Coolidge were being shown [separately] around an experimental government farm. When [Mrs. Coolidge] came to the chicken yard she noticed that a rooster was mating very frequently. She asked the attendant how often that happened and was told, “Dozens of times each day.” Mrs. Coolidge said, “Tell that to the President when he comes by.” Upon being told, President asked, “Same hen every time?” The reply was, “Oh, no, Mr. President, a different hen every time.” President: “Tell that to Mrs. Coolidge.”[3]

and when Mrs Coolige realizes how she is Calvin Coolige willingly choose to wear that ball and chain, the proper response from her would be to thank him for his fidelity, to appreciate and admire the man that places the need sof his family over and above his own nature.

The proper answer of a Mrs Coolige to being describe as a 'ball and chain' thusly, would be "Thank you".
That a man places his wife and family over and above his own nature, gratitude, appreciation, and admiration are the legitimate rsponses from the wife.

Antigone · Feb 22, 2011

SolomonVII said:
Your serious answer was in post 111.
You never even noticed.

I'm not sure to whose question that was an answer, but it certainly wasn't mine.

But then again, by now I don't expect you to answer it.

plmarquette · Feb 22, 2011

it isn't who wears the pants or what is in the pants, but who works together as a team, to care for children, to compliment the gifts of the other, to submit to God and walk in faith...

SolomonVII · Feb 22, 2011

Antigone said:
I'm not sure to whose question that was an answer, but it certainly wasn't mine.

But then again, by now I don't expect you to answer it.

Did you get the joke?
If you didn't, then it is called the Coolige effect.
Study up on it until, you get it.
Once you get it, my post was saying exactly that.

Liberating Motherhood

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

back in black

Legend

Legend

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

back in black

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

The Wrath of Whatever

Veteran

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency