This reminds me, in a good way, of the hidden structural similarity of capitalist and communist systems. Both reduce man to the Homo economicus, a soulless fleshbot intended for purely utilitarian ends. By stripping the subject of everything that is not objective, which is too say externally observable and measurable, the essence of the subject is erased and only a parodic shell remains.
Interesting article. Perhaps I haven't been exposed to the abuse of the trad movement that you complain about. I guess I feel very differently though.
For a young lady to reject, for example, college, in favor of pursuing marriage and family is the height of an individual and soulful choice. To WILL any thing is to reject all that is inconsistent with your choice. Kieerkegaard's definition of a knight, in fact, is someone who focuses the whole of their being on a single desire and gives up everything else for the One Thing of ultimate value, which would certainly seem to include a woman who gives up the world for her family.
All of the most traditional women I know are very into the reading of old books, too difficult for most in our society now, and many enjoy shooting or athleticism. So I guess we have just encountered very different strains of this movement. Certainly 'mommy bloggers' of any stripe can be obnoxious though, but some would say that of other types of bloggers too.<<
Love is the key element in any successful relationship. The World has confused Love with just material pleasure. We need to rediscover the beauty, the depth and the importance of true sacrificial Love.
I'd love for you to write more about the profane versus the sacred and their relation to the market economy. As I've aged, I've come to think that my job as a mother and a woman is to manage mine and my children's exposure to the market. I see so many "trad" moms with instagram accounts that expose their children to scrutiny under the guise of mommy blogging. They seem to embrace their "femininity" while selling private family moments for likes.
We are so lost and nothing is more symtpomatic of this than our understanding of and treatment of women. However, I think this duality of ignorance you point out might be be understood on a spectrum. While the "trad" undertanding is superficial and can be clownish, the leftist understanding is subversive and demonic.
I think you have highlighted something really key to the discomfort I feel about the "trad" meme that's been gaining popularity. I think there should be narratives and memes that make the so called "trad" life choices of marriage and children the most common choice, but the collectivist treatment of "women" goes against the individualist philosophy that I think should undergird what we do. How to blend the need for community with the requirement of individual responsibility is the great tension that I don't think any real philosophy can solve, given my beliefs about the fallen nature of humanity and nature. But we can at least try to avoid jumping off the cliffs on either sides.
“...life will put her in a position where the caricature can no longer hold her and the illusion cracks.” I like the dimension you opened up to at the end.
"The right wing trad movement’s discouragement of women from pursuing education of any hobbies that are “masculine” stems from their belief that these activities will “masculinize” her."
But this is, in fact, true. We become what we do. If you spend a lot of time on athletic pursuits, you become an athlete. If you do drugs and get high all the time, you become a druggie. That we become what we do is taught in the Bible, by C.S. Lewis, psychology (see Jordan Peterson on the subject) and understood as traditional wisdom. If you want a feminine, nurturing wife, marry an elementary school teacher; if you want a more masculine wife, marry a lawyer.
This does not mean the traditional occupations and pursuits of one sex should be forbidden for the other sex. It's simply a matter of degree. No man is 100% masculine, and no woman is 100% feminine. We each have degrees of the opposite sex, but the more we cultivate the actions of the opposite sex, the more we become like the opposite sex. Again, such should not be forbidden, but at the same time the fact of this dynamic should be recognized and not denied.
I don't know if I would agree that traditionalism reduces women to a baby factory with legs and arms to clean and cook. I don't find Chivalry represented here which, I would think, is an important part of traditional view of women.
Miss Lilly, you totally mischaracterize the traditional view of women, then blast it with the same bazooka you use against feminists. Rather than using the feminist view of traditionalism, perhaps you could discover real traditionalism's view of the world...not just women? Feminism is a historical "flash", here today, gone by noon. Traditionalism has withstood the test of time. Learn it, embrace it, love it.
I think Megha that if we take the Trad woman presented as attempting, or purporting, to describe a complete femininity then your criticism is totally justified. That is, if a woman says, 'My femininity has content and meaning because of my beautiful milk jugs that delight my husband and satisfy my baby', then without a doubt that lady has missed something. But, if we take the Trad woman as a polemic, an invective and contrast to the Trans woman, then I am inclined to be more generous to her. If the woman says, 'My femininity has content and meaning, as compared to your Trans femininity which is empty and meaningless, because your breasts are fake and useless whereas mine are the vessels of divinely ordained wifehood and motherhood. I am to my family an echo of Eden, you are a presentiment of Dystopia'. It may be that the comparison is unstated and implied, but perhaps context is meant to evoke the comparison?
Where do they find these people? This is liberal gibberish written by a woman who apparently doesn't have a life. It appears she has precious few real world experiences. If she did, she'd cite them in this article. I choose to participate in reality, not quote someone else's.
This reminds me, in a good way, of the hidden structural similarity of capitalist and communist systems. Both reduce man to the Homo economicus, a soulless fleshbot intended for purely utilitarian ends. By stripping the subject of everything that is not objective, which is too say externally observable and measurable, the essence of the subject is erased and only a parodic shell remains.
Interesting article. Perhaps I haven't been exposed to the abuse of the trad movement that you complain about. I guess I feel very differently though.
For a young lady to reject, for example, college, in favor of pursuing marriage and family is the height of an individual and soulful choice. To WILL any thing is to reject all that is inconsistent with your choice. Kieerkegaard's definition of a knight, in fact, is someone who focuses the whole of their being on a single desire and gives up everything else for the One Thing of ultimate value, which would certainly seem to include a woman who gives up the world for her family.
All of the most traditional women I know are very into the reading of old books, too difficult for most in our society now, and many enjoy shooting or athleticism. So I guess we have just encountered very different strains of this movement. Certainly 'mommy bloggers' of any stripe can be obnoxious though, but some would say that of other types of bloggers too.<<
Love is the key element in any successful relationship. The World has confused Love with just material pleasure. We need to rediscover the beauty, the depth and the importance of true sacrificial Love.
I'd love for you to write more about the profane versus the sacred and their relation to the market economy. As I've aged, I've come to think that my job as a mother and a woman is to manage mine and my children's exposure to the market. I see so many "trad" moms with instagram accounts that expose their children to scrutiny under the guise of mommy blogging. They seem to embrace their "femininity" while selling private family moments for likes.
We are so lost and nothing is more symtpomatic of this than our understanding of and treatment of women. However, I think this duality of ignorance you point out might be be understood on a spectrum. While the "trad" undertanding is superficial and can be clownish, the leftist understanding is subversive and demonic.
I think you have highlighted something really key to the discomfort I feel about the "trad" meme that's been gaining popularity. I think there should be narratives and memes that make the so called "trad" life choices of marriage and children the most common choice, but the collectivist treatment of "women" goes against the individualist philosophy that I think should undergird what we do. How to blend the need for community with the requirement of individual responsibility is the great tension that I don't think any real philosophy can solve, given my beliefs about the fallen nature of humanity and nature. But we can at least try to avoid jumping off the cliffs on either sides.
Ever read Eugene Onegin? It could perhaps be read as an example of early 19th century feminism. Russian culture often presents parallels to the west.
“...life will put her in a position where the caricature can no longer hold her and the illusion cracks.” I like the dimension you opened up to at the end.
"The right wing trad movement’s discouragement of women from pursuing education of any hobbies that are “masculine” stems from their belief that these activities will “masculinize” her."
But this is, in fact, true. We become what we do. If you spend a lot of time on athletic pursuits, you become an athlete. If you do drugs and get high all the time, you become a druggie. That we become what we do is taught in the Bible, by C.S. Lewis, psychology (see Jordan Peterson on the subject) and understood as traditional wisdom. If you want a feminine, nurturing wife, marry an elementary school teacher; if you want a more masculine wife, marry a lawyer.
This does not mean the traditional occupations and pursuits of one sex should be forbidden for the other sex. It's simply a matter of degree. No man is 100% masculine, and no woman is 100% feminine. We each have degrees of the opposite sex, but the more we cultivate the actions of the opposite sex, the more we become like the opposite sex. Again, such should not be forbidden, but at the same time the fact of this dynamic should be recognized and not denied.
Well said! The root of our perverted views on women, and most other things for that matter, is an excessively materialistic view of the world.
Excellent article. I've read enough of your posts that I've now felt obliged to pay for the privilege.
Thank you for this!
I don't know if I would agree that traditionalism reduces women to a baby factory with legs and arms to clean and cook. I don't find Chivalry represented here which, I would think, is an important part of traditional view of women.
Miss Lilly, you totally mischaracterize the traditional view of women, then blast it with the same bazooka you use against feminists. Rather than using the feminist view of traditionalism, perhaps you could discover real traditionalism's view of the world...not just women? Feminism is a historical "flash", here today, gone by noon. Traditionalism has withstood the test of time. Learn it, embrace it, love it.
Still thinking about this article. Lol.
I think Megha that if we take the Trad woman presented as attempting, or purporting, to describe a complete femininity then your criticism is totally justified. That is, if a woman says, 'My femininity has content and meaning because of my beautiful milk jugs that delight my husband and satisfy my baby', then without a doubt that lady has missed something. But, if we take the Trad woman as a polemic, an invective and contrast to the Trans woman, then I am inclined to be more generous to her. If the woman says, 'My femininity has content and meaning, as compared to your Trans femininity which is empty and meaningless, because your breasts are fake and useless whereas mine are the vessels of divinely ordained wifehood and motherhood. I am to my family an echo of Eden, you are a presentiment of Dystopia'. It may be that the comparison is unstated and implied, but perhaps context is meant to evoke the comparison?
Where do they find these people? This is liberal gibberish written by a woman who apparently doesn't have a life. It appears she has precious few real world experiences. If she did, she'd cite them in this article. I choose to participate in reality, not quote someone else's.