Thoughts on Feminism, Marriage, and Family

Conservative feminism may seem like an oxymoron to some. It isn't. Feminism is about addressing inequities between the opportunities, respect, and treatment afforded to men compared to those afforded to women. Some strains of feminism are so radical as to seek the destruction of anything implying differing natures and roles between men and women. This minority approach is unhelpful as it undermines families and ignores biology. In this post, I intend to articulate a better approach to feminism, one espoused by many already, and comment on some causes and results of chauvinism.

Women are paid less then men for exactly the same work in almost every nation in the world (even the United States). Worldwide women are subjected to enormously high rates of domestic abuse while society continues to condone a false perception of men as naturally unable to control themselves. Women worldwide have lower access to education, healthcare, and political activity. Baby girls are abandoned or seen as a misfortune in many places around the world.

After the second wave of feminism in the 196os and 70s, women made tremendous strides in reclaiming their God-given rights; however, the excesses of the radical strains of thought did much to bring about negative side effects. The movement opened the doors to greater objectification of women in the media, no-fault divorce laws undermined the family and left women more vulnerable to financial problems, and an overemphasis on womens' careers over family left the roles of fathers and mothers devalued.

While feminism has been successful in improving women's opportunities and treatment, there is still deeply rooted perceptions and beliefs that devalue the proper nature and role spectrum of women. In many religions, it is taught that men are created in the image of God, while women aspire to a step-up in heaven of sexlessness. Some faiths teach that Mary was an eternal virgin, that she gave birth only once (I don't know how they read Mark 6:3 though) and that her asexuality represented some apex of femininity. Many Christian faiths teach that Eve sinned disobediently causing the fall, which is, in their view, a great tragedy that could have been otherwise avoided.

While I hope to cooperate with many of these faiths in advocating the many principles on which we agree, these views on femininity promulgate the problem of society's abuse of women's self-evident rights and divine nature. Ultimately, they hurt the family. Without getting into theology too much, it is my belief that Eve acted bravely when she ushered in mortality and paved the way for Christ's atonement and our eternal progression. The hebrew, "bet" is used and translated as "rule over" in Genesis, but is probably more correctly interpreted as "rule with." Man is to "rule with" his wife. I believe Mary had other children after Jesus with her husband Joseph and that her life, intimacy in marriage included, is an example of an honorable woman. Additionally, I believe Femininity is an eternal trait of women to be celebrated forever. This is an issue of faith largely outside the realm of the influence of public policy. However, I hope that those who unwittingly have supported such discordant beliefs reconsider. "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally and upbraideth not; and it shall be given them." (James 1:5) I know that to be true.

The loss of a marriage culture in America is a huge cause for concern and comes largely as a result of erroneous perceptions of proper masculinity and femininity. Children deserve to be born into a home where the parents are hardworking co-presidents of the family who love one another and are serious about there commitment. We take the covenant of marriage too lightly. In France, if one of the spouses objects to divorce, the other must put forth evidence of either adultery or abuse or separate for two years and attend mandatory family counseling with one another. France needs improvement in their respect of the marriage contract too, but in this respect, they take the commitment more seriously than we do. Also, the media fictitiously romanticizes bachelorhood, over-independence, and uncommitted sexual intimacy. The media condones male aggression. As humans, it is natural for us to express our affection by making promises of loyalty to one another. Marriage is the precipice of loyalty and teamwork. The eternal meaningfulness of committed and selfless marriage allows for deep joy and success that should be better protected by public policy.

Now, in this imperfect world, some women don't marry. Some are unable to have children. Some are abused. These women should be supported by public policy and they should be viewed as equal. However, the ideal situation to be incentivized by public policy is an equal marriage between a man and a wife.

I echo Hilary Clinton's declaration to the U.N. that "human rights are women's rights and women's rights are human rights once and for all." Give women a voice equal to that of men. Give women equal wages and opportunities in the workplace. Give wives and equal place at the head of the family. Women have a special nature; they are daughters of God! Women have a valuable role in the home as mothers. The selfish, individualistic cultural trends of recent history have degraded the role of a mother in favor of success in the workplace. American mothers and fathers must put the nurturing of children and family as priority number one. Even if this means sacrificing some career goal, putting family first will save the country. Family before self, always.

Putting the Cart Before the Horse

Too many people derive their life principles from the way they live rather than living according to their values and beliefs. If such a person becomes dependent on or acclimated to some substance, activity, or behavior he is likely to chase after religious, political, and ethical axioms to justify his comportment. Even if he was raised with contrary values and even if feeling and evidence point clearly in another direction, I have been surprised at the lengths people will go to find some relativistic philosophy to justify their conduct.

To be sure, this is the easy way out. Searching out truth and rectitude can be laborious, tedious, and uncomfortable. It isn't easy to break bad habits and to establish good ones. It isn't easy to sacrifice. It isn't easy to change. It isn't easy to be patient. It isn't easy to admit fault. But, these represent some of the obstacles in the way of gaining truth and virtue. It is much easier to say, for example, "I have my own values. I like to _______. You can't prove that ______ is wrong. Lots of people _______. So _____ isn't wrong."

A trademark problem solving strategy employed by McKinsey & Co. business consultants is to break the issue at hand (like insufficient revenue or excessive expenses) into mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive categories. In "The Firm" consultants refer to this as MECE (pronounced "Mee-see") and no problem analysis or solution is adequate unless it is completely MECE. You have to break up the big problem into separate categories that do not overlap and you can't have any gaps. Then, you break those categories down in the same manner until you can't do it any more. This system of organizing information allows consultants to break up the major issue into bite sized pieces. It allows analysts to come up with the individual factors that make up the larger problem. The consulting team can then better innovate practical solutions, implement them, and measure success within that MECE framework. [See The McKinsey Way by Ethan M. Rasiel]

Christopher Peterson and Martin Seligman came up with a MECE analysis of society's problems in their book, Character Strengths and Virtues: A Handbook. They intended the book primarily to serve as the positive converse to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, a handbook outlining all the things that could go wrong with a person's mind. They wanted to outline and describe all the things that could go right in a person's mind. In my opinion, their work is a masterpiece. They categorize all the character values and virtues that have been ubiquitous throughout time and geography and describe them to the extent that is virtually unanimous among classifications of people as a whole. Their list is as MECE as possible. It includes:

1.) Wisdom and Knowledge: Creativity, Curiosity, Open Mindedness, Love of Learning, Perspective

2.) Courage: Bravery, Persistance, Integrity, Vitality

3.) Humanity: Love, Kindness, Social Intelligence

4.) Justice: Citizenship, Fairness, Leadership

5.) Temperance: Forgiveness and Mercy, Humility and Modesty, Prudence, Self-Regulation

6.) Transcendence: Appreciation of Beauty and Excellence, Gratitude, Hope, Humor, Spirituality

I submit that these values are all as American as is Liberty and should be recognized as such. Almost any problem confronting our nation can be traced back to some lack of one of these virtues by either some component of our citizenry or by outsiders. I support a Constitutional Amendment officially recognizing these values as American. The government should seek to protect and incentivize these virtues. A pure libertarian might object to this saying it is not the place of government to enforce moral values. In a sense, I certainly agree. Forcing values on citizens is the approach of paternalistic authoritarian governments. I believe recognizing and protecting these values is different from forcing or enforcing them. I am worried Americans may be trending towards modeling government and interpreting law according to the condition of society rather than on the principles that define our ideals as a nation. This is putting the cart before the horse and is a recipe for societal decline. The political ideas, governmental institutions, and law should not be established to justify how we are. They should be constant anchors pointing towards who we want to be as a nation. The U.S. Constitution itself was founded on this idea of intergenerational stability as a protection of the carnal sentiments of a moment or of a mob majority: "We the People of the United States, in order to ... secure the Blessings of Liberty for ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

When we say, "United we stand. Divided we fall." I think we are mostly referring to these American and human virtues. If Americans embody these values, we will succeed and we will lead the world. If we fail to live according to these enumerated virtues, we will equally fail. American institutions and policies must be designed in a way to first protect American's right and duty to live according to these values of their own volition. Individuals' freedom to act cannot be allowed to infringe on others' freedom to be citizens of strong character. That is where the line of freedom to act as one desires must be drawn. That is the harmony of the American system. We can't be a nation if we have no common values. No man is an island. With the liberty of being an American comes the responsibility to protect the right to live virtuously.