No hiatus for solipsism during World War II.

640px-American_military_cemetery_2003

In my last post I quoted from a radio program delivered by Margaret Sanger discussing the hardships women face in marriage and the importance of marriage counseling.  Sanger described a young mother she met the day before on the train:

…she was beginning to feel very bitter toward her husband because she said that she could tell from his letters that he was actually enjoying the ↑excitement of↓ war! Already he had been to Iceland, England, Africa, and Italy! Oh, she was willing to admit there were plenty of hardships connected with it… but what had she been doing all this long while? Just staying home day after day minding the baby! “When he gets home,” she told me, “he can just sit with the baby for a while and she what it’s like. I’m going out and have some fun!”

I could see her point of view… what woman couldn’t. You don’t have to be a war bride to feel trapped… many a house-wife gets that feeling just watching her husband go off to the office every morning while she stays home facing the same meals, dishes, and children. How many divorces have their beginnings in just this very feeling of imprisoned futility.

The date of the program was July 19, 1944.  This was just a little over a month after D Day and before the Normandy breakout.  World War II was very much still raging in Europe, and American men were still fighting and dying there.  Yet at this very time we had (if we believe the story), a woman complaining to strangers on a train about the exciting adventures her husband was enjoying in the European theater (most likely as a result of being drafted).  Moreover, this was a story Sanger felt perfectly comfortable sharing on the radio at home to the wives and mothers of US servicemen, as those men continued to fight and die overseas.

American Cemetery at Normandy photo released as public domain by Bjarki Sigursveinsson.

Posted in Solipsism, Ugly Feminists, Whispers | 87 Comments

The roots of marriage counseling.

Marcus D linked to a column by feminist and historian Rebecca Onion titled Lock up your wives! Advice columns from decades past provide a chilling glimpse into the horrors of marriage counselling before feminism.  While the title claims that marriage counselling predates feminism, the article describes how marriage counseling as we understand it today grew out of feminism in general, and specifically the rejection of the idea that marriage vows are permanent (emphasis mine):

Marriage counselling, once the informal job of clergy, parents and trusted elders, became its own profession in the 1920s. Following increased advocacy for women’s rights, divorce rates in the US rose 15-fold between 1870 and 1920. Meanwhile, psychology and social work found their footing as professions. Some marriage advocates, unable to stem the tide of divorces through legal strictures, turned to counselling as the answer.

In short, marriage counseling is a product of the divorce revolution.  The underlying premise here is not so much that divorce is beneficial because it ends unhappy marriages, but that it is beneficial because it gives wives leverage to force their husbands to do as the wife demands.  Once the husband does as the wife demands, goes the logic, the marriage will become happy (See also:  Fireproof).  While it is refreshing to see this spoken about honestly, it isn’t just feminists who celebrate this ostensible improvement on marriage.  Modern Christians have eagerly embraced this new view of marriage, a view I’ve dubbed the wake-up call model.  Although this modern Christian approach is drenched in denial, deception, and rationalization, it isn’t difficult to spot the modern Christian embrace of divorce if you look for it.

As just one example, traditional Catholics have expressed great concern with the explosion in annulments the RCC grants in the United States.  In response to these concerns, the Archdioceses of Boston has published a document defending the explosion in annulments.  The document explains that the explosion in US annulments is a positive development, a sign of justice and progress.  The problem is not that too many marriages in the US are being declared null by the RCC, the real problem is the rest of the world is behind the times and doesn’t grant enough annulments (emphasis mine):

In the last twenty years, the numbers of declarations are much higher in this country than they had been in the past. Yet this is due to the fact that the procedural laws governing marriage cases were expanded in the late 1960’s. Cases no longer had to go to Rome. They could be adjudicated locally. The appellate system was also somewhat streamlined. Furthermore, Roman jurisprudence was expanded in the light of the teaching of the Second Vatican Council. Cases could be heard on new grounds of jurisprudence.

Tribunals across the United States are operative so that individuals may vindicate their rights. The bishops of our country have invested personnel and resources to ensure the church’s jurisprudence and procedural law are fulfilled. Unfortunately, such an investment in justice is not as evident in other parts of the world. This is why the numbers in the United States appear high. In fact they are skewed.

The other thing I found interesting about Onion’s piece is her repeated reference to the eugenics movement’s involvement with the creation of modern marriage counseling.  I wasn’t aware of the connection here, but found a similar claim on wikipedia:

Marriage counseling originated in Germany in the 1920s as part of the eugenics movement.[1] The first institutes for marriage counseling in the USA began in the 1930s, partly in response to Germany’s medically directed, racial purification marriage counseling centres. It was promoted in the USA by both eugenicists such as Paul Popenoe and Robert Latou Dickinson and by birth control advocates such as Abraham and Hannah Stone who wrote ‘A Marriage Manual’ in 1935 and were involved with Planned Parenthood.[2] Other founders in USA include Lena Levine and Margaret Sanger.

Margaret Sanger as you may recall is one of the founders of Planned Parenthood.  With a bit of searching I found an old radio broadcasts where she promotes marriage counseling.  From How to Avoid Post War Divorces:

The pity of unhappy, ruined marriages is that with a little scientific advice and the use of common sense so many of them could be saved.

She offers as an example a woman who resents her husband for traveling to exciting places around the world (as a soldier in WW II):

the wife.. who was realy just a girl.. was feeling trapped and rebellious. She loved her baby ↑of course↓ , and well she might, because he was a beautiful child, but she was beginning to feel very bitter toward her husband because she said that she could tell from his letters that he was actually enjoying the ↑excitement of↓ war! Already he had been to Iceland, England, Africa, and Italy! Oh, she was willing to admit there were plenty of hardships connected with it… but what had she been doing all this long while? Just staying home day after day minding the baby! “When he gets home,” she told me, “he can just sit with the baby for a while and she what it’s like. I’m going out and have some fun!”

This was back in 1944, nearly 20 years before Friedan coined the term “the problem with no name”, yet all of the same tired feminist cliches about marriage we hear today were already fully formed and being sold to the general public.

I could see her point of view… what woman couldn’t. You don’t have to be a war bride to feel trapped… many a house-wife gets that feeling just watching her husband go off to the office every morning while she stays home facing the same meals, dishes, and children. How many divorces have their beginnings in just this very feeling of imprisoned futility.

 

Posted in Book of Oprah, Church Apathy About Divorce, Feminists, Marriage, Philosophy of Feminism, selling divorce, Threatpoint, Wake-up call | 67 Comments

A tragic tale of strippers, hamsters, thugs, and baby mommas.

Lisa Fogerty at Cafe Mom spins a mother thinking with her genitals as an act of kindness:

But plenty of women make that call to get involved with men who aren’t law-abiding citizens. Some of them are able to see the good inside of that person — and sometimes they’re right and deserve respect for giving a person who made a mistake another chance at love. Other times, they discover that person is incapable of changing his bad ways.

Posted in Feral Females, Foolishness, Rationalization Hamster, Stantons Heroes | 133 Comments

Not the real stepdad.

Not new, but new to me from the Onion:  You’re Not My Real Stepdad!

You’re not the boss of me. You’re not the guy who married my mom after she got divorced. You think you can just show up and start ordering me around like you’re the father figure I first met when I was 8? Well, you’re not…

…you’re just a phony who’s trying to make us forget my mom was already married, then divorced, then single for a while, then real sad, then remarried.

Well, screw you, Greg! I won’t let you replace the man who replaced my father. And I don’t care how long you stay married to my Mom—I’ll never call you Dennis!

I’m not going to sit by and watch you try to fill in for my true stepdad, who was there for me during those tough times in court until it was mandated by a judge that he not be there anymore.

Posted in Feral Females, Manosphere Humor, Satire | 49 Comments

Exploding 50 something pregnant women.

Drudge had a link today titled “More women waiting until 50 to have children…”.  The article it points to is from myfoxny.com, titled 51 and pregnant:

Tracey Kahn is a successful publicist. She is single, lives in a beautiful apartment in Manhattan, has a 2-year-old daughter, and is pregnant with [sic] again. She is 51.

And Kahn is not alone. A growing number of women [sic] putting off motherhood until middle age, especially in New York City, where younger women are career driven and put off growing a family.

Between 1997 in 2008 there was a fourfold increase in the number of women [sic] born to moms over 50 in the United States.

We’ve been through this before, but I decided to take a new look at the data since a few years have passed.  The Fox article doesn’t cite the source for the fourfold increase claim, but either way the essential fact they are leaving out is how incredibly rare it is for women over 50 to give birth.  It may well be a fourfold increase, but the actual numbers are so small as to be meaningless from a societal perspective.

I can’t find data specifically for women 50 and over, but the 2012 Statistical Abstract of the United States lists the number of births to women age 45 to 54 in Table 80 (PDF, xls).  Here is the age distribution of births in 2008, the most recent year data is available for:

2008birthsbyage540

Note the minuscule bar to the far right.  That is what all of the fuss is about.  Actually that isn’t even it, since it includes women 45 to 49 as well.  This lead me to see if I could tease out the difference by looking for years where births to mothers 45-49 and births to mothers 45-54 are both available.  By comparing the difference for known years, we can get a sense of how many of the most recent births are to women 50 and over.

Fortunately, the 2010 Statistical Abstract presents the data for 45-49 year old mothers, and the 2012 Statistical Abstract presents it for the larger bracket.  Here is the data for the oldest age bracket in the respective reports in one table:

combinedtable

Note that while there isn’t 2008 data for 45-49, the 45-54 values for 2006-2008 are constant.  Also note that there is no reported difference between births to women 45-49 and births to women in the larger bracket.  Whatever the fourfold increased value is for births to women 50 and older, it isn’t enough to round up to the next 1,000 in any of the years we have both figures for.  This means we are talking about fewer than 1,000 births in any given year.  The 45-54 bar on the graph above is a minuscule sliver, and births to women 50 and over are a too small to register sliver of that sliver.  While we may have gone from 25 to 100, or perhaps from 200 to 800 births to women over 50 between 1997 and 2008, this isn’t the kind sweeping change the news story no doubt left its readers thinking has occurred.  Births to women over 50 remain extremely uncommon, despite feminist propaganda to the contrary.

See also:  Charts on delayed motherhood.

Posted in Aging Feminists, Data, Fantasy vs Reality, Fertility, Foolishness | 328 Comments