Thursday, April 07, 2005

Dissenting Views

Cullercoats Cliffs

I decided to collect "dissenting views" (which are often rude comments) here and keep it on one post. Readers are welcome to give a ready answer for the reason of the hope that is in you, regarding the role of wife, mother and homemaker! Just remember not to slip into the same kinds of insults as the dissenters dish out.

From Anonymous.
Lady: I suspect you are no lady at all but a greasy, saggy, baggy, wrinkled old lady living in the past. Don't you realize the harm you are doing spreading this kind of thing to young women? It is a day and age they should know they should be in a college getting a good education, not confined to a marriage. Shame on you and good riddance.

Dear Anonymous,

You really need to get a grip on yourself. I'm a lot less saggy than some of you young girls who sit around all day eating chips and drinking beer. Perhaps you should work in the garden more and grow some fresh veggies for your complexion and your health. I've seen a lot more wrinkles in some of your age, than in 60 year old women, these days. Hard drinking and low living catches up with you fast.

If you don't want to be a "greasy, saggy, baggy, wrinkled old lady" by the age of 30, you need to take a sober look at your daily life. How much fresh air are you getting? How much fresh fruit and vegetables are you eating? How much water are you drinking? How much rest are you getting? Are you preparing for marriage, for a lifetime, or are you planning on having a starter marriage, and three or four more after that? The way you look as an old lady will tell the story of your life. You can either have a sweet countenance or be bitter, and that will show on your face.

As for my spreading the art of home living to young women, I fail to understand why your blogs, filled with the nonsensical jabber about the latest sci-fi movies are better equipped to influence young girls.

At last, regarding college, I think this man explains it better:

Again from Anonymous: (I wish you anonymous people would use Anonymous 1 or Anonymous 2, or make up a name like Jack and Jill, etc. so I can tell to whom I am addressing. Otherwise you all sound like something that came out of the same factory.)

I wish you would be more open minded about things. Women are so much more than home makers! I can't imagine getting all this education and then being locked up in the house all day. Where do you think money comes from? Haven't we come a long ways from the past in order to get to the stage where women at last have the freedom and independence to earn money? This isn't the 1950's anymore and you need to wake up. No one is going to look after you the rest of your life.

You are so ignorant.

Dear Anonymous: It would take some time to answer all your accusations at once, so I will deal with one at a time.

I find that many young women are not very open-minded, themselves. They come across sites like this and they are horrified. They can't accept the fact that even college graduates do not want to pursue their careers but go home and take care of their husbands, their gardens, and their babies. What is so ignorant about doing what is right at the time it needs doing? What is so wrong with putting duty before desire? Perhaps you need to get used to some different ideas other than the one idea you have, and be a little more open-minded to the diversity you so loudly claim to love. Diversity seems to cover all kinds of things, except when women want to be married for life and raise children, teach them at home, take care of the house, iron their husband's shirts and help him in his destiny. Diversity is okay as long as it doesn't include the homemaker.

Saggy baggy old me in 2008.

Here is another rude comment, for your research. I combined several comments because they were all the same, like it came from a textbook or something. It reminds me of the list someone gave me about feminism, which explained, among other things,

Here is the combined comment:

"Dearie, I never intended for you to publish my comment; I knew you wouldn't. I just wanted YOU to read it. Of course I have anger; I'm a woman, not a Stepford. And nice try, but the Bible was not that man's authority in that ridiculous sermon. "Maybe you should take a course in communications or negotiations"LOL Like you did? Calling women who disagree "silly"? Calling girls who are worried and ask "what if" questions self-important and smart-mouths? You are a Victorian-laced woman from a race that should be are pathetic. There are just no words for the rot you represent. The Bible is an archaic mode of life that does not work in the world today...why do you cling to it? Don't you know you cannot live in the past?....People are not getting married anymore, in the tradtional way. Why can't you accept that? And, there are different relationships today, not just the husband/wife relationship...the time will come when people like you will be guilty of the crime of are a racist witch who doesn't deserve space here....housework doesn't take rocket doesn't require you be locked in your house 24/7. I'm going to be rich enough to afford a maid, and my children will have a nanny, so I can get on with something meaningful in life, like a career and a paycheck. I don't want to subject my children to poverty."

The reason I combined the comments, is explained in the "For Feminists and Students" post on the side. Briefly, I detailed that if the comments became annoyingly similar and lacking in originality, I would just post them as one, as they all sound like they are coming out of the same machine.

The feminist movement cannot be accomplished without the infiltration of Marxist/Communist teaching. This teaching even combines parts of the Bible to illustrate their points.

That explains why feminists go on and on and on in endless discussions about theology and "doctrinal disputes" and their obesession with a man's role in life. I do feel sorry for them, for they will be denying themselves, in life, the opportunity to have a loving husband who will cherish them enough to protect them and allow them the freedom to be home.

Another one:

"I can't believe that women like you still exist. You ought to be dead, or locked in a museam."

You wouldn't be from Romania, would you? You sound a lot like some of the women who write to me from there. Your comment was almost word for word what the communists told Christians in China. "Your God will be locked away in a museam", they said. Regarding museams, though, I have always wanted one. I could charge admission and still stay home. You have no idea the number of antiques I have around here.


Lydia said...

Now to address the objection to "getting all that education and then becoming a homemaker." Your education is not enough for homemaking. There are no schools, anymore, that can help you. It is a self-taught experience. There were some schools in previous centuries, for women, that dealt with managing the home efficiently, but they were scorned out of existence by the 20th century feminists and their mocking educational establishments. Now we have women who are so ignorant they cannot boil water. I'm sure there were those types in the olden days, too, but they were always looked on as less than marriageable and more ornamental. Today we have women scoffing at the idea of homemaking and yet they don't realize that they too are merely ornamental. They love to dress up in the latest fashion and go to the bar and show off their newly pierced skin and their new rags that costs them way over the price of the fabric itself. Education will not teach you how to have a lasting marriage, raise good children, and keep the family afloat financially. Education will not tell you how to teach your own children at home. Your education doesn't count, when it comes to real life with real people. Some people are book smart and some people are people smart, but unfortunately, modern education makes you neither. It prepares you to work the rest of your life for a wage. It prepares you to care about rewarding yourself with material things. There are many find female doctors and lawyers, but if they had to put their kids in daycare in order to pursue those careers, what contribution do they really make? The children of daycare are getting cheated so that their mothers can pursue a career. Getting all that education will not get you the kisses and the tender moments during the day with your children. It will not get you a good man who will give his life for you, and sacrifice his fortune. It will not give you a good church. It does not give you the memories that really matter in life.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Well, anon,
First you shouldn't use all Caps - it's impolite.

Second, it may come as a shock to you, but Christians are still the biggest world religion, so there are plenty of people who believe the Bible.

Third, Lydia doesn't have to "get away" with anything, she lives in a country where free speech is allowed, so that she can criticise education as much as she wishes.

Lydia said...

If I "hated" education, it wouldn't make much since to be studying so much, nor would it have made sense to home school in the classical education for 10plus years. There is a big difference between learning and educational philosophy of different establishments and that is where I draw lines. One should always be a learner, but once a certain kind of formal education is used, it is possible to lose the love of learning or to become set in your ways.I have seen more grads and degree-bearers who have closed minds, than homemakers, and homescvhoolers who are always finding educational opportunities in every day life. I could go on and on about the experiences I've had with college kids who don't want to consider any views but the ones they have been indoctrinated with, but there is enough on the web about it already. Read the book, "The Closing of the American Mind."

Anonymous said...

I can't understand why you haven't been shut down. You and your ilk belong in a museam, not on a front page. Makes me shudder to think you could spread this around and drag us all back into the past. Women don't have to be stupid anymore. They have been liberated or haven't you heard? You should read your history better. We don't have to confine ourselves to the house anymore. Now, we can be anything we want to be. Why don't you get an education and make something of yourself?


Anonymous said...

Anonymous, I find it very amusing that the one who is telling Lydia to get an education is the one who exhibits appalling spelling mistakes!

If we are liberated, why are you even leaving your comments? Surely liberation applies to all areas of life. Surely liberation means women can do whatever they want, up to and including staying at home, if that is what they wish.

As for being stupid and confined to the house...I have finished university for the summer. Since mum has not finished work yet, I clean for her, and sometimes cook. Yet, amongst all this, I am continuing my education...I am currently reading works of philosophy. Education does not have to stop when you leave a formal house of education. Read what Lydia says above about closemindedness in college students.

I do not consider myself an unliberated woman.

Lydia said...

Dear Stupid (the way you spaced your post, makes it look like that is how you signed your name),

Your post was so loaded with subject matter, I hardly know where to begin. I will discuss the "you are living in the past" issue, for now.

I could ask you if you ride a bicycle to University. Many people do. If so, maybe you are the one living in a past. I drive a car.

A ridiculous comparison, I know, but isn't just about everything we do in some way, connected to the past? Most of it was invented in the Victorian era. I sometimes wonder if, left with nothing, any of us could invent the things that have been handed down to us from the past. Do you use a telephone? You are somewhat in the past, for it was invented before you were born. Do you use a washing machine or an elevator? It all comes from the past.

Yes, you don't have to be confined to the house. You can now be confined to a building all day long until the whistle blows for quitting time. At least, at home, women are free to come and go as they please, when they need to, without having to punch a time card.

I know how you feel, though, as there seems to be a stage in everyone's life when they think that becoming a wife and homemaker is about the most stupid choice in the world. You can grow out of it, though. It just takes maturity and an open mind.

Anonymous said...

It is people like you that hold women back and keep them from going forward and accomplishing their dreams. What if I wanted to be an interpreter, or a scientist? In my country, women staying at home is a thing of the past. There are no home makers any more. If you persuade women to go home, they will not have a salary any longer and they will be literally locked up in the house all day, under the control of their husbands. There are places to accommodate children: daycares and schools, or haven't you heard? As for food having to be home cooked, I don't see the difference. As for housekeeping, I can afford to have help, so I won't be doing any house work, and can concentrate on my career.I think you ought to be banned from the web.

Anonymous said...

It's people like you Georgina who would drag all women into work force against their will, like they did in Sweden.

It's people like you who force affirmative action on employers, so that less qualified women are hired over men just because they are of the right gender.

It's people like you who spread misandric hystery in the society and accuse all men of being controlling, abusive etc.

It's people like you who leave their kids in the day care to be raised by strangers without any second thought. It's your right, of course, but it's people like you who want to force it on all the women in all the countries.

And finally, it's people like you who are against free speech as you want to shut all the dissent.

You and your kind are really dangerous, not Lydia.

Lydia said...

I will address one aspect that fits your entire post.

Suppose the government mandated that everyone buy government bread. People lined up each morning for their share of government bread. The government said that it was better because it had all the nutrients in it and had been inspected.

However what if there were some women who learned to bake their own bread and give it to their family? It tasted better and the children were in better health because they ate their own home made bread. The mothers didn't have to stand in line and spend money on government bread, so they had more time for their husband and children. The home made bread had fresher ingredients than the government bread. The mothers were not as tired out because they didn't have to go out for their daily rationof government bread. The money was not being spent on that bread and was used for other things the family needed, because the ingredients for home made bread were a lot less expensive.

Now let us say some people got very upset at these women saying they should have to stand in line like everybody else. It wasn't fair that they were baking their own bread, and it would soon take them all back into the dark ages where everyone had to bake their own bread. Wasn't government bread progress? Why would anyone want to make their own bread when government bread was available so cheap and without all that labor?

Also let us suppose that a woman wants to make her own clothes rather than buy clothes from a factory, where women work at very low wages. Instead, she buys the best fabrics and makes her own. Some women who work say that isn't fair because she doesn't work in the factory and makes her own clothes. They think she will take them all back from the progress they have made (working outside the home in a factory, of course) and send them into the dark ages where women made their own clothes at home.

Or let us suppose that the government sent maids to homes during the day when the women were all at work, and one woman decided to clean her own house. It was personal to her and she wanted to make sure it was done right. It enabled her to see things that needed improving, whereas a maid might not notice. She also wanted to teach her children to clean house, so she stayed home and cleaned her own house. Some women objected because they thought she would take them all back to the dark ages where women stayed home, cleaned their own houses, baked their own bread and sewed their own clothes. In the meantime, the women who bought into the government idea of "liberating" them from the home, continue to go day after day and stand in lines to get their government bread, or spend money on gas so they can get to work somewhere else.

On another subject: wouldn't it be better not to use so much gas? It is horribly expensive. How much could be saved if women could stay home and just let their husbands go to work. But in spite of the great big choice it was supposed to be, the choice to go to work, it is no longer a choice to many women. Now, they HAVE to work. And, you know the reasons why: debt, husbands who refuse to provide for the family, high house payments, and so forth. It looks like coming home may be more liberating than you think.

Anonymous said...

It's Christian feminist again. I decided to write one last time because I was absolutely appaled by your post on boys not whistling after women anymore, which you regret so. Dear "lady" Lydia ( by the way, did you know that only the daughters of British earls, marquesses and dukes are entitled to use the title Lady before their name? something tells me you're no aristocrat, so why call yourself that? a craving for titles? how the way, I'm a real aristocrat, with family tree dating back to the XIV century, and with ancestors who held high positions at princely courts since the XVIIth century, but I don't brag about that and I never use my title. In a democracy, titles are ridiculous ) A woman who desires to be whistled at is no lady. In my mind she is more likely a harlot. HOW DARE YOU criticize women who choose to dress according to modern fashion and don't wear the long, baggy, loose and shapeles things you call " feminine dress"? How dare you suggest that women invite assault and rape by the way they dress, and at the same time you regret men don't whistle after women anymore? If any woman invites rape, it's you with your twisted, perverse way of thinking. In my country, women are still whistled after. Everytime this happened to me I felt nothing but contempt for those pathethic men who used that way of gaining my attention. At the same time, I felt extremely unconfortable, like a piece of meat drooled after by hungry dogs. If you enjoy being whistled at, you enjoy tempting men to sin, you enjoy their lust. What a hypocrite you are, whit your rantings about modesty and femininity! And your position on modern fashion is so ridiculous, it's obvious you never read Vogue or Elle! Today's fashion offers plenty dresses and skirts which are beautiful and sexy and show women's beauty. There are great outfits which include pants and business suits and women are certainly not confused with men by the way they dress. In fact, your "feminine clothing" is long, shapeless and has made me, my mom and friends, laught a lot. If you like so much the fashion of the past, I suggest you wear it! Because it was more beautiful than the things you wear now! I really have no words to describe what your post on whistling made me feel. A psychiatrist would understand and explain the contradiction between your perverse desires and your rantings. What bothers me about your lot is the way you are so judgemental and critical of anyone who doesn't fit into your narrow standards. As Christians you should be full of love and you're full of hate. As Christians, you're not supposed to judge others, but you do. Read your Bible, "lady" Lydia! I suppose you're some kind of presbyterian; in any case, you're obviously protestant As an Orthodox, for me your doctrine is heretical, but I've never presumed to say that if you follow your doctrine you're bound to hell .God, not us, is the judge of that. So it bothers me enormously to see you so critical and bitter about all those who don't follow your path. Live and let live! My personal opinion is that women are free to chose, but on some level I think it's so much easier for lazy, not very gifted women to stay at home, do some housework and be kept by their husbands. You chose the easy way and justify it by your interpretation of Scripture. Fine, but don't impose your choice as the right one! A real man wants a strong woman, a partner, not a brainwashed doormat. It's only insecure men who need to feel that they're the leaders all the time. Weak men need to dominate weaker individuals in order to feel strong. That's why they insist on having slaves aka submissive wives.
This is really my last comment. I always thought you were a narrow-minded, mean-spirited, frustrated woman, but by your post on whistling you proved a perverse, harlot-side even I never suspected. Well done, "lady" lydia!!!!

Lydia said...

Dear Romanian Lady,

Before Jennie Chancey and I formed the site "Ladies Against Feminism" (LAF), we and a number of other women belonged to an online group called "Victorian and Edwardian Ladies Society," where one of the practices was to prefix your name with the word "lady".

We had Lady Jennie, Lady Susan, Lady Lydia, and lady this or that--everyone addressed themselves as lady, to indicate a more mannerly and genteel way of life that we were trying to import. This trend spread, and now I still see it on many of their blogs, where they sign their names with the word "lady."

It just means lady -like and doesn't imply a title at all. There is no rule or law that says you must be royalty in order to have that word in front of your name.

In past centuries, almost all women were addressed as ladies, and it didn't mean royalty. However,as many of us are Bible believers, we know that when we follow the teachings of Christ, we are daughters of the King, and can be princesses or ladies if we like.

Perhaps you would rather I call myself "Princess" instead of "lady." It began as a tongue-in-cheek kind of joke, but the name stuck, and it goes so much better with Lydia.

You dont have to have official papers in order to use the word lady in front of your name. In the Victorian and Edwardian Ladies Society, we always used the word lady if we were members of that group.

When we formed the site LAF Jennie wanted me to have a column there dealing with some subjects I had sometimes posted on the Victorian and Edwardian Ladies Society, and so she called it "Lady Lydia Speaks" and the name stuck.

Lydia said...

Lady in Romania,

Actually I don't mind at all if you post but could you do it without personal insults? And did you read any of the links that were recommended to you the last time you visted? Also, why dont you brew yourself a nice pot of fragrant tea, pour it into a delicate tea cup and sip it while you go through the theme articles. A couple of them are really inspiring: When Queens Ride By is the story of a woman who who was inspired to put on a pretty dress and bake some bread and make a hot meal for her husband, having already cleaned the house and made it a wonderful place for him to come home to. He was enduring a lot of uncertainty in his life, and this gesture helped him get through it. Keeper of the Springs is such an important article because it shows what happens when women leave the home to pursue the hunt with men, and how they become more like the men with their smoking, drinking, foul language, and such. Please read it. One other is the article by Taylor Caldwell called "Women's Lib" in which she showed how women working would cause men to stop taking care of them and stop protecting them, and how many men would become lazy and delicate, claiming they had "bad backs" and staying home while their wives worked and paid for the house, etc. Just go through the whole side bar of theme articles and you'll come to a much better understanding.

Also as a feminist I know you are concerned about poverty and inequality, so I was wondering how are you helping the orphans in your country? Speaking of religion, the Bible describes the purest kind of religion as:

James 1:27 " Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world."

So Lady of Romania, what are you doing to have this pure religion in your life? Are you visiting the orphans and the widows, and easing their affliction? I understand that Romania had a very severe orphan problem but hid it in order to become a member of the European Union. I, and others, send money monthly to some of the orphans in Romania and the Ukraine, in order that they might have some comforts in life.

Lydia said...

Regarding Vogue: I posted a new design from their sewing catolog on the latest post, if you care to look. The fashion I was wearing in the picture is identical to one of their latest designs, if you care to click on the link. The magazines you mentioned are more expensive than books, and they don't add to the decor of the home nor help anyone in my home. I avoid them, as they put unrealistic expectations upon women regarding their appearance.

Anonymous said...

As I mentioned before, my mom is a doctor and untill school I was raised by a nanny. However, this did not affect me in any way. I always had a great mom and never lacked kisses and tender moments, in fact I had more than the usual share. Some even considered me spoiled by my parents.

All the people I know went to daycare or had nannies and that didn't prevent them from having great mothers. A child spends in daycare about 8 hours, that's just the time their mothers spend at work. The rest of the time they're together.

And again a double standard: a child's father can work and you don't consider he's neglecting his children. He sacrifices himself to provide for them. how about the need for 2 incomes?

I would never subject my children to poverty or want just so I can stay at home and not be bothered with the real life. "Real life with real people" is what me and the millions who work and have a family are living.

It's you who are hiding from the world and who live in a fantasy of the past that was never really the way you describe it.

You're obviously terribly afraid to live in the big bad world and you find a refuge in your pretty pink home. You're so afraid that you're trying to prevent others from living real life. The life you offer women is one of perpetual minority, an eternal childhood.

They never really grow up: from father to husband to son, they're always dependent on a man. They're not fit to face the problems of life. If their husbands die or desert them, what can they do to make ends meet?

They can become a burden on others ( brothers, sons, church members0 God forbid they should be self reliant and independent and able to earn their own living!

Lydia said...

Dear Lady of Romania,

I think you have had enough time here and maybe should study your Bible a little more before you make rash decisions about life.

You made the claim that all the people you knew grew up in daycare. I guess it is a class of two cultures, because, all the people I grew up with were in their own homes raised by their parents and I never saw a daycare center until I was 50 years old. I think because you lived when there were daycares, you may assume that is the way life has to be. So if my friends were not in daycare (raised by stay at home moms) and you and your friends were in daycare, which one is valid? You have to have a standard to base it on, not just your own reasoning. The Bible gives a clear role for women to be wives, mothers and homemakers and to be guides and guards of the home.

You were raised by a nanny. I was not. Who is right? Again, you don't give a standard to go by.

You were raised by a nanny but that means you were from a rich family. The people I grew up with had no such thing nor did we ever hear of "nannies" unless it was in an old English novel. WE always thought nannies were something of the past, from the dark ages, so who is living in the past? We were happy to be at home with our mothers, who explained that were rich people who couldn't be bothered to raise their own kids so they hired nannies.

8 hours in daycare? Yes my dear but you overlook the fact they are the most productive, teachable, wonderful hours of the day. After they go home they are tired and so are the mothers. That isn't quality time. The daycare and the workplace get the best of the mother and child, and at home there isn't a lot of energy left.
The child's most teachable moments are during the day when he is influenced the most. The mothers need to be with them then, not after the daycare closes.

There is no double standard when the men go to work to provide for their families. This enables the mother to give her nurturing to the children. Most fathers do not want someone else raising their children and will gladly sacrifice their time to enable the mother to stay home.

As for hiding from real life, don't give me that. It is you who are hiding from real life with real people by escaping the home where your duty and responsiblity lies, and where you are supposed to guard and guide it. You see only those who live the way you are living, but I would strongly urge you to get out and visit these homes and see how the women are managing them and how the family works when the mothers stay home.

What is "eternal childhood" about the hard work and responsibility of raising your own children and looking after your own husband, and taking care of the home? I have never seen a child do it.

As for being dependent on a man, even if something were to happen to a husband, people here have life insurance and retirement plans and many things that give them security should something happen to their husbands. In fact, there is more for them than if they worked all their lives and spent it all.

Not fit for the real problems of life? What are the "real problems" of life? Are you fit to have a lasting marriage? I mean, one that lasts 60 plus years? Are you fit to raise children up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, according to Ephesians chapter 6? Are you fit to become a widow who teaches younger women to love their husbands and children and keep the home, according to Titus chapter 2?

No one said a homemaker would not be able to earn her own living if her husband died. Rather, they are more qualified to work than most people, from the experience of the home. Many of them find ways of earning money, but like I said, there are securities like retiremnt and insurance that they will get.

You are like Martha, worried about many things, as Jesus said. Instead, you should just be concerned about choosing the "better part." I think at your age you ought to just settle down and have a cup of tea, and study a little more some of the things online...there are single girls here who have links on my blog, that might be a good example and also there are lots of shops to look at (try and feel the love of the home as you pick out things for it. It is a lot better for you than fighting with people.

Lydia said...

Lady Romania, please go to This is a page by Vox Day and you can post there. I'm curious to see how far you can get on that particular blog. The men's blogs are not so tolerant with feminist views. It should be quite a challenge to you. The articles are about why women are bitter

paste this in:

You can also click on the sidebar under "For students and feminists" the article Bitter Women and get there.

Anonymous said...

Miss Anonymous: Just what is meant by not becoming a burden on men? Even if you never marry, you have to be employed by someone, and there is probably a man involved. These days when women divorce, they are a burden on their former husbands for a lifetime, getting a monthly support check, sometimes even when they had no children with the man. I know several women who are double-dipping into men's incomes by divorcing, collecting alimony, marrying again without his knowledge, and still collecting money from him, and on and on. If you are on welfare or any state compensation or state help, you are a burden on someone, particularly many men who give a huge share of their paycheck to taxes to support the welfare system or the state pension system. I would much rather be a burden on a husband and a son than on the state, and I feel I earned it, since I was the one who put away their paychecks into savings accounts and lived simply and helped them get ahead.

Also, if you really are in Romania, don't you have cultural love songs, folk songs, and fairy tells about men and women falling in love? In all those songs and stories, does it ever express that men admire women for their degrees or their careers? Well of course today, they do, and is it any wonder? If they get a woman with a career they can have one more car or boat or man-toy that their own salary might not buy.

Anonymous said...

I used to think the way that this woman thinks. What helped me change my mind was some very good teaching that I had in the church, and I am not a Protestant or a Catholic. I was blessed to be exposed to the scriptures about loving your husband, and even though I did not have a husband at the time, I learned what it was that drove men away:domineering women who are high minded and not submissive, unfeminine, mouthy, bossy, opinionated, lacking in understanding, as the Bible describes them in Proverbs. After I took a spiritual self examination, I discovered I would have to give up the things that I clung to that I thought defined me. There are some good books and movies and music that inspire love in women that we should be listening too, not the mantra of the feminists today. Feminism just can't get you a happy family with a good husband and nice children. The feminist attitude can't peacefully exist alongside of Christs teachings. Having an attitude about men is wrong. If I had not given up my feminist ways I would not be married today. It was a turning point in my life when I decided to no longer pilot my own way but allow God's word to work in my life. This is hard to understand for women whose lives are not in subjection to Christ, for you are in a different spiritual realm when you are piloting your own ship. You can say you are a Protestant or a Catholic or an Orthodox, but what matters is if you are submissive to the will of God contained in scripture and if you have a personal relationship with Him.

Lydia said...

Becky, your comment reminds me of some films that every feminist should see. In them, is shown the natural differences between men and women, and the inclination of men to take care of women when they are submissive and feminine, even if they are spirited. When I was a teenager there were interesting stories to read about how the bitter women chased away the men, and the sweet ones got a husband. I always tell those who are bitter and upset to watch a good love story or read a good book or listen to some old fashioned music that portrayed men and women when they were naturally attracted to each other and the women weren't trying to be equal. There was a cute movie many years ago called "The Feminist and the Cop" starring Barbara Eden, who thought she didn't need a man. It seems that film makers and story tellers have given up on feminists and no longer write romances like this.

Lydia said...

Lady from Romania,

I am not posting any more of your comments until you digest my own comments here and do the reading assignments that I suggested to you. The Theme Articles actually answer all your concerns and if you would read them, you wouldn't be writing so much. If I answer everything, I'll just be re-writing the theme articles, and I have a house to clean and a garden to keep and food to cook and church duties. I will save your comments for later when I have time to deal with them. Until then I hope you will keep reading some of the links, and especially go to Vox Popoli (click on "Bitter Women") and read all the articles on that page. Maybe one of them will really hit a chord with you and you'll identify with it. Also regarding Understanding Men, you know the equality issue seems to take a back seat when you marry and you care about each other.That's a feminist issue.

Anonymous said...

Your views on public education are profoundly disturbing. i read one of your article on LAF where you seem to think that public schools and universities are part of a huge conspiracy destined to brainwash people.

I really don't understand how anyone can compare homeschooling with public education. After all, mothers cannot be trained in every single subject, from maths to biology, in order to be able to properly educate their children.

In schools, we have teachers who are specialists in their own field. And what has religion to do with public schools?

Your faith must be really weak if you are afraid it can be destroyed by going to school. A true Christian will never change his opinions concerning creation and God, no matter what he is taught in biology or philosophy. I didn't loose anything by going to school, college and university in fact I gained insight and an amount of knowledge no homeschooling could provide.

I can accept the fact that not all women were oppressed in the past ( not because the laws were in their favour, but because some were lucky enough to have good husbands or to live in an enlightened society ).

You, on the other hand, are unable to accept proven facts, i.e the historical lack of rights for women in the past. Everything was so rosy back then in your view... That's because you obviously only read books that fit in with your view.

And yes, in the past most people were home educated, but by tutors...which is very different. There was no broad access to education. This brings me to another topic you never adressed: your obvious double standard for men and women.

Men can go to college, they will not be corrupted. Men can go to work in the big bad world, they will be safe. Women can't. Men can have a career and be husbands and fathers, women can't. and yet, you're proven wrong daily by millions of women who have good jobs and happy families.

If they stayed home and wasted their God-given talents, how many great doctors, teachers, managers, politician, the world would have lost! how many good things would have been left undone! have you ever read about Elizabeth I? the greatest monarch England ever had, a woman who never married!

I don't accept your view that I shouldn't marry if I have a career. I love children and I will have thwm without becoming a housewife.

It would be a waste of my intelligence and talents. Being a good mother and a good wife has nothing to do with staying at home

Lydia said...

Miss Romania,

I allowed this comment to be published, not because it was so brilliant, but because it was so full of ignorant assumptions. I don't suppose your education was "nuetral" was it? It is because of your education that you are so full of contradictions about education, about men, about homemaking, about life. It had a greater impact on you than you know.

You obviously know knowing about basic education. How in the world would you go about proving that before public education existed, those who could read, write, do math and biology,only learned by hired tutors? It is simply untrue. And why does it matter? AFter all, it was in the past and as you said, we shouldn't live in the past. I know a lot of homeschool parents and they adequately taught their children the subjects you seem to belief can only be taught by experts. As for your statement that you don't know how anyone can compare public school with homeschool, so what? If parents want to homeschool, it is their own business. It doesn't mean they are "comparing", it just means they to take full responsibility for their children. If you really want to compare, you need to visit with some people who are homeschooling, and there are millions of them so it should be easy to find them online. I home educated my own, and there was no lack of resources for biology or math. If you are so smart, tell me, please, what the definition of science is, and how you would determine a true scientific fact from a false one? What is the "scientific theory?" and are there any flaws in it? If so, what are they? Is science based on observation, experiement, supposition, or presumption? And as for math, what is the basic difference between arithmetic and math? If no one could read or write before there was "broad access" to education, how in the world were great cities built, historical records kept, commerce done, or the Bible assume there was just an elitist group that was educated but the majority were not... it is a fantasy land you live in where the past was a pitiful era, lost without public education.

As for your remark about having children but not wanting to waste your talents by raising them at home full time yourself, I suppose then you would still pay someone else to do it and tell them their job was low and demeaning and that they themselves were being paid to do something that was beneath you?

God created women fully capable of training up their own children, and they have done it since the beginning of time. Just because public education came on the scene a hundred years ago does not suddenly make women unable to teach their own children, raise their own children, nurture their own children.

You need to read "Keeper of the Springs" by Peter Marshall. What he said, was true. When women begin leaving their children to pursue careers, the waters of society are thus polluted, with offspring that care nothing for the home, the family, and the values of their forefathers.

Now I will tell you why learning to read is not something we need to leave up to "experts." There are 26 letters of the alphabet, in English, representing 44 sounds. With these letters and sounds and combinations of sounds, anyone can teach reading. In fact, in the 1950's, Mexico had a high rate of illiteracy, and the government made a policy for "each one to teach one". The "each one teach one" policy wiped out the problem, because CHILDREN were teaching other children. When a child learned to read, he was supposed to teach a younger child. So if it required experts, and public schools, how in the world did these older children teach the younger children to read? All you need to know is the combinations of sounds and letters, and people pick it up fast. Look at our pioneers who had basically the Bible to use as a school book. One of our early presidents, John Adams, said that in the 1800's (before public education) that American families were doing so well in teaching their children to read and write, that an uneducated person could hardly be found.

Let me ask you, regarding the study of language,what are the "elementary sounds?" in a given language? What is the difference between a vocal, a sub-vocal, and an aspirate? What are the instructions for articulation? What are "marks of ellipsis?"

In history, who wrote the following statement?

“Alexander, Caesar, Charlemagne, and myself founded empires; but what foundation did we rest the creations of our genius? Upon force. Jesus Christ founded an empire upon love; and at this hour millions of men would die for Him.”

Please continue to go through the archives and the links and keep reading. There are 500 articles here, and there are many good comments, as well as links.

Anonymous said...

If the feminist in Romania would read this

it explains more about what the public schools are doing.

Anonymous said...

And this

Lydia said...

Miss Romania,

You said: "I love children and I will have thwm without becoming a housewife.

It would be a waste of my intelligence and talents. Being a good mother and a good wife has nothing to do with staying at home"

You would have a hard time proving that the care and teaching of your own children at home, and the care of the home is a waste of intelligence and talents. It actually requires more intelligence and talent than any other job, if it is done well.

You said After all, mothers cannot be trained in every single subject, from maths to biology, in order to be able to properly educate their children. "

Once again, you would have very great difficulty actually proving that mothers cannot educate their children properly. Life itself disproves your theory, as there are now hundreds of home school graduates who are better educated than their public school counterparts, and doing well in life. I educated my own children at home, and had no difficulty with these subjects, for which there is plenty of knowledge and resources, available, and easily accessible. In actual fact, it is not the educator who does the work, it is the student. Once the student is given the love of learning by his mother, he can learn anything on his own, even without a tutor. All he has to know is how to read and write and have what we call "a learner's heart." This is something that is required in the home, and in marriage, and in raising children. Women need to have a learner's heart, coupled with a strong desire to serve others and to sacrifice their own desires for the well being of others. Women that are home are the most unselfish of people. They are not motivated to do well because of money, but because of duty towards God and towards their loved ones. Like one of the commenters said, it is a sad time we live in when nothing is valued unless it has money attached to it. Probably if a college education and a job didnt pay, but were voluntary, and homemaking paid, there would be a lot more homemakers. I doubt very much that women would work outside the home if there was no money involved.

Anonymous said...

Regarding faith and school, Miss Romania:

The more time you spend in institutional living, including public schools (or even private, religious schools) the more you are influenced by them and the more you take on the beliefs of those systems. You yourself, reflect, in your comments, a bias, which you learned somehow, and it did not come out of thin air. You may claim all your beliefs came from inside your own head, and for sure, some of them did, for foolishness is certainly "bound up" in the heart of a child, as the Proverbs say, but, a lot of your comments truly reflect what your education has taught you. You might have thought you went only to read and write, or attended school just to get educated, but you came away with a lot of beliefs, reflected in the posts you put here, that were subtly indoctrinated into you. If this were not so, why then, do those who believe in the Bible, live a different way and believe a different way and speak such different values? Because your camp believed one way, and the other camp believed another way. Everyone is going to be taught at an early age what to believe, therefore, it is up to parents to choose which way they will be taught. After all, children's adult beliefs and lifestyles are so often based upon their early training. Therefore, why shouldn't parents want their children educated in Christian principles rather than those of the state? Why shouldn't they want to protect their children at a young age? You are obviously greatly influenced by other mocking feminists from blogs which shall not be named here, as your words pen some of the very phrases found on those blogs.

Anonymous said...

I stay home and look after the farm while my husband works. I guess I must be "lazy and not very gifted." Why don't you come and laze around with me while I take care of the house, the animals, the garden, teach my children their school lessons, sew dresses for myself and teach my daughters to do the same,etc. Why don't you come and spend a week here and then go home and see if you can honestly say I am lazy and not very gifted. I guess you went to university to learn that. It figures. The feminist teaching there has gone unchallenged for too long.

Anonymous said...

regarding the schools indoctrinating children with socialist beliefs, it is not so strange. It is actually true.
Go here to read more

Anonymous said...

You think communism/marxism is not connectd to feminism. Look here

Anonymous said...

You're an ignorant, uneducated, racist woman, "Lady" Lydia. There is nothing ladylike, feminine or womanly about you. You can play dress up and throw tea-parties until the cows come home, my dear, but that doesn't make you a true lady or a true Christian. It makes you a silly, sad, mentally disturbed old lady.

BTW, all those ridiculously silly rags you link to employ many working women on a regular basis. Their advertisers, which is where they make their real money, also employ many working women. Working single women. Working single lesbian women. Working single heterosexual women who enjoy having one night stands. Actually, pretty much every kind of woman you're totally against and believe is going straight to hell in a handbasket.

I guess the pretty pictures of tea cups and doilies and embroidered aprons mean more to you than your supposed convictions about working women.

Guess we can all see what your real God is...

Lydia said...

Jean in Jersey City:

Your comments give your city a bad name. You need to study and read a little more before you spout off something like this. If I were at an airport, waiting in line, would you walk up to me and say all this to my face? Hiding behind a screen makes it easy to be bold with such rash statements. Let me approach each of your subjects separately:

Lesbians: Several of these women have come into our lives through their hostility towards us. Eventually they calmed down enough to get in a talking mode, and my husband was able to show them the word of God and what it says about how much God really loves women and wants the best for them. Eventually they were baptised into Christ and are now living faithfully and gloriously for Him, having put away their old life. The former lesbians that I know have been very successful in having a stable home life and have been making a great difference in the community around them regarding such things as the dangers of immodesty, liquor, drugs, lewd materials on the newsstand, and many other things. They actually make a bigger statement with their lives than many people who have taken their Christian upbringing for granted. There is hope for everyone, that they can have a peaceful life. I can tell by your post that you are very stressed out about these issues. You can never have any peace within yourself as long as you are following that broad path.

Hell: I would like you to find the phrase "going to Hell" somewhere in this blog. I don't think I ever said that anyone was going to "hell in a handbasket," whatever that means.

Working Women: I explained this in a post called "Making Home A Place You Like to Be." The world has always had working women, throughout the ages, but they were not doing it to be equal with men or to dominate the work force, nor to make a statement or prove their rights. And, they had the sense not to put it first. Women worked just til they got a husband and then they put it behind them and never looked back. Marriage was a step up, a privileged and honored place in life. They would no more have left their children than a dog would have left her pups, or a cat her kittens or a hen her nest, in order to pursue a career.

Doilies and teacups: My doilies were hand stitched by women at home. Yes, they worked with their hands, as the Bible commands, and they left us beautiful things to treasure. Women at home have more time to make such things. The antique stores are full of such work, but it is fast disappearing, because the younger generation doesn't want to settle down and make these things. They will be in the high rise offices working with papers and telephones all day and have nothing to show for it but a paycheck, which will be spent before they even get it cashed. The kind of work that our grandmothers left for us is lasting and soothing and beautiful. The kind of work young women are forced into today, can be nerve wracking and disturbing. At home, a woman controls what kind of stresses she faces. She is in charge. She's the head of her company. It is her domain. She loves her family and she cares about what they eat and what they wear and how they spend their time.

Mental Disturbance: One of the cries of the Karl Marx/Communist/Socialist movement is that the family would be sick, outdated, archaic, and the women at home would be called mentally disturbed. Breaking down the home is the main goal of such people. It is marriage and home and family that they want to destroy. There is an attack on the home, politically and socially. Even churches do not always uphold the family, catering instead to those who cause disturbance or who are in rebellion.

Old Lady: I'm older than some people, in years, but then, so are you. Everyone is older than someone else. It is not my fault that I am getting older. It happens to EVERYONE, and one day you will be an old lady, but the question is, what kind of old lady are you conditioning yourself to be? Will you be a bitter, cranky, critical, worldly old lady, with a coctail in one hand and a cigarette in another, or will you be home making cookies for your grandchildren, and teaching them how to plant a garden and sew clothes?

Against Women: I'm not against any woman, or any group of women. I am against a false teaching called Feminism.

Anonymous said...


Anyone can change. There is hope for everyone.

Lydia said...

To continue with your points:

Playing Dress up: some of you girls look like something out of a circus, with the rags you wear. Maybe you are the ones playing dress up.

Having Tea parties: I never knew of tea parties destroying a family the way going to the bar or taking drugs or partying all night does.

Racism: I think everyone should be proud of their own race, and dress with dignity to honor the race God has given them. I don't think anyone should use race as an excuse to forget to get married, kill their own children, or abandon their families. I hope you share that view. Obviously, you are prejudiced against me, but I don't know if it is because of my Dutch ancestry or not.

Uneducated: Since you have no idea of the expanse of my education, you are making a judgement. It isn't an argument. It doesn't make any sense.

Dressing up and tea parties does not make you a Christian: You are right. Did I say that dressing up and having tea parties made one a Christian? The only thing that makes you a Christian is obedience to the gospel. By grace we are saved, through faith.

Guess we can see who your real God is: I can live without material things. I can be happy in a tent if that would mean I could be home with my family and look after them. Could you be happy with that, or is money all you ever think about?

Lydia said...

I beg your pardon: I meant no insult to the circus. Those costumes actually look better than what is offered by designers and manufacturers to young women today in the stores. In fairness, it is not all the fault of the young women.They don't know how to sew, and are held hostage by these choices of clothing, having no alternatives.

Kimberline said...


You are doing in your post just exactly what you are angrily accusing Lady Lydia of. You are stereotyping homemakers and assuming things about them which are just not true yet angrily saying Lydia somehow is belittling these working women, women getting education and stereotyping them.

Why are you so angry? Is it that your particular way of life is threatened somehow by stay at home wives and mothers?

I notice a great deal of passive aggressive language in your post. For example when you criticize Lydia and then in the same sentence call her "my dear." How condescending! Why can't you come to the table in discussion instead of with angry words and accusations and demeaning names? Hasn't your education taught you how to do that? If it hasn't, then it has not served you well at all so far.

You mentioned the magazines that Lydia links to and call them RAGS and then go on to say they employ women of all types. So do you hate these magazines because of that or do you hate them because they are liked by women such as Lydia and myself and other women here? You both criticize them and then point out how they offer opportunities to all sorts of women.

Why do you think that women like "us" hate women like you described? We don't hate these women at all. We do not dislike the PERSON but perhaps dislike that so many women are railroaded into lifestyle decisions by social pressures and are offering just one more possibility for them. The way we live allows us so much happiness and yet you persist in accusing of of hating other women when we offer this possibility to them. How is that wrong and why does it threaten you so much?

You imply that we do this whole home making thing because we just don't know there is something better out there than what we do at home. I was "out there" in the world. I went to college and pretty much found that it was indoctrinating socialist and feminist ideas. I bought into a lot of it because if my fellow students and I didn't, I saw that the professors were going to make it a difficult path or even impossible path to travel. It was easier to go the path of least resistance and I doted on that approval. But I felt empty about it all and unfulfilled as a person because it was all very controlling and artificial. I realized I didn't believe MOST of what they were teaching and I didn't respect that they were pushing conformity to a way of life that didn't suit me at all.

I went into the work world because my mother was not willing to let me be at home although my father was. She was a stay at home wife and mother who somehow bought into the popular rhetoric that what she did wasn't important, so she set her mind that I would NOT be like HER and I would do something of VALUE. Well it hurt me to think that she thought raising us kids was of no value :(

So I was out there in the work world. I was caring for elderly people that couldn't be in the homes of their families because their daughters were busy working. Later I took care of children in day care who had mother's who were working. These mothers were always struggling with their guilt at leaving their children and I can vouch that the children struggled with feeling separated and left behind by their mothers. And all my great education landed me in a poor paying job that is supposedly SO IMPORTANT to these other women...taking care of the elderly parents and the children. These other women willingly put their loved ones in the care of "professionals" who are so looked down on in the work world hierarchy that they receive pitiful pay and rarely any benefits. That will show how much this feminist society REALLY thinks of the elderly and children. If society REALLY valued children and the elderly, those who take care of them would be the BEST paid people in the world. It stung me a good bit to find that a valet who parked people's cars at a local restaurant received regularly tips larger than I'd make in an hour. People I knew would willingly fork out an exorbitant tip to the man taking 5 minutes total to park their car and retrieve it for them than they would pay a babysitter for an hour to care for their children. That valet made more working part time only a few hours a week than I could make in an entire week. Gee, I could have skipped the the years of upper level education and training to care for the elderly, infirm and children and just gone right to being a valet. I tried to tell myself that at least my job MATTERED, so it had value. You know what? It didn't really matter in the big picture. Any other person coming along the pike could do the job and I was quickly forgotten as soon as I left any position. What I did workwise didn't really stand in the passage of time. Being a mother will stand for ALL time and will have a greater reach because I will impact my children, their spouses, my grandchildren, by the way I parent and keep my home.

And the women struggled in their jobs to be able to pay for this benefit of farming out their parents and their children. And the guilt grew and the exhaustion grew from always running and being on the go. And I realized I was just one of them. That if I kept my job I'd be doing just the same. They lived rushed and frantic lives and drug their kids long for that ride. I wanted off that merry go round and soon.

It is heartbreaking when you see these people - left behind by the working daughters and mothers - begging pitifully to just GO HOME. The old people in the nursing home just want to go home...anyone's home, but especially the home of their children. And the babies, they want their own mothers to be the ones to lay them down to nap and to feed them and to comfort them when they are ill or troubled. They are sad because no matter how well schooled and educated the day care provider is, she isn't their mother. What is really sad is that these children miss even LOUSY mothers because there is within a child an ability to forgive tremendously and love in a huge way. Women would be better off having THAT kind of approval and benefit than the type where they get their accolades in a job position that could be easily done by anyone else and often times WILL be done by someone else at some point. No one is irreplaceable in the job field. And a woman won't be remembered as well by even a few people for her job accomplishments as she will be remembered by her children and in an ever expanding family circle, the nieces and nephews that also will find nurture from her and then later on her grandchildren will look to her as well.

I'm not saying a working woman can't be a good mother, but I am saying she isn't a PRESENT mother and really, that is what children want and need. And once a mother has BEEN that present mother, she will know that is what is best for herself as well. No more guilt for putting a child second to a job.

I don't regret the opportunity I had to be out at college or in the work world. What it did was make me aware that what I do at home IS the best I can give. At least I don't buy into the feminist rhetoric that says "Now we all have choices," but then undermines and belittles MY choice to be at home." THAT is hypocritical.

So my wish for you is that you go ahead and get all that education but do it with your eyes open. Be out there in that work world if that is your choice, but I hope for you that you will not be so bitter and angry about those who choose to not join you. Don't feel so threatened by a woman like me. I was once right where you are and now I am full circle. Back in the home and finally doing what I am CALLED to do and doing it with a grateful heart. My wish for you is to find the same peace and joy that I have, but I really don't think you will find it out in the work world or in the university. Your greatest joys and accomplishments and memories will lie within the home and family you can create.

I'd love to talk to you again in oh, 20 years and see what experience has taught you and where you are in your life.

I do wish you the best.


Lydia said...

"You are a Victorian-laced woman from a race that should be dead."

Hmmm.... If I had said that online, I suppose someone would threaten to sue me. Why is it these posts seem to border on accusing me of a crime? Maybe they are students, studying to be lawyers, and testing me as a case of some sort. I have no property, no money, and no inheritance. If you sue me, you will only get a collection of old fabric and all that scrapbook paper I am trying to use up. There is one old brown truck in the back pasture that does not work, loaded with any trasg made of metal. We were going to sell it all but the truck would not move. I don't know how much it is worth but if you sue me and you get the truck, you will do me a big, big favor. I've been trying to get that thing out the yard for 18 years.

Anonymous said...

It’s Christian Feminist again – hopefully for the last time. After reading almost all the articles and the links on your blog, I realize how lucky I am and how grateful I should be. I’m lucky that I live in a society where the overwhelming majority of women are encouraged to think for themselves, to have an education and a successful career. I am grateful to the millions of women worldwide who prove every day that women , just as well as men, can have a great job and a happy family. I’m grateful to those who fought so hard for women’s rights. I’m grateful to my great-grandparents, my grandparents and parents who studied hard and worked hard to have a better life than their own parents. A few generations back, my ancestors ( with the exception of my maternal grandfather’s family who belonged to the nobility) were poor, illiterate peasants who barely managed to survive. Their descendants are now highly educated people who have good jobs and high-ranking positions in politics, public administration, medicine, etc. This is the result of their efforts to be better than their parents, which you seem to condemn. There would be no progress if people didn’t try to have a better life than their parents. And by the way, perhaps if you had a job, you would have now money , property and you could leave an inheritance to your children.
I’m lucky to have a great job which challenges me every day. I have great colleagues who are also my friends. We work together and at the same time we manage to have fun together. I’m happy to go to work every day and I’m grateful that I’m surrounded by women, many in high-ranking positions, who are great at what they do, and by the way, they are more capable, more conscientious and much better than the men who work with them. I’m grateful that in my country more and more women have the top jobs in marketing, public administration, etc. By the way, they’re almost all married with children. I’m grateful also that most men don’t want an unpaid servant or a brainwashed woman for a wife. I’m grateful to my father, who has always pushed me to learn, to heve good grades, to go to the best university. He has always encouraged me to be very ambitious and to make the most of my abilities. He would NEVER dream of supporting me financially until I got married and he would be horrified if I became a housewife kept by her husband. He has always told me that financial independence, a high-ranking job and a good salary are the most important things. And by the way, he also encourages me to get married and have children soon. He sees no incompatibility in that and the biggest disappointment for him would be if I wasted my intelligence and talents and stopped working.
I’m grateful to my mom, who has always worked, at times even 2 jobs, making sure that we had everything we needed and wanted. I’m grateful to her that she preferred to have a job and work, instead of trying to make ends meet and living off my father’s paycheck, ‘being frugal” as you put it. She’s a great doctor who has helped a huge amount of people. She’s made a difference in so many lives , which she would never have done if she stayed at home.
Concerning home education, I will never believe that you or any other mother are equally proficient in all subjects. You may be well-read and intelligent but you cannot compare yourself with a teacher specially trained in one subject. For instance, in high-school I studied national and foreign literature, maths, geometry, algebra, chemistry, physics, philosophy, anatomy, zoology, grammar, history, geography and 2 foreign languages. If you’re able to teach your children of different ages and levels all these subjects, then you must be a genius. I’m sure you only read books and study theories which fit in with your vision. For instance, I think your children know about the Spanish Inquisition, but I bet they have never heared of the horrible persecutions suffered by Catholics in Protestant countries . You also claim that feminism =Marxism, but have you heard of Mary Wollstonecraft, Marie de Gournay or Christine de Pisan? They lived long before Marx and they were women’s rights defensors.. Read the Victorian women authors, especially Charlotte Bronte’s Shirley and you will see that everything was not perfect in women’s life in the Victorian era. Do you think they would have fought for their rights if everything was fine? You posted a quote of Queen Victoria on women’s rights. A while back, I suggested you read her biography to see how her actions clashed with her views and I posted her quotes on marriage and children. Of course you didn’t publish my comment, since they obviously didn’t fit your view.
The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world? Please!!!!! World leaders don’t make decisions based on their mothers’ influence. I’m sure few women teach their children that war is good, but how many leaders have chosen not to go to war? In fact, they seem to be eager for it. How many unjust wars, tragedies and genocides have been avoided or stopped? Very few. Do you know why? Because leaders make decisions based on politics, international relations and many other things, not on the education they received from their mothers. This goes for every level of decision-making. The only example I can think of is King Baudoin of Belgium, a devout Catholic, who abdicated for a day in order not to sign the law which allowed abortion. And he didn’t change anything, in the end.
You seem to think work is a prison but really, nobody keeps us prisoners. We have lunch breaks and if we have an important errand, we can go away from work a couple of hours or more. Guess what? Staying at home bores me to death. Tea parties and making silly objects out of leftovers are not the thing for me. I prefer reading a book or watching a movie, but still that couldn’t fill all my time. So no, dear “lady “Lydia, homemaking is just not my cup of tea.
Finally, as Christians you are bound to love your enemies, not to judge people. If feminism is you enemy, then as a true Christian you should love us and pray for us. Obviously, you prefer to judge everyone who doesn’t fit in with your views, which by the way are pretty narrow.

Lydia said...

While I regard feminism more as a false teaching, rather than an "enemy," let this be a record that I do pray for you. Your judgementalism of the homemaker is very very apparent in this post, but being accused of being narrow is not an insult. Christians are supposed to be narrow, otherwise, they would be like everyone else, following the crowd, doing what the masses do and what the liberal media and colleges design.

As I have a lot of pressing responsibilities at the moment, I'll open this up to the other homemakers to leave their comments regarding your post.

Anonymous said...

Dear "lady in Romania,"

You should not worry too much about a small amount of women in the population who stay home, or even about the ones who make the decision to commit their lives to being full time homemakers. They will never "rule the world" in the sense that you and others may fear. For 75 years or more the feminist doctrine has been dominant. Just walk down any neighborhood and count the places where people are home. You will find there is about 1 woman home in any village. It shows you that the feminist ideologoy won, and that there is no danger to you being controlled by the homemaker's beliefs.

There will always be a broad way, and feminists have taken it. It is the narrow way that few will follow. There are more of you than there are of us. The feminists do rock the cradle and in a sense rule the world. All you have to do is see what happens in the universities, the courts and the business places. Go down town and see how many men are running the businesses. Go to a bank. Go to a post office. Go to a department store. Mostly, there are women there. Go to a school: most teachers and principals are women. Go to a hospital and see the count: women dominate the workforce in many areas.

"The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world" does not necessarily mean a world leader or a president. It means the population that actually controls things. Look at the lawyers and the judges: they rule against the family in many cases. Look at the womens studies classes at the University: they rule the mindset of the next generation of girls going out in the world. Those girls will have careers, not long marriages, and not babies. So who rules the world? Truly, the hand that rocks the cradle. The ones rocking the cradle these days are the ones that teach something different than the Bible. Even a mother at home is influenced by the television and radio and music, that give her a different message. She can be home listening to the messages that tell her that she should rebel or get a job or do something else. The magazines and the friends she has, also are in favor of doing "something else." So, the hand that rocks the cradle is an "invisible hand" --because while it SEEMS like a young woman is raising her child, rocking her baby, etc., it is the teaching she gets from the hospital staff (which sometimes gives her bad advice), the radio therapist talk shows, the television programs like Oprah, etc. trying to "liberate" her from the task of being a full time mother, etc.

But don't worry, you aren't in danger of homemakers taking over. There will always be working women and there always has been. But in the past they didn't really want to work and didn't see it as the ultimate a woman could do. They would have much rather had the privilege and honor of being homemakers.

There are fewer women at home these days than in the 1900's, so it looks like society is on your side. Those who do stay home, are possibly leaving jobs open for the women who really need them, such as those whose husbands won't provide for them, those who don't have husbands, and those who don't want to be homemakers. Be thankful for homemakers because they do not fill these jobs, and they make the job market easier for the single women.

Anonymous said...

Re: Queen Victoria's diaries: if you will watch the film of Queen Elizabeth giving a tour of the property of the royal family you will see her show the diaries. She showed where one of Victoria's daughters had erased some entries and re-wrote them. I don't remember the reason she gave for doing this, but I do know that some of the diaries were altered by the daughter. We do have, however, Queen Victoria' words in some speeches and news pieces and letters that were not altered.

Anonymous said...

To Romanian lady:

You claim if a woman works she can buy property and leave an inheritance to her children. I know people who have inheritances like that, and it is a great blessing because the women do not have to go to work. They can stay home and look after the house, sew, raise their children, write, pursue their interests.

You also seem to claim that only if the WOMAN works, can she have property. That is not so. My husband is the bread-winner, the provider. I do not work except at home. I prefer the freedom to come and go as I wish and to look after our property while my husband is at work. Many women do have property and do not have to go get a job or pursue a career.

Also, my husband is a good provider and has no bad habits that would consume our income. It is a lot easier to prosper if the family does not spend money on entertainment or accumulating a lot of expensive things.

I can understand why some women would have to work, due to the way they conducted their lives. However, there are many women that don't have to work and are very fulfilled without career. They consider their homes their careers. It isn't a mindless job. It takes maturity and energy and a keen mind to mind the home.

Anonymous said...

Not all historians trust the reliability of the Queen's diaries, as they were erased and written over, by her daughter. The best quotes come from her speeches and letters, newspaper entries, etc.

Anonymous said...

During a live television broadcast the Queen was seen showing Neil Kinnock and other MPs around Buckingham Palace. Mr. Kinnock remarked that it was great to see Queen Victoria's diaries, "and in her own handwriting". The Queen then told the truth with millions watching, that Queen Victoria's diaries had all been destroyed because she had upset the British establishment. The diaries were all rewritten, taking out the most important bits where Queen Victoria recorded every sitting she had with the medium John Brown when she made contact with Prince Albert. Even those outside of the religion of Spiritualism are beginning to realise just how badly they are being deceived by a handful of tyrants, acting as a sort of thought police force, deciding what information is safe to allow through to the public.

Anonymous said...

Historic speeches of Queen Victoria

Anonymous said...

Anxious to protect her mother's reputation, she burned Victoria's diaries and rewrote them in her name.

Lydia said...

Romanian Feminist:

Since you obviously talk a lot, you are certainly welcome to get your own blog and post your own opinion. Just click on the big "e" on the upper corner of a blog page and see where it says "get your own blog." That way, you don't have to make your blood pressure go up all the time by arguing. If you have your own blog, you can deal with people on your own terms. It is free, and you can then post all the beliefs you have, even if they are wrong.