Rousseau vs. the Puritans

My beautiful children are making a lot of noise, so this will have to be blunt and unlinked.

American motherhood has been defined since the dawn of America as a nation by what we would now call a PUA (pick-up artist).  That’s right, if you’re an American woman promoting mother-only care as historical, the most natural and the best possible care for children, you’re promoting the views of a man who abandoned his own illegitimate children to be reared in orphanages without the least thought.

Rousseau’s view on motherhood was that women needed to be constrained in the domestic sphere by sole (not primary, but SOLO) care of their children so that they wouldn’t go out into the marketplace and rule over men.  Yes, that was what the man feared.  He claimed women were sooooo powerful that if they weren’t trapped at home constantly pregnant raising kids by themselves (only to be handed off to men at apprentice-age of 12-13 if boys and married off at 15-16 if girls) that they would TAKE OVER THE WORLD.  And yes, he comes close in his writings about motherhood to using phrases like trapped or constrained.

The entire point of Rousseau-style motherhood is to limit female power and influence and constrain women’s roles, even in the domestic sphere.  One must remember that in the 18th century, household production by wives and mothers was still economically important and a Rousseau-style program of childrearing would make it much harder to maintain that economic role.  This was intentional.

Rousseau’s framework of solitary childrearing by mothers has, astonishingly, continued down nearly unaltered in 200+ years in American society.  American society really is just that weird and started out with wacky theories about mothering propagated by a man who didn’t do any proper family formation of his own.

In contrast, the colonial Puritans had a view of motherhood as a primary role for women and marriage as the highest state for men and women (presaging the Mormons, who replicated some aspects of their views on family and community), but they didn’t believe women were supposed to rear children alone.  Women were expected to be part of a large, bustling household composed of husband, wife, servants and relatives, with the husband sometimes gone for months earning the giant wheelbarrows full of money needed to keep what was essentially the original home-based business going.  So Puritan women were expected to stand in their husband’s stead and have authority in both the home and the marketplace.  In this respect they diverged wildly from Rousseau while still holding to the idea that women were best suited to marriage and motherhood.

And while there were many young-married Puritans, there were plenty of older-married ones who started families later in life when they could get the cash together to set up the proper household structure.  So all the current fretting about people delaying marriage “too long” is just a lot of Rousseau-inflected hokum.

Rousseau is the source of the obsessive pressure for teen marriage no matter what in various eras in America, especially of barely-pubescent girls.  Rousseau is the real source of what many think is just from attachment parenting, the idea that mom is the only possible proper caregiver for children (and yeah, it’s always plural).  Because of Rousseau’s influence, women braved the frontier life and tried to rear children that way and enough continued encouraging it that, well, here we are today.

So if you are a mother struggling with small children in isolation, and you see people saying that this is what women really want and really feel fulfilled by, they are telling you a PUA fish story.

I remain a neo-Puritan on this subject and ever will.

College has replaced the parish

This is more of a note than a fully hashed out idea, but I think there is something to the fact that the “tribe” of college-educated adults and especially college-educated parents is where what remains of functional parenting culture lies in America among American-born Americans.  It’s the college-educated who hook each other up with nanny shares, allowing them genuinely flexible childcare that pays a good wage to the nanny while none of them ever pay more than center-based daycare costs per family.  It’s the college educated who can still find college-educated young women willing to barter and be live-in childcare for a gap year or two.  Who make social events mixed-age, and welcoming to children and their parents.  There is a loyalty and support base there that even crosses political boundaries.  But of course, both parents have to be college-educated.

Thus, when the political rubber hits the road, conservatives are more loyal to their real tribe of college-educated types than their supposed tribe of conservatives, Christians or conservative Christians.  I’ve seen way too many non-Christian college educateds serve as enforcers of progressive stuff by assuring college educated Christians that so long as they agree with some progressive thing (obviously being frothy about how evil Trump is would be a recent example) they’re “sane, sensible Christians” and thus acceptably human and allowed to retain access to a fairly vast social network.

And why shouldn’t they scrabble for the attentions of fellow college-goers?  Completing a BA/BSc or more has a shared vocabulary and world of experiences that crosses the same kinds of political and ethnic lines that church or parish (sometimes) used to.  Being cut off from a complete culture with its own traditions and lore, and of course, support in real terms like showing up to watch your kids with ten minutes’ notice, it’s easy to see why Christians end up choosing to go along with tons of progressive cant to maintain those bonds and access to those resources.

 

 

Please help Vladimir Bukovsky, Freedom Fighter

I am spreading the signal for this good cause.

This really brilliant woman has a good summary with donation links.

This is the donation page:

https://www.crowdrise.com/help-vladimir-bukovsky-brave-putin-critic1/

 

If you can spare something, please do.  If not, keep passing the link along.

Goal was met!  Yay!

The Pornographic Missing Stair Shaped Elephant in the Marital Bed

I have a half-finished post briefly outlining that men bringing pornography consumption into their marriages has been part of American married life since World War II.  This of course goes against the narrative that men are “driven” to seek out pornography because mean mean wives are withholding sex as a tool of control and dominance.  But the historical evidence is on the side of the man bringing the habit into the marriage and retroactively blaming the wife when the sex life goes awry.

“Missing Stair” is a reference from a promoter of deviant sexuality discussing the shocking fact that when you devote your free time to obsessively pursuing a sexual fetish, the subculture you create attracts predators and abusers like flies to fresh manure.  The missing stair is the way that the subculture coalesces around the abusers to work around their abusive tendencies and still keep pursuing the other forms of deviance as a group.

This working around a bad actor can occur outside the world of sexually deviant subcultures, and it does occur in settings that are not themselves “missing stairs” to the culture at large.

Which brings me to this post.  Pornography is a huge elephant in the room regarding sexual marriage dynamics and pretending it’s harmless or trivial because “it’s just pictures/video” illustrates just how deep the corruption and protection of evil to feed unrepentant depravity goes.

One of the issues with 2016 marriages is that they involve men and women who came of age just as pre-teen pornography exposure became something that was easy to do accidentally and very easy to do intentionally.

From the male side, when men are exposed from age 9 or 10 to frequent graphic sexual imagery of women, it’s disorienting at best for them to step outside and go to a shop.  The female store clerk isn’t…behaving correctly.  Neither are the women chatting to each other by the cereal aisle wearing the…right clothing.  Or…behaving correctly.  And forget talking to a girl, it’s almost offputting because she just isn’t behaving according to what you are used to women doing constantly for hours per day in multiple browser windows and screens.

And this is at best.  Many men respond to this disorientation by resenting or even hating regular women for not acting like erotic automata.

Christian ministries around pornography are trying to grapple with something that is in some ways more serious than regular brothel visits or having a mistress.  The ladies in the brothel and the mistresses are, after all, actual women who will slip up and act normally sometimes in the course of things.

The missing stair here is of course the idea that the plastic unreality of the porn women is safer, less sinful, perhaps even not a sin within a marriage.  I certainly hope one might see the problem with this reasoning.  Women doing that sort of thing are at best having natural feminine impulses distorted all out of human recognition and reduced to strange and increasingly perverse transactional assaults on the senses.  And at worst they’re being drugged and physically coerced into participation.

Any Christian man saying that some women should exist in this plastic evil world so some men can pretend their wives are the obstacle to an ordered and chaste married sex life is promoting sin and evil and maneuvering around an entire missing staircase of sin.

Homeschool Enrollment Trends

http://icher.org/blog/?p=2801#more-2801

This data is caveated like whoa for obvious reasons, but it’s interesting because it gives a glimpse of where critical mass is that can lead to more options for homeschooling households than doing it alone in the woods and never meeting any other homeschool families.

Something all the men who yell “homeschool or die” never talk about, but having the choice to be part of a community and not having to be jane teacher of all subjects is a big deal when making the decision about whether to homeschool and for how long.

 

The Poison Red Pill, an Introduction

I am finally going to start fisking and discussing “Red Pill Woman” posts because the political season in the USA has shown that a lot of the craziness the manosphere talks about regarding women’s behavior and thoughts really is more common among conservative women who are not too conservative to vote (Republican).  So for the fishbowl I swim in, it’s 30% of women instead of 10% of women.  Depressing.

Anyhoo, the main issue with Red Pill Women’s advice to other women is that Red Pill women on the internet are so profoundly male-oriented that they can’t give useful advice to other women.   Women repeating bad male advice to women is not useful to women. So I’ll criticize it and point out what’s bad about it.

I’ll also criticize it when people use their own lives as examples of living rightly.  Yes, you can have a clean slate, sort of, on the internet even if you’ve had six divorces and five kids out of wedlock and now you’re a devout Latvian Orthodox Christian at 46, but your advice on how to marry at 24 and stay married should be taken with some shakers of salt.

Red Pill Women mostly don’t introspect about how they got from A to B there.  They just talk about B like they always did it.  Red Pill Men do too, but that issue is kind of resolving itself in real time with other men taking up that task of critique.

 

About “women delaying marriage”.

Recently the Christian manosphere has decided to blame women for the very high ages for first marriage.  They do this every few months, here’s a roundup of the latest with commentary afterwards.

Shorter Dalrock: Doug Wilson thinks lazy manbabies are keeping sweet Christian women from getting married at 22!  Joke’s on him, there are no Godly Christian women!  Churchian Carousel Bandits are keeping SUPER NICE TOTALLY MATURE AND GREAT CHRISTIAN GUYS WHO TOTALLY ARE MATURE AND STUFF from getting married at 22!  Additional Dalrock supplement to above, same premise.

Shorter Donalgraeme: I’m going to assert that later marriage is all womens’ fault and I assure you I will back it up with data at some unspecified point in the future.  But in the meantime, since most of my commenters agree with me, IT MUST BE TROOOOOOOO.

Shorter Moosenorseman: If women would just act more like dogs (amiriteboyz), there wouldn’t be a marriage crisis!

Anyway, the marriage issue is not solely the fault of naughty women and their hypergamy.  The evangelicals marrying young delay childbearing 5-10 years.  So they nominally marry early but then have kids late just like the people who delay marriage into their late 20s and early 30s.  This masks a lot of the manbaby stuff as well as the carousel issue.  Men are being more immature on average, and also in addition, women behave poorly and are immature and unrealistic as well.  Both pieces are true, not just one side of it.

And because childbearing happens at the same late 20s and early 30s point in time for most births these days, a lot of women figure that there’s no point in marrying young since they couldn’t have the kids right away anyhow.

We’re back to real vs. imaginary status again.  You get nothing marrying young and having kids right away except a lot of hassle and headache from people around you for being foolish with your childrens’ futures.  Marry young but hold off a few years, and suddenly things are fine, you were prepared.   Suddenly you might be worthy of a tuition check or ten from one set of grandparents.

Our kids are going into private school and every single one goes on at length about how you might want to hit up gramma and grandpa for that cash.  But of course, you also can’t have eight kids that way either, maybe not even four or three.

There is a lot of blaming women and parents (by which we mean MOM) for later marriage and childbearing, but basic needs are increasingly impossible to meet for people having kids right now at young ages.  This is why even single mothers overwhelmingly have a kid, not kids plural.

And as I already linked, there are Christians marrying before 25, you just have to admit that this is where the husbands and wives are (for Protestants anyhow). But for some reason, going where the young marriage is happening in America is not something any of these folks want to do….

ETA: commenter “thedeti” is going to spam now (1pm EST), so don’t reply to him if any get through.