Women need men and children to be fulfilled
October 21, 2007 | By Justin SandersThis is a guest post from Justin Sanders who writes at www.thestateof.com. It is his opening argument on the question, “Do women need men and/or children in order to be fulfilled?” and it does not reflect my personal views. Check out my opposing viewpoint, “Generation Y breeds a new kind of woman,” here.
It is said that famed feminist Gloria Steinem once quipped, “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.” Well, if that’s the case, fish need bicycles.
In heterosexual marriage, the male wins a woman’s trust (i.e., love) through courtship. A woman cannot love a man she cannot trust. In return, she gives him the power to love her. This exchange of power for love is how a man and a woman become one, which is the primary goal of marriage. It is the psychological key that allows us to grow. Sex is the symbol of this permanent and exclusive bond. Without this growth and this bond, the lives of most people are unfulfilled.
Feminism teaches that male and female are the same and sex roles are merely “stereotypes” imposed by men. As a result, millions of people are clueless about their sexual identities and suffer from arrested development. Nowadays, women are socialized to work in corporations, not to be wives or mothers. Feminism has destabilized society by undermining heterosexuality and the family. This perverse assault on gender difference is disguised as an act of “defense” of women’s’ and homosexuals’ “right” to be single and childless. Women have been duped into seeking “power” and “independence” (aloneness) through climbing the mirage of the corporate ladder. What women really want is power expressed as male love. They will get it when they are able to believe in a man.
True femininity acts in concert with its masculine counterpart, just as masculinity needs a feminine companion in order to truly develop. This has been the natural order of human beings from time immemorial. The natural result of this union between the masculine and the feminine is the child - Heaven’s most precious gift. Without a child to care for, a woman often becomes frustrated, bitter and distracted. She often uses the “success” of her “career” (which is simply a glorified word for “job”) as a replacement for the void of the missing child. Motherhood changes a woman permanently. The job, which once seemed so important, quickly becomes secondary to the starry eyes of her loving child. I’ve seen far too many women recite feminists mantras only to discovery - in their late 30s - that all they really wanted was a warm baby to snuggle.
Men and women are different, biologically, emotionally and physically - and there is nothing wrong with acknowledging that, so long as we never attempt to confine women to certain limited roles. In the past, men “overplayed their hands,” so to speak, and wrongly confined women to solely domestic roles. Now, a vicious cycle has been created because men are overcompensating for their past transgressions by feeling as if they must act and think like women in order to make themselves more attractive (i.e., metrosexual). These men typically have a hard time keeping a woman’s interest because women innately reject weak men. A man gains fulfillment by protecting and providing for a family. Weak, feminized men cannot do this.
To be clear, there is nothing wrong with a woman having a career. What is wrong is when women prioritize their career and neglect the deeper fulfillment of family life.
Unfortunately, I can’t even deign to give his argument any credence because he fails to even recognize HUGE categories of race and class; he writes as if all women are white and of middle class means. Brown and Black women have HAD to work and many of my grandmothers would have considered being a housewife a privilege instead of working as a domestic or in a factory all day long and then coming home to tend to their own home and hearth - and I am sure many poor white women can relate.
Perhaps this guest poster will argue that these women should have married up, but how does that work systemically in a free market, global economy where someone has to clean the toilets at Target? He fails to recognize that some women don’t have the choice to stay home or work towards a career… or that there are feminists and anti-feminists; check out Alice Walker’s treatise on womanism.
Frankly, this is poorly written and so poorly researched that it reads like a childish dilettante’s ramblings on “women” and “teh gayz.” Had he not made overgeneralizations and a slight attempt to research the myriad schools of feminist thought AND look at intersectionality, this could have been interesting and provided an opening for a lively debates.
Comment by Saskaia — October 21, 2007 #
There are many many responses I’d like to give to this post that attempts to paint all of society with a conservative (and largely inaccurate) broad brush, and luckily for me all these responses can be succinctly summed up with the phrase “bullshit.”
Comment by Rachel — October 21, 2007 #
@ Saskaia - these are all good points. I must admit, while I consider myself a sort of feminist, I don’t know all the schools of thought. I’ll be interested to hear your thoughts on my post tomorrow.
@ Rachel - that is similar to the reaction that I had. While I do think there are some valid points in Sander’s argument, I believe he reaches a conclusion that is not representative of women today.
Comment by Rebecca Thorman — October 21, 2007 #
[…] This post is an opening argument to the question, “Do women need men and/or children in order to be fulfilled?” Check out the opposing viewpoint from Justin Sanders here. This post was also published at Damsels in Success. […]
Pingback by Modite - Engagement for the next generation — October 22, 2007 #
I believe there is not a power struggle between man and woman, but difference in lifestyles.
Lifestyles have been changing for years, and it’s called as evolution. Like micro-organisms, (which are the beginning and end of us) we adapt and change our ways to fit in society. Like any life on Earth, we live to survive the best way we can (Survival of the Fittest). Men and women should both do their best in society to provide for their child, raising money for a good education, food, shelter, clothes, etc. It’s not about seeking power, but seeking success and feeling secure to support yourself and your family. Yes, it’s probably hard to accept that things are changing, and changing at a fast rate. But I believe there is no reason to argue about power and dominance in a relationship. If my wife is making millions, I wouldn’t complain about staying home cooking, cleaning, and working around the house! Why would you complain?
About men acting and thinking like a woman is obsecured. If a man doesn’t know how to work out, wash, shave, dress properly, smell semi-good, and brush your teeth, then he has a problem. If a woman puts all her effort into being a beautiful lady, how come she can’t put all her effort into being successful in a career? A man should be on his top of the game as well. If he wants to be the dominant person, then dress, look, and act the part. To me, it’s upsetting when I see beautiful, young, sexy woman with a fat, redneck, mean, slob - OR -w/ a scrowny, emo, black eye make-up, and woman-wearing jeans. Come on, I’m ripped, smart, nice clothes, and have money to spend! I study biology, at the gym and library 24/7, and have two jobs! lol
Comment by Dan Frick — October 22, 2007 #
I have a hard time swallowing what Mr. Sanders is saying. I believe that he is sincere and in no way intentionally degrading women. I cannot believe that an educated man would phrase what I assume he’s referring to as homosexuality or bisexuality as “people being clueless/ arrested development”.
Furthermore, the argument that a man does not need a woman is just as simple as a woman not needing a man. There is absolutely no need to complicate this matter by bringing psychological or physiological differences into the argument. In the last thousand years, there were many, many men who went their entire lifetime without spawning a child, they were called bachelors. Generally they had lovers or a “girlfriend” who they could seek out when they wanted comfort. These women could have been prostitutes or mistresses. Bachelors were often respected, wealthy, and envied. Why now should that trend fade even though women are now occupying the “single and happy” role. I do not believe we should curtail the individual woman’s success by telling her that she isn’t happy until she’s knocked up. Perhaps women now are feeling a psychic connection to the strain of overpopulation on the earth and are choosing to slow the rate of babymaking. Or maybe men are just whining because they aren’t getting any…
and one quick note on Dan’s comment: Evolution is not a conscious decision. It is a series of trials. But mostly errors. The consequnce for an organism making an evolutionary “mistake” is usually death. Society cannot be truly defined as an “evolving” society without first clarifying the manner of evolution. Nature is a cold cruel mother, and she cares NOT for the individual. Society seeks to embrace both the individual and the gathered masses. We are not a survival of the fittest race. We care too much for the weak to be considered in the “race” for a lasting presence on this earth. Bacteria has and always will be the strongest life form on this planet. Not because of the individual, but because of its numbers.
Comment by Stephanie Campbell — October 22, 2007 #
Stephanie,
In the past, bachelors were the exception, not the rule. The contemporary man is, in many cases, raised from birth to be a bachelor. (See, George Clooney, etc).
Do you believe in the concept of arrested development? I do. I have many 30-something male friends who have their own house and car who, when asked about finding a mate say, “I’m not ready, man.” One need not actually have homosexual sex in order to be gay. A 35 year old man without a woman is 80% of the way there.
Comment by Big J (Justin Sanders) — October 23, 2007 #
@ Dan - I think just as women should be allowed to grow and change, men should be too … thanks for your comment!
@ Stephanie - how you make me laugh
Overpopulation is a serious concern in all of this.. good point. Thank you for commenting!
Comment by Rebecca Thorman — October 23, 2007 #
Is is just me or does “Men and women are different, biologically, emotionally and physically - and there is nothing wrong with acknowledging that, so long as we never attempt to confine women to certain limited roles.” contradict “What is wrong is when women prioritize their career and neglect the deeper fulfillment of family life.”
So what we are saying here is let’s not confine women to a certain role as long as they know that they must have a family.
And also, women hold their own power. They can be powerful in themselves with or without having a man.
Comment by elysa — October 24, 2007 #
This article takes some half truthes and runs so far with them that the arguments collapse on their knees gasping for air. I think the family unit is equally important for both men and women, a career should come secondary to either gender.
My personal favorite line from the article, “I’ve seen far too many women recite feminists mantras only to discovery - in their late 30s - that all they really wanted was a warm baby to snuggle.”
This is so absurd it is hilarious.
You would know all of this justin, because you are a woman?
Comment by Cristin — October 25, 2007 #
Thanks Cristin,
But I don’t your logic. Because I’m a man, I can’t write about womens’ emotions? Is the reverse true? Are you forbidden from writing about how men think?
Comment by Big J (Justin Sanders) — October 25, 2007 #
[…] Justin Sanders, who guest-posts at Modite writes: Feminism has destabilized society by undermining heterosexuality and the family. This perverse assault on gender difference is disguised as an act of “defense” of women’s’ and homosexuals’ “right” to be single and childless. Women have been duped into seeking “power” and “independence” (aloneness) through climbing the mirage of the corporate ladder. […]
Pingback by Friday Fun: « ProcrastinatioNation — October 26, 2007 #
I had to re-read the blog several times after reading the comments beause it seemed like they were commenting on a different blog. I didn’t read into the blog that Justin was saying that women shouldn’t work, shouldn’t achieve what they want. Could this be because I am in a relationship where I trust my husband, feel fullfilled by motherhood and have a challenging career? Men need to be respected by women and women need to be loved. It is that simple.
Comment by Christine — October 27, 2007 #
@ Elysa - good observation! Thank you for contributing to the discussion.
@ Cristin - I agree. The family is important, but career is also fulfilling. Thank you for sharing your viewpoint.
@ Christine - It’s great that you are in a healthy relationship. And while I don’t agree with all of what Justin has to say, I do think there are some points that hold true. I think in my counter-post, I sum it up nicely by saying “Women need men. Just not like they used to.” Thanks for commenting!
Comment by Rebecca Thorman — October 27, 2007 #
I disagree with Sanders viewpoint. Now that I said that I shall say this … why do men assume that women have some sort of magical “mothering” instinct encoded into our DNA that makes us all want to have lots of babies, oh and we all “naturally” know how to take care of them. And do it better then the father?? Just because women carried the child within their bodies for 9 months does not automatically make women the better parent.
Also … what does he mean we are no longer “socialized to be wives & mothers”??? Did we not all play house with our friend? Have Baby Dolls and Baribie with the Dream House? I would call that some fairly strong socialization right there.
Comment by Jane Sample — December 23, 2007 #