In 1969, when I was a college student of just 19 years old, feminism was just beginning to become a force to be reckoned with. The college campus sit-ins, demonstrations, protests and marches, led by non-Christian students, both male and female, were organized in direct opposition to every proven, Christian standard of behavior ever developed.
In addition, these ingrates initiated violent attacks on the very institutions that Christianity had developed, over thousands of years, to protect and reinforce, those critically important standards of behavior. Standards which had been essential to the success of Western Civilization, and the salvation of man.
These campus attacks not only targeted Christian morality and ethics but included the debasement of – reverence towards God, honesty in work and play, kindness to others, politeness to all, respect for elders, consideration for neighbors, charity to others, protection of the innocent, commitment to family, and most importantly, the sacrament of marriage and the miracle of motherhood.
The Christian institutions of academia, family, organized religion, military, business, judiciary and politics were, under these twisted radical’s bombastic accusations, suddenly turned on their heads. What was truth, was suddenly lies – as hate overtook love. What was good, was suddenly evil – as insanity overtook sanity. What was right, was suddenly wrong – as irrationality overtook rationality.
The female, radical, second-wave feminists were the principle instigators of the attacks on Christian marriage, morality, family and in particular, Christian mothers. Their sick and distorted view of family life was generated by their dysfunctional, non-Christian upbringings. And sadly, the outcome of their insidious influence over the gullible generation of 74 million baby boomers, which was enabled by the liberal news media, TV and entertainment industries, was in retrospect, devastating. This was especially true for Christian women and their roles as wives and mothers.
The truth was that the radical’s accusations and assumptions about family life did not, even remotely, reflect the reality of the Christian family life that had been experienced by 99% of those young baby-boomers. But despite this reality, the draw of “individualism”, “personal freedom” and “sexual liberation” would prove to be more powerful, as these college bound, hormone-ladened 20 somethings succumb, one by one. Sex, drugs and rock n’ roll would rule the day.
Thanks to these wicked women’s twisted, and insular, upbringings these non-Christian anarchists vocally rejected every traditional family value that Christians had revered for centuries because they were jealous of the joy-filled family lives most Christians led – sans divorce, abortion, abuse, adultery, neglect and debauchery.
And, the outcome of their envious, non-Christian, mental machinations was…?
Christian fathers? – they abhorred them.
Christian mothers? – they denigrated them.
Christian churches? – they reviled them.
Christian children? – they insulted them.
Christian faith? – they condemned it.
Christian morality? they trivialized it.
Christian ethics? – they disdained it.
Every Christian belief, premise, parameter, notion, concept, and ideal that had provided Christian Americans with the safest, most prosperous and most advanced society in human history were suddenly, and irrationally, questioned and found to be lacking, or worse yet, evil. More incredibly, millions upon millions of young Christian baby-boomers bought it!
Christian motherhood took the brunt of these attacks, as non-Christian, radical, second-wave feminists, such as Gloria Steinem, Bella Abzug, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Betty Friedan, promoted the twisted theories of radical feminist, atheist, bi-sexual, childless, single, mistress Simone de Beauvoir (1908-1986).
This was a woman who, for 51 years, allowed herself to be abused, disgraced and shamefully taken advantage of by the philandering philosopher Jean-Paul Satre, for whom she eventually sunk to the level of acquiring teenage girls for his pleasure. She was his lover, laundress, pimp and doormat. She was hardly the kind of woman upon whom a feminine ideology should center.
And yet, Ms. Beauvoir’s book, The Second Sex (1949) gave voice to many female non-Christian’s upbringing where men reigned supreme and women were nothing more than sex objects and servants.
This book was an autobiographical treatise of de Beauvoir’s particularly twisted life which did not reflect the home life of Christians. But, for the non-Christian women, it resonated on every level. And it ultimately planted the seeds of radical, second-wave feminism based on Marxist communist theory.
By the 1960s, their radical, second-wave feminist theories had blossomed. By 1970, with the publication of radical feminist, bi-polar, bi-sexual, childless, Kate Millet’s book Sexual Politics, which viciously, and irrationally, attacked Christian “patriarchy”, motherhood was no longer, as poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge described it, the “holiest thing alive.” Instead, according to most of the non-Christian, radical, feminists, it was the vilest thing alive.
Unfortunately, there were women who unwittingly played-right-into-the-hands of the radical feminists. One was author and playwright, Jean Kerr (1922-2003). Mrs. Kerr was an Irish, Catholic housewife living in a New York City suburb with her husband, Walter, and their six kids when, in 1957, she wrote a book titled, Please Don’t Eat the Daisies. It was about her family’s life in Larchmont. The book became a movie and a successful TV series as well. Mrs. Kerr’s wry humor, unintentionally, gave voice to those very same future radical feminists when she wrote in her book that, “The real menace in dealing with a five-year-old is that in no time at all you begin to sound like a five-year-old.”
This premise, of wasting your life immersed in “baby talk” would be repeated, in different ways and with different words, over and over again by the radical feminists as they began their attack on motherhood. They claimed that motherhood reduced women to blithering idiots. And unfortunately, since the vast majority of female, college bound, baby boomers were childless at the time, they were especially susceptible to this unprecedented BS.
Mrs. Kerr’s comment was not meant to demean the value of her time spent with her children. She was a humorist, not a psychologist. She loved her children and never indicated that she regretted the time it took to raise her family. Only a radical-second-wave-feminist-in-the-making could interpret her comment seriously. Or, view it as anything other than comedic bantering.
Another Catholic housewife, this time from Dayton, Ohio, named Erma Bombeck, would also unintentionally play-into-the-hands of radical feminism. Mrs. Bombeck began her nationally syndicated column, At Wit’s End, in 1965. She, also, wrote disparagingly about motherhood and suburbia with wry wit. At the peak of her popularity in the 1970s, Mrs. Bombeck’s column was read by 30 million readers, in 900 newspapers, in both the United States and Canada.
Unfortunately, both Kerr and Bombeck gave credibility to the radical, second-wave feminist’s assertions that motherhood and children were a waste of women’s intellect when, in reality, neither of Kerr nor Bombeck would have traded her family life for all the tea in China. “Baby talk” was a language both women spoke fluently and gratefully.
On the other hand, the “baby talk” that the feminists disparaged so vehemently, was just another example of their intense hatred for the joyous, Christian, mother/child relationship that they themselves had been denied. The “baby talk”, that the radical feminists were denied as children by their mothers and which they chose to belittle as radical adults, was in reality the intimate expression of the intense love of a Christian mother for her child. It was a cherished and precious part of motherhood.
It is still today, the expression of a unique familiarity between a Christian mother and her child. It reflects the devotion, caring and deep emotional bond that develops, almost immediately after the child’s birth, between a Christian mother and her beloved child. It expresses an intensely personal interconnection between a Christian mother and her child that is impossible to describe because it must be experienced in order to fully understand its personal intensity.
So, despite what radical, second-wave feminism claims, “baby talk” is truly Christian “mother love” in its purest form. To deny yourself this extraordinary experience, in order to pursue a feminist lifestyle built around a “career”, is not only foolish, but it represents an irrational and fundamentally flawed level of thinking, as well.
Be warned! Feminism is not what you have been led to believe. It is instead, a personally destructive way of life, even to the point of ruining your blessed relationship with your precious children.
Get out while you can!
Hi KQ, I am soon to have a baby are you saying its OK to goo goo and ga ga at her? These days moms and dads pride themselves on NOT talking gibberish to their newborns.
And, as you will learn with the birth of your precious child, that is a very sad development in child care. It is a clinical, heartless, non-Christian view of children’s needs. Ignore it. They need your cooing because it is the only way they can communicate with YOU. Remember, being a parent is not about you, it’s about the needs of your children and your communication with them is critical to your success as a parent and it begins the day your infant smiles and says goo goo to you. Smile back and say goo goo too. It will forge a bond that you will NEVER regret. Congratulations and God bless you both.
LikeLiked by 1 person