This past Valentine’s Day brought with it, as it often does, scores of articles about love and romance. But rather than celebrate its usual counterpart — marriage — we celebrated something new: singlehood. Single women, to be exact.
The rise of the single woman is hardly something to celebrate. She represents the culmination of a decades-long revolution that has chipped away, relentlessly and insidiously, at the traditional family unit. First it was motherhood, now it’s marriage.
Before I write more, let me be clear: There is absolutely nothing wrong with being single. Being single, by definition, is not a flaw; and it requires no justification. What is wrong is when feminists use this very purposeful trend to try and upend a centuries-old global institution that serves millions of adults — and their children — exceedingly well.
In the widely read November 2011 Atlantic cover story, entitled “All the Single Ladies,” singleton Kate Bolick declares that “it’s time to embrace new ideas about romance and family — and to acknowledge the end of traditional marriage as society’s highest ideal.” And her latest piece, published this weekend in the Wall Street Journal, is titled “For Women, Is Home Really So Sweet?” In it, Bolick compares home ownership for single women to society’s high opinion of marriage. (Hint: They’re both overrated.)
Just some articles by a frustrated woman? Hardly. Bolick’s “All the Single Ladies” — which has been “recommended” 51,000 times on Facebook — is being made into a television series. So now the young people of America will get this message crammed down their throats every week. That should make for some good partnerships down the road, don’t you think?
Indeed, Bolick is in good company — not just with Hollywood but with like-minded pontificators such as Hanna Rosin, who wrote a similar article last year called “The End of Men” – also in The Atlantic, and also widely read. The online version of this article incorporates a video in which Rosin (and her daughter) conclude, while sitting at a table opposite her son and (very emasculated) husband, that “girls are better than boys.” And we can’t forget one of the liberal media’s favorite professors, Stephanie Coontz. In an article last week in The New York Times, entitled “The M.R.S and the Ph.D.,” Coontz exalts the ascension of women and suggests they resign themselves to marrying down.
Then there are articles that aren’t so well-known — such as last month’s cover story in Boston magazine, entitled “Single by Choice.” The smaller caption reads, “This is Terri. She’s successful, happy, and at 38, just fine with never getting married. Ever.” It’s enough to make the average person think there’s something fundamentally wrong with the married state.
Which, of course, is the point.
Unlike women such as Condoleezza Rice, who quietly lead unconventional lives without a trace of resentment toward their fellow men, feminists are inherently insecure women who demand validation for their unusual choices. They do this by implying the so-called rise of women is a great thing — and proof that marriage is an outdated, patriarchal institution. At an event in Washington D.C., Bolick and Rosin appear together to do just that. Rosin, in her trademark elitist and condescending fashion, had this to say: ”Having reported a lot on Christian conservatives, I can tell you they get married, like, as soon as they fall in love and, you know, it’s probably because they can’t have sex unless they’re married — which is not the case for most of us.” (Envision lots of insulting facial gestures, as well as laughter coming from the audience.) Just imagine if I were to say in a similar forum, “Yeah, you know how those Jews are.”
High-profile feminists such as Bolick, Rosin, and Coontz celebrate the ascension of women as though it were a win-win. But the fact that today more women than men get college degrees and have good jobs is nothing to smile about. ”The good news about women is accompanied by bad news about men, which also turns out to be bad news for women,” writes Wall Street Journal columnist James Taranto.
The “bad news” about men is always couched in the context that men aren’t “manning up,” or doing what’s necessary to be responsible adults. Perhaps they aren’t — they’re certainly retreating from marriage, that’s for sure. The question is, why? And the answer is simple. With premarital sex a foregone conclusion and cohabitation on the rise, men live the good life with no responsibilities. Moreover, women have made it clear they don’t need a man to support them, to be happy, or even to become a mother. The result is that men become slackers.
And those so-called empowered women feminists created? Many learn, eventually, that they were cruelly misled. Millions of women find that they do, in fact, want to stay home with their babies when they’re young and therefore need a husband with a good job. But by that time, it’s too late. Their husbands have been schooled in the art of feminism just as they have and expect their wives to go to work and “pull their weight.”
And that’s just the women who were fortunate enough to find husbands in the first place. Others put off marriage indefinitely — until they decide they want a baby. Trouble is, they can’t find men who are willing to marry them.
To repeat what James Taranto put so astutely in his WSJ article: Happy Valentine’s Day.
— Suzanne Venker is co-author of the book The Flipside of Feminism: What Conservative Women Know – and Men Can’t Say, and author of an upcoming book about modern marriage. Her website is www.suzannevenker.com.
As much as we might wish people would compartmentalize, the transition in the world of work from long-term commitment to "easy come, easy go," inevitably spills into the way we manage our personal lives.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI agree. These thing are connected. I work in a unionized situation where people stay for 25-40 years before collecting a pension. The majority of my co-workers are long term married people with children. The structure of this arrangement, with its long maternity leaves, leaves of absence, FMLA arrangements, health benefits, flex time, on site day care, sick leave and due process rights reinforces the long term relationship between the employer and employees. People learn to co-exist because they will look at each other for years. You serve, and get to have expectations in return. It works like a marriage, encourages marriage, and supports marriage. Yet conservatives HATE this, deriding it as a drain on the economy. Go figure.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseExcellent, prophetic and a harbinger of no good for the US and the West going forward. We had a nice generational shift from self-regulation to sexual freedom, lots of fun but with short-term consequences.
And many folks are hell-bent to throw off the last vestiges of the Christianized conscience of our culture, with its "inherent" sense of right and wrong and the divine standards by which we keep our freedoms.
What is coming is cruel, heartless and without conscience, except for what the enviros declare is good for the earth and the PC's declare is a correct sentiment.
Abortion yes, murder no not quite. Kill a man? 2-5. Kill a dog? 5-10 years. Am I sounding cynical? You ain't seen nothing yet!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMen by thier nature are not inclined towards marriage and family. The fall of Rome and the onset of barbarism in Europe should remind us of that. It took the Church nearly 1000 years to create what we now call the "family". Man is always torn between Nature and convention, as well as duty and inclination. And what took 1000 years to build was torn asunder in less than 50. No amount of conscious raising, gender adjustments, and propaganda can change Nature. Men, without some kind of transcental guidance will eventually do what they please. Christianity and the insitutions is built created a means which unified what was once divided.
And women should enjoy thier new found freedoms while they can. For, as society steadily devolves into a Hobbesian wilderness (where life is mean, nasty, brutish, and short) so will the status of women. Just visit an urban ghetto - there are lots of them.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI love your comment, so true! and to think, less than 50 years torn asunder! and I witnessed the whole thing. I remember back in the 90s I saw a 34 year old woman who appeared on Oprah with the topic "single and happy to stay single, don't need to be married, happy with my career." I remember thinking, oh, great, someone that I agree with! I was around the same age. The audience was upset and tried to argue with her and reason with her. I thought, "don't they get it." and she was youthful and attractive and appeared puzzled by their outrage. I wonder what she is thinking now....
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAnother factor to consider is that the cost of marriage is higher for men than it was in the past, due to divorce laws favoring women.
If the cow can result in the loss of half of your property, alimony payments, and child support payments, it should not be surprising that men try to get the milk for free.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBingo. The author asks the question nobody else seems to be asking: Why are men avoiding marriage? But her answer is too simplistic and incomplete. It's not just that premarital sex is a foregone conclusion or "getting the milk for free". In fact, getting married is no guarantee of frequent and abundant sex since the wife can refuse to have sex at any time, and often do (and of course it can work the other way, too).
And to many men, marriage represents a significant financial risk. The way the divorce laws are written and enforced, any person with money or the potential to have money needs to think long and hard about whether to risk half of it on an institution that ends in divorce 50% of the time.
If a man gets married, his wife can stop having sex with him at any time. And then if the man sues for divorce over this, the judge would award the wife half of the marital property and earnings. If the man is the primary earner, that means he would give up perhaps half of his earnings during the marriage period and probably a significant amount for post-marital maintenance.
So as for "getting the milk for free", many men have come to realize that marriage is no guarantee of getting the milk at all but a significant risk that they would pay for it anyway for years and years.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMiss Bolick's article is a bit concerning. What kind of education, or re-education, do the feminist think men need? I gaurantee they wouldn't like the results. Emasculated, feminized wimps? Modern feminism, the 3rd wave brand, has attempted to make marriage a contractual arrangement in the minutia with the net result being for a lot of gusy to ask; What is the deference between a wife and a prostitute? Answer; Not much anymore. There’s a joke; "a golddigger is just like a prostitue, only a little smarter.” Smarter maybe, but no wiser, and that’s what feminism has done to women. Why should a man be interested in a woman like Mess Bolick? She doesn’t believe in marriage or commitment or family. Feminism is educating women to turn their backs on these.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWith premarital sex a foregone conclusion and cohabitation on the rise, men live the good life with no responsibilities. Moreover, women have made it clear they don’t need a man to support them, to be happy, or even to become a mother.
You leave out the most important consideration: Modern marriage is a terrible financial risk for a man (to a first approximation: all obligations, no rights) and the modern woman makes a terrible wife. She's basically an entitled roommate who can take your stuff and stick you with her bills if she finds herself unhaaaaaaaaapy, which, lucky you, she perennially is.
The problems with the family in the West are misandric laws and unfeminine women. And these problems show no sign of being fixed, and little of even being named.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI don't think this is all women's fault here. Our society may not be "shaming" unwed motherhood or illegitimacy anymore, but neither is it "shaming" lifelong bachelorhood either. Maybe it never did, but I have entirely too many male friends in their very late 30s (some in the early and mid 40s) who have never been married and feel no desire to do so. They work hard and figure, what's in it for them? Really nothing. And society offers so much more for the bachelor man nowadays, there really is no pressure to get married.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat part of "slacker" and "man up" do you not understand?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAs a man divorced after 17 years of marriage I have a different take on this issue. Marrige is a broken insitution.
It doesn't matter what the elites tell women, men can look at the empiracal data and see marriage is a no-win situation for a man today.
Forget about all that sex in the hookup culture. That is only fun for so long. Eventually everyone wants stability. But marriage offers little to a man.
If she decides to take on the lead role in supporting the family society looks at him as being lazy. If he decides to take on the same role society looks at him as an oppressor for asking her to take a support role.
When it comes to the decision to have children, society says it ultimately is her decision alone. If she chooses not to have children who is he to object; if she does it is his lifelong responsibility to support them.
And if the marriage should fail for whatever reason he is expected to support her and the offspring forever.
I was lucky. I pay no support and have my child at least 50% of the time. So you cannot attribute my opinions to simply being bitter.
Knowing what I know now I would never take the risk of marrying again. And I make no apologies for telling young men to avoid it at all costs.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMen aren't slackers. I know men who were divorced by their wives. These poor guys move back with their parents at age 40 while their wives get the house and the kids..
Is it any wonder that their sons don't want to get married? Especially middle class or lower middle class men who will never recover financially.
I am more worried about who my son dates than my daughter. He will have more to lose if his potential wife divorces him.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis is Suzanne Venker -- I'm having trouble logging in the proper way.
The word 'slacker' in the title is meant more for the 20-something set who are now struggling to find their way as a result of our feminist culture. It's certainly true that older men/fathers are NOT slackers. Rather, they've been burned. Just wanted to clarify the difference there.
And to the man who said he'd never marry again: I understand completely. Those are the men I hear from regularly, and my new book will address that issue. I'm just not ready to throw in the towel for the men of America -- I have hope for a turnaround of sorts...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf that book is a balanced view of family law, I'd love to see it. And if it is, I bet you it will never get published.
Both the Right and the Left prefer men to be stolid workhorses, producing income for a wife and tax revenues for the government.
If you mention issues such as putative father registries (look it up), lifetime alimony or insane child support laws (many boys molested by their adult teachers are on the hook for it), both sides of the aisle will tell you to go away. Just ask Warren Farrell or Stephen Baskerville.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI just don't see this. Perhaps I live in a bubble, but most people that I know are getting married and having children. Of my friends from high school and college, only a few of them are unmarried and childless. I think my generation is starting to reject the Hillary complex... who would want to stay home and bake cookies? It turns out many of us want that and are figuring out ways to live it. As the sweet older women I met at a restaurant last week said, "do whatever you have to to stay at home with them, live on spaghetti if you must". It was nice to get the encouragement and to have a kind stranger take an interest in my baby. It reminded me of when I once climbed up a mountain and was getting near the top, those who had already reached the summit and started back down would lend encouragement as they passed you by; "keep it up, you can do it, you are so close". There are still many people who value family. Maybe it skipped a generation or two, but all is not lost.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI like your comment, you give us hope.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAre they trying to reinvent the wheel? Have they ever heard of the TV series Sex and the City? There is nothing new under the sun.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou know an article is, unfortunately, true when you feel a pit in your stomach after reading it. Wake up, women. You've been duped.
-m
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDivorce is the issue. Everybody knows people, male and female, who got shafted in a divorce. Virtually nobody knows anybody in an unhappy marriage -- this is why we're always surprised to get the news when couples split up. There is no social stigma with cohabitation and birth out of wedlock anymore.
Women could be calling the shots. As Richard Pryor famously noted, they've got half the money and all the __________.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse