Oh… that is so disgusting.  What is the appeal of sleeping with someone everyone else has already slept with?  Gross.
Please don’t think that all single people are like this.
to the contrary, I’ve been abstinent since 1997!!!  Gah!
.
As an example, although I enjoyed the Sex and the City series… as an example of female camaraderie in the tumultuous world of trying to find someone to love…. I always pitied the character of Samantha ( who would sleep with anything with a pulse) knowing that she just didn’t know her worth as a woman.
There are many of those women out there.  Pray for them when you’re praying for the single people faithfully and stoically seeking their spouses!

From the sound of it, she had an experience that ran counter to what her secularist faith told her to expect.  Rather than re-examining the soundness of that faith, she renews commitment to it despite the evidence.  There is faith, and then there is blind faith.

Without even realizing it, she proved the point of how destructive porn could be to the viewers perception of sex.  When it is reduced to two people behaving like animals in heat, there isn’t a wonder in the world that it’s joyless and deflating.  I feel sorry for her.

Wow.  took a look at her writings on Salon.  pretty messed up.  Odd thing is the latest one posted is how she is starting to have desires to have a baby.  The world has gotten real messed up.  Pray for her.

“Afterward, she disappointingly notes that the whole thing was a bit of a let down. Not because she did something morally and spiritually destructive, but because it was a little boring saying “All of which is to say: It was like nearly every casual hookup I’ve ever had.”“
The woman is treating the man as Pavlov’s dog. This is her modus operandi. Abuse then, destroy. Power over the opposite sex. I’m sure the man as a porn star has his own modus operandi for destroying women. Both need to grow up, mature and become real people.

While I do not at all approve of the sexual behavior described in Salon, and I am also displeased at what contemporary feminism has become, I must say something for the word feminist nonetheless since I have found no better term (occasionally I play with egalitarian). I keep hearing a great deal about women wanting to imitate men but very few of the feminists that I know want to be men. We simply don’t want to be placed in this confining little box called “femininity.”

If feminists are at times excessive in praising women who engage in bad behavior, it is only because we wish to be human beings first. And it is the nature of humans to be ethical or unethical. The pedastal that many have tried to place women is actually a cage. For example, I remember a few years back in helping set up a protestant church in Gym, I was asked to give the curtains a “woman’s touch.”  Well, I did a lousy job because working with curtains is not my forte and I was a little annoyed that this man just assumes that I am good at decorating. On the other hand, I am a very good public speaker but week after week, I am forced to listen to a homily by someone who can’t preach a sermon to save his life.

Thus, feminists have found it necessary to rebel against these boxes, even the supposed virtues women have. In college, I found that women were MORE likely to postpone having sex with men so that they are thought of loose instead of their own innate self-restraint. The idea that I often hear among Christians, which is that young women are pressured into sexual activity to please and keep young men, is not generally true in my experience. I am not saying that this doesn’t happen but it is not as prevalent as we make it out to be. I personally get annoyed with all the attention given to men’s struggle with celibacy as if it is only Christian men who find it difficult to abstain. And if someone should bring it up in small group or something, some pious woman will say something about how as women God created us for love and relationship. And I am usually thinking, speak for yourself, I have plenty of love and relationships, what I am struggling with is the lack of sex!

Of course, as a Christian, I in no way endorse this libertinism. Sex is for marriage. But as a former atheist and feminist, my first acts of rebellion were sexual and they were motivated by wanting to be free of this cage that I was handed in which only men are sexual human beings. I am reminded of the famous speech by Sojouner Truth which she describes all the ways that she does not fit the victorian feminine paradigm and then asks, “Well, ain’t I a woman?”

My real point is, The church will get a lot more young women on board if they simply attacked this woman’s bad behavior as just that—bad behavior. But I certainly feel alienated as soon as you impose this vision of feminity onto her and then criticize for not fitting into it. Is she her sinner? Yes, indeed, but no more and no less than the man she slept with. Her sin is herself and against God, not against womanhood.

Peace in Christ,
Carolyn Hyppolite

This line caught me: “After minute worth of bad porno-like dialogue…”  Exactly.  It trains people to think that that script is how they are supposed to relate to one another romantically.  Of course real life is a let-down in comparison to a fake ideal.

That was my same reaction when my friends told me about a woman they read about in the news recently who drank only alcohol and Coke, smoked incessantly, and ate almost nothing, until she died of a heart attack.

They were criticizing the woman’s family for suing Coca-Cola and mocking the woman for killing her own self, but all I could say was, “That is so sad.”

Now that I think about it, I read something like this by a man whom I think may qualify as “saddest man on the internet.”  It was largely him bragging about having a list of conquests a mile long, and some trash talk of women, but with one revealing paragraph about how he had once wanted to get married but can no longer even entertain the idea because he will never be able to trust.  That is a broken person, to whom the human world is a desert he will be doomed to wander in search of water and not find it.  I could only be moved to pity.

Sounds like there’s a part of her that hasn’t “grown up.” Unfortunately she makes a living off of writing articles like this. :(

If she thought it was boring for her, imagine how it would have been for him?  The guy works in the sex industry and is saturated with it.  It would have been as exciting as making photocopies.  It reminds me of a book that came out a decade ago written by Hollywood call-girls called “You´ll never make love in this town again”, most of the sexual experiences described make sex with celebrities sound dull and irritating.  The only exception being a chapter in which a call girl named “Linda” describes her experience with Glenn Frey of the Eagles, who actually treated her as though she was his girlfriend, buying her dinner and talking to her like a human being.

While I agree with all of your points and your assertions, there is one thing I’d like to contend: your use of the word feminist here.  The opening section of your article does speak to the very heart of feminism, which truly ends up simply being a desire for “humanism” in the Catholic sense.  Feminism as it is known in the media has been highjacked by sinister agendas, and needs to be recategorized to reflect that.  What the Salon author is speaking of is not feminist, its not humanist, it may not even be animalist, its pure objectification that doesn’t consider the value of herself, of the porn star, of her mother, her friends, the community, or the world around her.  It is so contrary to her God-given nature that this has nothing to do with feminism; this has to do with a culture of unbridled selfishness.  To cast this as “feminist” makes it divisive and limits the vision of truth to being reduced to polemics, which causes unecessary damage and I would add, lacks charity towards a movement that seeks to strengthen women to be viable participants in the Church, in relationship, and the community.  The early feminist movement that has been highjacked fought for women’s rights, the rights of the unborn, and for women to not be objectified.  I question whether your article seeks to edify, or simply to get on the badwagon and malign those who seek to bring Christ’s love and truth into a dark world.  Many good things have come from feminism, and still do, and this adoption of the term simply gives more power to those who stole the term, so that the Church may be further divided in its work for social justice.  I wish you wouldn’t bring that into it.

Whatever you would like *feminism* to be, the sad reality is what it has turned out to be.  I didn’t hijack the name, they did.

What a sad life to live.

Pat, you keep using the word feminist as you do. I used to think of myself as a feminist. When I was in the 6th grade, my homeroom had a shelf of books about acccomplished women like Elizabeth Black, Physlis Wheatly, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, etc. I read them all and wanted to be just like them. Then when I got a little older Betty Friedan, germaine Gree and Gertrude Stein came into the picture. In 1970, I attended conciousness raising meetings. I realized then that what was being promoted was the imitation of the worst sort of male behavior: promescuity, the abandon of the family and worse. Like how male chimps will kill baby chimps to make the female go into heat quicker. Women began killing their own children in order to remain sexually available. At one meeting, we chanted “My wants are more important that my family’s needs.” I tried to continue in my support of feminism. I was a charter subscriber to Ms magazine and continued reading everything I could get my hands on from the movement. But more and more, feminism became about sexual license and always and above all, abortion. Absolutely no deviation from the party line was permitted. My eyes were opened. I had thought being a feminist meant liking being a woman and thinking that being a woman was a good thing. I realized that being a feminist meant rejecting everything that made me a woman instead of a man and choosing to be like, not a good man, but a bad one. Pat, you have the right idea about feminism. Don’t let anyone change your mind.

Terentia… this is brilliant.  I’m copying it to set it apart—- that your words get another opportunity to be noticed.  Just perfect!!
.
I had thought being a feminist meant liking being a woman and thinking that being a woman was a good thing. I realized that being a feminist meant rejecting everything that made me a woman instead of a man and choosing to be like, not a good man, but a bad one.

This was a great line, and so true: To be equal to men, you must be just like the worst of them….
Other than that, I would just say, it would make me really nervous ... a male porn star ... who would want to sleep with all those possibilities of stds. Scary. That would be my worst nightmare.

“Feminism” is social eengineering to destroy the family, pit women against their natural protectors (men), and tax the female half of the population. Ms Magazine was a CIA front. Betty Friedan hired female domestic staff. It was all a scam, women taught lies because it benefitted the increase of state power and diminished the private resources of the individual. I long ago realized that “feminists” valued nothing that I valued as a woman, not marriage, not tradition, not children, not sexuality, not even women.

It’s a bit like “The Seven Year Itch”, only without the humor, passion, tension, and clever dialogue. The Salon article itself is a complete let-down. Such cultural mediocrity spells the end of our society. It’s difficult to imagine someone wanting to live like that, day after day, year after year; a perpetual search for a new titillating experience and being disappointed time after time.

Carolyn,

This puzzles me. You say:

I keep hearing a great deal about women wanting to imitate men but very few of the feminists that I know want to be men. We simply don’t want to be placed in this confining little box called “femininity.”

Then you say you just want to be considered human.  I don’t get it.  You don’t want to be a man.  You balk against femininity.  What exactly do you think makes up the human race, if not male and female.  What do you think being a woman means?  Are you saying you want to neuter us all?  No feminine, no masculine, just folks?  That’s just not possible!  We are what we are, praise God.

When will our culture understand that we’re not to bend reality to fit our ideas, but rather are called to change our ideas to fit reality.  Whether you like or don’t like the “box” of femininity, I’m afraid that if you were born a woman, that’s just reality.  You are feminine.  Your acceptance or rejection of that fact has no affect on the reality of it. 

This is an attitude that I find particularly sad.

Sad as this woman’s troubles are (self-imposed or not), it’s not an adequate basis for condemning feminism.  Like many conservative critics of feminism, the author has reduced a broad and multi-faceted movement to a its seedy side.  This same author would become quite upset if the sins of Catholics (which are many) were tallied up as evidence that Catholicism is wrong, yet sees no problem with offering an ad hominem critique of feminism.  Sure, there are feminists who use an often distorted or one-sided feminism as reason to behave quite badly.  However, the author has gravely mistaken the primary interest of feminists: most feminists do not want to be men.  They want to cease being defined in reaction to men: women are not “misbegotten men.”  Perhaps they tire of being known as “the weaker sex” (weaker than whom?  Than men, of course - the default gender).  Perhaps they tire of the paternalism of agricultural societies and have seen in the postindustrial world the opportunity to redefine the gender - since gender is, among other things, socially constructed.  In any case, their project has good things and bad things about it, like any, and unfortunately the conservative obsession with dragging up the muck squanders an opportunity to present a more even handed and truthful appraisal of feminism.

Down in the backwoods an older man was bought before the judge, by a jealous husband whose wife was a young very pretty woman, and the judge asked the man, remember he was under oath to tell the truth, if he if fact did sleep with this woman and the man without blinking an eye said: “not a wink, your honor”. Case dismissed.  I am wondering if this fruit-cake, Miss Flory, even had this encounter or was it just in her dream world. It doesn’t matter, because as Jesus said, “A man commits adultery by just looking at a woman with lust” and this goes for the women also. All of those that are caught up in filth needs our prayers very much as Our Blessed Lady has said many times that immoral activities send more souls into the pits of hell than any other types of sins.  +JMJ+

Advise your readers not to click on the link to her article. It is attached to so much spyware it will crash their systems.

@MK: Femininity in the sense Carolyn was using the word (behaving in ways that are considered characteristic of or suitable for women) isn’t the same thing as womanhood/being a woman. What Carolyn was complaining about was the tendency to try to push people into a particular mold just because they are women, e. g. assuming that just because she is a woman she has to be interested in interior decorating. The same applies to men too, of course. To take a trivial example, liking team sports is considered a masculine trait, but it doesn’t make a man less of a man if he dislikes football and likes ballet.

Why no camera?  Seems to me that a picture speaks a thousand words. No camera? Is that the new(est) semi temporary bottom sorta rung? Sin will not stay ‘camera-less’ it wants out! No camera… oh.. thats moral. Very sad. simply wait till your kids are in Jr. High Ms. Clark.

Feminists promote behavior in women that is most despicable in men. Greed. Avarice. Selfishness. And lust. To be equal to men, you must be just like the worst of them. No, Mr. Archbold the following definition from Wikipedia defines feminists behavior. I hope you are not the father of daughters.

Feminist activists campaign for women’s rights – such as in contract law, property, and voting – while also promoting bodily integrity, autonomy and reproductive rights for women.

Based upon her public acknowledgment of her behavior, Tracy Clark-Flory fits the dictionary definition of “SLUT” exactly.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/slut

You can call me judgmental, but you would be wrong. She admitted to a behavior. A person who behaves that way is called a “SLUT.” Ergo, she is a slut.

MK,

I am not rejecting who God made me. I am not rejecting who I am. I am rejecting the prepacakged boxes that people think that men and women are supposed to fit. I would not say that people are neuter but I also don’t think they fit neatly into cookie-cutter gender roles. It’s more like a bell curve in which men are more likely to have certain characteristics and women others. For example, I think on AVERAGE men are funnier than women but not all men are funny and a few women are funnier than most men. Those women are not abdicating their feminity.

I happen to be very “feminine” in many ways. I usually wear dresses and make up, etc. But unlike most women I know, I love to argue, especially about politics and religion. Over the years I have realized that I normally have to argue with my male friends although I have occasionally met other women who share my passion for debate. However, that I enjoy debating which more characteristic of men than women does not mean that I am trying to be like a man. I am just being myself.

CKH

To “Barbara McDonnel” the whole “reproductive rights” thing is nothing but a code word for murder. I sincerely hope you are not the mother of any daughters, because “reproductive rights” folks tend to kill their daughters at a much higher rate than their sons.

Repent.

Well said Scotty and thanks Anne B :)

May the Blood of Christ free her from this twisted, diabolical grip on her immortal soul. This society is unraveling expoentially. How much more will our pateint, merciful Lord be humiliated? Wh aren’t the wounds of Jesus good enough for us?

“Tracy Clark-Flory is a sex and relationship staff writer at Salon. That sentence is the scariest notion in the world.”

I dunno, I can think of some scarier ones. “Tracy Clark-Flory is a sex and relationship staff writer at the National Catholic Register.”  “Terrorists have taken your daughter hostage.” “There is no resurrection.”

I wonder if Tracy Clark-Flory would have had sex with the porn star if there was no such thing as artificial contraception?  No condoms and no pills means MOST people would abstain from such casual treatment of sexuality.  Stories like this emphasize why the church has been right about artificial contraception all along.  Unfortunately the cat is out of the bag and the damage this stuff has done to us is immeasurable.  We are destined for a long slow slide into further moral depravity because most people are not going to give up their pills and condoms.  God help us.

Carolyn,
I think the conflict here is the so called definition of what is a “feminist.” Although not “old enough” to have experienced the “traditional age” of women’s roles in the 50’s & 60’s I’m old enough to know that whatever age you live in there will be false expectations on you.  “Feminism” started as a rebellion against men, and has evolved into a movement that seeks to destroy the power of men while elevation women.  At first, this may have had reasonable sources in the objectification, oppression, or infantilization grown women experienced on a daily basis, in conjunction with rigid social roles that didn’t allow for freedom of expression for many people.  However, this movement quickly devolved into replacing men with women at the top of the power struggle.  Women are encouraged to cultivate baser traits, ignore their more natural nurturing side, and act like men were once criticized for acting.  As the mother of 6 boys, I am afraid that my sons are criticized and demeaned for acting like boys, and as they grow to manhood, they will be hard pressed to find a woman who can deal with a guy who is just… a guy.  Men were created as very different types of people than woman!
I say this as a middle aged woman who has few women friends, I love debate; am very direct (I’ve tried to cultivate my diplomatic skills but with dubious success!); I prefer flat honesty over the tendency of most women to sugar coat and manipulate in efforts to avoid hurting feelings.  If I ask a question or a favor, I prepare myself for the worst case scenario, not because I am a pessimist, but because it’s always a possibility and I believe it’s unfair to pressure people into my way out of guilt!  But, the scorn and ridicule I’ve experienced from WOMEN, FEMINISTS for choosing my own path and following it: having 8 kids, marrying for love not money, staying home and being involved with volunteer activities instead of career… the list goes on and on.  I am a college educated woman with a high IQ and lots of motivation, but I’m treated like an imbecile because I chose to raise my own children instead of putting them in daycare.  I don’t judge mothers who work and use daycare, but it’s not my choice yet I find my choices derided for “keeping women in feminine cages”
I like being a woman, I enjoy looking pretty, but I’m tough and direct and have a low tolerance for stupidity (I’m told those are masculine traits!) 
I am NOT a feminist!  I do NOT support the causes of the feminist movement.  I support educating my kids first, and then those I come into contact with, on the value of understanding the duality of humanity, that God has created us male and female, which means as a gender we have specific strengths and weaknesses.  However, just as we have qualities as a gender, so also do we have specific and unique qualities as an individual which may not be so easy to categorize, which is why we need to respect to value and dignity of each person, get to know them, so that we can love them as God loves them! 
I support your desire to be yourself in all things, but that isn’t feminism.  That is loving yourself for who you are.  A good thing, much better than feminism.

Hi Lisa,

I agree with much of what you say. I also agree that feminists have been hard on women who choose to stay at home and have been in denial about the reality that mothers are not exchangeable for fathers in the lives of young children. I have no problem with stay at home fathers .but a man cannot breast feed and I think children deserve the health benefits of being breast fed.

But I do want to explain where that judgement comes from. I think for women who battled really hard to open doors and get equal pay and prove themselves, it feels like ingratitute. I am not saying that they are right to judge; I only want to explain. Also, the decision of some women to have eight kids and raise them affects other women in that employers are more likely to be worried that a female employee is going to take time off and cause them money or that they are not serious about climbing the corporate ladder. Again, I am not saying that people should not have large families or stay at thome to raise their children, I am only trying to shed some light on the fact that it does affect women who want careers.

As for the term feminism, I don’t want to abandon it out of historical gratitute. I went to Mount Holyoke College; it was the first women’s college founded in the United States because women were not admitted to colleges. It was in 1973 that harvard started admitting women in their undergraduate programs. That was not that long ago and that would not have happened without feminism.

I am a graduate student studying theology. Could I have done this 50 years ago? Would I be permitted to be who I am and pursue my passions without feminism? Absolutely Not!

Thus, while I lament current trends in the movement and I resist NOW when it comes to abortions, I will not disown the movement that has made it possible to live the life I live now. As a black person, I feel the same way about the civil rights movement. I think current NAACP politics is foolish and perhaps, it is time for them to realize that they have outlived their usefulness but I am not going to disown the civil rights movement.

Peace in Christ,
Carolyn H.

Great blog, Pat.

If Tracy or her friends are reading this and thinking- “What could these squares possibly understand about my lifestyle and what makes us passionate”. I would just like to say that it was when I had kids later in life that my conscience finally got on a line that enabled me to see clearly what before had been only partially apparent.  Now I get that we should have lived our single lives as a preparation for our married with children lives- the latter is a whole lot longer and so much richer in terms of spiritual value. I can’t imagine doing anything more important than being a completely devoted, loving husband and father. I wasn’t raised or brainwashed with this idea or belief- I sneered at “domestication” of males when I was young even though I believed that I was a romantic at heart. Family life is reality- not a reality tv show- and reality has a tendency to wake us up out of our confusion. This is how it worked for me- that’s my story- I didn’t live my life as a “square” from Day 1, quite the opposite truth be told, but I relish being a “square” now, I want nothing more than to be a rock solid loving man in the lives of my wife, children and future grandchildren- a man who learned from his past, put aside his past, is completely present to give everything I am and have to those who I am charged to help nurture and take care of. I know when you are younger, the wisdom of those older can oftentimes sound like clanging gongs- but maybe my witness can soften those who are a bit open to seeing what the future of marriage and kids is really all about- and why what you are doing now is a part of that future- so the time to get right in your heart and your conscience is not a future deal- it is now- no time to waste- really. Pray for the strength, pray for the insight, pray for your future family- take responsibility now and not wait until later or too late. God Bless

Personally this is exceedingly sad for me.  My Mother’s maiden name was Flory.  I pray for all those trapped in this life of evil, but I will pray especially for her.

I’m glad to see that there is more of exchange of comments today.  To those who state that the concept of feminism has changed, yes and no.  The media taking the name feminist for its agenda to polarize.  I am a feminist, I am conservative, I am against many forms of contraception and absolutely abortion, I stand firmly against Planned Parenthood and I stand for women to not be dehumanized on any level.  I do not believe in taking any man’s power and I stand for the both traditional roles in families and some modern distinctions.  I am feminist because I don’t want to see any more babies murdered and I don’t want to see anymore families destroyed.  When someone is subjugated to lesser status by limitations on opportunities and education, there has to be a humanist endeavor to reinstate their God-given dignity.  So thus the name “feminist”.  We know that this can not be done by becoming the worst of the oppressor, we can not do this by tearing down those who care enough to do real work towards amelioration.  Those that have worked with the downtrodden women see the devastation that it does, women that have no hope so they see no value in themselves which translates to how they see others, especially to those who emphasize the character they find to be the root of their problem—their femininity.  Who makes a woman more feminine?  A child.  First the woman will defile herself and men, and then she will defile her children—because of a wrong sense of self!  this is what feminism seeks to achieve.  Don’t believe the hype, there are lots of feminists like me out there, and we get put off because the media and sinister politics have hi-jacked the term “feminist” to be synonymous with pro-promiscuity, pro-abortion Planned Parenthood.  Sex sells, and their term feminism gives a false sense of empowerment.  They profit from your mis-appropriation of the term, because in the confusion the church will cling to the term “feminist” in its wrong form.  Like Rahner says about God, we have to first figure out what symbol of God we are talking about when we talk about God.  The term feminism, as I originally commented needs to be recategorized to regain the ground that the enemy gained when he obfuscated the meaning.  In the interim, we, who fight human evils against women, such as misogyny, sexism, objectification, oppression in the workforce, medical oppression and medical freedom from unjust impositions, human slavery and human trafficing, etc. all humanity will continue to suffer from the corporate sin.  I am a feminist like many others that cannot see the best of God’s good in humanity while one party is in an undue state of subjection and lives beneath their full dignity as an icon of God.

She is a product of the culture of death. She has no idea how lost she is, and she has no way of recognizing the true beauty and gift in sex.

I don’t look at her and think she is gross. I pity her and all those that are like her. I pray that one day these women will see the darkness for what it really is and begin a search that leads them to truth.

I imagine that one day they will look towards God and be the BEAMING example of Saintliness. That kind of conversion speaks more than anything I would be able to say on my own.

Of all the responses I guess I agree most with Lisa. I am a woman who is a mix of traditionally feminine and male characteristics, personality, interests, and behaviors. I do not identify as a feminist because I don’t label myself and I’ve never felt discriminated against for being a woman. I mean I never think of myself just in terms of my gender, my race, etc. I’m just me - a conglomeration of female, white, catholic, irish/german, nurse, mother, teacher, wife, daughter, co-worker, volunteer, sister, girlfriend, cook, neighbor, caregiver, accountant, consultant, etc. and I like being all those things.

I think people who do single out their gender, race, sexual orientation, religion or what have you, and focus so much attention on only one aspect of who they are, rather than being a whole person, are the people who always feel discriminated against. I think it’s a kind of paranoia and self-esteem problem that is very sad and holds a person down much more than any externally imposed discrimination.

Sometimes, I think society equates happiness with invoking envy in one’s neighbor.  I didn’t read her column, so I don’t know if she names names and post pictures.  It could be an entirely fictional account.  Anyway, God bless you for your events to encourage people to turn away from things like pornography and related sins.

Correction of previous post:  ‘events’ should read ‘efforts’.

This is the world the post-Vatican II Church wants to be open to…

Carolyn, I don’t think anyone is asking you to disavow the movement that legitimately fixed some equality issues. What you’ll find is that many of us think you should disavow a very different movement that uses the same name and has more or less eaten the old movement that is now focused on normalizing sexual immorality.
—
Let me address an earlier point you made: “But I certainly feel alienated as soon as you impose this vision of feminity onto her and then criticize for not fitting into it. Is she her sinner? Yes, indeed, but no more and no less than the man she slept with. Her sin is herself and against God, not against womanhood.”
—
Now, I don’t know what vision of femininity you think Pat is trying to impose on her, but there is such a thing as femininity and even if I don’t know what exactly it is (though I am aware that it doesn’t mean that all women must be good at curtains), I’m fairly certain that sleeping with porn stars -or anyone except a husband- is not part of it. But I think the issue here is that because this article does not cover it, you are assuming that we somehow take less issue with the actions of the man than with the woman, or do not think that his actions are sins against masculinity.
—
Let me correct that: This man’s actions are just as much in conflict with what it means to be a man as the woman’s are with what it means to be a woman. A man who is promiscuous is failing in his manhood. Failing badly. It is often said (and seems to be accurately so) that men, in general, struggle more with lust than women. Again, this an average statement, there are, of course, many exceptions. Perhaps this is why historically, and as a group, men have often failed in their duty more often than women. But this does not make the failure less of a failure, and does not change the fact that historically, as a group and until recently, women have not failed in this particular way.
—
Or to put it in terms you’ve already used: that pedestal you mentioned, the one that can seem like a cage? We’re supposed to be up there with you. But we, that is men as a group, fell off a long time ago, so that the responsibility to live purely has been shouldered primarily by women - despite the fact that we all share the responsibility equally. And now there is this movement that seems dedicated to destroying what is left of the pedestal. This is why we say that feminism is trying to transform women into the worst parts of men. Those worst parts of men are bad in men. Terrible. We are not saying that our failure to live up to the standards that some women are only now discarding is anything less than a failure on our part. We are just saying that lowering yourselves to our level is a bad thing, and the movement that seeks to make this easier is also a bad thing.

How can I bleach my brain?  Up my nose, in my ears, what?  I’d worry about this phenomena more if I believed this whole thing actually took place, which I don’t.  So, I’m a little less worried for her, but more sad.

Jacob S.

Thank you for your very wise and thoughtful responses. I have no quibbles or objections. You have no idea how rarely that happens :).

Peace in Christ,
Carolyn Hyppolite

That was so not sexy.

Fortunately (or unfortunately?),in Nigeria here,feminism as a movement is not very popular.after readin everyone’s(rather impressive) comments,I however have this to say:i think many of the injustices and prejudices women have suffered and are sufferin are brought on them by no other than women themselves.i’m not very old(am 22 infact)but from the ‘short’ time i’ve spent here on earth,i’ve come to realise that women are their own enemies and if feminism wants to really make any sense to my generation,it should start by educatin women on what being’human’and ‘female’ really is.

Carolyn,

Lisa said:

“I support your desire to be yourself in all things, but that isn’t feminism.”

I guess we just need to be clear on what we mean by “Femininity” and “Feminism”.

The one thing that no one can truly disagree on when it comes to the differences between men and women is the ability to carry children.  (Natural Law is not based on EVERYONE being able to do something, but rather on the natural ability to do so…yes, some women cannot carry children but that is irrelevant).  Therefore, feminism must (should) speak to this issue above all others.  To celebrate this feminine trait is to celebrate motherhood, marriage and children.  Feminism, as it is known today, wishes to destroy these things.  Thus, feminism is anti-feminine.  So when you say you resent being forced into preconceived ideas of what femininity means, you need to be very clear on what you mean by femininity and who exactly is “forcing” these roles on you.

Equal pay is a human issue not a feminine one.  All humans beings should be treated equally, and sometimes that doesn’t happen.  The argument isn’t really that women deserve equal pay, but that women are human beings and all human beings should be treated with equal dignity because they are human, not because they are female (or black or tall or etc.). 

But there are certain issues which are strictly feminine.  Like birth control, abortion, motherhood…these are the issues that are being attacked by so called feminists and these are the issues that we, as feminine creatures, must defend.

Sadly, it is the feminist movement that is a female greatest enemy.

MK,

My daily life is not defined motherhood. It is a life that was fought for and gained for me by the feminist movement and I remainn grateful for that. My daily life is marked by being involved in work still dominated by men, something that is extremely rare in every other area in life today. It is only in religious conferences today that one can be assured that there will be a paucity of women’s voices. And as a generally conservative woman, I run around with many people who prefer it that way.

As for any potential child-bearing I might have, I see no interest in the Church talk about motherhood on what concerns me and I think the majority of women, which is how can I balance my motherly responsibilities with my other life aspirations and will my husband help me in this endeavor by helping out around the house. This is something that feminists speak to.

There is this view it seems that every feminist is a pro-abortion radical and I think that might be a case of the squeaky wheel getting the grease.  The fact is that most of us have become “feminist” in the original sense of the word. Most of us now think that young women should vote, receive equal pay for equal work, receive the same education as boys, and be able to pursue careers if they so choose. Most of us, even among conservative circles act like these are normal, even virtuous ideas. Well, that only shows how thoroughly the feminists have won. These ideas are a radical shift in human history. I simply choose to acknowledge their sources. I actually think part of the silliness of modern feminism is caused by their success; they have so thoroughly won the battle that they are trying to figure how to keep themselves occupied.

I do want to add one more thing about fatherhood. There are not too many voices proclaiming that the identity of men is defined by their biological ability to father. And it is unclear to me why this should be defining for me. At the rate that I am going, I might never have children. Right now, I think I would be sadder if I never published a book.

And please, don’t accuse of putting down motherhood. Mothering is important to humanity to society. But still, I wan to give birth to words.

Peace in Christ,
Carolyn H.

Much of feminism comes from women not really taking the time to understand the reality of the average man’s life——they go with a false glamorized picture.

They ignore the average man’s pains and hardships, snubs and push-downs.

I didn’t read the Salon article. Why would one? Some years back, the now-defunct magazine POV had a story in which its two sex columnists slept with each other.

So I didn’t renew my subscription. Scummy stuff!

Carolyn- I just wanted to up lift you a little as I see you are some what on your own here.  Please know you are among friends here.  I know not all are called to the vocation of motherhood.  Many are thus called to the service of God in other ways.  It sounds as though that is you.  I have a sister-in-law who is also called to the building up of the house of God in other ways.  I hope that you have no worries about this because I know other women can be hard on this demographic of women also.  I truley hope that where ever you journey this side of heaven you feel the great companionship of friends and always feel you are among them in a catholic church.  If not, please think of me if ever you feel alone and know there is at least one catholic female out there who doesn’t think ill of you for having a different vocation as a woman.  Peace and love of Christ to you.

Carolyn,

You say: My daily life is not defined motherhood.

I’m not arguing that it is.  What I’m saying is that femininity is defined by motherhood.  Take away the one thing that separates us from masculinity and the rest becomes a “human” issue.  Not a feminine one. And it is precisely this difference that is attacked by feminism. 

Your ability to work where you do and get equal pay is NOT a feminine
issue.  I understand that it is women who were/are being discriminated against precisely because they were women…but ultimately that issue was one of equality for ALL people.  Blacks had to fight that battle, but it wasn’t really a “black” issue.  It was a human issue.  The attack on the specific femininity of women comes only from feminists who attack the very thing that MAKES us feminine.  (Sorry for capitalizing..if you use italics the comment goes into moderation). 

Your desire to birth words is not a feminine desire or a masculine.  It’s a human desire.  Therefore, if someone tries to stop you you are fighting a human rights issue, not a feminine rights issue. 

Your desire not to birth children is a rejection of what makes you a woman.  Not saying that’s a bad thing.  Just saying that to reject motherhood out of pocket is to reject what makes you a woman.  No matter how you try to state otherwise, you are truly against (for you) what makes you a woman.  Bearing children.  In the strictest sense of the word feminine.  Everything else is about human equality.  Nothing else separates us from men.  Not in the truest sense, anyway.

Thank you Jennifer :)

MK said: What I’m saying is that femininity is defined by motherhood

I really don’t understand what this means. Women are able to bear children and men are able to father them. That is a difference in our varying potency but that I have the physical potential to do something does not mean I am bound to do it. Plus, I never said I am against having children…just that I don’t seem hear that ticking biological clock that I keep hearing about. But I am pretty upset with myself for not having done other things, like not writing more.

Anyway, if that is the box that you mean by feminity than I am fine with rejecting that. I like being myself and I want to go on being myself. My only other goal is to be shaped into the likeness of Christ, who is truly human, and the human to whom we are all called to be conformed—male and female.

Peace in Christ,
Carolyn Hyppolite

Carolyn and Jennifer,

I’m not making a judgment on Carolyn one way or the other.  No, not every one is called to motherhood…or marriage, or the priesthood.  I am only trying to define feminine and feminism.  If feminism is the attempt to hold up and protect that which is feminine, then it should be about holding up and protecting motherhood.  This is not the same as saying that all women must be mothers.  It is simply saying that job equality is not really, at its heart, a feminine issue.  It’s a human one.  A person can be fully human without embracing the thing which makes them one gender or the other. 

Good heavens, if I were to say that all women who don’t want children were anti feminine than nuns would be in a lot of trouble.  Feminism today however IS anti feminine in that it attacks the very act of motherhood.  It objectifies the sexual act and rejects unborn life.  It is actually anti-feminine. 

If Carolyn is choosing a higher calling, then she is not against feminity.  She is simply rejecting the thing that defines feminity.  If she supports motherhood as a whole then she is not rejecting women as a whole.  The question is, is Carolyn rejecting motherhood all together or just for her?  If it’s just for her then she is not anti feminine. 

Our culture however, rejects motherhood altogether.  They reject the very thing that makes us women.  Not women who choose not to have children, but motherhood per se.  See?

Here, let me try this.  I do not work outside the home. I have rejected the business world for ME.  But I do not reject the business world as a whole.  I have nothing against business.  But if there is a group out there who would like to see ALL businesses shut down, then they would be anti-business…

MK,

You ask, am I rejecting motherhood all together? But I think that’s a strange question. Without motherhood, the human race would cease to exist. I am not aware of any feminists who are against women giving birth. There are many feminists who are against women having more than two children because once you have more than two, it becomes pretty difficult to have a career. I don’t agree with this position but I don’t it’s a rejection of motherhood just a rejection of motherhood ONLY as a woman’s sole occupation.

Of course, there is the issue of abortion but even here feminists have only tried to create an escape to get women out of unwanted motherhood. I want to be clear that I do not support a woman’s right to choose to kill her baby but it is overstating the feminist position to say that they support abortion because they reject motherhood.

A third of women have had abortions but then have gone on to have children later in life. Abortion is about convenience and control—having children when you want to. Most feminists end up marrying and have children—generally late in life after they have accomplished other goals.

There are of course from a Christian perspective all sorts of problems with wanting absolute control over one’s life and one’s body. Absolute control ultimately belongs to God. But historical control over women has rested with fathers and husbands and seeking control, feminists have sought to free women over these sources of control.

Or to take your business shows how ridiculous a position that would be. Just like it would be silly to suggest that all businesses should shut down, it would be silly to say that all mothering should cease. Both of these things would seriously harm the perpetuation of the human race. I think feminists get that. I certainly have not met any who don’t. Of course, many feminists lament your decision to make motherhood your only occupation. But that’s a minority view. Most feminists are choice feminists who are ok with women choosing full time homemaking as long as they are free to do otherwise. On the other hand, in many conservative Christian circles, full time homemaking becomes the only option and the more women choose that option, the easier it is to guilt other women into doing it who may desire other paths.

Peace in Christ,
Carolyn Hyppolite

My mother is the quintessential 1950s housewife.  She has a college degree, and taught primary school for about six years.  She gave up teaching in schools because after her second child she could not balance both an outside job and motherhood.  Both she and I adamantly believe that daycare for babies and toddlers is harmful to their psychological development.
.
When I was growing up my mother told me that “Jesus was the first feminist”.  She explained to me that Jesus ignored many of the conventions of his day, and elevated women to their rightful dignity.
.
I think both Carolyn and MK can agree that in many places in this world, the dignity of women is sorely lacking.  It is interesting that the young lady from Nigeria higher in this thread, also notes that women are often the ones themselves that perpetuate harmful sexism.
.
It is a pity that the word “feminist” has to exist at all, but human nature, being what it is will always tempt those who are stronger to exploit those who are weaker, (and yes, women are guilty of this bad behavior also!) So if there is a word that describes males or females who labor for the rights of *all* females, than I find no problem in favoring this word.
.
Why should traditional homemakers be allowing others to decide what this word means?  They should be *vocally* taking the word back and showing up the selfish narcissists for who they *really are*. the qualities that a woman has, which would allow for babies and children to be murdered or neglected make her UNfeminist.  The proabortion ANTIfeminists took over the word “choice”.  In like fashion they commandeered the word “feminist”.  I can’t think of a more UNfeminine group of women.

@Caroline H: “..that young women are pressured into sexual activity to please and keep young men, is not generally true in my experience. I am not saying that this doesn’t happen but it is not as prevalent as we make it out to be.” You know, it’s been a long time since you went to high school.I wish you could walk in my daughter’s shoes just one day. You’d hear the lunchroom conversations, the sexual bragging among girls is worse than boys. You can’t sue a classmate who gropes you on a schoolbus and talks filth to you, while school officials do nothing. My daughter endures it every day on campus. It perists because most girls enjoy sexual innuendo and welcome it.

Although I understand that people like this should be brought to our attention for prayer, I am utterly at a lost as to why you would even link over to that article!!!  Or even suggest reading it “if you have the stomach”??? It’s disgusting, and I think it’s sinful to read things of the level of impurity.  That’s not the kind of thing I come onto a Catholic website to read…Come on!!!

Grace,

I want to voice my support for linking to the article (although I opted not to read it). I have come across other cites, usually protestant critics, that say that catholics are afraid of linking their articles. The argurment usually goes, they are too afarid of exposing their people to alternative views…just accept what I tell you, etc.

If you don’t feel comfortable reading it, don’t, but it is not professional to critique someone’s work without giving readers access to what you are critiquing.

Nearly every day I read something on the ‘net that exposes the utter stupidity of those like Ms Clark-Flory. Just when I think I’ve seen it all something will come along to prove that dumb just got dumber. I’m sorry, I just can’t mince words on this. If ever there was a path to self-destruction, this is it. Let’s all pray that the Good Lord will open the eyes of the blind and thus they be freed from all this nonsense.

THIS IS AWESOME, THANKS.  GOD BLESS.

I do think you’re somehow exposing her with your sadness… It’s a bit judgmental ( although I understand it’s quite difficult not judging the situation when writing about it).
She realized it was an empty experience. In that sense, she made a strong point for those favoring a catholic view on sexuality. She gave her own testimony: it was a meaningless endeavour.
The way I see it: it isn’t even good or bad. It’s void, deeply void. Nihilistic approach to relationships.
Saint Augustin said that the evil is the absence of goodness. I think it just suits for this case.