When I read this 1997 essay about the death of Diana (recently linked at XXFactor), and I found myself nodding along. The author says that modern women’s over-the-top fascination with princess-hood isn’t just a craving for everything foofy and romantic—but points to a deeper longing:
t is the rare little girl who wants to grow up to be queen. To wish to be a princess is not simply to aspire upward, to royalty; it is also to aspire to perpetual daughter-hood, to permanent shelter. To dependency.
But, as Diana’s life demonstrated, that radical dependency bore terrible fruit:
[F]or all her fame and her 36 years and her accomplished motherhood and her millions, the life of a princess prepared her very poorly to look after herself.
... As long as Diana was out there, plying her glamorous, uncertain path to a full self, we could at least retain our ambivalence about the myth. We’ve known for a while that trying to be a princess can stifle you, but it’s horrible to think it can kill you.
[T]his drama is girlhood and young womanhood in America: a succession of choices between the possibilities of independence and the seductions of dependence.
At first I agreed. I was thinking mostly of the disturbing evangelical movement to keep daughters domesticated and uneducated, passing them directly from the demands of the father to the demands of a husband. It is oppression under the guise of a desire to cherish and protect.
It also reminded me of the secular version of stunted womanhood that hyper-sexualized socialites display. They think that their overt promiscuity empowers them, but their entire worth depends on how much they please men. Same story, different language: oppression under the guise of fun and games.
I thought, too, of the typical American woman who lives in a trivial haze, endlessly distracted by a parade of the meaningless: celebrity break-ups and Brazilian waxes. Even after bearing children, they prolong their own teenage girlhood as long as they can.
Yes, I thought, women lost their heads over the wedding because they simply do not want to grow up—that must be at least partly true.
But when I passed the article along, my friends reminded me of a simple fact: I’m spoiled. This longing isn’t trivial, and it isn’t about immaturity. Many women today never get the protection they deserve, period. If they have some inchoate longing for “the seductions of dependence,” it’s not because they’re petty or immature, but because they’ve been robbed.
I’ll never forget a scrap of conversation I heard on the radio. A young couple with a new baby found themselves in a terrible fix, jobless, homeless, rejected by family. The young woman, overwhelmed, cried out, “I just wish you could fix everything!” and her boyfriend responded not with anger, but with a postmodern whine: “That’s totally unfair—what a sexist construct!” And the woman wept, “I know, I know.”
But she didn’t want to be pampered—she just wanted, as a mother and wife, to be sheltered for a moment, even if only by words of comfort. She wanted to know that he would at least try to take care of her and the baby—and surely he wanted to believe that he was capable and strong, a real man. But the world had taught them both that what they wanted was something foolish, artificial, and archaic. And so they did not know what to do—neither one of them.
My husband and I depend on each other equally, but in different ways—why is that so terrible to admit? Women and men alike have been robbed of a very basic human understanding of couplehood—but the longing doesn’t go away. Women long to be cared for. This is not wrong.
When I am pregnant, I know my husband will care for me. When I’m tired, he will help. When someone insults me, he will defend me. When I spend time caring for babies and the house, I’ll be met with gratitude, not mocked and belittled. I’m no shrinking violet, but sometimes I just plain need him—and he needs to be needed.
Women walk a fine line: It’s tempting to surrender to lazy ninnihood—to confuse femininity with feebleness, and to let our minds and our wills atrophy. And so women lash back against this feebleness, squashing any signs of softness under their executive high-heeled maternity shoes. Let’s be clear—feminism brought many necessary goods to the world, and I don’t want to go back to the fifties. But neither do I want to pretend that I can do it all by myself.
Here’s my advice for a woman looking for that middle road between harsh feminism and stunted daughterhood: Be strong, be smart, take responsibility for yourself—and never, never bind your life to a man who doesn’t want to care for you.
Comments
Post a Comment
My advice to women today is read Pope John Paul II’s apostolic letter Mulieris Dignitatem on the DIgnity and Vocation of women.
In reading this apostolic letter you will weep and hear the words you have longed to hear from a man. Then start to study the Theology of the Body. God has spoken to us, all we must do is open our hearts to hear him.
Very good point!
Unfortunately, in certain “pious” circles being devout woman means exactly that - atrophy of will and mind. Single girl with good education, well-paid job and healthy self-esteem is automatically qualified as feminist, and consequently, bad marriage material.
Wonderful post! I have spent the better part of my 12 years of marriage (so far) learning to accept that I want and I need to be cared for. Fortunately for me, I married a most caring man who wants and needs to care for me and isn’t afraid to tell me so.
This has been on my mind, because of a woman I saw in an elevator at a medical complex the other day. She was young and pregnant, and you could see her man and her baby were her whole world, her whole consciousness. Her man was there, and he was bored, bored, bored—with the appointment, with the woman, with the baby, with the whole life he had wandered into. He was already looking around for his chance to escape.
Probably I imagined all of this. Maybe he was her brother, maybe he was tired from working the night shift, maybe she wasn’t even pregnant—I don’t really know. But I wanted to run out into the streets and warn all the young women: don’t give yourself, heart and soul, to some random guy who won’t even marry you!
“But I wanted to run out into the streets and warn all the young women: don’t give yourself, heart and soul, to some random guy who won’t even marry you!” But they probably won’t listen to you. And just because the jerk consents to marriage…please, sometimes thats the worse thing that can happen with a random dude. Sometimes its better to just tell them to RUN, RUN!!!
I believe there is a distinction to be made between (1) the spoiled and selfish little-girl princess who expects to be catered to and demands that everything be done for her, while giving little of substance in return, vs. (2) the doormat “Cinderella” female, who traded life under the thumb of a bullying stepmother for life under the thumb of a man who belittles and diminishes her, while she continues to hide in the shadows, afraid to exercise authority or responsibility except over her children, vs. (3) the true princess, the woman of valor, strength, grace, honor, and dignity, who “laughs at the days to come,” who welcomes responsibility and expects to exercise it, who honors her husband - her “knight in shining armor” - and surrounds him with tender love and care all the days of his life, who is nevertheless extremely competent, capable, and intelligent, for which her true knight respects and honors her in return.
Three very different “princesses”. Three very different women.
I would go a step further here… Women do long for “daughterhood”—but it is ultimately the daughterhood of our Lord that will fulfill this longing. We all have a natural desire to be cherished, loved unconditionally, protected, and cared for. Ultimately, we find this need met in relationship with God the Father. However, so many women (and girls) have been wounded by the important men in their lives—fathers, brothers, grandfathers, uncles, boyfriends, etc.—that women no longer understand what authentic masculinity looks like. When this happens, they look for other ways to fulfill this natural longing in a manner that leads to destruction and heartbreak. Likewise, many men have a natural instinct to protect those around them, but have had this message subverted and twisted so much that they linger in perpetual boyhood, not only failing in their role as protector and provider, but shirking all natural responsibility in the process. There is nothing sexist about this—this is part of God’s design in the complementarity of the sexes. Men are to protect and provide for those around them; women are to nurture and civilize. This by no means implies that women should be rendered helpless, unable to take care of themselves or others, without a shred of independence in thought or action. But there is a reason God created us “male and female”—equal in dignity, with unique and distinct gifts that complement and elevate (not dominate or oppress) the other.
—-
The evidence for this is so clear. Books I’ve read that point to the root of these issues (namely, absent fatherhood) include “Strong Fathers, Strong Daughters” (Meg Meeker) “Father, the Family Protector” (Stenson).
So well put! Women - mothers especially - are also always admonished to take care of themselves, to nurture themselves, to take time for themselves. But the burden is still on the woman to do it for herself!
Good post, Sim! I’m spoiled, too! Thank god!
...in some random class, I remember learning the differences between independence, co-dependence and interdependence- by men & women embracing their roles and duties, we are interdependent and the world runs better
As a “stunted daughter” myself, I feel strongly that girls should be encouraged (just as much as boys) to be responsible, independent, and healthy all on their own. And yet still recognize the need for community and that it is OK to “need” people. I seen too many “perpetual daughters” from my background marry to get out of their homes of origin and when their husband turns out to be a loser they are stuck with his abuse because they have literally never been allowed to do anything. Like you said, I’m one of the lucky ones.
There is a passage that might be something to contemplate.
‘Be as wise as a serpent and as gentle as a dove’
and S and K Hahn had a series on EWTN: woemen need to worry about being saintly women and men saintly men and stop trying to make the other partner conform to your idea of saint hood.
Well said. With all the beauty and royalty of Kate and Wills wedding, I’ve been thinking about the contrast between Diana and Kate. Remember that Princess Diana was NINETEEN when she married. She was chosen as Charles bride by - Camilla, (according to my philosophy professor) partly for her family money and partly because she was perfect for the part - young, pretty, innocent, docile, caring, etc. If the question is one of dependence, she really had no one to depend on - certainly not her husband and certainly not her own family who offered her up to the altar of fame and celebrity.
I hope that Kate fares better and can truly rely upon her own family and her new husband. And yes, I’m spoiled too - and loving every minute of it.
I’ve given up on the term feminism. To me it has no good connotation. It pretty much belongs completely to the pro-abortion, man-despising feminist crowd.
Again, Simcha,
You hit the nail right on the head.
Mazal tov!
@ dan—but it shouldn’t, should it? Catholic women, and men to, would do well to take back feminism (term and all) for the glory of God. That is why I like that the ‘new feminists,’ who teach the kinds of ideas Simcha touches on here, still use the word to describe themselves.
“postmodern whine”—great phrase.
Have you read A Return to Modesty? A good portion of the book addresses how important it is for men and women to accept that they are different sexes, that’s the way God made them, and that it is good.
Totally agree with you about the idea of some women being “robbed”. At a closer look every woman is for sure to have this same struggle you point out.
I really appreciate this article, and I think there’s a lot of truth in what you said.
I also think that men are becoming afraid of offering help to women because it might be seen as belittling us.
I do have a question, though, about this statement: “I was thinking mostly of the disturbing evangelical movement to keep daughters domesticated and uneducated, passing them directly from the demands of the father to the demands of a husband.”
As a Mennonite who attended a Jesuit middle school, I know a little about Catholicism, but not a whole lot. I always thought that the ‘movement to keep daughters domesticated’ plagued Christians as a whole- I’ve never seen it as a uniquely evangelical problem. Is there something that I’m missing?
@Allie - most of the well-publicized radical “stay at home daughter” movements seem to me to be evangelical, but that’s just my impression—I have certainly also met Catholics who are benighted with these ideas.
The other side of this is men. We men need to be protectors, providers, fathers, lovers and friends to our families. In the last 50 years, we have tried to invent a substitute for the family, and failed miserably.
I don’t wish to rain on your parade, but things have changed. Men too.
Women have to protect themselves just like men do.
I know it’s harsh but it’s life.
Sorry women, but there is a growing body of young men who are rejecting their roles as free body guard. The generation coming up are being instructed to NOT protect, regardless. Just as women have been freed from being domestic servants, so we refuse to be protectors any longer. My daughter tells me femenism is about giving women choices; well you made your choice, and now we are making ours.
@Eric, spare us your pity party and be a man. Catholic men don’t take the culture’s temperature to live their lives. Sorry if women are no longer doormats, but you’re still a man. Act accordingly.
As a young man, I don’t “need to be needed”. It just plain amazes me how modern women can seriously believe I would rather give up my freedom and independence to become essentially a slave to one of them. Why would I want to waste my life caring for a spoiled princess who probably still holds some kind of grudge against me for the alleged mistakes my great-grandfathers may or may not have made? Give me a break! The only woman I could see myself caring for is my sister, but then again she doesn’t really need it, so I think I’ll keep enjoying my freedom thank you very much. :)
christopher, it is encouraging to me that you young guys are getting the message. There is a community of men who will support and encourage you. Just remember to ignore the shaming language.
@Eric - Males who refuse to act like men ought to be shamed.
I don’t think I’m any less of a man for refusing to bow down to the demands of these “princesses”... actually I dare say the complete opposite is true. I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree.
@Christopher You most certainly are not. A real man determines his own path and disregards what others think. Let the Manginas and Momma’s Boys worship females. Shame and guilt are a mere invention of christianity and we reject it.
@Eric & Christopher - You fellas have fun in your He-Man Woman Haters Club.
Everything is still the same as it always was between men and women.
Except that nowadays, women no longer need men and men no longer need women.
Both sexes have now been liberated from one another.
This is the century of the self. Each of us must concentrate on him/herself.
We could not be freer than this. You would be a fool not to enjoy it and take full advantage of it.
The manacles of matrimony have been removed: we must rejoice that.
And when it comes to being a “true” man (or false, I guess) it’s up to each individual to decide what he or she is.
The “role” model belongs to history books. The future belongs to the young and the free.
It is now women’s turn to get used to change. It may take time, as it took men time, but the future looks good to me as a free individual.
So much more can be accomplished this way.
So very true Rebel. To hell with the “Tough Guy Woman worshiper’s Club”
@Eric, Christopher, and Rebel: I can’t help but think you’ve confused me for someone else (I’ve yet to meet a spoiled princess who cares for eight children), but since you somehow ended up commenting here, I’m really curious: what exactly is it that you are able to accomplish when you are totally free? Please be as specific as possible.
@Eric - That’s an insult?
@Simcha:
Freedom is not enough.
Freedom is the basis upon which you base or engineer your life. It’s your food. It is basically your essence.
When no one depnds on you, you become the true master of your ship, of your life. Marriage or matrimony is just the opposite of freedom: it is the surrendering of yourself for some reason, any reason, to someone else. Fine, but then it must be a question of choice.
“What do you do with your freedom asked the dog. I do as I please, answered the wolf.”
I also want to add that women now have options. If it is only a question of fairness, men must have the same options. Don’t you agree?
Women have been freed and we should salute that.
Men have been freed and we should salute that.
The best way to avoid disapointment is to have no expectation.
When you are truly free, you cannot be disapointed or cheated.
There is yet another huge advantage in managing your own life: unless you want to, you don’t have to kill yourself on the job and all the money you make is yours.
And for love and sex, well it is free, plentiful and probably the best recreational activity ever invented. What will a chain improve?
I dunno, Rebel, you’re describing a lot of “freedom FROM” but not a lot of “freedom TO.” I don’t think that any of us is truly free - but some of us choose our bonds because they lead us somewhere good, while others of us refuse to acknowledge what we are in bondage to. Anyway, I’m going to bed now, wolfman.
@Eric:
It is so true that shaming is an old trick. It has been played for ages.
Seems to me that many a (young) man is awakening to the phenomenon.
The arrow is broken but ... still in use, regardless of how inefficient it has become.
Marriage is being put to death but the beast resists. With its obliteration will come a new era where the state no longer has a hold on you.
And then we will be free TO…. do what we want.
It may be than no one is completely free, but still, many millions of men, slaves, have died so we can enjoy freedom.
These men must not have died in vain.
Yeah, the shaming tricks no longer work. The social contract between men and women has been broken, and women were the first to break it.
Men used to be women’s free protectors, bodyguards and providers - that was the service men provided in their part of the social contract.
Women have broken their part, yet still try to shame men into 19th century obligations. You will see an increasing number of men happily swinging beers and playing video-games all day - with no ability to be shamed back into “manning up”.
Simcha here. Eric, I’ve deleted this post because of the vulgarity. Feel free to rephrase and post again.
@Eric, Christopher, Rebel, et al: I think you misunderstnad women. They have been made to believe (as have you) that this mythical “freedom to do what I want” is the very life-blood of our temporal existence. It is not so. Man is a communal creature, and as such, interdependence is a natural and necessary part of his life. Whether he chooses to believe it or not, man needs to be needed at some point in his life.
Men and women have been fed lies over the past few decades which many have chosen to take as truth. Men are womanizing, peter-pan-complex-afflicted morons, and women are spoiled, do-it-for-me witches with a B; the world has most unfortuantely convinced many of us to view each other this way. Now, instead of rejecting our natural tendency toward interdependence in favor of this illusion called “freedom”, we must fight it on both sides if we are to have the truest form of freedom we can.
After all, as Bl. John Paul II said, “Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought.”
Chris Thanks for the thoughtful and helpful post. Perhaps the system of interdependence is the best way for a society to function. I do not see that happening today. I was born in ‘67 and have never known a world of men protecting and women serving or whatever they did. Equality of ability was the environment for us. The old ways were in rapid decline and feminism was in full swing during my formative years. It will be a long time and a collapse of a civilization before any semblance of such a social order ever re-asserts itself. Until then men will adapt as we always have and abandon any notion of “serving and protecting.”
@Eric
“It will be a long time and a collapse of a civilization before any semblance of such a social order ever re-asserts itself. “
Earlier humans had yet other functions: men protected and hunted, women produced food and babies.
Those roles disappeared and new ones arrived, each to be replaced by the next.
Protect and serve are probably buried in the past: new paradigms will arise.
Technology has always been at the source of all changes. Now, with robots, no one will need to serve and no one will need to protect. Men will not need women anymore than women will need men. That’s true independance.
And from that may / will rise another civilization. The “Self” will be the way of the future.
That world will thrive when feminity is stamped out.
Humans will be produced inside machines. When that happens, feminity may be shelved, as it becomes irrelevant. The same does not apply to masculinity: testosterone will be required to run the planet.
We can see it happening now as women become more and more masculine : they are already adapting to tomorrow’s world: they may eventually become (as) good (as) men. I think this is a cause for celebration.
I truly believe that the introduction of the artificial uterus will solve all the problems that exist between men and women, since no one can have the upperhand.
I love this post! Thank you.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.