Federalist Magazine Staff Annoyed that Other Outlets Publish the Down Side of Motherhood and Are Requesting Sunny Motherhood Propaganda Pieces – As If Conservatives Haven’t Pushed for Motherhood Enough? The Mind Boggles

Federalist Magazine Staff Annoyed that Other Outlets Publish the Down Side of Motherhood and Are Requesting Sunny Motherhood Propaganda Pieces – As If Conservatives Haven’t Pushed for Motherhood Enough? The Mind Boggles

I apologize if you’re actually a regular reader of this blog (do I have any regular readers?, I don’t know!) and if you get really tired of me repeating myself, but I never know who is reading whatever blog post I write (it may be their first visit), and I don’t want anyone to misunderstand where I’m coming from.

At first glance, most conservatives would probably confuse me for a nuclear family-hating, man-hating, feminist liberal, merely because I criticize other conservatives for their inaccurate, at times insensitive, or non-stop, abnormal and un-biblical obsession with promoting marriage, motherhood, and the nuclear family.

I’m a conservative, I am not a feminist, and I don’t hate marriage, parenthood, or the nuclear family.

But you damn skippy I am going to call out other conservatives when I see them over-hyping marriage, parenthood and families, and especially when they do so by insulting singles for being single or the childless for being childless (whether by choice or by circumstance).

I sure don’t support the vast  majority of opinions and causes of liberals, feminists, and progressives, but occasionally, I concede they may have a legitimate point or concern on some topic or another.

I actually meant to blog about this (and a million other articles from other sources) a few months ago but didn’t get around to it at the time:

(Link): BuzzFeed Should Stop Publishing Only Negative Takes On Motherhood

The author, it says, is a “Karin Agness Lips,” which totally sounds like a made up name 😂.  The piece was published on May 18, 2022.

Here are some excerpts (and of course, below these excerpts, I’ll state where I disagree):

(Link): BuzzFeed Should Stop Publishing Only Negative Takes On Motherhood

Stories about parental regret might get clicks, but BuzzFeed acting as a PR machine against motherhood might also influence people’s decision to become a parent.

by Karin Agness Lips

As BuzzFeed contemplates its future, the website should reconsider its approach to motherhood.

…In April, BuzzFeed ran an article headlined, “Mothers Are Revealing How They Realized They Regret Having Children And How They’re Coping Now, And They’re Such Nuanced And Valid Feelings.” The first mom the article quotes said, “I regret having children because of what’s going on in the world. I feel a SEVERE feeling of doom and anxiety when I think about her future. She will probably never be able to afford a house and struggle with debt, climate change, scarce resources, and inequality. I am truly terrified, and I feel so guilty. If I was childless today, I would 100% not have any children.”

This is such a pessimistic view of motherhood and society. Yet it is a view that is getting more attention.

… [The author goes on to cite famous persons who have expressed that they will only have one or two kids and no more.

She also cites statistics showing that more and more people are opting out of parenthood – while later in the article stating that more and more people supposedly want to have children – I don’t know how one squares that circle. Maybe she means to suggest a lot of people want to have kids but feel like they cannot afford them(??).]

… Yet very little of what we see elevated in popular culture focuses on the joy and satisfaction that nurturing children brings mothers also.

… It seems like popular culture spends more time promoting the “wine mom” narrative that women need alcohol to get through mothering and less time honoring women for the work they put into mothering. Just because caregiving can be tough doesn’t mean it is not worth our time, shouldn’t be done, or is bad.

[The author links to several articles at BuzzFeed by parents who say they regret having had children.]

…We get it, BuzzFeed wants its readers to know that not everyone is happy with her decision to have children. But BuzzFeed is doing more than this. It is promoting a narrative that conflicts with what Americans want.

A huge majority of Americans have or want children. Only 5 percent of American adults do not want children.

[The author surmises that perhaps women who are mothers who enjoy motherhood are simply not writing about the joys of motherhood, so that perceptions on the subject may be skewed, since online, we seem to be hearing more from people who admit to disliking being a parent or dislike aspects of parenthood.

The author ends her piece by expressing upset that there are so many “motherhood regret” essays being published and encouraging women who enjoy motherhood to start cranking out essays about how great motherhood is.]
— end excerpts —

Where the author states:

Stories about parental regret might get clicks, but BuzzFeed acting as a PR machine against motherhood might also influence people’s decision to become a parent.
— end —

This is clearly a double standard by this author, for most conservatives are, and have been for decades, acting as a “PR machine” in FAVOR OF motherhood to influence women to get married young and to have children.

That non-stop portrayal of motherhood or marriage as being a woman’s only or highest godly role or design in life, with an underlying, sometimes unspoken promise by conservatives, that motherhood and marriage will totally fulfill a woman and bring her purpose and identity, is precisely the reason that the ladies on the left have been pushing back against this for years, because those points are false.

Critique of Federalist Editorial “There Is One Pro-Women Camp In American Politics, And It’s The Right by Elle Reynolds” – Do Federalist Magazine Members Realize There Are Single, Childless Conservative Women?

Critique of Federalist Editorial “There Is One Pro-Women Camp In American Politics, And It’s The Right by Elle Reynolds” – Do Federalist Magazine Members Realize There Are Single, Childless Conservative Women?

Way below, I will link to and discuss yet another unfortunate editorial from conservative site The Federalist which again incorrectly conflates “womanhood” with motherhood,  as if there’s an assumption that all conservative women are married with children
(hint: we are not. Some of us conservative women are single and childless. I am no less a woman, or no less a conservative, merely because I am childless and single).

It seems as though The Federalist, like many other conservative sites, pumps out at least one of these
“womanhood = motherhood and wife, and if you disagree with this assumption, you must be an abortion-supporting, man-hating, Democrat feminist”
type editorials about once a month to once every three months. And they are so tiresome.

Just a few months ago, I wrote this post:

(Link): Authors at The Federalist Keep Bashing Singleness in the Service of Promoting Marriage – Which Is Not Okay

And now here I am again, having to address another one of their, “rah rah marriage and motherhood, being conservative as a woman means being a wife and a mother!” type pieces.

Some conservative authors may concede that it’s possible to be a woman and be single and also be childless and also be a conservative, but one would not know it, from their unrelenting association of womanhood with marital or parental status.

I’m a conservative woman who was raised a gender complementarian Southern Baptist. I rejected complementarianism years ago and no longer consider myself to be a Southern Baptist.

I am not a progressive, a liberal, or a feminist.

I don’t agree with all views of feminists, but at times, I’ve found that other conservatives, in attempting to “own the libs,” or in arguing against feminist perspectives (some which conservatives occasionally caricaturize, which results in strawman arguments), go too far in the other, and equally wrong, direction.

I have nothing against the nuclear family, marriage, or motherhood. However, there is nothing wrong with a person being single and childless, whether by choice or by circumstance.

Yes, some conservative (and non-conservative) women are single by circumstance, and somehow such women are never considered in these excessively pro-motherhood, pro-nuclear family, pro-marriage pieces. More about that:

(Link):  Otherhood – An overlooked demographic – the Childless and Childfree Women and Singles Especially Women Who Had Hoped to Marry and Have Kids But Never Met Mr. Right (links)

If you’re a Christian – and I think many of the writers at The Federalist are Christian, or at least supportive of Judeo-Christian values – you cannot plausibly defend a hyper-fixation on marriage, the nuclear family, and motherhood (or fatherhood) from the Bible itself.

The Bible actually teaches that spiritual family is of more import than biological family. Jesus of Nazareth taught in the Gospels that if you follow him, you are to place him above your spouse, any children you have, your siblings, your parents, and other biological family.

(See Matthew 12:46-50 and Matthew 10:37,38 for more about how Jesus discouraged his followers from prioritizing biological family or spouse above devotion to God or above spiritual family, as today’s American conservatives tend to do.)

The Bible simply does not teach anyone to “focus on their (biological) family,” nor does the Bible teach that marriage, natalism, parenthood, or the nuclear family will fix a culture or that marriage or parenthood will make a person more godly, ethical, or responsible.

The Bible says that the problem with humanity is sin, that each person is a sinner, and the Bible prescribes belief in Jesus as Savior to be the cure – not marriage or having a baby.

In 1 Corinthians 7, the Apostle Paul wrote it is better to remain single than to marry:

Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do …
(28) …But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this.
32 I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs—how he can please the Lord. 33 But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife— 34 and his interests are divided.
An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world—how she can please her husband.
35 I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord.

That sure doesn’t sounding like a ringing endorsement of marriage, motherhood, and the nuclear family, the kind I regularly hear from secular and Christian conservatives!

However, too many editorials by conservative sites – Federalist is really bad about this, as are BreakPoint and several others – continue to conflate “godly,” “mature,” patriotic, and good with “being a married mother.”

I’m a conservative woman who never did marry. Not because I am “anti marriage,” but because in spite of all the propaganda I was fed by Southern Baptist and evangelical Christians from the time I was a kid and teen (i.e., if I just had faith, attended church, prayed, etc, that God would send me a husband), and although I followed that evangelical and Baptist teaching, I never-the-less was never sent a spouse.

I did not choose to remain single over my entire life; that is just how my life turned out.

By staying single for as long as I have, and I remain right of center politically, I’ve seen that too many other conservatives, in seeking to correct what they see as liberal or feminist mistakes regarding family and marriage, end up going in error by going in the direct, 180 degree opposite direction, by placing an over-emphasis upon marriage and parenthood.

Here’s a link with excerpts to the editorial from The Federalist, and below, I’ll pick apart where I agree or disagree:

The Editorial by E. Reynolds on The Federalist

(Link): There Is One Pro-Women Camp In American Politics, And It’s The Right

Excerpts:

by Elle Reynolds
June 15, 2022

… Even at the height of the feminist movement, the lies that women must become like men to be real women were damaging — but now, all pretenses are up.
— end excerpt —

Women Must Become Like Men To Be Real Women?

When Reynolds writes, “… the lies that women must become like men to be real women were damaging,” what does she mean? What does she mean by women “becoming like men?”

I think I know what Reynolds means, and if I am correct, she is most likely referring to gender stereotypes, that women are, or should be, great at relationships, free to show emotion, nurturing, warm, passive, be risk averse, and docile.

(Note that many of these stereotypes for women are the same as hallmarks of codependency.)

The Sexual Revolution Has Backfired on Women by S. Moore

The Sexual Revolution Has Backfired on Women by S. Moore

Before I paste in excerpts from the editorial, and though I’m a conservative, I’d like to say that I don’t agree with the usual conservative response to the “sexual revolution.”

First of all, too often, too many conservatives blame “women’s lib,” and the 1960s “sexual revolution” with any and all societal ills – conservatives will blame sexual promiscuity and so on for all that, but sexual promiscuity existed prior to the 1960s, and in other cultures.

Secondly, while I am not opposed to parenthood, the nuclear family, or marriage – or to the notion of waiting until marriage to have sex – too often, most conservatives instruct people that the way out of cultural rot is for everyone to marry, marry by the time they are 23, and have ten children. I disagree – for several reasons.

Marriage and parenthood do not keep people from sin, sexual or otherwise (see examples of what I mean in this post and in this post).

If you’re a Christian conservative, you should be aware that the Bible does not say that a “cure” for the individual or for society is marriage and parenthood – for more on that topic, please see (Link): this post, (Link): this post, and (Link): this post on this blog.

The Bible actually advises that singleness is preferable to marriage (see 1 Corinthians 7), and recall that Jesus of Nazareth never married, never had children, and he actually made some anti-nuclear-family-esque type comments (see posts linked to in the aforementioned paragraph for examples of that).

There are adults – like myself – who are single by circumstance (I had hoped to marry but it never came to pass). Some adults are single by choice, which is fine – nobody should be shamed or guilt tripped for being single by circumstance or for choosing not to marry.

The problem is not one’s martial status.

A person can remain single and celibate over a life time and manage NOT to rob liquor stores, not participate in looting and rioting, not pelt police officers with rocks, and not rape and murder people.

The problems stem from lack of self control and choice – do you choose to be a law abiding citizen or not? Being a law abiding citizen is not contingent on being married or on having children.

Hopefully, the editorial below does not fall back on the usual tropes of, “Oh dear me, if only everyone would marry young, have kids, and form their own nuclear families, society would be crime and sin free” fairy tale.

If women of any age are having difficulties getting a mate, or in staying married, the answer is NOT always or necessarily to return to stifling, sexist, 1950s American “pro marriage and pro nuclear family” positions.

Things are not always mutually exclusive or do not have to be – life for women does not have to consist of only two choices (this is a false dichotomy):

1. be a “sex positive” feminist lady who has sex with any body and every body or 2. be a traditional, stay-at- home wife and mother

You can cook up a third or fourth way of living life.  Life does not have to be lived by only one or the other parameter above. I don’t know why most on the right and some on the left continue to depict life as though only two avenues for women are possible.

I don’t entirely fit into either the left’s or the right’s notions of how women should live, and the older I get, I resent individuals, groups, or organizations (whether right, left, religious, or secular) condescendingly trying to define me or tell me how they think I should live, and at that, based on my biological sex.

There were a few aspects of this I didn’t agree with, but most of it seems okay enough:

(Link): The sexual revolution has backfired on women

Young women today are more sexually liberal than ever, but this could be extremely damaging – as the modern Mary Whitehouse has warned us

by Suzanne Moore
May 31, 2022

Who wants to be thought of as uncool, uptight and no fun? Certainly not young women who have been brought up to be “sex-positive”. This means being open, tolerant and progressive about sex, removing all judgment and shame and believing anything goes as long as those involved consent to it. It’s a beautiful idea: sexual freedom and enjoyment for all and personally I cannot wait for this revolution to happen.

It’s something of a shock, then, to be reminded that we are supposedly living in post-revolutionary times. As feminist author Louise Perry makes plain in her clear-sighted new book, The Case Against the Sexual Revolution: A New Guide to Sex in the 21st Century, what this actually means is a flood of pornography and hook-up culture, where a few swipes lead to casual encounters, “rough sex” is seen as routine, prostitution is viewed as just another career choice and we have the lowest rate of conviction for rape in a decade.

… It certainly is “progressive” for some men, who get to sleep with women who have been taught that all desires are acceptable and transgression is erotic, but the number of young women who tell stories of being choked and spat on or pushed into sexual acts they were not sure of, during what used to be called “one night stands”, is disturbing.

…But there is a case to be made that today’s aggressively sexual culture does not make many women happy; indeed quite the opposite. Some are paying such a high price for our so-called freedom that we might question what it all means.

I Appear Successful, But Since Having Kids I Feel I’ve Lost Myself by Annalisa Barbieri (Letter from a Married Mother Who Has Depression, Low Self Esteem)

I Appear Successful, But Since Having Kids I Feel I’ve Lost Myself by Annalisa Barbieri (Letter from a Married Mother Who Has Depression, Low Self Esteem)

Before I get to the link and the letter, I wanted to say…

The article below – via The Guardian – doesn’t make it clear, but the following appears to be an e-mail or a letter from a married mother who has low self esteem, and she’s writing to this paper for advice, guidance, and help.

I’m sorry this lady is not doing well, but I want you to take away from this that being married and being a mother (having children) will not necessarily make you happy, or bring you joy, inner peace, or a healthy sense of identity.

I’m afraid that a lot of conservatives – especially Christians – keep promoting these false notions to women, from the time we are girls, that if we just marry (and/or have children), that being married and a parent will bring us permanent happiness and purpose in life, but clearly, that is not the case.

I am not “anti family” nor “anti motherhood,” but I figured out a long time ago that being a parent or married may not bring you fulfillment in life, and it is that expectation that a lot of “pro family,” “pro motherhood” type of conservatives continue to hold up – it is misleading, false hope and propaganda.

I’ve got other examples on my blog of women who married (or who are mothers), and yet, being married (or being a mother) didn’t bring them happiness, but they were still left feeling overlooked, depressed, or lonely – in some cases, because the man they married doesn’t meet their emotional needs regularly, but spends all his day wrapped up in his hobbies or watching television.

I have blog posts of women who admit that they regret motherhood!

I think if you’re someone who had hoped or expected to marry (or have children) it can be painful  or very disappointing if that did not happen for you, but if you can accept it,
and permit yourself to go through a grieving process and determine to move on in life and determine to enjoy life anyway (in spite of life not turning out how you had hoped), that you can ultimately find joy, happiness, fun, and peace without a spouse and without children.

You can find other avenues of joy, meaning, and happiness in life that don’t involve being married or having children. I made that transition myself years ago, though it took me several years of grappling with unhappiness to get there, but it can be done.

But again, notice, that although the woman letter writer here married and had children, that she is STILL depressed, feels like a failure, feels like a “loser,” and thinks she is not enough.

Being a wife and a mother – contrary to what a lot of excessively pro-family, pro-natalism Christian conservatives bang on about – did not fill that empty void she has, nor increase her self image to a healthy level.

(Link): I appear successful, but since having kids I feel I’ve lost myself

Excerpts:

Squashing your anger down is exhausting. Try using your free time to do what makes you feel good, and see what shifts

May 20, 2022
by Annalisa Barbieri

[This appears to be a question from a writer to an advice columnist named Annalisa Barbieri? – the article doesn’t make it clear]:

[Dear Advice Columnist,]

I have struggled with depression and anxiety since my teens and have had therapy and medication on and off since I was 17 (I am now 37). I’m aware of deep-rooted low self-esteem and shame.

I feel worthless. I never want to draw attention to myself and have a paralysing fear of confrontation.

I have managed to maintain a few close friendships, have worked in the past, and am married with two kids. So I appear “successful” on the surface.

Three-Year-Old Killed in Disturbing Exorcism Ritual by Her Family at California Church, Police Say

Three-Year-Old Killed in Disturbing Exorcism Ritual by Her Family at California Church, Police Say

(Link): Mother of 3-Year-Old Girl Who Died at SJ Church Talks About Daughter in Video

May 11, 2022

The church where the girl died is the same one that was searched after 3-month-old baby Brandon Cuellar was kidnapped from a San Jose home

…Police say the 3-year-old girl was a victim of child abuse, as members of the church tried to ward off “evil spirits.”

Investigators said it happened from an exorcism-like ritual done by her family.

(Link): Mom Accused of Killing Toddler in Church Exorcism Shrugged It Off: ‘It Is What It Is’ – paywall

Arely Proctor Hernandez, 3, was allegedly deprived of food and water, and repeatedly assaulted in a San Jose church’s attempt to rid her of “evil spirits.”

May 10, 2022
by Justin Rohrlich

A California mom whose 3-year-old daughter suffocated to death during an exorcism to rid the child of “an evil spirit” said shortly before her arrest that she was sad the girl had died but was thankful she wouldn’t have to live in a world where “everything is just so bad, like, everything just going downhill.”

Feminist Author: Stay-At-Home Moms Breed ‘Worse, More Sexist’ Men

Feminist Author: Stay-At-Home Moms Breed ‘Worse, More Sexist’ Men By Samantha Ibrahim

From what I recall reading years ago, there is a grain of truth of some of what this feminist woman wrote – I have read studies that men who have daughters tend to be less sexist than men who don’t, and that men brought up with sisters where all household chores were equally divided (the boys weren’t let off the hook for domestic chores) grow up to have more egalitarian gender attitudes than men who grow up in families where they see their parents expect or force the female children to take on more domestic duties.

I’ve also read studies saying that never-married women are happier than married women. There are studies saying people who are parents are not as happy as childless couples. (Some of these studies are linked to below under “Related Posts.”)

Having said that: while I do believe that too many conservatives (I myself am a conservative) have turned marriage and parenthood into idols, and that they do cling to some sexist stereotypes, I do not have an issue with women who knowingly walk into marriage and motherhood.

That is, I do not think that feminists should shame women who want to marry and have children any more than I think that it’s acceptable for conservatives or Christians to pressure women into thinking their only life goal should be marriage and motherhood.

(Link): Feminist author: Stay-at-home moms breed ‘worse, more sexist’ men

By Samantha Ibrahim
April 13, 2022

Controversial feminist author Jill Filipovic is preaching the “overwhelmingly negative consequences” of stay-at-home moms — and social media watchdogs are coming for her.

Filipovic, 38, detailed her stance that these mothers create “worse, more sexist” men — and women who are “psychologically and emotionally worse off” — in a now-viral (Link): Twitter thread published on Tuesday.

First Comes Love. Then Comes Sterilization. by Suzy Weiss

First Comes Love. Then Comes Sterilization. by Suzy Weiss

Disclaimer (if you’re new to the blog): I am not “anti-family.”
If people, of their own informed volition, decide to have children, that is fine by me.
But I am opposed to the guilt tripping or shaming by some adults (who are usually religious or conservative) to pressure other adults (and it’s usually women who are the targets of pro-natalism propaganda) into having children.

I found some of the reasons the young, childfree or anti-natalist people cited in this article below for not having children to be strange or idiotic, but it’s not my place – or yours – to dictate to them if they have children or not.

(Link): First Comes Love. Then Comes Sterilization. by Suzy Weiss

Inside America’s Baby Bust. Meet the young women who never want to have kids.

October 2021

… Americans are making fewer babies than we’ve made since we started keeping track in the 1930s. And some women, like Diamond, are not just putting off pregnancy but eliminating the possibility of it altogether.

Last year, the number of deaths exceeded that of births in 25 states — up from five the year before. The marriage rate is also at an all-time low, at 6.5 marriages per 1,000 people.

Millennials are the first generation where a majority are unmarried (about 56%). They are also more likely to live with their own parents, according to Pew, than previous generations were in their twenties and thirties. 

They also aren’t having sex. The number of young men (ages 18 to 30) who admit they have had no sex in the past year tripled between 2008 and 2018.

Cities like New York, where young, secular Americans flock to to build their lives, are increasingly childless. In San Francisco, there are more dogs than children.

The Gross, Shaming Natalism Propaganda on Gab Platform by Its Rude Members, Including By Roman Catholics and Other Conservatives

The Gross, Shaming Natalism Propaganda on Gab Platform by Its Rude Members, Including By Roman Catholics and Other Conservatives

A few days ago, someone I follow on Gab – I was automatically signed up to follow that person when I joined the site, I did not choose to follow them on my own – (with Gab being a social media platform that is similar to Twitter) shared a meme by someone else called “Disco.”

You can view that meme (Link): here on Gab.

I will also provide a screen shot below.

By the way, I am not as familiar with Gab’s functions and commenting as I am with Twitter’s, so I am not quite sure how to reply to people on Gab or how to link to specific comments by myself or others.

I am a pro-life conservative.

I am not opposed to equal rights for women, but I don’t identify as a feminist.

I don’t really fit in totally over on Gab, a platform which unfortunately attracts a lot of extreme right wing kooks (but some of the users seem okay),
but I don’t really fit in over on Twitter, either (where I was suspended for months previously before I got posting ability again),
because Twitter is over-run with far left “nut jobs,” most of whose views I normally do not agree with.

I have found that both conservatives and liberals / progressives are about equally annoying and wrong on the parenthood, marriage, or nuclear family topics.

Not all progressives or liberals are opposed to women having children; they just believe (and I agree with this concept, though I am a conservative) that women (and men) should be permitted to decide for themselves if they truly want to be a parent or not.

People should not be guilt tripped or pressured into having children.

There are some very fringe, far-out there leftists who are “anti nuclear family” and who are opposed to people having children, and they call themselves “anti natalists.”

I don’t agree with progressives who try to propagandize women (or men) from having children.

I don’t think it’s the progressives’ place to try to brainwash, scold, shame, or guilt trip people from having children.

But then I see the reverse dynamic from a lot of secular and Christian conservatives.

I see people who identify as conservative or Roman Catholic on sites such as GAB who keep pumping out these stupid, horrid, “Have ten kids by the time you’re 30” type memes or comments.

And these views are not even “biblical.”

Christian Conservatives Explain Outrage Over Dave Rubin’s Surrogacy Announcement – Women Used As Props in Homosexual or Transgender Communities

Christian Conservatives Explain Outrage Over Dave Rubin’s Surrogacy Announcement – Women Used As Props in Homosexual or Transgender Communities

I actually follow Dave Rubin on Twitter. I’ve known for awhile he used to be liberal and became a conservative at some point, and he is a homosexual.

I am not too educated on the topic of surrogacy, so that is something I need to research.

In the past year, and though I’m not a feminist myself, I started following a lot of anti-trans-agenda feminists (they tend to call it “radical feminism”), and some of them are strongly opposed to women being used as surrogates to provide babies for other people.

One of my only annoyances with this at this stage, based on what little I know, are Christians who criticize married, infertile (hetero) couples who turn to a surrogate mother and/or IVF, etc, to have a child.

The reason I dislike this, is that I find it hypocritical: most Christian churches, denominations, and persons present being married and having children as being “better” than being single and childless.

So, Christians shame adults for being single and childless, but when or if that adult then tries to take steps to make marriage or pregnancy possible (whether by using dating sites, IVF, a surrogate), that same Christian, church, or denomination will shame that single, childless adult.

You will get shamed or criticized by Christians for striving for the very thing or life goal they are constantly pushing in your face, whether it’s marriage or parenthood.

I may not necessarily be in agreement with all opinions expressed below by other authors.

(Link): No Allies Who Buy Babies

The problem of gay surrogacy reminds us that the right’s alliance with anti-woke liberals cannot and should not survive.

…This, of course, is the primary issue: the moral abomination of surrogacy itself, the commodification of the human child, the relegation of women to the status of incubators. But there is a secondary concern as well.

The same people who make a living being outraged that Lia Thomas, who is a man, is allowed to swim in the women’s races for his college cannot turn around and tell us that there’s nothing wrong with two dudes having babies together.

Is there a difference between men and women, or is there not?

The normalization of homosexuality, and especially the normalization of homosexual parenthood, necessarily leads to the more radical gender ideology advancing from the left today.

I Guess The Southern Baptist “Biblical Womanhood” Site Is No More – Many Other Complementarian Blogs Now Inactive – and I’m Not Sad About It

I Guess The Southern Baptist “Biblical Womanhood” Site Is No More – Many Other Complementarian Blogs Now Inactive – and I’m Not Sad About It

I wrote about this Southern Baptist site a few years ago, here:

(Link): Southern Baptist’s New Sexist “Biblical Woman” Site – Attitudes in Total Face Palm of a Site One Reason Among Many This Unmarried and Childless Woman Is Saying Toodle-Oo to Christianity

Biblical Womanhood mast head screen shot

That site was hosted here at one time:

(Link): Biblical Womanhood (Southern Baptist site – www.biblicalwoman.com)

However, as of February 2022, the site is not loading. I guess it was taken down?

I’ve done some web searching, but I cannot find another site about Biblical Womanhood like this one by SWBTS, or written by them.

Their site was an off shoot of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (their site: swbts.com).

Their site’s affiliated Twitter, account, @BiblicalWoman still exists, but they removed all Tweets – well, the Twitter account must’ve been newer than the site, because the Twitter page says they started their account in 2019, but their site goes back to at least around 2014.

Apparently, the last that site was active was May 15, 2021, if the (Link): Wayback Machine site: Biblical Womanhood Site Archived is any indication.

On another look, 2015 was the date on Wayback Machine’s last available date for them, but a few of their blog posts are time stamped 2019.

Edit. I think somewhere on the archived “Biblical Womanhood” site is a notice that says they will be shutting their Christianized Martha Stewart site down and moving content over to Facebook.

Let me see if I can find them on Facebook. Their archived site states that their Facebook group address is (Link): facebook.com/BiblicalWoman. I tried that link, but it goes to a blank page, except for this text:

This Page Isn’t Available
The link may be broken, or the page may have been removed. Check to see if the link you’re trying to open is correct.
— end —

So even their Facebook presence was deactivated at some stage.

But where ever, and how ever, will I get content to shame me for being single into my adulthood (the TGC or Desiring God sites maybe)?

Where else will I get content like, “55 Feminine, Biblical Casserole Recipes with Hamburger Meat as an Ingredient,” -?
or, “17 Feminine, Godly Handi-Crafts Using Popsicle Sticks Glued Together” -? Where?! 

Can I make it through life without gender stereotyped dating, cooking, and arts- and- crafts advice from complementarians?  What ever will I do?🤔🙄

From the Southern Baptist Biblical Womanhood’s (Link): archived “About” page:

Whether it’s parenting your teenage daughter, finding purpose in your singleness ….
— end excerpt —

Oh please. 99.9% of the time, 100% of complementarians are only interested in three, four areas areas in regards to women(*), and NONE of them have to do with single women, because complementarians, beyond giving their presumptuous “practice being a good homemaker NOW, while you’re living alone in your own apartment, to prepare yourself for the day, when you’re 25 and get married and have children!” articles (presumptuous because some women never end up marrying), they never have anything meaningful to say about adult female (or male, for that matter) singleness.

The areas most complementarians harp on 100% of the time include:

• convincing women it’s not biblical for them to preach,
• brainwashing them to think the complementarian form of codependency (“submission”) is good and godly,
• and constantly harping on “marriage and motherhood.”

Says The Transman: “‘[I]t’s so important that we stop defining ‘womanhood’ in terms of ‘motherhood”” – Well, Yes and No

Says The Transman: “‘[I]t’s so important that we stop defining ‘womanhood’ in terms of ‘motherhood”” – Well, Yes and No

The headline on the page reads, “Transgender man who gave birth slams nurses who called him ‘Mom’” but a quote from the page says, “[I]t’s so important that we stop defining ‘womanhood’ in terms of ‘motherhood'”

In terms of physical biology and human anatomy, no.

Biological women are the ones in the human race who become pregnant, can get pregnant, and/or give birth – which makes them mothers. The father is the biological man who contributes the sperm.

Now, in- so- far as not all women can or want to have babies – because they are infertile or are childfree or some such – well, yes, I would agree that “womanhood” shouldn’t be confined to meaning “motherhood” in that sense (too many Christians keep defining womanhood to mean “woman who marries and has children.”)

But this transgender attempt at re-defining the word “motherhood” based on the bonkers idea that “fathers can be mothers” is a big no-go from me.

Even if we arrive one day where technology allows for a uterus to be implanted into a biological male (chromosomes XY), that person with an implanted uterus still will not be a woman – he will be a man with an implanted uterus.

(Link):  Says The Transman: “‘[I]t’s so important that we stop defining ‘womanhood’ in terms of ‘motherhood””

Dec 22, 2021
By Hannah Frishberg

Not everyone who gives birth is a “mother,” this transgender man would like medical workers to know.

In Oct. 2020, Los Angeles resident Bennett Kaspar-Williams, 37, gave birth via caesarean to a healthy baby boy with his husband, Malik.

But in the process of having little Hudson, Kaspar-Williams was troubled by the constant misgendering of him by hospital staff who insisted on calling him a “mom,” the Daily Mail reported.

It’s Okay If You Don’t Have Baby Fever! by Olga Khazan

It’s Okay If You Don’t Have Baby Fever! By Olga Khazan

The Atlantic is one of those sites that periodically publishes some material I agree with and enjoy, but ever since Trump was in (and now out of) office, they seem to go the other route and publish some bat sh*t insane leftist material.

The following article seems okay to me, though. But please don’t assume that if or when I share an article or editorial at The Atlantic that I always agree with all of their content.

(Link): It’s Okay If You Don’t Have Baby Fever – via The Atlantic

Excerpts:

A deep, sudden longing for babies is certainly real, but it’s not a prerequisite for having kids.
By Olga Khazan

Dec 22, 2021

….But some people—research and, frankly, real life shows—will get pregnant this winter without getting baby fever, without even thinking about babies, and indeed without really meaning to at all.

And I’m here to tell you that’s also totally normal and fine.

Being a woman of what obstetricians charmingly call “advanced maternal age,” I have tried to detect the mysterious force that is baby fever, so far to no avail.

At first, I thought I’d get baby fever when I woke up on the first day of my 35th year, my body suddenly deciding that I would enjoy changing diapers more than watching TV. That didn’t occur…