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


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

In the last two months, I’ve seen two different editorials from conservative site The Federalist in support of marriage (or parenthood).

I’m a conservative. I am not in opposition to marriage or people choosing to have children.

My issue with other conservatives is that they are so paranoid of liberals and assume all liberals are anti-marriage and anti-parenthood to the degree that they leave no room for nuance, meaning, that unfortunately, many pro-marriage and pro-parenthood conservatives end up “trash talking” singleness and the state of being childless (or being childfree).

I’m a conservative woman who has never married, and I’ve never had children, yet I do not hate marriage or married people having children, and I am so tired of these conservative authors or pundits feeling it necessary to put down single or childless adults like myself in their quest to defend marriage and natalism – conservative single adults like myself get caught in the cross-fire.

If you are a conservative who believes too many liberals are anti-marriage or anti-parenthood, and you want to speak out in favor of either station, that’s fine with me, but as a single, childless, conservative woman, I do get very hacked off and offended to read these conservative articles and editorials whose authors assume that any and all single and childless (or childfree) adults are awful, selfish, anti-family, weird, under-developed, or jerks.

Not every one in the United States today who is single past the age of 30, or who is childless or is childfree, is a feminist, a liberal, a progressive, pro-abortion, Democrat, or anti-family.

So, to my fellow conservatives, stop assuming that all single adults who remain single by choice OR by circumstance, or who are childless or childfree, are terrible, selfish, or are baby-hating progressives.

There is ZERO NEED to defend or promote marriage by talking in a derogatory manner about singleness or the state of being childless or childfree.

Make your case in favor of marriage or natalism without resorting to insulting all single adults, or assuming and making the false case that all single adults hate marriage, hate babies, or vote Democrat.

Here is the first of two recent pro-marriage or pro-natalism editorials at conservative site The Federalist  that manage to work in insults and slams against single adults or singleness itself – which is totally shameful and unnecessary!

(Link):  Joy Behar Accidentally Admits Social Conservatives Were Right About Sex

Pertinent Excerpts:

BY: NATHANAEL BLAKE
December 10, 2021

… In particular, large numbers of unattached men are bad for society; having a family encourages men to be productive and protective, rather than idle drones or predators.
— end excerpts —

I mean, really? It’s not necessary or fair to refer to or describe men who remain single as being “idle drones or predators.”

I have a long-running list of news headlines at my blog (in this post) of married men (some who even work as church pastors) who were arrested for wife abuse, making child porn, or raping children.

Serial killer John Wayne Gacy was married to a woman, had two biological children by her, but he went on to rape and murder over two dozen young men. Did marriage and fatherhood make Gacy more “loving” and “giving?” No, no it did not.

Marriage does not stop a man from being “a predator.”

Continue reading “Authors at The Federalist Keep Bashing Singleness in the Service of Promoting Marriage – Which Is Not Okay”

Joy Pullman at The Federalist is At It Again: This Time, She’s Promoting ‘Bedroom Evangelism,’ Which is Not Biblical

Joy Pullman at The Federalist is At It Again: This Time, She’s Promoting ‘Bedroom Evangelism,’ Which is Not Biblical

As a moderately conservative individual, I agree with much of the content published at The Federalist, but certainly not all. This is one of those times when no, I don’t agree.

The name Joy Pullman looked familiar to me, and sure enough, a few years ago, I did a post or two criticizing (Link): one of her other articles.

This time, I am disagreeing with this following piece at The Federalist by Joy Pullman;
I will put some excerpts in, and below that, discuss where my areas of disagreement are
(and it’s a super long excerpt – my comments will be way, way below):

(Link): Christianity’s Growth Problem Isn’t Politics, It’s Our Failure To Have And Evangelize Children

Like just about every other Western Christian body, as well as the United States, the SBC is left to squabble over shrinking slices of a dwindling pie.

by Joy Pullman

The New York Times put out a lengthy preview of the Southern Baptist Convention’s top controversies heading into their annual meeting this week in Nashville, Tenn. Members of the nation’s largest evangelical denomination are weighing the future of their religious body amid numerous theological controversies.

Decline Stems From No Babies, Not Being Too Trumpy
The Times reports that one of the SBC’s concerns is “15-year decline” in members, both through potential theological schisms intertwined with politics, such as critical race theory, and through an aging and thus declining membership.

….While the Times makes much of contrasting the SBC’s political conservatism with its forecast of demographically decisive American leftism, it doesn’t note that the SBC’s decline is directly related to following broader American culture, instead of Christian beliefs, on a keystone of institutional vibrancy: fertility.

Continue reading “Joy Pullman at The Federalist is At It Again: This Time, She’s Promoting ‘Bedroom Evangelism,’ Which is Not Biblical”

The Authors at The Federalist Site Often Don’t Get It: Joy Pullman is Fine With Men Harassing Women Who Wear Headphones In Public – Part 1

The Authors at The Federalist Site Often Don’t Get It: Joy Pullman is Fine With Men Harassing Women Who Wear Headphones in Public – Part 1

I am quoting portions of an essay at The Federalist site in order to offer a rebuttal to it. Link is below.


The Federalist is a conservative web site.

I’m a conservative.

However, I am a conservative who is truly and actually repulsed by sexism against women – and yes, many conservatives will say they are as well – but then they go on to mock and ridicule the very legitimate concerns raised by other women, which means, ultimately, they are supporting and defending sexism despite their avowed concern for women and girls.

Let’s examine one example of this very thing. From the right wing site The Federalist comes this editorial written by a Joy Pullman (yes, the author of this appalling piece is a woman – one usually only sees such dreck from conservative male authors):

(Link): Even Women With Headphones May Want A Man To Chase Them

Here is the obnoxious sub-heading on that page, which was published in September 2016:

Back off, uptight whiners, and stop making public and romantic life so much less fun for everyone. Some ladies like a good chase.
–(end quote)–

I’m surprised a woman wrote this piece, because it conveys a lot of the stupidity, the ignorance of women, and wrong, sexist assumptions many men have of women, but this is written by a conservative woman – so maybe I should not be surprised.

A lot of conservative women (I myself am conservative, but please recall, I don’t agree with them on all topics) hold this bizarre and wrong position that the automatic, correct position on any topic pertaining to gender that feminists, or all women as a group (which may or may not include feminists), are championing or upset about, must be to adopt the direct, opposite position.

And that is an incredibly stupid and irresponsible position for conservatives to take, for, like broken clocks, (Link): even liberal feminists are correct at least twice a day.

Continue reading “The Authors at The Federalist Site Often Don’t Get It: Joy Pullman is Fine With Men Harassing Women Who Wear Headphones In Public – Part 1”