The Women's March

I was glad that my granddaughter went to the Women's March because of her youthful, wholesome curiosity to experience a significant event and her desire to defend the dignity of women which has been vilely violated by many, including our President. My hope  is that her Catholic faith awaken in her a catholic (small c...universal, inclusive) appreciation for all that is good and true and beautiful in every person, culture and movement.  I agree with the adage "if you are not liberal when you are young you have no heart, if you are not conservative when you are old you have no brain."  Rather a little too open-minded at that age than too close-minded! I also hope that she will see deeply into the deeper causes for the abuse of women. Specifically, the feminism on display at the March is in large part an expression of the broader cultural liberalism that exploded upon our society in the 1960s, took possession of the Democratic Party and all of our elites, and is profoundly toxic for women. This movement is really a secular religion and builds upon five interwoven core beliefs and values: the trivialization, sterilization and desecration of sexuality by disconnecting it from marriage, family and new life and redefining it as merely expressive, romantic and recreational; the deconstruction of femininity and masculinity in favor of a homogonized, neuterized androgyny that devalues maternity and paternity; the destruction of powerless, devalued human life in abortion, embryonic experimentation, euthanasia and related projects; a (quasi-Marxist) obsession with power that mimics a crude machismo and disregards femininity in its distinctive psychological, moral, emotional and spiritual influence; and a suspicion of all authority as inherently oppressive rather than a gift from heaven. The first and prime building block of cultural liberalism is the hegemony of contraception (e.g. Obama's imperial contraception mandate) and the disenchantment of sexuality. Harvey Weinstein, who now embodies misogyny at its worst, accurately diagnosed himself: "I came of age in the sexual revolution!" In the jungle of sexual license it is the women who are the victims, along with the little ones they conceive. A culture of respect for women requires a vigorous masculine ethos of chastity, humility, fidelity, and chivalry...but that is the very ethos that the sexual revolution destroyed (at least in elite culture.) The second core value is closely related: the deconstruction of gender. Out of some real or imagined traumatic violation, mainstream militant feminism resents "the difference" of tenderness and reverence intended by our creator in favor of an imitation of a debased machismo fascination for power, rights, autonomy and sexual license. And, so we hear the endless harangue about "patriarchy" as abuse of male power (which is not without value) but the real problem is the absence of "paternity" as gentle, confident, authoritative and generous virile love. Paul Vitz and other researches show that the girl who lacks a strong, positive connection with her father is more vulnerable to sexual abuse. The sexual predator can smell interior strength or weakness and will avoid the young women who emanates the self-esteem, tranquility and modest assertiveness that comes from a devoted, admiring father. Contrast to the mother who remains always psychologically "attached" to the daughter, the father comes from afar, from the outside world, and represents that world and helps to transition the son and daughter both to the objective world. When Dad says "you played well today" it inherently means more than if those words come from Mom. And so, we need more paternity, and maternity, (even as we need less patriarchy in the oppressive sense). But that is hardly the agenda of the women's movement as we know it. A deep respect for women will elevate the distinctive goodness, generosity and sensitivity of the female and encourage a chivalry, a reverence and tenderness, that highlights "the difference" between the sexes. When the two are leveled and homogonized the woman becomes the victim. The third core value of our Cultural Revolution is the disregard for defenseless life, that of the unborn, of the elderly, the disabled and those unable to defend themselves. Such liberalism elevates the isolated individual and its rights and powers and removes it from embodied, familial, gendered relationships like paternity, maternity, and filiality. It engineers a war of one against all in which the most vulnerable are violated, little ones and women especially. This brings us to the infatuation with power since the self is in a constant state of warfare with the other oppressive gender (as well as race, class, sexual orientation, etc.) Marxist class warfare has been transformed into gender warfare. And so the woman must be "empowered" economically and every which way to defend herself against a world and especially men that are implicitly hostile. I personally dislike talk of "empowered women." The concept of "power" implies the application of force against an extrinsic, inert or hostile force. By contrast, the genius of woman is her "influence" ... an interior strength that entails reciprocity, mutuality, gentleness, graciousness and generosity. I imagine even my own funeral:  I don't aspire to be described as a man of "power" but as a man of "influence" in a good sense. The last core value is the suspicion of authority which leads to the concern with "power" in the war of the one against the many. Our Catholic tradition alerts us that all of us as sinners are prone to abuse our authority but all genuine authority (father, mother, police, teacher) is a gift from God and to be honored as such. But the secular cultural revolution is, at least implicitly, atheistic and resentful of all authority. And so, paternity is reconfigured as patriarchy; the police are viewed as normally violators rather than protectors of the peace. And all genuine relationships of authority and obedience are rejected in favor of the hegemony of the Imperial Self.

Of course President Trump is the inspiration for the Women's March because of his infamous bragging about how he easily abuses women's bodies. With this I am in accord as I count myself among those moral conservatives who view his policies as bad (though not as bad as the alternative) but his personal example as repugnant. I would never vote for Trump because I could never look my granddaughters in the eye after the way he spoke of his treatment of women's bodies. (On the other hand, if he repented in sack and ashes, gave away all his money to the poor, took a vow of celibacy, and publicly asked forgiveness of all women, I might vote for him as Little League President.) He is a complex, contradictory figure: at his worst he is sibling of Weinstein and Bill Clinton as a child of the sexual revolution. In his treatment of women and serial polygamy, he personally embodies the very liberalism that the woman's movement champions even as he holds together a cohesive, loyal family and upholds (sincerely, it seems to me) the right to life of the little ones. My granddaughter's favorite chant from the March was:  "It's love, not hate, that makes America great!" With this I heartily concur! It is genuine love... not a romantic, sentimental, politically-correct derivative...but a wholesome love that embraces every weak and vulnerable person; that celebrates and cultivates femininity and masculinity as well as maternity and paternity; that reverences sexuality as the temple of life and intimate, faithful love; that reveres all genuine authority; and that is unafraid of the "powerlessness" that comes with surrender, generosity and openness to the other.