A MOTHER'S PLACE

Susan Chira wrote a typical feminist book that rationalizes her having an exciting job at the New York Times as a reporter who even gets a buzz from being in dangerous situations around the world. In her book, A Mother's Place: Taking the Debate About Working Mothers beyond Guilt and Blame she says, "I wrote this book out of hope and fear, to confront my own demons and share my exhilaration." Well, the demons won. "I used to quail inside whenever I met a mother who had chosen a different path from mine; in my heart, I felt challenged and questioned my own choices." But she overcame her conscience and proclaims the following great wisdom: "I had been searching for absolutes that did not exist." Did she search for God's will? No.

"While I cannot predict what lies ahead for me as a mother or professional, I know that I refuse to listen to those who tell me I cannot honorably do both." Millions of women, thank God, are listening and leaving the workplace to take care of their family. "I wanted to say to the voices of doubt outside me and within me. Be silent." She does not know that there are voices from spirit world influencing her. "I am tired of hearing women told that they should not dare to want it all -- or as much as anyone can reasonably hope to get. I am going to shut my ears to the drumbeat, and I am going to keep my eyes trained on my children." How can she keep her eyes on her children when she is working long hours at the Times? I am also tired of hearing the feminist crap that floods the media. But God wants us to fight the good fight and America is in for the fight of its life in this cultural war.

Danielle Crittenden

A excellent book that speaks against the Satanic garbage of the like of Chira is Danielle Crittenden's What Our Mothers Didn't Tell Us. She writes, "For more than thirty year the women's movement has told us that we would be happier, more fulfilled human beings if we left our homes and children and went out to work. To the degree that we might feel misgivings or guilt about leaving our babies to others to raise, we have been assured that such feelings are imposed upon us by society, and sexist -- no more normal for a mother to experience than a father. Instead, we've been taught to suppress these worries and to put our work ahead of our families, or at the very least, to attempt to 'balance' the demands of boss and baby. Any strong rush of maternal feeling, any desire to surrender pieces of our professional selves, is viewed as a reversion to some stereotype of motherhood the women's movement was supposed to have emancipated us from. The popular books on motherhood being written by feminists today are no less vehement than they were in 1972 that full-time motherhood is a servile and ultimately dangerous state for women to succumb to. Being a good mother, they say, means taking care of ourselves first and learning to let others' needs come second. The so-called 'Good Mother,' who makes sacrifices for her children, has been 'again and again, the means of restricting women's worlds and prohibiting them from engaging equally in the public world of men,' write Diane Eyer in her 1996 book, Motherguilt: How Our Culture Blames Mothers for What's Wrong with Society. (Eyer is also the author of the 1993 book, Mother-Infant Bonding: A Scientific Fiction. Is it important to mention that this great authority on maternal feeling is not a mother?)"

Yes, it is important to say that Eyer is not a "great" authority and it is beyond me that Eyer can have the gall to write a book about babies and never have had one. This is an example of the total arrogance and stupidity of feminists. Feminist literature has been an avalanche and all of it is inspired by the demons that the Bible calls the forces of darkness.

BONDING

Eyer is, for some reason, really upset and disgusted at three popular writers on children that push for mothers to stay home with babies. As far as I know, all three are not against mothers returning to work after some point. She writes, "I describe the din of mother bullying which has been midwifed by the baby gurus T. Berry Brazelton, Penelope Leach, and Benjamin Spock among others." They are "bullies" because they want mothers to stay home with infants instead of in day care? "Their psychobabble about attachment and bonding has facilitated a backlash against working mothers in the courts and the workplace." These "baby guru" "sacred texts" "and their fellow clergy" "perpetuate a constricting stereotype of mothers as little more than architects of the perfect child, not people with their own legitimate needs and diverse talents. If today's mothers are feeling guilty, it's a good bet it's because the Holy Triumvirate has told them in so many words that they are guilty." "When it comes to working outside the home, the baby gurus stand grandly in their pulpits ... and pontificate about the sinfulness of mothers who work. "They believe 'othercare' is inferior to mothercare and pass along this message to new mothers primed to accept it as gospel." It is interesting that she uses religious terms with such distaste.

NURSING

"British psychologist Penelope Leach is one of the world's most widely read child care experts, with her own TV show and worldwide public appearances to promote the word. ... In her most recent book Children First, she criticizes all forms of nonmaternal care during the first eighteen months of a child's life because, she proclaims, it is inherently inferior to the care provided by the one-and-only 'special adult' -- mother. ... She touts breast-feeding as a fundamental and necessary part of the attachment process and incompatible with working." Can you feel the heartlessness of her words?

"In his 1994 finger-wagging lecture, A Better World for Our Children, Spock admonishes it's better for one 'parent' (guess who) to stay home for the first two or three years of a child's life, although he recognizes the need for 'parents' to work." She has contempt for these writers who are far removed from teaching what the true standard of a mother should be. Can you see how Satan is working? We must fight the root cause of evil. Feminism is the root evil that seeks to destroy godly families. It is a cruel and vicious view of life.

Her solution is the same as all communists -- big government: "mothers and fathers must insist on a genuinely family-friendly workplace and the kind of family supports provided by every other Western nation, including paid family leave and a first-rate subsidized, regulated child-care system. ... universal subsidized child care could virtually eliminate child poverty." Spoken like a true socialist/feminist.

Maybe the disgust Eyer has for the idea that mothers and infants should be together is some flaw in her character that has given her an ice-cube heart. She is one of many professors who poison their students with their unnatural views and then influence many with their books and speeches and TV appearances. Science is god for Eyer. She says science shows that mothers who do not bond with their infants do no harm. When we get away from God we move away from common sense and love. Feminists are basically unable to love very well.

Cain and Abel

In this cultural war there are basically two sides -- the Liberals and the Conservatives. Neither know about the depth of God's desire for absolute values. But the Right is more on the Abel side. Eyer is on the side of Cain. There are many books by authors on the Abel side. An excellent book is Home by Choice by Brenda Hunter. God speaks more through authors like Hunter, and Satan speaks through authors like Eyer.

Crittenden continues: "Not only this, but women are often told it is actually better for a mother to work outside the home, because she will be more satisfied that way and she will foster in her children a much healthier sense of independence. Mothers 'should work outside the home. If they do not, they cannot preserve their identities or raise children,' Joan K. Peters argues in When Mothers Work: Loving Our Children Without Sacrificing Our Selves (1997). 'Sacrifice has no place in the motherhood pantheon,' declares Susan Chira in her 1998 book, A Mother's Place: Taking the Debate About Working Mothers Beyond Guilt and Blame. 'As I and many other mothers and their children have found our bonds can survive hours or days apart ...'

BE THERE

"Authors like Susan Chira may insist that they are every bit as involved in their children's lives as mothers who work less or not at all because, as Chira once said, her children are in her heart and she is in theirs. But just being 'in their hearts' is not enough (a friend of mine, upon hearing this, remarked that Chira was speaking of herself as if she were dead -- 'I live in their hearts ...'). We must be there for them in body as well as in spirit. I've noticed that when you work, you try to make up for the time you're not with your children by being overly involved with them; but what they really prefer, particularly as they get older, is for you to be there but distracted. They can ask you things as the thoughts occur to them; color a picture without you checking your watch; play by themselves while you're nearby, busy with some chore; go for a walk in the park because the weather at that moment happens to be lovely; and see neighboring friends on the spur of the moment without elaborate play dates having to be arranged to suit everyone's timetable. It is these trivial, daily, and seemingly mundane moments that compose a childhood. And they are moments a mother never gets back. The length of time it takes for a human being to transform from a demanding infant into a smiling baby into a crawling terror into a walking child into a teenager and finally into a grown man or woman is profoundly short. Years later, a mother looks at baby photos and hungrily tries to recall the powder scent of her children's skin, the soft indents of the back of their necks, the pudginess of their feet, how she could cradle their entire bodies in her arms. Where did that all go, so quickly? As my mother-in-law once said, wistfully staring at a picture of her daughter when she was a baby. 'You can't have them back ever again,not even for one minute."

"When you think about it, it seems a poor trade-off for a society: valuing the work a woman does writing legal briefs more than the hours she might have devoted to helping her child feel her importance in the world. It is sad that in the space of a generation motherhood has sunk from being regarded as a strong, noble and vital task to one that garners pity at best, contempt at worst. Until we acknowledge that not only do children need their mothers but that mothers need their children, and that this is neither bad for women nor a sign of weakness, we will never be equal to men in the ways we care about."

During this time that she writes of the True Mother of mankind has been living in America. She and many followers of the Messiah abandoned their children to others because they felt they were in a war and needed to leave their homes to go fight. The result is that some see it as a sacrifice that had to be made, like the men who left home during World War 2. Other members look back and question Father's strategy in this "emergency time." I feel it was a complete mistake. It will take a monumental effort to overcome the damage done by this short term gain that will now be long term pain. The criminal behavior of Hyo Jin and the disgust of some of the children of True Parents for what they see as a sick soap opera at East Gardens has put the providence back more than any other attack from outside.

There was never much caring for members as so-called children of the True Parents. Everyone knew that if anyone got sick you had no health insurance and you would shipped off to your physical parents to have them care for you. The church is not a loving community that out loves people's physical families. There are no trinities. I hope this book ends this dismal state the UC is in and members come together in loving communities that care for each other. Who knows? Maybe feminism is so rampant and women are divorcing and leaving their homes in droves is because Father has had divorces and True Mother is not a stay-at-home mom? Maybe society affected Father. Maybe he saw and sees so much feminism that he felt sisters should act like men and earn money and then leave their children with others as they went out to "teach" and "heal" the world.

NOVELTY AND GLAMOUR

I like what she says about the argument that the workplace is so wonderful and fulfilling: "For the younger generation of women, work is stripped of the novelty and glamour it once held. Women who can be described as having interesting, fulfilling jobs represent a tiny minority of the workforce. There are about 100,000 female lawyers in America. More than 600,000 women work as receptionists, more than 1 million work as waitresses,and close to 2 million work as bookkeepers. These women by and large do not experience the world of work as liberation from the drudgery of child rearing. For them, it is work that is drudgery and child rearing is liberating.

"Even women who work in jobs they once found exciting and stimulating often don't feel the same way after they give birth and are startled by how much they enjoy being mothers. They are forming something of a backlash movement against the executive 'supermom' of the 1980s, who attempted to balance briefcase and baby, and instead are quitting their careers in order to do what we heard women would never do again -- that is, move to the suburbs and raise kids. 'Growing up in the slipstream of feminism, my friends and I had definite notions of what we would do when we grew up. We would become pilots, lawyers, actresses, photographers, and tycoons. Never, ever would any of us settle for being just a housewife, ' observes former radio correspondent Meghan Cox Gurdon in a 1997 essay. But, she goes on to say, with some embarrassment, 'Reader, I am a housewife. I'm acquainted with scores more. And not one of these women ... are bored, foolish, or frustrated. None of us is even overweight. Of the two dozen housewives I know best, all but one has at least a bachelor's degree. Most of us left successful, professional careers after our children were born, and most of us are in our thirties. At our coffee mornings -- yes! we do sometimes meet for coffee! -- we talk politics as much as we do infant feeding schedules ....' But it is still considered a socially awkward choice for a smart, ambitious woman to make. As Gurdon writes, 'I ran into a former colleague recently, a radio correspondent who, like me, has lived around the world and reported dangerous and thrilling stories. Her face crinkled with incredulity when I told her of my current goings-on. 'But what do you do?' Ah. This is the great unanswerable question, the one dinner party query that leaves all but the most self-assured housewives gasping like beached tuna.'

"The question is only unanswerable, however, in a society in which the virtues of work have been so inflated that we can no longer appreciate anything that's not accompanied by a paycheck. ... Hillary Clinton's remark, 'I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies' It is these attitudes that have made it difficult for a woman today to occupy either sphere of work or home completely happily, without feeling guilty and exhausted in one or insecure and under appreciated in the other."

Maybe all this obsession for money comes from the obsession the UC has for money. The MFT was said to be a spiritual experience and they are still inflicting this crap on what few young new members join. Then we have national magazines like Good Housekeeping write articles of how some young person gave up everything to work round the clock on the MFT. In one article I saw in Good Housekeeping a long time member in the UC, Joy Garrett wrote a letter to them indignant that they would write such bigoted, persecuting trash, but I sympathize with the son and mother in the article. Joy said her experience was sweetness and light. The truth is that she is a rare person who has gone through the UC and had a pleasant trip. The vast majority left or are still nursing their wounds from the terror they went through. And to all those fundamental Unificationists that stand up for the MFT I ask you to tell people how many spiritual children you have? How many physical children? Over 10 like Father says we are supposed to have? No one can say that the church center they attend brings in hundreds or thousands of members a year and no one has even had the simple idea of adopting from outside the UC so they could have huge families. Many members are broke or scraping by even though most UC women work.

Crittenden is not perfect, though. She thinks she is so original and on target by coming up with the idea that since women live for 80 years they can find 40 years to have a career. What they should do, she says, is wait to have a career after they spend "six or seven or eight of those years " with her young children. She says her daughter's life "may differ from those of men." She hopes young women would marry in their early 20s and "promptly have a baby. I don't know any woman who has done it. But I wonder if it wouldn't be the most radical and even progressive act an ambitious woman could commit." This is the usual problem with those on God's side. They are weak and just water down the opposition. The "Me too, but less" response to all the pressures the feminists put on society. Crittenden wrote her book when her daughter was little. Hopefully she will not return to the workplace and stay home and be there for her daughter as a teenager and then as a mother herself.

OLD TRUTHS

She is right standing up for principles that America has spit on. "while it is obviously true you can't go back in time, it is not true that the teachings and principles that have guided humans since the beginning of civilization have suddenly become irrelevant. ... This might seem like very ancient advice. That's what makes it all the more revolutionary today. Sometimes the job of a mother is simply to repeat the old truths and again and again, and pray they stick."

---