Our friends at The Imaginative Conservative have unearthed a 1998 essay by the late Elizabeth Fox-Genovese, in which she ponders the effects of feminism (both good and bad) on the family.
“On the positive side of the ledger,” Fox-Genovese writes, “women’s political activism of the past few decades has decisively improved the independence and dignity of women as individuals. Women today enjoy opportunities to fulfill their talents, attain an education, pursue a career, run for and win political office that most of our mothers and grandmothers could not have dreamed of.”
Specific feminist victories included “a married woman’s right to own property in her own name” and later “no-fault divorce, recognition of marital rape, and other forms or assistance for the wives of abusive husbands.” As she points out, few would now “dispute the positive value of these and related changes, but some are also beginning to worry that they have come at an exorbitantly high price”—-that is, the dissolution of the family.
Although she criticizes many aspects of twentieth-century feminism, she does not consider conservatives above reproof:
Conservative women . . . often campaign vigorously for “family values,” but more often than not they show no inclination to pay for services that might help less affluent Americans to hold families together. For better or worse, we have moved well beyond the point at which it is realistic simply to exhort people to do the right thing . . . . We may reasonably assume that without substantial support and incentives neither marriages nor two-parent families will regain their standing as foundational social institutions.
In light of today’s growing marriage gap between rich and poor (and the many social problems to which it contributes ), promoting marriage seems even more crucial than when Fox-Genovese was writing. Incidentally, research does support her argument that merely telling poor people to get married is unlikely to restore the institution.
In any case, I’d urge you to read the whole piece .
Dear Reader,
Can I be direct with you?
War abroad. Socialists on the rise. AI upending human life. Endless uproar online. The modern attention economy doesn’t want readers — it wants users enslaved to the tyranny of the present.
First Things is the antidote: literary excellence, timeless truths, and a fixed point of reference in a culture that has lost its bearings.
But we can’t do it without readers like you.
Our goal: Raise $150,000 by November 1 to sustain First Things in the year ahead.
Your gift anchors readers in the permanent things.
Make your Fall Campaign gift now using the button below.
If you have any questions or would like more information, please contact Giovanni Del Piero, Director of the Editor’s Circle, at gdelpiero@firstthings.com or 212-627-1985.
The Church in the Age of Therapy
In 1966, Philip Rieff wrote in The Triumph of the Therapeutic that “Religious man was born to…
Canada’s Deadliest Blind Spot
On September 20, the Daily Mail ran a story with the provocative headline, “Our 83-year-old Christian grandmother…
The Faithful Joy of Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen
Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen seem to have had little in common. She favored rhinestones; he wore…