‘74

PROPOSITION: Man apart from his mate is perversion; woman apart from her mate is equally so, both of whom are repressed and blind to the fissure of life that in the end must be welded by love.           

 QUESTION
Is Women’s Liberation a faddish hoax; is it a sob in the wilderness rustling the paranoia of the times?.

Article 1 WL is based on the supposition that man denies woman the chance to become a person who is a subject rather than an object.

Objection:The argument presupposes that “persons” are male. A person’s objective is to endure life’s crises and to become a man, or to become a woman, each with his or her unique identity. Persons are unsexed — computers are far more effective “persons”; persons per se are but slaves to societal demands and directions.
 
Reply:   WL should be based on the proposition that all humans are entitled to similar rights. 

Article 2 Women, once their children have been raised, should enter or continue a career.
           
Reply:            Yes, if it is important for them to resume their personage and does not interfere with their womanhood, disrupting harmonious relationship with their husbands.

Objection:       It is assumed that women, not partners should raise children — either way, it is no guarantee that offspring are better raised than what a nanny is capable of. 

Article 3  Women should take on muscularly strenuous work.

Reply:                  Yes, but only if she is built for it.            

Objection:            If her “manly” work is a source of embarrassment to the man she loves, she should resign. 

Article 4  A woman should feel obligated te leave a job in face of mass unemployment.

Reply:         Yes. She is morally bound to yield to breadwinners of other families.

Objection:            Reference to “woman” should be replaced by “non-breadwinner.” 

Article 5 A woman should be obligated to maintain her femininity on the job, even though normally filled by men.

Reply:                  Yes, for the same reason a man should sustain his masculinity in teaching or secretarial work; an occupation should not unsex one nor infringe upon one’s identity.

Objection:            Be wary, lest this be construed as sexist; a workplace is to exercise respect of each unique identity.  

Article 6 If a wife is more capable of earning a living than her husband, (assuming he is in good health) she should go to work and expect him to quit his job and take care of the home and children?

Reply:                  Neither should expect that of the other if childless.

Objection:            It is paramount that a man exercise the role of supporter; for it is partly in this context that he can function freely as a man. However, if finances jeopardize the relationship, he must yield to the higher breadwinner. He can offset the “shame” somewhat in addition to caring for the home and children, by being involved in useful, “manly” hobbies. 

Article 7 A mother should be obligated te sex-orient children’s chores.

Reply:                  No, chores are chores, regardless. 

Objection:            Yes, strong emphasis at the outset, then gradual fadeout. In the case of all one sex, or in the absence of father or mother image, negative reinforcements are necessary, such as “Don’t let that garbage can get too heavy, Jane, you don't have a brother in the house, you know.” or “Son, you’re as clumsy as your father with these dishes! — still, I deeply appreciate your help!” 

Article 8  A single girl should be obligated to retain her career when she marries.

Reply:                  Most definitely, if it is an important ingredient to her identity.

Objection:            Only when it contributes to the economic welfare of the household; but in no way should it interfere with having children if either desires. 

Article 9 The wife should be the determinant as to how many children to have.

Reply:                  Yes, unless she misrepresented her partner at the outset; even so she has the right to change her mind, provided it does not upset the stability of the marriage.

Objection:            Family building is a partnership of equals. 
Article 10 A wife should feel an obligation to have children, even though there is evidence that it will jeopardize her health..

Objection:            Health is a facilitator to the free movement of womanhood.

Reply:                  In no way should the husband be the motive for such an obligation.  

Article 11 Should the husband have the right to divorce if his wife works in spite of his objections?

Objection:            He should ask the inverse.

Reply:                  He should reassess his objections out of which hopefully there will result reconciliation; if not, he must split — a great favor to the wife. 

Article 12 Does a woman have an obligation to choose between her career and marriage?

Objection: Her first obligation is to her womanhood which is best fulfilled by a balanced marital relationship.

Reply:                  The very same applies to the spouse.

Article 13 Because a woman feels comfortable in playing a passive role, should she feel guilt?

Objection: NOW might think so; a passive role, however, does not mean servility.

Reply:                  No more than a man should feel guilt for his aggressiveness, The dialectic is aggressive-passive response. 

Article 14 A housewife finds “liberation” in the duties of a household.

Reply: There is little evidence that a housewife is but a housemaid; in fact, she manages the affairs of the family.

Objection:            “Housewife” is a noble profession and should not be used as a pejorative.  

Article 15 A woman yields to the dominance of a man because it fulfills her being as a woman.

Reply:                  Yes, but only when the man is sensitive to the needs of that fulfilment.

Objection:            Therefore, a man who yields to the dominance of a woman does so because it fulfils his being as a man? — nonsense.