It appears that there is not so much to disagree with here as it may have seemed.
I thought so too until things got pulled so far into minutia….
(1) I am puzzled by your problem with feminism. On my view it is part of the remedy to the problem, not its cause, as it encourages women to be independent and authentic, thus moving them out of a role in which they are expected to sacrifice their identities for an R, and toward R's that avoid unhealthy enmeshment. Insofar as it generates a problem, it creates a new social situation that we need to learn how to handle. Just like doing away with slavery creates a need for plantation owners to learn how to be as successful without exploiting others.
I don’t have a problem with feminism per se, just as I don’t have a problem with affirmative action (recall that analogy?) Feminism play a crucial role in bringing women up toward par with men in society and in the workplace. We all benefit from that. But like affirmative action that is now being rolled back because minorities are given undue advantage in the workplace or college enrollments (please let’s don’t get into debating this), I believe feminism was pushed too far in some areas.
I still like the “Everybody Loves Raymond” examples. There are just too many of them. In some situations Raymond deserves the irritated looks he gets from his wife. But in other situations, I think the examples are relevant. For instance, in the clip used for the ads, Raymond says to his wife “… oh and I should go to work everyday and come home and take care of the kids! What do you do all day I’m sorry.” What I am not debating is whether the husband should help with the kids and chores. I believe he should. Why I think this is a good example is that he immediately apologizes for even questioning what his wife does, and is rather in a state of apprehension that she will get angry with him.
I understand this is a comedy show and not typical of all marriages, but I have personally seen this same thing play out in couples where one would think the man is the dominant spouse, not like the TV show. If this is ok with both people, then fine. But I believe that all too often the man does not really like this arrangement, but will not say anything about it, for many reasons.
And I think feminism plays a role in teaching women to believe they are entitled to play this part, that they have a trump card over the man when it comes to emotional issues, and all is fair in love and war to be sure they (the women) get their way. After all they are responsible for the emotions of both people and are focused on and have the best interests of the relationship at heart, right? (facetious comment)
Does that make any sense to you?
Disclaimer: I know this does not apply to all relationships, that it is a generalization, that it is a leaky case, that each can interpret as s/he will, blah, blah, blah…
I don't think it is principled feminism that has gone too far. But, insofar as feminism has altered the old patterns of relationships, while we still find our way to seeing what new patterns should be, I can grant that it has upset the status quo and that some individuals can take advantage of misusing a so-called feminist position, that really is not.
So, for instance, to go back to the slavery example. After slavery ended, I expect that some ex-slaves used the exploitation model themselves to try to achieve success. This is not honoring the values in virtue of which we deem slavery wrong. But, its possibility arises by honoring those values, for that is what caused us to end slavery in the first place. (Please set aside complaints that it was simple political expediency.) So, honoring those values empowers some exslaves to exploit others because power has shifted. That doesn't make that exploitation right. And, it doesn't make the underlying values that upset the status quo wrong.
Women can just as easily ABuse the old dependent wife role as the new feminist wife role to control and manipulate men. This is not decisive as to whether the true ideals at stake are good ones or not.
If you prefer, consider current politics in which the right ideals are appealed to, but not properly honored, to advance harmful agendas. I'm sure you can find examples no matter which party you support.
Women can just as easily ABuse the old dependent wife role as the new feminist wife role to control and manipulate men. This is not decisive as to whether the true ideals at stake are good ones or not.
This is quite true, as is the male side of this argument, that men abuse their roles. But the literature on male abuse, control, manipulation, etc. can fill a large room. Schlessinger’s perspective is unique in that it narrowly focuses on only one side of relationships. I believe her view is only a minor step further than the thoughts of Willard Harley and Michelle. Those two focus on responsibilities for the overall relationship, stepping back to take a more balanced, objective look at male/female interaction. Schlessinger puts the spotlight on only one side of this matter and brought to my attention issues that did not come out with Harley or Michelle.
In the end, this is really no different than identifying when and where abuse occurs, and empowering oneself not to take it anymore. The fact that it is so covert and difficult for many women to see is what seems to make it controversial.
