This is disturbing.

[velvetpage]

On the one hand, these women have a right to self-determinism, as we all do. On the other, I have to question how much of this extreme submissiveness to God, husband and children is self-determined, and how much is the result of brainwashing from infancy that this is all women can/should do.

http://buriedtreasurebooks.com/PrairieMuffinManifesto.php

Comments

[stress-kitten.livejournal.com]

The inherent concept behind this that I was referring to is that the whole family believes strongly in Christian ideals.

This means that while man may be the head of his household, he is also responsible for the healthy, safety and happiness of his family. This includes taking their needs into account, not just doing as he wishes. That is the assumption I believe this is written under, and one that as "modern society" we usually devalue because it is often utopian and we have seen too much of human nature to not believe in the corrupting ability of power on the human condition. If we believe the men involved in this equation to be trying their best to live up to the Christian ideals of faith, hope, charity and fellowship, this is far less disturbing a "manifesto".

Of course, it is still utopian, and therefore flawed, because as we are all aware, the abuse of power is rampant throughout human history. As you mentioned regarding social exclusion, there aren't any checks and balances involved to safeguard those whose power is less overt.

[velvetpage.livejournal.com]

You're right, but I still see more "outs" from those ideals for men than for women in this manifesto. PMs aren't going to complain about their God-given monthly trials, but their husbands are excused certain behaviours because "boys will be boys" - even if they're all striving to live up to utopian ideals, they've worked in a nice little double standard with that one.

I want to see the Prairie Dawg Manifesto.

[stress-kitten.livejournal.com]

I agree.. seeing the Prairie Dawg Manifesto would be helpful in getting a true understanding of what's expected. It is true that there are more "outs" for men in this manifesto, but that's because this is a manifesto that relates completely to women's duties and obligations. Men's duties are only incidentally addressed and certainly not comprehensive.

And you'll note that women's RIGHTS aren't addressed at all in this. If a Prairie Dawg Manifesto were to be created, it would be interesting to see if it focused as exclusively on their duties and obligations. If it didn't, then the whole shebang loses all credibility, as far as I'm concerned.

[velvetpage.livejournal.com]

Hmm, that's true. It seems to me that in this context, women should have the right to be honoured before all others, physically and in every other way, by their husbands and children à la Proverbs; they should have a right to get back some of that tranquility they're supposed to provide their husbands, in the form of not having to listen to the men's work rants if they don't want to; they should be seen as partners with their husbands in childcare matters, particularly discipline (i.e. no "wait till your father gets home" discipline - what she says goes, just as it does for him) and the right to demand counselling and/or a renegotiation of the marriage, up to and including divorce, for adultery, abuse, or addiction on the part of themselves or their husbands.

[velvetpage.livejournal.com]

Oh, I forgot one: she should have complete control over her own healthcare. She is not her husband's property, and he does not have the right to dictate her healthcare. He has the right to be included in decisions about the reproductive aspect of healthcare, but the decisions should be hers and hers alone.