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

[paka.livejournal.com]

Yike. How'd you find these people?

[urban-homestead.livejournal.com]

I wonder how much of it is exactly the opposite: a rebellious, defensive reaction against a society that they perceive as attacking their right to a traditional lifestyle. They seemed aggressive about their submissiveness, like they expected people to be shocked by it. As, indeed, some people apparently are. :)

[kesmun.livejournal.com]

Latent feminism and humanism in Laura Ingalls Wilder and Louisa May Alcott's books? *Blinkblinkblink* Yeeeeeesh!

[collie13.livejournal.com]

That was rather sad. I found #'s 36 & 40 rather creepy, too. The first seems to basically say the PMs should just accept whatever men dish out to them because that's what god wants... and the second seems a polite form of sour grapes.

Well, I guess the smart girls will escape... I hope?

[mysirensong.livejournal.com]

I had to stop reading halfway through because I'm really tired and this is just TOO GOOD ... I want to give it my full attention. Plus, I'm getting a craving for blueberry muffins and it's just way too late for that. :)

[stress-kitten.livejournal.com]

Y'know... a lot of what she says isn't necessarily terrible, except in the same way that Plato's Republic and every other utopian ideal is flawed. It discounts human nature. What is written there is so wide open to abuse, it is indeed scary. But then, if you're putting your faith in God to only give you what you can deal with...

Of course, I'm a firm believer in the world not giving you more than you can deal with as well... but I'm also a believer in "God helps those who help themselves" and I don't see putting myself in a situation where abuse is so possible as a good thing.

This isn't to say I don't agree with some of the statements, and I was thinking the other day about Frazer and my's relationship. We have a very strong one, with a great deal of communication, discussion and advice shared back and forth. We take each other's opinions, feelings and goals into consideration. But in the end, if Frazer insists on something, I do it. Willingly, I might add, and it rarely gets to the point where he insists because since we are both so concerned about the happiness of the other, we tend to accomodate the other long before any need to insist presents itself.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that while this manifesto places limitations on women, there are implicit limitations on men as well - limitations that are not spelled out, but that are there at a fundamental level. I'm also saying that those statements leave a lot more room for individuality than they might at first appear.

Do I agree with this manifesto? No. Do I think that those that adhere to it are nuts? No. I can think of many instances where such a life could be incredibly fulfilling and healthy. Hell, I can see myself doing it without much trouble - a few choice statements aside. Just not where I live right now. But the fact remains, I don't think its for everyone... and the implication that everyone should follow this path to be most disturbing.