A Woman's Month
March marched by with corporate and federal homage
paid to “Women’s History Month,” during which prominent women were featured in
variously publicized ways. Women’s
History Month? Why do we need this, and
why a month? Normally, annual commemorations
of this kind associate with religions. Lent,
the most obvious example, also happens to fall in March, and has for centuries. This and other observances (Annunciation,
Nativity of Jesus, festal days for Saints) teach and reinforce Christianity’s
values and beliefs. What, by contrast,
holds the core content of Women’s History Month?
The majority of images and stories given during the
month follow this syllogism found on the federally sponsored web site, www.womenshistorymonth.gov:
Throughout
our history women have made valuable contributions during wartime both in the
civilian and military realm. No matter what the role—military personnel,
pilots, nurses, journalists, or factory workers—women's experience of war
remains an important and sometimes overlooked aspect of our nation's history.
Syllogism? Indeed.
Premise 1, compounded from two, establishes the meaning of “contribution” as a masculine
occupational category.
1a: Setting the stage within a military context founds the discussion on
a masculine idea—men do constitute
the traditional militia.
1b: The roles exemplified align to occupations.
Premise 2: Contributions
of this kind have been overlooked.
The unstated conclusion: The masculine occupational contributions need
to be highlighted, which is precisely what we find in March, woman after woman
honored in images of Woman as the equivalent—as in substitute for—Man. Politicians, political activists, soldiers,
and actresses are favorite examples.
The basic syllogism smuggles in the flawed meaning
of “contribution,” and further injects the sick idea that a woman’s contribution
doesn’t count unless it resembles a masculine accomplishment (the category of
actress accomplishes this too, but I’ll not analyze it here). This disrespect for the truly feminine places Women’s History Month among other contemptible modern inventions.
So instead I counter with two examples of great
women who highlight feminine virtue.
And, by the way, if you want to experience the real difference between
masculine and feminine qualities in virtue, visit St. Anthony’s Monastery in
Florence, AZ, and then visit St. Paisius Monastery in Safford, AZ. Both are cenobitic, Orthodox monasteries of
disciplined prayer, work, and worship. Both
hospitably welcome visitors, but the men’s monastery (St. Anthony’s) feels decidedly masculine whereas the
women’s (St. Paisius) thoroughly feminine, especially in the warmth of their
hospitality. Both impart a heavenly
atmosphere: “Male and female, made He
them.”
The first, most obvious Great Woman is the Virgin
Mary, mother of Jesus. Her best known
quality comes from her humble acceptance of God’s incomprehensible announcement
to her that she would give birth without the well known methods of conception.
“Behold the maidservant of the Lord. Let
it be to me according to your word.”
This response, however, finds completion in St. Luke’s equally simple
report after Jesus was born and many remarkable events had occurred, “But Mary
kept all these things and pondered them in her heart.” Mary’s greatness shines in how she receives
God’s will, accepting what He gives, whether done to her, or in her presence. In this way she allowed great things to be accomplished
through her. She does not fight against, nor reject, the
things she cannot comprehend, but “ponders them in her heart,” as she continues
moving within God’s will. The greatest
of feminine achievement is motherhood, characterized by fruitfulness, both
literal and metaphorical. Through Mary,
God worked salvation for all mankind;
she bore fruit indeed—and how! Sadly the
modern feminist sensibilities (born in resentment) miss out on the obvious
reality that in working this way, God
made Himself and His plans utterly dependent on this woman. And
isn’t this exactly how children, themselves, begin, as utter dependents? Therein rests the crucial importance of
motherhood to the fulfillment of feminine virtue.
Charlotte Mason, my next and last example, was an educator
in the late 19th and early 20th century England. She promoted a practical philosophy of
education centered on character formation, which was fully expected to be nurtured
by parents. Her methods continue in wide
use, finding an enthusiastic and broad audience among today’s homeschooling
families, but not only homeschooling families.
Her greatness arises first from the kind
of influence she has, and secondly from the size of that influence. She promoted virtue in and through virtuous
families. Herself not a mother, she
nevertheless exercised the virtues of motherhood in planting and cultivating
this whole-person approach, bearing fruit through her own established schools, institutions,
and teacher training. She continues to
bear fruit through her writings and the many organizations and families that
practice and promote Miss Mason’s principles and methods.
Neither of these women, great in very different and
truly feminine ways, have been “overlooked,” except by the ideologues who narrowly
conceive of greatness in masculine terms.
They are the more impoverished for it.
I wish they would keep their poverty to themselves rather than foisting
it upon the rest of us through political shenanigans. Women’s History Month
deserves an enthusiastic yawn, coupled with a joyful embrace of Lent and the
Feast of the Annunciation, the truly great events occurring ever year in March. And, I might add, Mother’s Day soon follows
in May, and what better way to celebrate the greatness of femininity than to acknowledge
the good influence of the most prominent woman in your life?
Comments
Post a Comment