As Hillary Clinton becomes the first woman to have a real shot at the White House, and not long after Nancy Pelosi became the first female Speaker of the House, feminists across the country are salivating at their dream being realized. They are not so excited about having a woman in the White House for the sake of there being a woman in the White House, rather that they will have nearly all of Washington in the hands of the far-left, promoting what they claim are “women’s issues.”

Feminism as a movement has become something altogether different than what its foremothers intended. In the beginning, “feminist” meant primarily getting women the right to vote – something to which I am clearly not opposed! These women wanted us to have a voice, and for them I am truly thankful. It is because of these women that I have an education, my very own blog, the opportunity to vote for Ron Paul in 2008, and – if I must – the ability to get a job.

These women – the original feminists – still had respect for their husbands. They accepted the responsibility to stay home and raise their children, and truly wanted little more than a voice for women. Then something happened.

During the 1960’s, women’s lib teamed up with the sexual revolution and a whole new women’s movement was born. Women were told that they could have sex without consequences and, during the 1970’s, that they could “have it all” – both a family and a high-powered career – joining the workforce in droves. The attempt to balance work and family continued throughout the 1980’s, then in the 90’s women began to realize that there were sacrifices that must be made in order to “have it all.”

Somehow, in the midst of this “women’s lib for the common woman,” the women’s movement was taken over by the far left. The women’s movement of today isn’t so much about “equal rights for women,” but a liberal agenda through which women would be made dependent on government rather than their husbands.

Fewer women identify with “feminism” nowadays, for they see feminism as a radical fringe-movement bent on lesbian rights and androgynous she-males taking over the board room (and the White House). All of us, however, are suffering the consequences of the modern feminist movement.

As a stay-at-home mom, I am either belittled as an uneducated blight on women’s rights or accused of being one of the wealthy few who can live on one income. I am neither. I graduated from college with a degree in philosophy and had every intention of attending law school (with the brains and the test scores to do it). I, however, made the choice to get married, have children, and fulfill my God-given role as wife and mother. I didn’t make the choice the modern feminists wanted me to make.

I, along with most stay-at-home moms, am also not wealthy. The highest number of stay-at-home moms are a part of households that earn between $20,000 and $25,000 per year (The Politically Incorrect Guide to Women, Sex, and Feminism, 187). The last time I checked, $25,000 per year is hardly “wealthy.”

What feminists don’t want to admit is that women would actually choose to stay at home. Choosing to stay home and raise children just doesn’t make sense to a woman who thinks the ultimate joy in life is doing what the boys do. Surely we stay-at-home moms must be too stupid to work or oppressed by our power hungry husbands, right?

Then again, even if the feminists concede that we’re not uneducated or wealthy, women like Leslie Bennetts tell us that we’re facing destitution by forgoing our careers raise children.

Men and women are suffering under the ever-growing government that is the feminist ideal. Higher taxes, more government programs, and a generally bloated federal government are the dreams of the modern feminist. Government education and subsidized day-care centers “allow” women to head to the workforce, while government-run health care and increasing business regulations give women the “freedom” to work where they choose. Unless, of course, they choose to stay home.

Hillary’s feminist dream of an “America for women” will be a nightmare for women like me. If you send your kid to daycare, you get a tax deduction; I stay at home and get lost income. The higher taxes it takes to pay for socialized medicine will mean my husband will bring home less money. Business regulations to urge “equality” for women means that – if something were to happen to my husband and I need to find a job – I will be less likely to find the kind of job I would be able to find if I was male. The push for increasing public education and eliminating the notion of school choice means that my decision to home school will be more expensive and potentially dangerous, as the NEA wields more power and labels homeschoolers “child abusers.”

So while the Democratic Party parades Hillary in front of the nation as the great savior for woman-kind, I shudder to think what my country will be like if – God forbid – she wins the White House. The former feminist ideal of opportunities and choices for women will be shattered in the name of New Feminism – a feminism that means only the choices the feminists want you to make are acceptable and my choice of staying at home to be a mom is made more difficult and less respected.

Advertisements