Women, marriage, motherhood, and feminism - an inescapable conundrum?

Aaron Clarey, writing at Captain Capitalism, has a quirky, iconoclastic view of life, the universe and everything.  His books bear that out.  He's opinionated, unafraid to challenge established views, and firmly opposed to much modern political correctness and social justice perspectives.  He can come across as abrasive and rude at times, too . . . so much so that he's named his business "***hole Consulting", which tells you a lot, right there!  He describes himself on his Amazon.com author page as follows:

Aaron Clarey is the world's only motorcycle riding, ballroom dancing, fossil hunting, mountain climbing, economist. He spent 15 years in banking to learn that work sucks, life is short, and it was not meant to be spent in a cube suffering the idiots of corporate America. He left and has since pursued a career in writing, consulting, ballroom dancing, and hedonism.

I don't agree with everything Mr. Clarey says, not by a long way, but he's often thought-provoking.  That's particularly true of a recent essay on women and marriage.  Here's an excerpt.

The K-College education industry alone has spent trillions of dollars over the past 50 years indoctrinating women to become men, putting their careers ahead of family, their educations ahead of individuals, and their politics ahead of love.  Certainly the lion's share of all education budgets since the 1960's has been dedicated towards actual education.  But if you look at the feminist indoctrination young girls received in K-College to put their careers above all else, you can in an accounting-like-sense attribute at least a couple trillion towards a clear and obvious intent to make women want to be wage-slaves, while belittling, even criminalizing being a wife and a mother.

While trillions of actual dollars have been invested in turning women into NPC, leftist, worker drones, what about the trillions of human hours also invested in conditioning women to become NPC leftists?  From teachers to guidance counselors to professors to government PSA's to media to women's magazines to women's studies departments to Jezebel and XOJane to even your own parents, it's impossible to calculate how many millions of women (and men) spent thousands of hours of their lives, promoting and propagandizing hundreds of millions of women over the past 50 years to abandon being wives and mothers and instead be good, little, obedient, debt-laden careerist NPC democrats.  Matter of fact, I can't think of a single larger expenditure of time in all of the US that comes even close to the resources we've spent conditioning women to become NPC leftists.  There has never been such a large, nation-wide, institution-wide push to form, program, and ultimately mold a people into something the powers that be want.

And I don't even know how to begin to measure the total resources spent by media, marketing, and advertisers to sell women the "empowered-don't-need-no-man-brave-executive" image all so women can buy $5,000 Prada handbags, $10,000 Chanel shoes, and $250,000 masters degree.  Be it movies showing the strong independent woman, or Silicon Valley fawning over the latest female CEO hire, or all of the MSM worshiping Hillary Clinton during the election, the entire entertainment/media/social-media world only reinforces to women today that the ONLY thing that matters is your career, your leftist politics, and your feminism.  Being a wife or a mother doesn't even come up on the radar.

Now I could go on citing other instances where resources have been purposely spent on conditioning women to become NPC's, but my larger point is how much has been spent on conditioning women to become good wives?  How many trillions in education budgets have been spent on teaching women to be good mothers?  And what institutions of our society (government, educational, media, corporate, etc.) actively promote motherhood and wifery?

And the answer is "none."  Not one cent, not one second, NOT EVEN BY THE PARENTS OF WOMEN THEMSELVES, is spent preparing, educating, explaining, or conditioning young women to be wives and mothers.

Of course, many women (being the conformist NPC leftists they are) will champion this.  They will celebrate it, pointing out that they are now officially "free" to do what they want and are no longer shackled to the evil patriarchal expectations of being a wife and mother.

But that is not the point of this article.  The point of this article is merely one of economics:

How much in resources has society spent on convincing women to be NPC leftist careerists?

vs.

How much in resources has society spent on convincing women to be good wives and mothers?

And what you will sadly conclude is that you get what you pay for.

There's more at the link.  It's not comfortable reading, but it certainly challenges current societal assumptions, and should make all of us, no matter what our political, social, cultural or economic persuasion might be, consider whether he's not asking a very good, fundamental question.  Are we, in fact, getting what we've paid for in terms of relationships - and is that inimical to the traditional nuclear family, which is always and everywhere built around the wife and children?

As a pastor, I've lost count of the number of marriage and relationship counseling sessions I've conducted.  A common denominator over many years is the complaint from many people, both men and women, that "I'm not getting what I expected/want out of this relationship".  They're usually taken aback when I retort, "Well, what are you putting into it?"  I think that's germane to Mr. Clarey's perspective, although it's true for both sexes, not just one.  I think men who want their wives to be merely "the little woman at home" are doing the female sex as much of a disservice as the NPC, politically correct extremists he castigates.

The lessons of Scripture are very clear, and apply to marriage and relationships as much as they do to anything else.

• Treat others as you want them to treat you.
• As you sow, so shall you reap.
• You will know someone's true nature by the fruits they bear (i.e. the good or bad that they do/produce).
• We are all as much sinners as everyone else - no-one is "special" and above sin, so it's pointless to pretend superiority on the grounds of sex, gender, race, or anything else.

I could go on, but those truths are eternal, and they still apply.  If we're raising our young people to think otherwise, to believe that they can "have it all" despite those basic realities, we're deluding them and ourselves.

What do you think of Mr. Clarey's perspective?  Let's keep the discussion going in Comments.

Peter