What do you think?
Rate this book
The Restless Woman
Contents:
Why talk about restlessness? --
The early church and its treatment of women --
Spreading turmoil in early America --
The world's treatment of women --
Women in the wrong direction --
The root of restlessness --
The untold story of women --
The new traditional woman --
Some restlessness is for our good --
Decisions that produce peace
Why talk about restlessness? --
The early church and its treatment of women --
Spreading turmoil in early America --
The world's treatment of women --
Women in the wrong direction --
The root of restlessness --
The untold story of women --
The new traditional woman --
Some restlessness is for our good --
Decisions that produce peace
144 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1984
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
July 19, 2018
10 chapters
144 pages
My Review—Though almost 30 years old, this book has timeless insight. “The Restless Woman” is she who “has been ‘liberated’ from traditional roles, yet now finds herself feeling empty and without goals; she’s ANY woman who is uneasy and dissatisfied with her lot in life.” And, naturally, much (if not all) of the dissatisfaction or emptiness has been brought about by the three Ms: Men, Marriage, and Motherhood. And, of course, the only faction who can help the “sisterhood” out is the feminist, the Woman’s Lib movement. The only thing we’re not told is who really ARE the leaders, the matriarchs of the feminist movement? Who are these women to whom all other women are supposed to turn for guidance and wisdom and emulation? (And, I suppose, the answer that follows was, to me, the most edifying part of this book for me.)
The mother of the modern feminist movement is said to be Mary Wollenstonecraft, authoress of that uninspiring document, the feminist movement’s “Magna Carta” (“…the most important of a number of feminist works published in the latter part of the 18th century” (47)): “A Vindication of the Rights of Woman.” Vindication? Really? By a woman who was so messed up in her childhood (by an abusive drunkard of a father (no wonder Mary hated men) and a weak codependent mother (no wonder Mary hated being a female)) that the only way to “lash out” at her parents was to write the document? By a woman who so believed in what she wrote that she followed it religiously…until, of course, she met a man she just couldn’t deny herself, became his sexual play thing, begged him to marry her (this from a woman who not only wrote of Man’s lack of worth but also of Marriage’s), rejoiced when she became pregnant, threatened to kill herself (and tried to twice, though each failed) when he wouldn’t marry her, eventually moved on to Man #2 whom she DID force into marriage, bore HIS child, and became such a Paragon of the Well-Adjusted Female (and of Motherhood) that her first daughter committed suicide at 19 and her second daughter became a mistress (read: play thing), who caused her lover’s wife to commit suicide! Right! And I’m supposed to want to follow in HER footsteps!
Or there’re feminist “leaders” Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucy Stone, c. 1800s. The first was the mistress of her SISTER'S husband and then “sold out” to that patriarchal white slavery ring (better known as Marriage). The second who, so decided against that wretched “ring” was she, that she…VOLUNTARILY ENTERED INTO IT!
Time marches on through countless feminist “warrioresses” (most of whom had equal moral compunction and equal “staunch” dedication to their “cause” of needing neither Men nor Marriage (though each seemed to do just that) until we get to Betty Friedan, touted as the 20th century’s feminist matriarch, authoress of the 1963 book “The Feminine Mystique." I’m told to follow her because she knows how a woman can become “fulfilled.” Really? Exactly how did she learn what it takes to be fulfilled? From her weak father and dominating mother, from whom she says she received her views of feminism? A mother whose anger and hatred of her husband made her LITERALLY sick?
And then comes Gloria Steinem, another feminist “leader” who was the victim of an unstable childhood. (Are we noticing a pattern here?) Her father had his head stuck in the “when-my-ship-comes-in” clouds and carted his family all over the country, looking for his big “break.” At ten, her parents divorced, and she moved with her mother into a rat-infested tenement. (Now, THERE are the makings of a happy, well-adjusted outlook on men and marriage.) Ms. Steinem became the foundress of "MS." Magazine, which she claims was meant to “serve as a ‘how to…to seize control of your life’ ” (83)—until, of course, Bill Clinton (yes, #42) came onto the scene and had his infamous sex scandals under his belt (no pun intended). The one involving Kathleen Willey led her to declare that every man is entitled to at least one grope (paraphrased). Really? So, before Mr. BJ Clinton, men were scum, and a woman’s lot in life was to be harassed and devalued by them? However, after Clinton, yeah, men were still scummy, but, unlike that PSA commercial on sexual harassment, which told us: “No! This is sexual harassment, and I DON'T have to take it,” we should take it in small doses because, well, it’s not really that big of a deal. (Funny how that works. Because a man supports my “right to choose,” I’m supposed to look the other way…just once. Suddenly now, miracle of miracles, wonder of wonders—sexual harassment’s not SUCH a big deal and, really, what’s wrong with just letting them have one free grope?) Just…wow.
Mrs. LaHaye touches on other feminist “leaders,” such as Mary Calderone (“Torn from her mother at an early age and then deserted by her selfish father as he traveled all over the world” (83)) and Andrea Dworkin (who considers it a sellout to get married and have babies and thinks lesbianism is the only way to go for a woman), but she doesn’t do so unkindly or without compassion. There are very few people anymore who had “normal” childhoods, but not all of these go into the world looking to corrupt as many people (most of them children, youth—innocents) because they, themselves, were hurt, mistreated, unloved, or abused as kids. The sad thing is, it isn’t Marriage or Men or Motherhood that’s the problem, it’s the individual involved. Marriage doesn’t make ALL women weak, subservient, and abused by men just because your mother was. Motherhood doesn’t make ALL women cranky, mean, or “unfulfilled” just because YOU feel one or the other (or your mother did). And men aren’t ALL lecherous skunks, who only want to pillage, plunder, and rape, just because your father did.
For me, it all comes down to this question: If the feminist movement were the answer, then why aren’t we, as a society, any better off under their version of “equality”? Why is society as a whole worse off than ever before when, in reality, the feminists have never had their agenda so fully implemented and realized as they do now? Maybe it has something to do with the blind (or confused and hurting) leading the blind.
Grade: A (thought-provoking)
144 pages
My Review—Though almost 30 years old, this book has timeless insight. “The Restless Woman” is she who “has been ‘liberated’ from traditional roles, yet now finds herself feeling empty and without goals; she’s ANY woman who is uneasy and dissatisfied with her lot in life.” And, naturally, much (if not all) of the dissatisfaction or emptiness has been brought about by the three Ms: Men, Marriage, and Motherhood. And, of course, the only faction who can help the “sisterhood” out is the feminist, the Woman’s Lib movement. The only thing we’re not told is who really ARE the leaders, the matriarchs of the feminist movement? Who are these women to whom all other women are supposed to turn for guidance and wisdom and emulation? (And, I suppose, the answer that follows was, to me, the most edifying part of this book for me.)
The mother of the modern feminist movement is said to be Mary Wollenstonecraft, authoress of that uninspiring document, the feminist movement’s “Magna Carta” (“…the most important of a number of feminist works published in the latter part of the 18th century” (47)): “A Vindication of the Rights of Woman.” Vindication? Really? By a woman who was so messed up in her childhood (by an abusive drunkard of a father (no wonder Mary hated men) and a weak codependent mother (no wonder Mary hated being a female)) that the only way to “lash out” at her parents was to write the document? By a woman who so believed in what she wrote that she followed it religiously…until, of course, she met a man she just couldn’t deny herself, became his sexual play thing, begged him to marry her (this from a woman who not only wrote of Man’s lack of worth but also of Marriage’s), rejoiced when she became pregnant, threatened to kill herself (and tried to twice, though each failed) when he wouldn’t marry her, eventually moved on to Man #2 whom she DID force into marriage, bore HIS child, and became such a Paragon of the Well-Adjusted Female (and of Motherhood) that her first daughter committed suicide at 19 and her second daughter became a mistress (read: play thing), who caused her lover’s wife to commit suicide! Right! And I’m supposed to want to follow in HER footsteps!
Or there’re feminist “leaders” Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucy Stone, c. 1800s. The first was the mistress of her SISTER'S husband and then “sold out” to that patriarchal white slavery ring (better known as Marriage). The second who, so decided against that wretched “ring” was she, that she…VOLUNTARILY ENTERED INTO IT!
Time marches on through countless feminist “warrioresses” (most of whom had equal moral compunction and equal “staunch” dedication to their “cause” of needing neither Men nor Marriage (though each seemed to do just that) until we get to Betty Friedan, touted as the 20th century’s feminist matriarch, authoress of the 1963 book “The Feminine Mystique." I’m told to follow her because she knows how a woman can become “fulfilled.” Really? Exactly how did she learn what it takes to be fulfilled? From her weak father and dominating mother, from whom she says she received her views of feminism? A mother whose anger and hatred of her husband made her LITERALLY sick?
And then comes Gloria Steinem, another feminist “leader” who was the victim of an unstable childhood. (Are we noticing a pattern here?) Her father had his head stuck in the “when-my-ship-comes-in” clouds and carted his family all over the country, looking for his big “break.” At ten, her parents divorced, and she moved with her mother into a rat-infested tenement. (Now, THERE are the makings of a happy, well-adjusted outlook on men and marriage.) Ms. Steinem became the foundress of "MS." Magazine, which she claims was meant to “serve as a ‘how to…to seize control of your life’ ” (83)—until, of course, Bill Clinton (yes, #42) came onto the scene and had his infamous sex scandals under his belt (no pun intended). The one involving Kathleen Willey led her to declare that every man is entitled to at least one grope (paraphrased). Really? So, before Mr. BJ Clinton, men were scum, and a woman’s lot in life was to be harassed and devalued by them? However, after Clinton, yeah, men were still scummy, but, unlike that PSA commercial on sexual harassment, which told us: “No! This is sexual harassment, and I DON'T have to take it,” we should take it in small doses because, well, it’s not really that big of a deal. (Funny how that works. Because a man supports my “right to choose,” I’m supposed to look the other way…just once. Suddenly now, miracle of miracles, wonder of wonders—sexual harassment’s not SUCH a big deal and, really, what’s wrong with just letting them have one free grope?) Just…wow.
Mrs. LaHaye touches on other feminist “leaders,” such as Mary Calderone (“Torn from her mother at an early age and then deserted by her selfish father as he traveled all over the world” (83)) and Andrea Dworkin (who considers it a sellout to get married and have babies and thinks lesbianism is the only way to go for a woman), but she doesn’t do so unkindly or without compassion. There are very few people anymore who had “normal” childhoods, but not all of these go into the world looking to corrupt as many people (most of them children, youth—innocents) because they, themselves, were hurt, mistreated, unloved, or abused as kids. The sad thing is, it isn’t Marriage or Men or Motherhood that’s the problem, it’s the individual involved. Marriage doesn’t make ALL women weak, subservient, and abused by men just because your mother was. Motherhood doesn’t make ALL women cranky, mean, or “unfulfilled” just because YOU feel one or the other (or your mother did). And men aren’t ALL lecherous skunks, who only want to pillage, plunder, and rape, just because your father did.
For me, it all comes down to this question: If the feminist movement were the answer, then why aren’t we, as a society, any better off under their version of “equality”? Why is society as a whole worse off than ever before when, in reality, the feminists have never had their agenda so fully implemented and realized as they do now? Maybe it has something to do with the blind (or confused and hurting) leading the blind.
Grade: A (thought-provoking)
Displaying 1 of 1 review