Good Advice For Men

 From Gab:

An Ideal Girlfriend?

Advice for men from Roosh:

What do you all think? I guess not everyone will be on board with his religion, but a girl who is modest, devote, loves to bake, respects her elders and dreams of being a mother is quite a catch nowadays:)

On Cattiness And Staying Positive

Cattiness is something most women will have to deal with in the course of their lives. The modern word for catty is passive-aggressive and this particular form of nastiness is much more typical for females though there are enough men nowadays who also exhibit passive-aggressive traits.

There are two chief ways to be catty, it's either making disparaging and discouraging remarks about things other people hold dear or asking malicious questions, especially about things other people prefer not to talk about. Of course, some folks are just inquisitive by nature and don't necessarily mean harm, but most of us can distinguish pretty well between friendliness and even curiosity vs maliciousness.

Cattiness is often driven by jealousy and the feelings of inferiority. The good example of a catty person in literature is Lucy Steele from Sense And Sensibility. She makes a great show of befriending Elinor but her only objective is to to gloat over the misfortunes of the latter and try to profit from their friendship by all means possible. Elinor, being a much superior individual, never answers her in kind.

Lucy Steele is hardly portrayed as a role model yet by some strange reason many women delight in denigrating each other and being as mean to other females as possible. Sometimes I just wonder why so many ladies who often have good husbands and healthy children appear to be so dissatisfied with their life that they feel the need to constantly attack and demean those of their sisters who demonstrate a modicum of satisfaction with their circumstances. It's like some other woman being content is an insult to them.

Our society in general thrives on negativity. MSM are constantly trying to either shock or guilt trip us, there is constantly a crisis going on apparently; and if things are OK in your own country at the moment you are supposed to worry about the looming WWIII, a civil war in some third world country, global warming (caused by evil Westerners) and stuff like that. It went so far I seldom watch the news any more.

The Bible teaches us to rejoice with those rejoicing not go around spreading doom and gloom and being overall wet blankets and please don't forget that looking at the bright side is a choice!

Discouragement

By this time my regular readers must have noticed the disappearance of yet another homemaking blog. The lady owner got discouraged by the negative remarks of people around her, including her own family, on her choice of occupation and ended up deleting it.

It's certainly true that society is sometimes downright hostile to housewives, especially in some countries/regions, but more often than not, you will be just viewed with cold indifference. People are generally self-centered, and having raised an eyebrow or two, they will usually return to contemplating their own problems.

It can be different on the internet which often serves as a magnifying glass, and, unfortunately, many women have become victims of planned troll attacks. Here one rule applies: if you can't stand heat, get out of the kitchen. Whether we like it or not, internet is a public space and it attracts all sorts of folks from basically everywhere on Earth. Some of them are freaks and perverts, or simply downright nasty, sadistic individuals who enjoy bullying others they disagree with. In real life they risk unpleasant consequences for this type of behaviour, so they engage in it online.

Though I perfectly well understand blogging fatigue and the desire to keep private things private I think that as adults we should be able to persist in doing what we think is right ignoring naysayers. We shouldn't expect lavish praise for our choices, either. As Helen Andelin wrote in Fascinating Womanhood, having the moral courage to do the right thing no matter the consequences is the basis of good character.

Running the household well isn't considered important nowadays yet there are still lots of women who choose full time homemaking as their profession. Some only for a couple of years, while the children are small, others even though childless or empty-nesters. Lots of them have blogs where they discuss things they do at home, positive things, such as organising birthday parties for their kids, or interior decorating, or cooking or gardening or other things. There are also lots of homemakers in real life, so why not concentrating on the positive instead of negative?

We also are blessed with YouTube where one can watch old TV shows such as I Love Lucy presenting homemaking in a positive light. In a way, it's probably easier to be a homemaker now than it was in the 1990s, before the internet. We should all try to support each other, online and in real life, too. If you know a lonely homemaker, please invite her to a cup of tea!

Guiding The House

I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully. (1 Timothy 5:14)

We seem to live in the times of general confusion nowadays so that even simple truths are often twisted beyond recognition and common sense has gone out of the window. One example of this will be the incessant discussions of the topic of submission on the net. Now most people who call themselves conservative/traditional Christians will (hopefully) agree that a married woman should submit to/obey her husband, so that's not what is driving the arguments.

The problem appears to be that modern people can't figure out for themselves what submission actually means and need detailed instructions on how to live their daily lives while practising it. For instance, what if your husband tells you to rob the bank? Do you have to submit, yes or no? As much of a strawman as the example above is, there are actually some people who want us to believe, that yes, the wife should obey (cheerfully!).

Others will draw the line by criminal acts, but then the line gets somewhat blurred. How about watching p0rn together? Taking naughty pictures? Wearing a mini skirt when it's against your convictions? And the most contentious of all, what if the husband orders his wife to work (this last command seems to be the only one a lot of wives will obey cheerfully).

I've written on this topic several times before. For instance, check this post which quotes from the wedding liturgy still used in our church. It basically says that the husband is required to support his wife and family with God and honour, and the wife has to be a good housekeeper and obey her husband in all things right and honest. The wife doesn't lose her cognitive abilities when she marries and she isn't required to follow her husband into sin, thus the question of robbing banks is settled, hopefully once and for all.

Of course, in life things are seldom so black-and-white, and it includes a lot of grey areas. That's why it's nearly impossible to write a comprehensive guide to marital obedience on the internet and that's why it's so dangerous to give marital advice to strangers you know nothing about except what they chose to share with you, and this very well may be a lie.

It is perfectly possible to create some general guidelines, though. Take the mini-skirt or naughty movies, for instance. The law doesn't forbid it (unless you live in Iran), and your husband may insist, but you aren't comfortable with it, so what are you going to do? Personally I believe, that in such a situation you should follow your own personal code of honourable behaviour, and your husband will in the end respect you more for this. You also should seek for compromise, in order to preserve marital peace, e.g.if you like floor length skirts and your husband likes mini, wear skirts below the knee but not all the way to the ground.

Here is what Helen Andelin wrote on the topic in Fascinating Womanhood:

"A man wants a woman of fine character, one he can place on a pedestal and hold in high regard...
At times a man will shake a woman's pedestal by suggesting she do something wrong. He may do this deliberately to see if she is as worthy as she appears to be. In other words, he tests her. What a disappointment if she lowers her standards and falls to his level..."(F.W., p. 204, Bantam Books 1992; emphasis mine).

Here is one thing to remember, however. You are not your husband's judge. You have no authority to force him to live according to your standards, however, it doesn't mean that you can't have yours.

Now you will ask me what all this has to do with the title of the post. Simply this, contrary to some new teachings, woman is given a certain authority in the home, otherwise she won't be able to guide it, you know. That's what John Gill, a famous 18th century Reformed Baptist who wrote Bible commentary had to say on the topic: "guide the house; manage domestic affairs, direct, order, or do what is proper to be done for the good of the family" (Read the rest over here).

Some time ago Lady Lydia had the post on the same topic where she stated:

There are a number of religious books and some teachings circulating that claim a woman has no authority at all in her Titus 2 role, but I cannot see that at all. Titus 2 and various other New Testament scriptures teach that the Christian woman must guide and guard the home. These scriptures give the woman the authority they need to make rules and establish policies regarding how that home should be run. If she wants people to remove their shoes at the door or not engage in loud conversation, or if she wants them to pick up after themselves, wash before they come to the table, or help with the housework, she has the authority to enforce that. She does not have to appeal to anyone to give her permission to be a keeper of the home, a guide of the home and a guard of the home. She already got permission from God's Word.

I believe that Lydia's understanding of the role of women is a traditional one. While the Western law was once very unambiguous about the husband being the head of the family, it didn't mean that he had to micromanage his wife. Jesse Powell explains it in his article on coverture:

" The husband was considered to own and control all financial assets and property in the marital unit...
The other side of coverture beyond the husband controlling and owning all the property was the “law of agency” or the “law of necessaries” where the wife was presumed to be acting on the husband’s behalf whenever she bought “necessaries;” clothing, food, lodging, and medicine for domestic use.  The law of agency defined “necessaries” according to the husband’s status, occupation, and wealth.  As the great English jurist William Blackstone (1723 to 1780) said “The husband is bound to provide his wife with the necessaries by law, as much as himself; and, if she contracts debts for them, he is obliged to pay them.”

In other words, though the husband had the last word on the finances, the wife was given freedom to buy things necessary for the proper functioning of the household, and that according to her husband's social status, so that if he was a wealthy man, he couldn't refuse her certain luxuries.

The traditional view on men and women was that they had separate spheres of action, and to a certain point, authority. That's what Alexis de Tocqueville wrote about American women in his book Democracy in America:

Book Three, Chapter XI
 In America, more than anywhere else in the world, care has been taken constantly to trace clearly distinct spheres of action for the two sexes, and both are required to keep in step, but along paths that are never the same.
Book Three, Chapter XII
I have no hesitation in saying that although the American woman never leaves her domestic sphere and is in some respects very dependent within it, nowhere does she enjoy a higher station. And if anyone asks me what I think the chief cause of the extraordinary prosperity and growing power of this nation, I should answer that it is due to the superiority of their women.

(Quoted from here)


However, it's obvious that the wife can't fulfill the command of guiding the house if she is obliged to go out and earn a living. The same chapter of the Bible which tells women to guide the house, also commands men to provide:

Verse 8: And if any man provide not for his own...he hath denied the faith and is worse than an infidel.

Now I've read some "gender" - neutral intrepretations of the verse, which state that the masculine pronoun and the word "man" refer to both men and women. Again, this in NOT a traditional interpretation of this verse. John Gill again:

"But if any  provide not for his own,.... Not only for his wife and children, but for his parents, when grown old, and cannot help themselves...

 he hath denied the faith; the doctrine of faith, though not in words, yet in works; and is to be considered in the same light, and to be dealt with as an apostate from the Christian religion."

It's obvious that the Scriptures teach men to provide for their families so that the wives can fulfill the commands of being keepers at home and guiding the house. Since nowadays it's far from given that the man you chose to marry agrees with it, it's wise to discuss this issue beforehand. Marriage is not only a sacrament (my religion actually doesn't teach it), but it's a covenant or contract, in modern words.

If the husband and wife made an explicit agreement before they are married that the wife will stay home and the husband will provide, he has to uphold his part of the bargain and if he then insists that his wife works when there is no dire financial necessity, then I believe she is within her rights to refuse. Now throw stones at me:)

On Integrity

According to the Longman Dictionary of English Language and Culture which I own, integrity is strength and firmness of character or principle; honesty, trustworthiness and also a state of being whole and undivided; completeness.

Integrity basically means not compromising your principles, not engaging in unholy alliances and practising what you preach. It is a quality of character solely missed nowadays, and unfortunately, not only by unbelievers.

The Bible warns Christians not be unequally yoked because there can be nothing in common between light and darkness. There can be no compromise between a Christian and a hedonistic, nihilistic post-modern world view and there can also be nothing in common between traditional Western Christianity and modern progressive ideology.

Progressives always speak in terms of oppressors and oppressed and advocate for equality, which for them never means equal dignity but rather the redistribution of power and material goods.

As applied to the relationship between the sexes, progressives seeks equality between men and women which for them basically means that both sexes must have the same rights and responsibilities. This system doesn't work and it won't work, no matter how the social engineers are trying to push it, simply because men and women are different. 

While feminists undoubtedly started it, there is no use for certain men to lament that women don't want to support themselves and prefer cushy government jobs to labouring in some ardous field, or that they often miss the same dedication men will demonstrate in their profession. You also can't say you are an anti-feminist and then expect your wife to have a career and support herself.

Patriarchy doesn't really mean the man staying at home drinking beer while his wife (or even wives as some of those propagating the new doctrine seem to support polygamy) is out there slaying dragons and bringing home the bacon.

In all of the world history, starting with Ancient Rome and Greece, extra rights meant also additional responsibilities. For instance, voting rights were tied up to the army service, that's why female suffrage is utterly dishonest since women aren't required to register for draft or fight in wars. However, the solution to the problem is not pushing women to become soldiers, as both feminists and certain men's rights activists want, but the restriction of the female suffrage as it should be obvious to anyone with  half a brain cell, that the majority of women won't make good soldiers.

In the same manner, when the law made the man the head of the family, he also had to financially support his wife (I've written about this on my blog before). In the times of the Vikings, the government even had established the minimum bride price the man had to pay if he wished to marry, the reasoning behind it being that if a man was too poor to pay the minimum amount of money required by law he obviously wouldn't be able to support a family and hence had no business to marry.

Nowadays, both men and women want to have all sorts of rights, but nobody seems to want to have any duties. I'm not sure how long we as society can go on in the same manner, but something tells me that not very long any more. As Christians, we are called to be better than this and to live according to God's Law which clearly states that there are distinctive roles for men and women within the family and society.

Morally speaking, both men and women are fallen human beings who can be redeemed by God's grace and neither sex is better than the other. Men and women have equal dignity in Christ, but separate duties and responsibilities. A man should be respected for being the leader, protector and provider, and the woman for being the wife, mother and homemaker. Both roles are important and essential for the good functioning of society. The sex differences are good, because God created them.

Let's try to live our life according to a higher standard and show a good example of what being complementarian really means.

The Dangers Of Alcohol

Some time ago I wrote a post discussing health benefits of alcohol, which probably cost me some readers, so today I'm going to write another one, this time about the dangers of (excessive) alcohol consumption.

While moderate drinking can probably have at least some health benefits as I mentioned before, there are several problems with alcohol. First, it is addictive, and because it is legal, people tend to overindulge, and many are not aware that alcohol withdrawal may be fatal.

Another problem with alcohol is that it removes inhibitions and makes people do stupid things they will most certainly regret later, like getting into fights or sleeping around. I think we all have heard about "beer goggles" (I think this song gives a pretty good summary of why you shouldn't drink) which make every woman beautiful, but while Western men were getting drunk for centuries, until recently the only females who kept them company, were "ladies of easy leisure".

However, nowadays drinking among teenage girls and young women seems pretty much the norm, and as this blogger points out may be one of the reasons of increased female promiscuity. It's a good idea to teach your daughters not to get drunk, especially in company of (strange) men.

"Is Good Character Beyond Your Reach?"

This is the question Mrs Andelin asks in Chapter 16 of "Fascinating Womanhood" after she enumerates the basic qualities which constitite a worthy character. Sometimes we feel overwhelmed by our duties. It seems like you are doing everything right and yet nobody seems to care and estimate it, not even your immediate family. The work of wife and mother is of such nature that it's often only noticed when she hasn't done it for today.

You may try hard to develop such qualities as unselfishness and honesty, yet you see all around you that people cheat, commit fraud, care only about themselves and seem to be rather successful, while you are taken for granted by everybody, including your own children.

It's difficult sometimes not to get discouraged, and instead of asking yourself whether you can acquire fine character, you think along the lines of: is it even necessary nowadays? 

Helen Andelin suggests in her book that good character is essential if you want to win your husband's love, but I think it goes much further than this, since as an old saying puts it, Virtue is its own reward. Simply put, we should do what is right, simply because it is right. To paraphrase the Bible, the one who knows what is good and doesn't do it, to him it is sin.

Doing what is wrong, or sinning in Christian terminology can literally destroy you. Mrs Andelin mentions it  when she writes about the consequences of sexual sin while discussing the virtue of chastity: "We live under spiritual laws which emanate from God. When we commit an immoral act, we come into conflict with spiritual laws, resulting in a feeling of guilt and emotional distress. Again I quote Dr. Max Levine...'There cannot be emotional health in the absense of high moral standards.' "(p.221, F.W., Bantam Books 1992.)

I'd like to draw your attention to this article  which suggests that immoral behaviour, such as habitual dishonesty, can and will negatively influence your brain and create a patology in the way it works. The same topic was discussed at length at the Orthosphere, however our main motivation in developing good character should be not self-preservation but pleasing God.

Helen Andelin points out that we should not be discouraged by the thought that fine character is unattainable, but rather make "a diligent effort" and pray for the Divine guidance. As she puts it: "The goal is too high and the forces of evil too strong to gain success without the guidance of the Holy Spirit. You can become a good pianist, tennis player, or public speaker by persistence alone but the perfection of character is not within the reach without the promptings of the Holy Spirit." (p.224, idem).

Mrs Andelin reminds us that our character is not fixed or unchangeable, and in times of trial or crisis we may discover that we possess the qualities which we never suspected we had.

I'd like to end this post with  the list of the traits which constitute  good character, according to "Fascinating Womanhood":

1. Self-control
2. Unselfishness
3. Charity
4. Humility
5. Responsibility
6. Diligence
7. Patience
8. Moral Courage
9. Honesty
10. Chastity

On Chivalry

Chivalry seems to be a hot topic nowadays, since it's being discussed on blog after blog. People tend to get quite agitated, and the discussions often deteriorate in a sort of a flame war with (mostly) women accusing men of not living up to a chivalrous ideal, while men defend themselves by saying that (most) modern women don't deserve any special consideration at all.

 Further, a lot of commenters seem to be confused about what exactly does the word "chivalry" mean. When asked to give an example of chivalrous behaviour, they will usually point to Titanic with men surrendering their seats in life boats to the ladies, or start talking about opening the doors for women and the like.

Obviously, it's impossible to discuss something without first agreeing on the definition so I again turned to my 1992 Longman and that's what it said: chivalry 1 (in the Middle Ages) the beliefs or practices of noble soldiers (knights) as a group 2 the qualities (such as bravery, honour, generosity, and kindness to the weak and poor) which this system aimed at developing

Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary of 1996 defines chivalry in the following way: 1. the sum of the ideal qualifications of a knight, including courtesy, generosity, valor and dexterity in arms. 2. the rules and customs of medieval knighthood. 3. the medieval system or institution of knighthood. 4. a group of knights. 5. gallant warriors or gentlemen: fair ladies and noble chivalry. 

The first thing which we can deduct from these definitions is that chivalry is something which pertains to men (warriors and gentlemen) so while it's possible for a woman to perform a noble deed, it would be wrong to call her behaviour chivalrous.

The second point is that chivalry as such was an honour code which was not specifically about women, but rather about how a warrior should behave. In one of my previous posts  I touched on this topic by linking to the Knights' Code Of Chivalry , which I now want to quote in full:

To fear God and maintain His Church
To serve the liege lord in valour and faith
To protect the weak and defenceless
To give succour to widows and orphans
To refrain from the wanton giving of offence
To live by honour and for glory
To despise pecuniary reward
To fight for the welfare of all
To obey those placed in authority
To guard the honour of fellow knights
To eschew unfairness, meanness and deceit
To keep faith
At all times to speak the truth
To persevere to the end in any enterprise begun
To respect the honour of women
Never to refuse a challenge from an equal
Never to turn the back upon a foe

As you can see, women are only specifically mentioned once. The chivalrous ideal was not about opening doors for ladies, but about behaving honourably and doing your duty to God and Fatherland. Since it was an ideal enforced by upper class men on upper class men, it's logical that not everybody subscribed to it, and that  every epoch had its fair amount of cowards, cheats and scoundrels.

This takes me to my next point. When a certain ideal is upheld in society it doesn't mean that 100% of the population will subscribe to it and live according to it. The ideal for women in the 1950s was a domestic goddess and yet many married women worked. The modern ideal is an empowered career woman and yet I know plenty of housewives. It doesn't mean, however, that we should have no ideals or standards at all, only that we should be realistic in our expectations of our fellow men.

 As society became more democratic in Victorian times, the chivalrous ideal spread through the middle and lower classes which probably led to the Titanic phenomenon. Medieval times are too far removed from us anyway to try and copy them, so when people talk about chivalry they mostly mean the Victorian ideal of it, hence the Titanic reference. However, is it realistic to expect that this ideal of men voluntarily sacrificing their lives for women could be upheld in our society?

To answer it we should first decide why men were expected to sacrifice for women. Is it because women were considered to be more deserving or more valuable? No, it was because women by law, custom and tradition were considered weaker and the original knight code mentioned protecting the weak and defenceless. Some conservatives seem to have forgotten it, but feminists never do hence their incessant shrieking about benevolent sexism.

Nowadays we live in the times when the law and custom say that women are equals of men. They have equal political rights. If they marry they are not considered legally to be under their husband's authority. They can join the army. Movie after movie portrays them besting the men at every endeavour. They are more often shown with a machine gun in their hands than with a baby. It's obvious for everyone that in such  moral climate it's utterly nonsensical to expect men as a whole to subscribe to the idea of sacrificing their lives for random women.

We can't have it both ways. Either women are equal to men, or they are fragile beings in need of male protection in which case they should surrender their political rights and equality before the law. This said, since I personally don't believe in equality I think that the chivalrous ideal is a noble one and individual men could still subscribe to it, but it is unrealistic to expect that an egalitarian society as a whole will.

The last point which I'd like to make is that chivalry was/is a moral code specifically for men and it was enforced by men. Women can't force men to become chivalrous, but they can inspire them. That's what Helen Andelin says about it in Fascinating Womanhood: "Men only feel a sense of duty to protect women who need their masculine care and protection...To awaken chivalry we must return to femininity. We must stop doing the masculine things and become the gentle, tender, dependent women we were designed to be, women who need masculine care and protection. When we do, men will delight in offering their chivalry." (P. 133, Bantam Books, 1992.)

I say amen to that.

Discretion

I was asked to write about discretion. According to my Longman edition of 1992, discretion is "the quality of being discreet", and being discreet means being "careful and sensible, esp. in what one chooses to say." Discretion went out of the window right after self-control and reserve so that nowadays people tell the most intimate details of their life to nearly perfect strangers.

 I'm afraid it can be especially true of women. I remember how I went to a supermarket once and while searching for meat I had to endure a loud conversation of two elderly women (whom I'm afraid I can't call ladies), where one was telling the other the most unpleasant details of a certain medical examination which she had undergone.

At a birthday party I once attended a woman proceeded to give a full medical description of symptoms of menopause which she was experiencing to a guy who looked as if he'd rather sink through the floor than listen to her. By the way, why is it that people who have various sicknesses or medical conditions think that it amuses others to listen to the stories about their health for hours on end? A dinner party is hardly a place to discuss such things.

Of course, it's true not only about health. It simply makes no sense to burden others with your troubles and problems. Most people who are not your close friends or relatives are not interested and will listen only out of politeness. You may think it's unfair, but it's true. It reminds me of an old joke, that a bore is man who if asked how he is proceeds to tell you exactly that.

It can also be unwise to tell strangers or people you barely know about conflicts or problems in your family. Not only they will lack sympathy, but they can later use the information against you, and considering the modern paranoia about abuse, they can even get you into legal trouble.

It's interesting that the Bible names discretion as one of the qualities of a Titus 2 woman: To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands...Matthew Henry in his Bible commentary refers to discretion as one of the qualities of a good personal character: "To be sober and discreet, contrary to the vanity and rashness which younger years are subject to: discreet in their judgments and sober in their affections and behaviour. Discreet and chaste stand well together; many expose themselves to fatal temptations by that which at first might be but indiscretion. Prov. 2:11 , Discretion shall preserve thee, understanding shall keep thee from the evil way."  (Read the whole commentary here )

Discretion in this context means making wise choices based on reason and not on emotion and not exposing yourself to unnecessary temptations. It's a character quality which our modern society not only lacks, but actively discourages (did you notice how nowadays vice is turned into virtue and vice versa?), so that there is even more reason for those beholden to tradition to practise it.

Housewife's Honour

My favourite phrase in the movie "Prisoner Of Zenda" (which I wrote about here ), is the one uttered by Princess Flavia, "women have honour, too!" What does it mean for an average housewife? In her chapter on Good Character in "Fascinating Womanhood", Helen Andelin talks about such virtues as responsibility and diligence and explains that they are essential for successful homemaking.

A homemaker is responsible for running the household efficiently and it's her duty to check that everything is functioning smoothly. If she dislikes some tasks around the house, it's not a reason to neglect them, she will do what is necessary without whining or complaining. She will take pride in the job well done. As Mrs Andelin puts it: "She assumes it (her work) with a keen sense of responsibility, realizing that it must be done and the job rightfully belongs to her." (Fascinating Womanhood, p.214, Bantam Books 1992).

The wife and mother who neglects her responsibility in the home, shows a weakness of character, or to quote Mrs Andelin again: "To turn her back on her work is a serious dereliction of duty." (idem, p. 215.) Think about these words. Dereliction of duty is considered a serious crime. In times of war you could be executed for it! When you are at home full time, it's easy to get distracted. At work, you have your superiors to tell you what to do, while at home you are free to fill your day as you see fit. Unfortunately, sometimes we fill it with hours of watching TV and browsing on the net.

Besides responsibility, a homemaker needs diligence, which basically means to do a good job. Diligence is the opposite of laziness and neglect. Mrs Andelin warns her readers against being just good enough, as it leads to mediocrity. The housewife should always be ready to go a second mile in her job, because only then she will really find satisfaction in homemaking.

There is actually such a thing as the homemaker's creed, which says, among other things, that homemaking is a noble and challenging career and that the homemaker will give the best of her efforts and abilities to it. (You can read the whole Creed over here ). Think about it as an honour code for housewives, just like the one used in Middle Ages by knights ). The world tells us that housewives are fat, lazy slobs and every time we neglect our homes and our appearance we enforce this stereotype.

One of the reasons the world puts homemakers down, is because they don't take pride in their accomplishments at home, and if asked what their occupation is, mumble something like, "I'm just a housewife." A homemaker should not see herself as some domestic drudge, she is the lady of the house and she should absolutely take pride in her job which is only possible if she is doing it well.

Moral Courage

This post is a sequel to that one, which discusses what constitutes good character, according to "Fascinating Womanhood" author Helen Andelin. In the chapter 16 "A Worthy Character" she discusses several essential virtues, starting with self-control. Another virtue discussed at length in the book is moral courage and that's what I want to talk about today.

The book defines moral courage as "the courage to do what is right, at the risk of unpleasant or even painful consequences" (p218, Bantam Books, 1992). In other words, moral courage means you should always do the right thing, no matter the consequences. In the classic story "Kidnapped" by R.L. Stevenson, an innocent man is framed for murder in a political show trial, and the main character David, who is himself only 18, declares his determination to testify on his behalf, to which his lawyer friend objects pointing out that if David interferes in what essentially is a political intrigue, he may very well be hanged himself. The following dialogue ensues:

'In that case, sir...I would just have to be hanged - would I not?'
'My dear boy,' cries he, 'go in God's name, and do what you think is right...Go and do you duty; and be hanged if you must, like a gentleman. There are worse things in the world than to be hanged.' (p.219, Wordsworth Classics, 1993).

In everyday life having moral courage will likely not demand you risking your life. It can be something as simple as sticking to your convictions in the face of  peer pressure and ridicule. Peer pressure, unfortunately, is not only something which teenagers experience at school. Housewives often suffer an enormous amount of pressure to join the workforce or they have to defend their decision to stay home even to their close relatives, sometimes sisters or mothers. It takes moral courage to go against the current.

While discussing defending your convictions. Mrs Andelin gives us an example of early Christian martyrs and reminds us that "Mankind has fought and died to defend principles they believe in."  (p. 219).

Another way in which we all need moral courage is when we have done something wrong. It takes moral courage to admit your mistake, or may be even a crime. "Sometimes, consequences are serious - humiliation, disgrace, punishment, fines, or even imprisonment." (F.W., p.219). The correct thing to do, however, is to admit your wrong and to "...clear yourself before God and man." (p.219-220).

To sum it up, moral courage means doing something right despite possible negative consequences. I think it was best expressed by Mr Knightley: 'There is one thing, Emma, which a man can always do, if he chuses, and that is, his duty...' Jane Austen "Emma", Penguin Books, 1994, p.112).

The Career Of A Domestic Goddess

What exactly is a Domestic Goddess? Fascinating Womanhood has a whole chapter dedicated to her in which Mrs Andelin does a really good job in covering the responsibilities of a housewife. It's especially helpful for modern readers, since there seems be to be some confusion about what does a homemaker actually do with her time at home (apart from eating bonbons on the couch, that is).

According to Mrs Andelin, homemaking is a career, and one of utmost importance, no less. A Domestic Goddess is a woman who embraces her career in the home and tries to achieve excellence in it. This lady's home is neat and tidy, her children are well-behaved, her cooking is delicious and her husband is the happiest man in town.

The chapter starts with describing the qualities of such a woman, and points out that to become a Domestic Goddess, you have to be skilled in traditional feminine arts, such as cooking or interior decorating, and be a successful manager of the home. To be a good manager, one needs to be able to balance various responsibilities, such as taking care of the house, and of the children, and choose what is the most important thing to do at the moment.

Mrs Andelin suggests that a housewife dresses up for her job, preferably in a housedress (a comfortable and pretty cotton dress worn with an apron). She points out that homemaking ultimately is a matter of character, and that a woman who fails in doing her domestic duties, shows a poor character as well. The housewife ought to have a keen sense of responsibility for her job in the home, not giving in to temptation to spend hours on the phone or watching TV, or just lazing around. If she is an efficient homemaker, she'll be able to also find time for pursuing her hobbies or helping others in their need.

The Domestic Goddess is also a good mother who delights in bearing and raising children. Her home is warm and happy and she radiates joy around, or, as the book states: "This warm presense is what every man needs when he returns from work, and what every child needs when he returns from school. The home should be their refuge, their source of comfort, understanding, and love." (p.229, Bantam books, ed. of 1992).

P.S. Here is an interesting perspective on women's work, while this blog post points out the duties of husbands and wives, according to the Catechism of Trent, and this article discusses what is true freedom for women. In publishing those links, I feel the need to refer you to the obligatory disclaimer.

Good Character

"Fascinating Womanhood" by Helen Andelin is the book some people love to hate, yet I have found that it can be very helpful. Of course, like other books, it should be taken with a grain of salt, nevertheless, it does contain some good advice and timeless wisdom. In one of the chapters, Mrs Andelin discusses what qualities constitute a good character. I thought it a good idea to write a series of posts discussing each of them with my take on the issue.

The author starts with self-control, a quality which, unfortunately too many people nowadays totally lack. The dictionary defines self-control as "control over one's feelings" or "the power to hold back the expression of strong feelings" (Longman Dictionary of English Language and Culture, the edition of 1992). Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary of the English Language (unabridged, the ed. of 1996) adds actions to feelings: "self-control (is) control or restraint of oneself or one's actions, feelings, etc"; and gives us a list of synonims: self-discipline, self-restraint, willpower, levelheadedness.

For the purposes of this post, I'll discuss control of one's feelings and one's actions separately. Control of one's feelings or self-restraint is what the British used to call "keeping a stiff upper lip", not letting it all hang out. Of course, we live in the times of reality TV in which people don't feel ashamed to tell the most private things about themselves to total strangers, and drag their family name through dirt by publicly complaining and even writing books dissing their close relatives and even parents. Especially in the case of parents, it breaks the commandment to honour your father and your mother. Also there are some things which should be kept private.

Literature gives us a good example of both self-restraint and the lack of it in Jane Austen's novel "Sense and Sensibility" where Elinor hides her feelings and keeps on doing what has to be done, while another sister, Marianne causes herself and others around her a lot of problems and nearly dies due to inability of practising self-control. In the beginning of the story, when the girls' father dies, Mrs Dashwood and Marianne keep on grieving and leave the management of family affairs to Elinor, while secretly thinking that she must be cold and insensitive, because she doesn't spend her days wallowing in misery and self-pity.

Helen Andelin states that self-control is necessary to manage one's life successfully, "to keep commitments, manage time and money, control thoughts and words, subdue appetites, school feelings, overcome temptations, and reach goals." (p. 207, the ed. of 1992 by Bantam Books). You can't live a successful life when you go all to pieces if something happens and let your emotions and feelings rule you. A person's actions should not be based on feelings alone, but rather on doing what is right and what should be done, which leads me to the second point: control of one's actions.

To control one's actions one should possess sufficient willpower, which can be trained. The book gives some suggestions on how to do it, mentioning prayer and fasting, demanding quotas of oneself and doing something unpleasant or difficult every day. I did a search on the internet and found the following article:

How To Strengthen Willpower

Now the website above is obviously geared to men, but I think their suggestions can be helpful for anyone. After all, the woman at home needs a strong willpower to be able to function properly and to fulfill all her duties, without an overseer telling her what to do. Being a housewife is comparable to being self-employed, and in the age of broadband internet there are various temptations and distractions present in your very own home. Which reminds me that I must be off making dinner! So till the next time...