”The object of a masterpiece is to give oneself away” (Boris Pasternak, 1922). The concept of selflessness used to be a virtue. Growing up I remember being taught to put others first, to care more for others’ needs than for my own, and to admire those who sacrificed their lives for another.
  These days it seems I can’t leave my home without being bombarded with signs, advertisements, and book covers celebrating self-love and emphasizing self-care. In fact I don’t even need to leave my home. One look at the internet and the self-obsession of human beings dominates the screen. The admiration of self-sacrifice has been swapped with the celebration of those who live for themselves (dismissed under the guise of “doing what’s right for them”). This has led to a depressed, desperate society in constant search of “mental health” tactics and therapy sessions, ironically all pushing the self-love/self-care ideology that got them there in the first place. 

  In his work, The Book That Made Your World, Vishal Mangalwadi spends a chapter writing about heroism and the advancement that Christians made in bringing the virtue of selflessness not only to the table but as the epitome of heroism. In the Classical Greco-Roman world, a hero was “a person who had the power to conquer and rule over others.” Laying down one’s life for another, as we are taught by our Lord Jesus, was not a consideration in the least. Alexander the Great (356-323 BC) is a classic example of this, as he is one of history’s most ruthless conquerors. Celebrated at the time for his strength and brutality, he left his kingdom to the strongest and most savage, and his kingdom was therefore torn apart within half a century.
  Augustus Caesar (63 BC-AD 14) was another ideal Roman hero. So violent and brutal did he use his power that William Blake wrote, “The strongest poison ever known came from Caesar’s laurel crown.” The Classical understanding of a hero as a person with power is really universal. Examples can be made with Islam, Hinduism, and in many other cultures and religions. Power, glory, brutality, and domination are the honored attributes that are celebrated as heroism all throughout our world. It wasn’t until the 1,000s when the Roman Catholic Church launched a frontal attack on the medieval concept and practice of heroism, beginning with a movement called the “Truce and Peace of God,” that the barbaric practices of chivalric heroism begin to die. The great Roman Catholic theologian Thomas Aquinas (1225-74) condemned chivalry on the grounds that “the Knights who sought glory through homicide and rapine sought vain glory”—which, he emphasized, opposed Christ’s teaching of meekness and self-sacrifice.
  Of course the Roman Catholic Church wasn’t without error, and a century later the German monk Martin Luther exposed its heresies, yet he demonstrated further the concept of selflessness—even self-forgetfulness—as he was willing a multitude of times to be burned at the stake for standing up for truth and defending the pure gospel and the people of God.

  All this to say, ever since then it has been custom in Western society to admire selflessness, to praise self-sacrifice, and to look upon as heroes those who lay down their lives for the benefit of another. That is, until today. What is praised these days? Soldiers who fight for their country? Mothers who give their lives to raising their children? Hard-working fathers who labor all day with little-to-no acknowledgment for their toil? No. What’s celebrated is the person who is “brave” enough to be “his or her true self”… i.e. whatever gender/animal/inanimate object their feelings tell them they should be and make a fuss about it in public. What’s celebrated is a man wearing a woman’s dress on the cover of magazines. What’s celebrated is a woman who aborts her baby because she feels it would ruin her life of pursuing a dominating career, which she believes is the ultimate way to prove her worth. Or a woman who refuses to stay home and submit to her husband because she must go fight against the oppression of women (a make-believe idea) in society. Or the woman who decides to leave her husband because she’s “not happy anymore” and she needs to do what’s right for her.
  These self-centered, vain celebrations that are applauded in today’s society as honorable and heroic show that not only have we made a complete 360° from our progress we made from the vain-glory of medieval chivalric heroism… we’ve stooped even lower. At least, if anything, we can admire the aspiration of strength in the Greco-Roman world. Strength is noble, needed, and is indeed a virtue. Now, meekness is the greatest aspiration because it is strength and power under control—used for the good and protection of others, not to glorify oneself or to exploit others. But in our day, the causes that people fight for are utterly shameful. All are motivated by self-love, “doing what’s best for you,” leaving friends and relationships—even your own family—if they aren’t making you happy or you deem them “toxic”; and the ultimate achievement is caring for yourself, whatever the cost. Of course people will defend this with “you can’t fill from an empty cup,” or “you can’t help others if you don’t help yourself,” but I don’t buy this. Of course everyone needs to take care of themselves: eat right, exercise, get good sleep. But these natural courses of self-care don’t need to be emphasized. We naturally love ourselves. We naturally want to take care of ourselves. What is not natural is being selfless. What is most beneficial to society is a people who live to serve others and ask themselves what is most beneficial to children, to families, and to society as a whole.

 But instead of asking questions like these, or focusing on causes that are actually substantial as they affect those who are truly suffering in real ways (fighting against abortion, human trafficking, drugs, etc.), people are rather focused on the “victimhood” of the LGBTQ community, or the supposed “oppression” of women. There are horror stories I hear frequently from my husband’s job of children being raped, abused, tortured, and murdered on a weekly basis. There are innocent babies being cut up and murdered daily with no one to defend them. There are innocent police officers going to prison for life, all for doing their job as trained yet being the wrong skin color while doing so (or being the right skin color but nevertheless wrong for wearing a badge). There are true victims in society that are worth fighting for; causes that are worth raising a voice about; innocent children with no one to help them. Yet what are the loudest voices we hear? The LGBTQ who need affirmation of their chosen gender or sexual orientation that no one cares about? Women who for whatever reason while hating men try as hard as they can to become like men? In sincere honesty, is there not something gross about this?

  Of all the victim-crying movements taking over society, the feminist “woman empowerment” movement might be the most destructive. It has in itself led to this self-obsessed society in pushing the “whatever is best for you” mentality, rather than seeking the interest of others. It is entirely self-focused, not caring about the well-being of husbands, children, or family. It has led to not only the action of millions of aborted babies, but the celebration of mothers who abort their babies. It has led women into the workforce, abandoning their children to be raised by others. It has doubled the divorce rate since the 1950’s. It has brought women into the military which has only created problems—both for them and for the men they work with.
 I know this is taboo what I am saying. I know speaking contrary to such accepted ideals is overwhelmingly avoided in our sensitive society because coming across as offensive seems to have become the worst crime one can commit in our day. But going back to the question of what is most beneficial to society, it is undisputed that a loving family unit that stays together—where the father works and provides and protects, and the mother supports her husband and cares for her home and raises her own children—leads to the most flourishing society (including one with the most mental health and stability; notable since there is such a big mental health emphasis these days). This is all undisputedly proven in history. Homes where fathers aren’t present, or where mothers are absent (yes, including working mothers), leads to the children being more likely to use drugs, commit crimes and felonies, and go to prison when they are adults.
  Women in the workforce, specifically in the military or positions of authority, has only led to more unwanted pregnancies and the breaking up of families due to adultery. I can sadly tell of countless stories of military women who have thrown themselves at the married military men they work with, utterly careless that they have a wife and children at home. Some men I knew to resist; some didn’t. I also have personally known several instances where police officers have committed adultery and left their families for the female coworker that they worked so closely with day in and day out. I am not overlooking the husband who should’ve had better character, but are we not all sinners who need to guard ourselves? Is placing females so intimately in partner relationships with males really a good idea? The feminist movement does not care about honor and nobility. It does not care about the breaking up of families. It is entirely about self-advancement and domination. I have yet to meet a woman in the military who joined because she cared so much about defending our country and wanted to give her frail female strength to serve and protect it. No, women who join the military do so to prove (or at least attempt to prove) that women can do what men can do; which they simply can’t. Their motives are entirely driven by a desire to dominate and prove their equality as a strong empowered woman. But who honestly wants a regiment of women fighting a gruesome battle for their country? I don’t! And if they were honest with themselves, they know they wouldn’t perform as successfully as a regiment of men would. Their attempt would be a disaster. Which shows that their motivation is not their country’s best interest, but merely their social status.
  Further, consider how females in the military are strongly encouraged to take hormone pills to block their periods each month, so that their menstruation doesn’t interfere with their tasks in the field. When you have to take hormone blockers to fight against your natural design as a woman to try to perform like a man, doesn’t that hint that maybe you’re not quite suited for the role? That maybe your natural biology shows what a woman is designed for—to bear and raise children? Isn’t it sort of not-loving toward yourself to manipulate your body in an unhealthy way just to attempt to prove you can perform like a man? Yet as mentioned, is it really about performing like a man, or is all this “women equality” outcry really not about equality at all, but about domination? What women are signing up to work on oil rigs or railroads, or to be construction workers, plumbers, or electricians? They aren’t. For one, they know they simply can’t excel in such jobs. But more so, their goal is to dominate men; to be in power over them [hence “women empowerment”]. This is why women are not seeking heavy-labor jobs, but positions of authority. This is why the military now has female platoon commanders poorly leading a platoon of males who 1) could all lead better than her, and 2) are all just wondering what it would be like to sleep with her, if not finding out in reality via consent or force. (Sorry guys, I’ve been around enough Marines to not tip-toe around the truth. It is what it is). Mangalwadi, my beloved scholar from India who I previously mentioned, laments this reality when he writes, “The great American family is now falling apart because of…the feminists who believe that equality demands that twenty-year-old girls be sent as soldiers into enemy territories—where they are vulnerable to being captured, gang raped, and brutalized—in defense of feminist ideology.” But women call this progress, and insist on becoming better men than men; all the while applauding a man who wins “Woman of the Year,” essentially crowning a man for being a better woman than a woman. The irony! Oh but I digress.
  Men and women simply are built different. This is biblical. God created man and ordained him to rule and dominate the earth. He created woman to be a helper to man (Gen. 2:18). God’s design is for men to lead and rule (Gen.1:28, 2:15; 1 Cor. 11:3), and for women to submit to their husbands, and to stay home and care for their households and their children (Titus 2:4-5). Many view this as oppressive. But what people fail to see is that if God designed us to perform a certain way, our greatest joy will come from living out the role He gave us. Do you ever notice how angry and unsettled feminists are? They are opposing God’s design, and that only brings frustration and discontent. They may insist that women at home are oppressed, but every woman I know who gladly stays home to raise her children and help her husband are the most content and peaceful women I know. It is wrongly assumed by feminists that to be under authority of one’s husband implies that women are lesser in value. This couldn’t be farther from the truth. Men and women are equal in worth and value, but are simply designed to perform different roles. Mangalwadi elaborates well on this when he writes, “A conductor and a musician are equal as human beings, but in an orchestra, the musician is under the conductor’s authority. Submission to that authority does not make the musician a lesser human being; it makes him an effective musician. According to the Bible, the husband and wife are a team of equals: [the husband] is to rule with gentleness, but he is to rule; the wife is to give to her husband not merely love but also honor and obedience.” Obeying her husband does not make her a lesser human being; it makes her an effective wife, mother, and citizen to society. She is not less privileged; she indeed holds the most privilege of the two sexes.
  It is a humorous concept, this idea of “male privilege.” I can’t help but insist that women (specifically women of color) are undoubtedly the most privileged human beings in society right now. They get passes on everything simply for being female. Even prostitution isn’t a crime anymore; their actions are now entirely the man’s fault. Society has succumbed so much to women’s cries of victimhood that they can pretty much do anything they want without repercussion and still climb the ladder they’ve set their eyes on. Qualification and competence don’t seem to matter anymore. You’re a female? You get first pick, first rank, and all the white males are last. And perhaps if there were such a time when men appeared “privileged” in the work force—i.e. they were more likely to get hired than a woman—was it not because, just maybe back in rational times, they were actually more qualified and fit for the job? Back before diversity and equality were preeminent, and competence and qualification still mattered, perhaps men were hired over women because they were indeed more suited to the workforce than women.

  But the further irony is, when did toiling outside the home become a “privilege”? Men for centuries have always got the brunt of societal roles. The weight of bills and providing for their families—all through labor and toiling and answering to a boss, having higher stress levels, more strokes and heart attacks, and younger death rates—all while the women get to stay home and freely live as they please under no authority or time clocks (other than their husband’s, who , if living according to God’s design, are caring for and loving their wives as Christ loves the church)…and they say that men are the privileged ones? G.K. Chesterton underscores this fallacy when he writes, “[Feminists] are always talking about man going forth to wield power, to carve his own way, to stamp his individuality on the world, to command and to be obeyed; but indeed, he is not so free. Of the two sexes the woman is in the more powerful position. For the average woman is at the head of something with which she can do as she likes; the average man has to obey orders and do something else. He has to put one dull brick on another dull brick, and do nothing else; he has to add one dull figure to another dull figure, and do nothing else. The woman’s world is a small one, perhaps, but she can alter it. She does work which is in some small degree creative and individual. She can put flowers in fancy arrangements of her own. I fear the bricklayer cannot put bricks in fancy arrangements of his own, without disaster to himself and others… Indeed, I should favor anything that would increase the present enormous authority of women and their creative action in their own homes. The average woman is a despot; the average man is a serf… and [feminism] is that mixed up muddled idea that women are free when they serve their employers but slaves when they help their husbands.” But women have chosen to flee their beautiful role of helpmeet to their husbands and of motherhood, to pursue serving a boss instead of their family, and this has only created disorder, discontentment, divorce, depression, and death.

  How abundant, on the other hand, are the joys of being a woman who embraces her role of serving and submitting to her husband, of caring for and raising her children and rejoicing in the the love and grace of God. These things are more precious than can be put into words. 19th century Presbyterian minister, J.R. Miller—from whom I have drawn much inspiration, encouragement, and joy in my homemaking aspirations—has, I believe, eloquently set words to describe the beauty and necessity of homemaking, of which I am indebted to include:

“Oh that God would give every mother a vision of the glory and splendor of the work that is given to her when a babe is place in her bosom to be nursed and trained! Could she have but one glimpse in to the future of that life as it reaches on into eternity; could she look into its soul to see its possibilities; could she be made to understand her own personal responsibility for the training of this child, for the development of its life, and for its destiny,–she would see that in all God’s world there is no other work so noble and so worthy of her best powers, and she would commit to no others hands the sacred and holy trust given to her.

[…]
Home is the true wife’s kingdom. There, first of all places, she must be strong and beautiful. She may touch life outside in many ways, if she can do it without slighting the duties that are hers within her own doors. But if any calls for her service must be declined, they should not be the duties of her home. These are hers, and no other one’s. Very largely does the wife hold in her hands, as a sacred trust, the happiness and the highest good of the hearts that nestle there. The best husband—the truest, the noblest, the gentlest, the richest-hearted—cannot make his home happy if his wife be not, in every reasonable sense, a helpmate to him.

[…]
A true home is one of the most sacred of places. It is a sanctuary into which men flee from the world’s perils and alarms. It is a resting-place to which at close of day the weary retire to gather new strength for the battle and toils of tomorrow. It is the place where love learns its lessons, where life is schooled into discipline and strength, where character is molded. Far more than we know, do the strength and beauty of our lives depend upon the home in which we dwell. He who goes forth in the morning from a happy, loving, prayerful home, into the world’s strife, temptation, struggle, and duty, is strong–inspired for noble and victorious living. The children who are brought up in a true home go out trained and equipped for life’s battles and tasks, carrying in their hearts a secret of strength which will make them brave and loyal to God, and will keep them pure in the world’s severest temptations.

[…]
Few things we can do in this world are so well worth doing as the making of a beautiful and happy home. He who does this builds a sanctuary for God and opens a fountain of blessing for men.

[…]
Home happiness depends on the wife. Her spirit gives the home its atmosphere. Her hands fashion its beauty. Her heart makes its love. And the end is so worthy, so noble, so divine, that no woman who has been called to be a wife, and has listened to the call, should consider any price too great to pay, to be the light, the joy, the blessing, the inspiration of a home.

[…]
Men with fine gifts think it worth while to live to paint a few great pictures which shall be looked at and admired for generations; or to write a few songs which shall sing themselves into the ears and hearts of men. But the woman who makes a sweet, beautiful home, filling it with love and prayer and purity, is doing something better than anything else her hands could find to do beneath the skies.” (Taken from his 1882 book, Home–Making).

  The opposition and fight against this beautiful design—all to gain…dominance? praise? attention? affirmation?…what is gained again?—is a tragedy. The feminist movement has captured women because it allows them to be a victim, and everyone just loves playing the victim. It allows women to point fingers at others for their unhappiness; it’s always someone else’s fault that they are discontent. It’s always someone else’s fault that they aren’t where they want to be in life. Taking ownership for any outcome of one’s life is out the window when all you have to do is cry oppression or racism.

  The pursuit of happiness cannot sustain one throughout life, as it inevitably does not produce happiness. Suffering and hardships are inevitable. If a life of happiness and ease is what you are seeking, you will not receive either. If excellence and nobility are what you seek, you will receive these along with peace and happiness. And what is honorable? A man laboring 10 hours a day to provide food and shelter for his family, coming home to spend a few short hours with his children, repeating the same 5 days a week, seeking no recognition or renown for himself, all simply out of love for his family and God… Or a military soldier (yes, male), leaving his family and country to fight a war for 7+ months in which he may very likely die, all to protect the freedom and welfare of his country and those who abide therein…all while not only receiving zero praise, but rather ridicule and slander for loving his country and being “privileged”? All the while the men who are being applauded are the transgender celebrities who are doing nothing for society other than confusing children and leading them into depression.

  Or women, which is more honorable? The mother who endures the intolerable pain of childbirth, is available to nurse her baby at a moment’s notice, gets little to no sleep for the first year of each child’s life, gives herself to cooking, cleaning, making a warm and loving home for her family, teaches and educates her children, and supports and helps her husband in any way she can to help him succeed for the benefit of the family and society… or… the woman who neglects her children (if she has children at all) to pursue her “higher calling” of chasing a career so she can prove her worth as a woman (as if she’s not worth more at home), slaving away for a boss who cares more about his own family than for her (when she could actually be serving a husband who values her above anything else), and spends her free time indulging in “self-care” treatments such as going to salons, shopping, getting facials, getting massages, practicing yoga, or whatever other self-care practices are advertised these days? How have the tables turned so drastically in what is looked upon as good and virtuous and praiseworthy? Surely there must be others who see how backwards society has become.

  I hope not to have angered anyone through these opinions of mine. I need to clarify that none of what I have mentioned are by any means salvation wickets that need to be hit. One is not saved by being a stay at home mother or by submitting to her husband. We are saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. But movements and ideals have consequences. There are ways to cultivate a flourishing society and there are ways to destroy one. And adhering to the very foolish and unwise ideal of feminism has proven to only lead to detrimental consequences, negatively affecting babies, children, families, and society as a whole.

  Nor am I saying that women in the workforce are all sinning, or all have mal intentions. I understand some women have to work. However, I truly believe far fewer women really have to work than is argued. Beloved baptist minister Paul Washer shamelessly observes: “Why on earth do most people have children? The moment the child is born they’re put in day care, because both parents are working. Why? In some cases it’s to make ends meet for a while, and I can understand that. But in most cases it’s not. Don’t lie to me—we’re in America. In most cases it’s simply because everybody wants two new cars, a home they can’t afford, and to dress with clothes that have certain emblems upon them.” This is the raw truth. Americans have been brainwashed into a materialistic way of thinking, and have lost the art of living simply—enjoying each other and creation over things. Socrates, though off on many things, was right when he said, “The secret to happiness is not found in seeking more, but in developing the capacity to enjoy less.” This echoes the apostle Paul’s encouragement to Timothy when he wrote, “But if we have food and clothing, with these we shall be content” (1 Tim. 6:8). Sadly, many women are in denial of what is honestly needed to provide a healthy home for their children, and so they insist upon their “need” to work to provide a fulfilling home, trading essential quality time for materialistic gain.

  And again, I am not denying the good that has come from some scenarios of women working. God is gracious God; He makes good come from even evil scenarios, let alone from simply unwise choices that we make (to reiterate, I am not implying that working women are evil; I am insisting that it is unwise and unhealthy for society at large). But of course people always want to focus on the exceptions: “I know an excellent female teacher, nurse, etc…” So do I. But 1) I strongly believe that parents should educate their own children, in which case teachers wouldn’t be needed. For specialized studies as they get older, male instructors would do just fine. But this argument requires an entire article of its own, in which there is not space for here). 2) Yes, I know a few nurses who have hearts of gold and tend lovingly to their patients, with no ulterior motive other than to help society. This is rare. I know even more nurses who come home and complain about their job, complain about their patients, have zero energy left to interact with their children, and are more interested in going on a date with the hot doctor they work with—married or not. We’ve all seen Grey’s Anatomy, right? Ask any nurse and if she is honest she’ll tell you there is more truth to that show than fiction.

  The detriments of women in the workforce—no matter the occupation—are weightier than the benefits that they might produce for society. Children need their mothers at home. Husbands need their wives at home. When this is attacked it opens the door to all kinds of mischief and malice. For this very reason Paul writes, “I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give no occasion for the adversary to speak reproachfully” (1 Tim. 5:14), for sadly it is true that we are prone to meddling and promiscuity if we stray from the wisdom of God’s counsel.

  Indeed, we will be prone to the end of a sad, solitary life. Consider my grandma—married to my loving grandpa with whom together they made four beautiful daughters. My grandpa worked hard so my grandma could stay home and raise their girls. He was a good man—faithful, humble, loving. Yet all the feminist media in the 60s and 70s insisted upon my Grandma that she wasn’t living up to her true potential; that being just a stay at home mother was demeaning and belittling to her. So what did she do? She took up college courses to become a teacher. She somehow believed that teaching other children would give her more value than teaching her own. So she told her four daughters to leave her alone every evening while she studied for her B.A. and then her M.A. She graduated, became a French and English teacher, no longer was financially dependent on my grandpa, left him with a broken heart, remained independent and single the rest of her life, and died alone. Is that admirable? Is that what you’d call success? Maybe if she had listened to the wisdom of J.R. Miller—or better yet, the wisdom of Scripture—my mom’s childhood memories wouldn’t be filled with her mother sitting at the dining room table telling her to go away so she could study; or witnessing her father pack and move out with tears in his eyes because his wife no longer needed him. Maybe my grandma could’ve died in the arms of her loving husband with whom she built a lifelong home together with instead of alone and bitter (for she did indeed become bitter at the world…or was she bitter at herself?). It is all tragic. It is all too common. And it is all because of the faulty feminist belief that women are more empowered and therefore better off and happier when they are free and independent of men.

  But not all stories have to end this way. And thankfully I have redemptive stories as well. A columnist responding to G.K. Chesterton in an article titled “Career Women” writes, “Today, the feminist view is starting to fade. More and more women are discovering that real happiness and ‘personal fulfillment’ are not to be found in the factory or office, and that few jobs offer beatitude but, rather, boredom, drudgery and stress. Women are saying in ever greater numbers that they want marriage and family, and that they want to devote full time to it. Those who have to keep working wish it were otherwise.” And I can attest to this. A dear, dear friend of mine asked to come to my house a few months ago to share with me something that has brought her much joy. We have been friends over a decade. She is married with two children. I have known her to have a feminist mindset the majority of not all of our friendship. She was not always the nicest to her husband, and she often felt undervalued being “merely” a stay-at-home mother. At one point she thought it a good idea to boost her self-esteem by becoming a nanny to watch another woman’s children two days a week. Somehow, leaving her own two children with her parents so that she could take care of someone else’s two children (so that that mother could hide herself in her office and do paperwork uninterrupted) would bring her more value and worth (due to a small paycheck) than staying with her own two children those two days a week. I found this silly, of course; but nevertheless I loved my friend. She came over for her requested and I couldn’t deny the happiness I saw in her spirit. I was anxious for our little ones to quiet and calm down so she could tell me her news. Well her “news” was simply this: She began going to church about 9 months prior; she began to realize her worth in Christ and how she didn’t need to attain or prove her worth outside of her home; she realized the greatest gift she could give to her family was to be home with them, to raise her children herself, and to lovingly submit to her husband. She began doing all these things, and she said with tears in her eyes that she’s never had more peace and joy in her entire life. The warmth that this has created in her marriage and in her home in general has left her in awe. I was so happy for my friend. Yet I cannot forget the words she said to me toward the end: “Laura, why didn’t you tell me?” In all honesty, I thought I had told her. I know I have had conversations with her about the love and grace of God, of the beauty of the gospel, and even of the preciousness of motherhood. But what she meant was, I didn’t keep telling her. It’s so easy to not what to be overbearing. To not want to turn people away or lose friendships. And so after maybe one or two times of having these discussions I thought, Well, that’s enough. But to her, that was not being loving; that was leaving her in her depressed, confused state. It made me realize that as much as people are afraid to come across as offensive these days, perhaps what people really desire is to be offended—to be offered truth and hope…anything other than the lies and ugliness that society is offering them.

  And so I write this.

  I hope, if anything, this may have been an encouragement 1) to stay-at-home mothers who feel their roles are insignificant due to what is loudly praised and ridiculed in society; 2) to everyone, to not believe that self-love and self-care is the cure to your depression or any other problem you’re facing, even though society insists it is the overarching cure; 3) to everyone again, to not be cowardly in standing up for what you believe in, especially those who have been made to believe that their traditional values must be hushed lest they (God-forbid) offend the victimized world.

Women: Love your husbands. Respect him. Honor him. Submit to him. Don’t try to dominate him. Have children (if the Lord grants you children), and raise them up to have faith in Christ and to cling to truth. Raising children and being there for your family is a far greater contribution to the world than you could give by toiling in the workforce.

Married women who aren’t able to have children: Adopt! What a beautiful, beautiful gift you could give an orphaned child who has a grim future. You can offer an unwanted child a loving home who would otherwise feel unloved, unimportant, and very likely lead a sad and hopeless life. You could teach this child of our God who is a Father to them—a better Father than any earthly father could ever be—and who loves them and values them and wants to bring them into His eternal loving home. This gift is priceless.

Unmarried women: You can be (but don’t have to be) an exception to avoiding the workforce. You are not yet married or committed to a husband and may need to provide for yourself if your father cannot. So if you must work, may it always be with the possibility in mind that the Lord will bring you a husband and your “career” will not come before him. And if you must work, it must be with the utmost care and respect toward the men you work with. I worked in restaurants before I met my husband and sadly I saw married men one after another leave their families for the cute waitress who would flirt with and seduce them at work. Men are not meant to go out into the day bonding with females for more hours a week than they spend with their own wives. This didn’t use to be a common practice. It is a modern acceptance, and it rarely ever turns out well, as I have exemplified earlier. Women must be mindful of this and be respectful, doing all things as unto the Lord and not for selfish gain. Further, single women can spend their time in noble pursuits such as visiting orphans and widows and serving extended family and friends. There is a plethora of noble, God-honoring work to be done that single individuals are better capable of doing than families are due to time and availability. The point is, giving of oneself for the betterment of another, ultimately for the kingdom of God, is what should be encouraged, admired, and sought after in society; not self-love, self-care, or the celebration of woman-empowerment. Yet sadly we live in a backwards culture, and even reading such ideas is likely making the reader uncomfortable, if not appalled.

  Now I must make clear that I hope not to have implied that I have mastered any of these qualities that I deem honorable. I certainly have not. I am naturally selfish just like everyone else. There is only one Jesus. The rest of us are inclined to selfishness. We surely then—and this is my whole point—do not need to be encouraged to be more selfish. We need to be encouraged to be self-less. Just as all men are naturally prone to lust, they certainly do not need to be encouraged to lust, or be told, “It’s ok, it’s just who you are.” They need to learn to control it and use it to benefit their relationship with their wives. Likewise, as women are prone to be overtaken by their strong emotions, they should not be encouraged to let their emotions dominate and rule over them. They need to learn to control their emotions, channel them in healthy ways, and make decisions and actions according to reason, not emotion.
  So it is with self-love. Lust is not a bad thing as long as it is directed properly toward one’s spouse. (*Some people argue that lust is bad in general, but I don’t agree. Lust is simply a strong sexual desire toward something, and it is good and right and normal to lust after your spouse. Most likely, if you’re not lusting after your spouse, you’ll be lusting after someone else, so better to channel it all on your spouse…which I highly recommend…but I digress!). So too, emotions are not bad, as long as they are kept in check and used in positive ways. So self-love is not bad in and of itself. We indeed all have it. But left unchecked or overly emphasized, it could easily lead to a narcissistic, aimless, dishonorable, and depressed society, which is what we have found ourselves in. How lost is this precious mind frame of J.R.Miller: “Love is always ready to deny itself, to give, sacrifice, just in the measure of its sincerity and intensity. Perfect love is perfect self-forgetfulness. Hence where there is love in a home, unselfishness is the law. Each forgets self and lives for others.
But where there is selfishness it mars joy. One selfish soul will destroy the sweetness of life in any home. It is like an ugly bush in the midst of a garden of flowers. It was selfishness that destroyed the first home and blighted all the loveliness of Paradise; and it has been blighting lovely things in earth’s home ever since. We need to guard against this spirit.” Yet how beautiful it would be to bring it back.

  Another clarification I must make is that none of this is to say that I am not friends with anyone who disagrees with me. Quite the opposite. I have plenty of “career-women” friends, working mom friends, and gay friends. I love them, and they love me. Some think I’m silly for not working outside the home; some agree with me and wish they could stay home with their children too. Ironically, all of my gay friends agree with me about the outrageous LGBTQ nonsense pushed in society. It’s very possible to be friends with people you disagree with. Even more possible to love them. But we are all entitled to an opinion, and it’s sad when people with valuable opinions feel silenced in fear of offending the surrounding culture. It comes down to discernment: don’t be obnoxious, but don’t be a coward either. “Man has it all in his hands, and he loses it all to sheer cowardess” (Dostoevsky). My dear friend whom I previously mentioned made this clear for me. And so I hope this has been an encouragement to the “other side” who gets shamed and ridiculed for not following the mindless spirit of the age wherever it blows.
  Lastly, I suppose all of this comes down to whether God is in the equation for you—whether you aspire to live for the Lord or not. For if not, God’s very word says then to “eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die” (1 Cor. 15:19-32). In other words, go ahead and be selfish; you have no reason not to be. But if in fact Christ rose from the dead, we have all the reason to live honorable, worthy, sacrificial lives of love, humility, and grace. Is this not a more beautiful way of living? Does this not give more worth and value to the girl who is told growing up that the most important thing about her is the career she will have? When in fact the most important thing about us is what we believe about God, which will shape and give purpose, joy, and value to all areas of our lives, leading us toward servanthood and self-sacrifice, culminating into the deepest joy, fulfillment, and honor, as taught and depicted by our own Lord and Savior.

  But who knows, maybe I just live in an old world parallel universe that no one has a category for anymore. Which is probably true. But it is all the more reason that I cling so dearly to the scripture that reminds me that our home is not this world, but we are looking forward to a city whose builder and maker is God (Heb. 11:10). So be it. Yet in this self-destructive society drowning itself in the false promises of feminism and self-love, I contend there is a better way.

          ~

“Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” (Phil. 2:5-11)

“Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others.” (Phil. 2:3-4)

“Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.” (Eph. 5:22-24)

“Teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, to be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.” (Titus 2:4-5)

🤍

@lauritadill