Mother and Daughter Country Sweethearts Aprons

Source: Mother and Daughter Country Sweethearts Aprons

It saddens me that so few women wear aprons these days. It may seem a small thing, in a world in which so many terrible things are happening (this very day, a radical Islamic terrorist from Uzbekistan ran down and killed at least eight people in Manhattan with a truck, while shouting “Allahu akbar!”), but it is both a symbol and a thing itself.

Aprons are attractive and feminine, as well as being useful for keeping a woman’s clothes clean (and if they have pockets, carrying needful items for sewing, cooking, or wiping the tears of a sobbing child). But they are also a uniform, of a sort: the uniform of a woman who takes caring for her home and family seriously – a priority, not just one among many possible tasks, that she may, or may not, do if she has time.

And if she has a daughter, and they are wearing a matching mother-daughter set like this one, she is both setting an example and encouraging solidarity and emulation on the part of the rising generation. That is something which has always been important, but now that it is no longer taken for granted, no longer a given, is perhaps more vital than ever!

A woman who puts on an apron is girding herself for battle with entropy, chaos, and dissolution. She is taking a stand against disorder on the domestic front, and in so doing, she is also taking a stand against disorder in the wider world. That may sound excessively cosmic, but I think there is real truth to it. So I am happy to see these! Hope they encourage more women to “put on the uniform,” and take up the fight.

 


 

(The others on the page are lovely, too. The only thing I wish is that the pictures showed an actual mother with her daughter! Although I suspect she’s probably the one taking said pictures…)

Advertisements

The Death of Eros by Mark Regnerus | Articles | First Things

Something strange is going on in America’s bedrooms… The trend is most pronounced among the young. Controlling for age and time period, people born in the 1930s had the most sex, whereas those born in the 1990s are reporting the least. Fifty years on from the advent of the sexual revolution, we are witnessing the demise of eros.

Source: The Death of Eros by Mark Regnerus | Articles | First Things

Interesting! Not everyone will agree with this, of course, but it’s based on academic social science research (so it can’t be simply dismissed as the ravings of those “deplorable” religious types…) and at the least, raises some issues that are worth pondering. Among them:

Despite all the talk of the “hookup culture,” the vast majority of sex happens within long-term, well-defined relationships. Yet Americans are having more trouble forming these relationships than ever before. Want to understand the decline of sex? Look to the decline in marriage…

A decline in commitment isn’t the only reason for the sexual recession. Today one in eight adult Americans is taking antidepressant medication, one of the common side effects of which is reduced libido. Social media use also seems to play a part. The ping of an incoming text message or new Facebook post delivers a bit of a dopamine hit—a smaller one than sex delivers, to be sure, but without all the difficulties of managing a relationship…

If these were the only causes, the solution would be straightforward: a little more commitment, a little less screen time, a few more dates over dinner, more time with a therapist, and voilà. But if we follow the data, we will find that the problem goes much deeper, down to one of the foundational tenets of enlightened opinion: the idea that men and women must be equal in every domain.

Social science cannot tell us if this is true, but it can tell us what happens if we act as though it is. Today, the results are in. Equality between the sexes is leading to the demise of sex.

Follow the link for more details. As I say, this idea won’t be popular, or even acceptable, with many people. I would modify it to say that identicality, rather than “equality” per se, is the real issue: the idea that men and women are basically interchangeable, rather than being different but complementary, and excelling in different roles. But however you want to parse it, it’s at least worth considering, rather than merely dismissing.

Live and Let Die – Maccabee Society

 

What does the decision of Charlie Gard say about society today? Parents should have every right to save their children. How did this become negotiable?

Source: Live and Let Die – Maccabee Society

I have not heretofore chosen to say much about the Charlie Gard situation, in which the parents of a child with a rare and typically-fatal disease were prevented by the authorities in the British health system from seeking experimental medical assistance which – though without guarantees – might have extended, or even saved, his life, if tried soon enough.

They prevented this even though the family had received more than ample donations to ensure that there would be no cost to the state, and even though the child, Charlie, had been granted permanent resident status here in the States, where doctors waited to do what they could for him.

And at the end, they even prevented the parents from taking him home to die – despite the fact that their argument had been, originally, that he deserved to “die with dignity.”

A British professor of law and legal ethics even went so far as to argue, in an op-ed piece in The Guardian (UK), that “children do not belong to their parents,” asserting that parents have no rights with respect to their children (!!!), only duties – “the principal duty being to act in their children’s best interests.”

Well, even if one buys the whole “no rights” argument – which I emphatically do not – the fact is that Charlie’s parents were attempting to do precisely that: since he was an infant, and not able to speak for himself, they were attempting to give him the best possible fighting chance for survival. In this they were actively, emphatically, and repeatedly hamstrung and blocked by the authorities.

Stemming from these specific circumstances of Charlie Gard, this Maccabee Society article points out the wider implications of this incident, and the precedent it has set. I found this an especially cogent warning:

“The cause for alarm behind the death of Charlie Gard lies in the fact that the court actively stopped the parents from seeking treatment. This marks a shift in attitude from one of permitting a parent to kill his or her child to one that orders the parent to kill the child. This obviously sets a dangerous precedent: if the state does not think it is worth it to save a life, even if it does not bear the cost, it can deny treatment.

“This bodes nothing less than death for so many others, especially the majority who do not have the moral and financial support that Charlie’s parents had.”

It is very far down the “slippery slope” to go from “you must not kill your child” (traditional viewpoint / classical Christian morality) to “okay, you can allow your child to die (‘death with dignity’) / kill your child (abortion) if that’s what you think is best,” to “you must allow your child to die, and you may not seek treatment to prolong his life!”

What are we becoming? May God help us.

QOTD: On ancestors and descendants

Major David French Boyd, CSA
Major David French Boyd, 9th Louisiana Infantry, Confederate States Army; First President of Louisiana State University

“He who feels no pride in his ancestors is unworthy to be remembered by his descendants.”

Maj. David French Boyd, CSA; 1st President of LSU

Particularly ironic, in light of current events in Louisiana (New Orleans, in particular)!

Happy Mother’s Day (U.S.)!

Happy Mothers Day - Facebook profile pic.png

Wishing any and all mothers who may be reading this a truly happy and blessed Mother’s Day!

And at the same time, remembering with deep love and appreciation my own dear mother, who went to be with her Lord and ours in February of 2007 – ten years ago this year. I still think of her and miss her, every single day.

Ma 1975
   Jean Elizabeth “Betty” (Reamer) Harbold, c. 1975 – my beloved “Ma” (1927-2007)

If your mother is still alive, tell her how much you love her, how much she means to you! Because you never know how much longer, or shorter, will be the time you can spend together. And if your relationship with your mother is not all it could or should be, then please, if it is possible, do what you can to repair it.

Again, we don’t know how much time we have, and – unless she is a truly vile person, which is blessedly rare – I know of no one who thinks, looking back on their life, “Gee, I wish I hadn’t spent so much time with my mother…”

Again, Happy Mother’s Day to all mothers! And thank you for the work you put in to your families. May God bless and keep you!

Europe’s future-less “leadership”

Posted by an acquaintance on Facebook:

  • Macron, the newly elected French president, has no children.
  • German chancellor Angel Merkel has no children.
  • British Prime Minister Theresa May has no children.
  • Italian Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni has no children.
  • Holland’s Mark Rutte, Sweden’s Stefan Löfven, Luxemburg’s Xavier Bettel, Scotland’s Nicola Sturgeon—all have no children.
  • Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission, has no children.

So a grossly disproportionate number of the people making decisions about Europe’s future have no direct personal stake in that future.

Suddenly, a lot of things seem to make more sense, now… in a sadly warped and twisted sort of way. I don’t know about the rest of you, but to me it’s downright scary, presented in such stark terms. No wonder they’re acting like such idiots. They simply, literally, Do. Not. Care. Because they will not have children to reap the bitter harvest from the rotten seeds they are sowing.

Every previous generation had to think about future generations. These individuals do not, because for them, there will be no future generations.

And it also points up the sad fact that the European birth-rate is in the tank. It’s a bit of a catch-22: people are less likely to have children if they don’t believe in their own future… and it’s hard to believe that there will even be a European future, unless that birth-rate gets back up there to at least replacement level – and at this point, restoration level!

Meanwhile, some of us – myself included – would love to have children, but sadly have not found a partner to share that dream…

 

Protect children. Protect childhood.

Best quote I’ve seen so far on supposedly “trangender” children — and the adults who encourage / enable them:

Children — too young to drink, too young to smoke, too young to drive, too young to vote, but somehow old enough to decide that they want to mutilate their genitals and pump themselves with more hormones than a factory farmed chicken.

I’m sorry, not sorry, but anyone who thinks this is okay is seriously unhinged.