Nicole Madigan-Everest posted an article at The Punch recently, entitled “Mummywars – how mothers are our own worst enemies”. Her conclusion, as puerile as it is vacuous, is that Mothers should just give up their petty jealousies and support each other, like, you know?
Mothers supporting mothers? Nice and cosy thought, but who does Madigan-Everest think she’s fooling? There isn’t a mother alive who wouldn’t sacrifice another woman’s baby to protect her own. Why? Because women are deeply rooted in the earth, and the earthly drive is to survive, or help one’s genes survive, at all costs. And no matter how moral a woman is, how good a person she is, how kind, how caring, how selfless, there’s no time in her life when she is more attached to Mother Earth than when she has a baby. To a normal woman, nothing is more important than the survival and well-being of her baby.
A ‘good mother’ is, by any definition, one who successfully puts the needs of her child before all else. This can only mean, deep down, she can’t seriously care for another mothers child in a way that she cares for her own. That would require her best efforts, which she must reserve for her own child. She may be kind, helpful and useful, to a point, but this likely has less to do with child care than storing up ‘support credit’ with the other mother against the day when she or her own child are in need. As such, it is more likely to be self-centred than selfless.
This is why a man is so desperately needed in a child’s life. A mother can raise a physically healthy child on her own, perhaps, but will always need support if the child’s emotional, physical and spiritual health is to be optimised. A father is needed to raise a good child. A mother can try to do this, but the self-centred feelings she has for her child, left unchecked, will eventually elicit self-centredness in the child. A father is needed to teach the child how to create worth in others, which is the essence of a civilised society. If we want to live in civilised society, the importance of the father must therefore not be understated. There are thousands of studies that indicate the widespread negative impact on society of single motherhood – increased selfishness, delinquency, drug abuse, criminality, violence, self-loathing, isolation, teen pregnancy, suicide.
Yet, in her article Madigan-Everest makes exactly how many references to fathers? None. Instead, she implies mothers alone comprise the “parenting world” even though she knows the readership of The Punch is more or less equally divided between men and women. She also makes no reference to the critical role of a male in tempering the self-centredness inherent in motherhood. Before you complain that the article was only about mothers, I say it is absolutely about fathers – the calculated absence of reference to them. This omission defines the problem to the very solution Madigan-Everest purports to find – i.e. removal of the father from the parenting equation. Not only is she putting the cart before the horse, she’s trying to persuade her readers that the horse is redundant.
This is a growing problem in Australian society, facilitated by the gender feminist ideologues that have swelled the ranks of the family services sector. If their highly discriminatory National Council’s Plan for Australia to Reduce Domestic Violence Against Women and Their Children, 2009-2021 passes through both Houses of Parliament and makes it into Family Law, the role of the father in a child’s life will be so trivialised and undervalued that self-centredness will be the defining character of parenting in the country.
Actually, ‘The Plan’, as it has come to be known, will go much, much further than this. It proposes to criminalise the presence of a father in a child’s life and, it would seem, of men in general. Read this article on what it proposes and try to quell your anger.
Apartheid has begun its ugly march into Australia, supported in no small part by candyapple articles like Madigan-Everest’s that treat Australians like children and men like, well nothing.