Thursday, July 10, 2008
Modern Woman: The Lost Sex
Sometimes I read books with which I know I will disagree, but from which I hope I will gain understanding of the issue. Modern Woman: The Lost Sex (Harper & Bros., 1947) by Ferdinand Lundberg and Marynia Foot Farnham, MD is just one example of that experience.
Ferdinand Lundberg went on to write The Rich and the Super-rich: A Study in the Power of Money Today (Kensington Pub Corp, 1988) among others.
A film clip of Dr. Farnham describing her theories can be seen at YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2Rc63H7r6Y
I discovered Modern Woman when I was reading Carol Tavris’ book Mistakes Were Made (but Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts (co-authored with Elliot Aronson) (Harcourt, 2007). Tavris gives short shrift to Dr. Farnham's 61 year old book and dismisses her arguments by essentially saying,
“Well, if working is so bad for women’s psyche, then why is this woman a medical practitioner, researcher and author? Isn’t Farnham herself a contradiction of her own treatise?’
Dr. Farnham argues that work defeminizes women and thereby destroys the family, the home, children (if any) and the male-female sexual relationship.
Two quotes from the book are surprisingly familiar even in today’s more enlightened society, because we still hear these arguments in one form or another:
"Work that entices women out of their homes and provides them with prestige only at the price of feminine relinquishment, involves a response to masculine strivings. The more importance outside work assumes, the more are the masculine components of the woman's nature enhanced and encouraged. In her home and in her relationship to her children, it is imperative that these strivings be at a minimum and that her femininity be available both for her own satisfaction and for the satisfaction of her children and husband. She is, therefore, in the dangerous position of having to live one part of her life on the masculine level, another on the feminine. It is hardly astonishing that few can do so with success. One of these tendencies must of necessity achieve dominance over the other. The plain fact is that increasingly we are observing the masculinization of women and with it enormously dangerous consequences to the home, the children (if any) dependent on it, and to the ability of the woman, as well as her husband to obtain sexual gratification."
"The psychosocial rule that takes form, then, is this: the more educated a woman is, the greater chance there is of sexual disorder, more or less severe. The greater the disordered sexuality in a given group of women, the fewer children they have."
Dr. Farnham’s first point in the book is that the Industrial Revolution stripped both men and women of the essentials of their psychic well-being. It took physical labor and personal creativity away from agriculturally-oriented men and plopped them into stifling suits, stale offices, cars and cul de sacs. Their brutish competitiveness in capitalistic markets are merely a natural expression of their male desire to express their masculinity. (“Men will be men.”)
For women, that same Industrial Revolution “Emptied out the home.” Formerly, the home was the focus of livelihood of the family, the center of economic status, the hub of all family education and recreation.
“What is still called the home is to a large extent a vacuum, nothing of consequence happens there.”
“… the people themselves [in contemporary homes] have very little of a life in common.”
Family size is smaller, some homes are huge but empty, while others are small and superficial as most activity, recreation and eating take place outside of the home today.
Some social costs or consequences of this emptying out are borne by all: suburbanization, rush hour traffic to connect origin and destinations, antique-collecting (to ape the rich). Most critically, Dr. Farnham says, “the home is an extension of the maternal womb.” Thus, the destruction of the home has been emotionally hazardous for society -– and the one person most harmed by this phenomenon is Modern Woman. “[This] is the root cause of women’s restlessness and discontent.” Women suffer from neuroses as they struggle to find their appropriate identify outside of the home.
Dr. Farnham takes an interesting stroll through key judicial decisions by Chief Justice William Coke (1552-1634) of England and William Blackstone (1723-1780) to review their key roles in the arbitrary reversal of common law precedent which caused womens’ rights in property, law, economics, and ultimately society to be stripped to the bone. Women and good men have been battling ever since to re-establish those natural rights that once were considered inalienable for women as much as for men.
Dr. Farnham argues that the social freedom of women depends upon the degree of social safety and security provided by the environment. “With the attainment of some degree of civilization -– and civilization can only be attained under conditions of peace -– the personal rights of women broaden.”
If we look at China or any nation at war today (including our own), we could agree that social safety and security do broad the personal rights of everyone, not just women.
Unfortunately, Dr. Farnham’s “cures” are what make Modern Woman the archaic treatise that in fact it really is:
1. The government should subsidize psychotherapy for all the neurotic women thrust out of the security of the home.
2. We should return as many activities to the home as possible
3. We should return women to that protected home, where they can be safe and secure once again.
Ironically, we will hear many of these arguments today: we will hear it from those who say that all women, everywhere, are in a constant search for “work-family balance.” We hear it from those advocating more government faith-based initiatives to reconstruct the American home; from those who argue that women who are successful achieve those results only by emasculating themselves, their spouses and their families; and from those who argue that government “should” take action against a sea of psychological ills that afflict only one-half of the participants in the marriage contract.
At least now I understand where these arguments found their “home.”
Ferdinand Lundberg went on to write The Rich and the Super-rich: A Study in the Power of Money Today (Kensington Pub Corp, 1988) among others.
A film clip of Dr. Farnham describing her theories can be seen at YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2Rc63H7r6Y
I discovered Modern Woman when I was reading Carol Tavris’ book Mistakes Were Made (but Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts (co-authored with Elliot Aronson) (Harcourt, 2007). Tavris gives short shrift to Dr. Farnham's 61 year old book and dismisses her arguments by essentially saying,
“Well, if working is so bad for women’s psyche, then why is this woman a medical practitioner, researcher and author? Isn’t Farnham herself a contradiction of her own treatise?’
Dr. Farnham argues that work defeminizes women and thereby destroys the family, the home, children (if any) and the male-female sexual relationship.
Two quotes from the book are surprisingly familiar even in today’s more enlightened society, because we still hear these arguments in one form or another:
"Work that entices women out of their homes and provides them with prestige only at the price of feminine relinquishment, involves a response to masculine strivings. The more importance outside work assumes, the more are the masculine components of the woman's nature enhanced and encouraged. In her home and in her relationship to her children, it is imperative that these strivings be at a minimum and that her femininity be available both for her own satisfaction and for the satisfaction of her children and husband. She is, therefore, in the dangerous position of having to live one part of her life on the masculine level, another on the feminine. It is hardly astonishing that few can do so with success. One of these tendencies must of necessity achieve dominance over the other. The plain fact is that increasingly we are observing the masculinization of women and with it enormously dangerous consequences to the home, the children (if any) dependent on it, and to the ability of the woman, as well as her husband to obtain sexual gratification."
"The psychosocial rule that takes form, then, is this: the more educated a woman is, the greater chance there is of sexual disorder, more or less severe. The greater the disordered sexuality in a given group of women, the fewer children they have."
Dr. Farnham’s first point in the book is that the Industrial Revolution stripped both men and women of the essentials of their psychic well-being. It took physical labor and personal creativity away from agriculturally-oriented men and plopped them into stifling suits, stale offices, cars and cul de sacs. Their brutish competitiveness in capitalistic markets are merely a natural expression of their male desire to express their masculinity. (“Men will be men.”)
For women, that same Industrial Revolution “Emptied out the home.” Formerly, the home was the focus of livelihood of the family, the center of economic status, the hub of all family education and recreation.
“What is still called the home is to a large extent a vacuum, nothing of consequence happens there.”
“… the people themselves [in contemporary homes] have very little of a life in common.”
Family size is smaller, some homes are huge but empty, while others are small and superficial as most activity, recreation and eating take place outside of the home today.
Some social costs or consequences of this emptying out are borne by all: suburbanization, rush hour traffic to connect origin and destinations, antique-collecting (to ape the rich). Most critically, Dr. Farnham says, “the home is an extension of the maternal womb.” Thus, the destruction of the home has been emotionally hazardous for society -– and the one person most harmed by this phenomenon is Modern Woman. “[This] is the root cause of women’s restlessness and discontent.” Women suffer from neuroses as they struggle to find their appropriate identify outside of the home.
Dr. Farnham takes an interesting stroll through key judicial decisions by Chief Justice William Coke (1552-1634) of England and William Blackstone (1723-1780) to review their key roles in the arbitrary reversal of common law precedent which caused womens’ rights in property, law, economics, and ultimately society to be stripped to the bone. Women and good men have been battling ever since to re-establish those natural rights that once were considered inalienable for women as much as for men.
Dr. Farnham argues that the social freedom of women depends upon the degree of social safety and security provided by the environment. “With the attainment of some degree of civilization -– and civilization can only be attained under conditions of peace -– the personal rights of women broaden.”
If we look at China or any nation at war today (including our own), we could agree that social safety and security do broad the personal rights of everyone, not just women.
Unfortunately, Dr. Farnham’s “cures” are what make Modern Woman the archaic treatise that in fact it really is:
1. The government should subsidize psychotherapy for all the neurotic women thrust out of the security of the home.
2. We should return as many activities to the home as possible
3. We should return women to that protected home, where they can be safe and secure once again.
Ironically, we will hear many of these arguments today: we will hear it from those who say that all women, everywhere, are in a constant search for “work-family balance.” We hear it from those advocating more government faith-based initiatives to reconstruct the American home; from those who argue that women who are successful achieve those results only by emasculating themselves, their spouses and their families; and from those who argue that government “should” take action against a sea of psychological ills that afflict only one-half of the participants in the marriage contract.
At least now I understand where these arguments found their “home.”
# posted by ChampionBoards.com @ 4:48 PM 
