From a review of Kay S. Hymowitz’s book Marriage and Caste in America: Separate and Unequal Families in a Post-Marital Age, by F. Carolyn Graglia:
The urge to reproduce is hard-wired into most living beings. There is merit in what Rutgers professor of anthropology Lionel Tiger asserts in his book The Decline of Males that these girls are choosing Darwinian reproduction over Marxist market production. “I am unwilling,” he says, “to accept the notion on face value that having a baby is less valuable than acquiring a law degree or a small business. It is not self-evidently better to become a lawyer than a mother.” Perhaps some of the women who followed the feminist script would agree with Tiger insofar as they enjoy market success but face an ever-diminishing chance of marrying and bearing children. In her essay “The End of Herstory,” Hymowitz observes that “there are no Feminists in the throes of fertility anxiety” and that an increasing number of mothers are opting out of the workplace to return home. The older career woman, who sacrificed her marital and maternal prospects, and the baby mama in the ‘hood, each responded to the message of her subculture. But both the baby mama and the single woman who uses a sperm donor to achieve motherhood are acting selfishly, treating babies as commodities to satisfy their own needs while denying them a marital home with two biological parents.
Revival of a marriage culture depends on convincing women on both sides of the divide that marriage should precede childbirth and that children need their biological fathers at home. This culture would re-stigmatize illegitimacy, reform divorce laws, and enforce mores that uphold sexual intercourse as the reward of marriage. Citing evidence of disgust with the sexual revolution and the determination of children victimized by divorce to do better than their parents, Hymowitz concludes that Americans are now “earnestly knitting up their unraveled culture.
Mary Victrix 
Thanks for all your posts on chivalry!
I am not sure if you are familiar with the organization Corpus Christianum but it is another association which promotes prayer for the family, Christendom, etc.
Wow! This is a great article even if it’s still somewhat liberal. I think it shows that some of the liberal-minded folks are starting to see the folly in their recent ideas. First of all, pursuing a career while you leave young children to be raised by *care-givers* is not producing people who have a decent foundation of morals and/or a decent sense of security. Granted, I am not criticizing those who truly must work to put meals on the table, etc. But, I’m thinking that the vast majority of dual-income families don’t HAVE to be dual income … it’s a choice. And, it’s a choice that women have been told is the BETTER choice. In fact, now that it’s been a reality for so many years, men who are the sole bread-winners feel an unusually high sense of pressure … the corporate culture lays people off regularly so there is no sense of job security which weighs very heavily on a man when his wife is not employed to carry them over such a hump should it arise. It is a slippery slope that we have been sliding down on for years.
It has also been the biggest *encourager* of artificial birth control because, let’s face it, the woman needs to get back to WORK. And, who can afford day-care for 8 kids? So, it’s been feeding into all of this now for quite some time. yet, as law-suits and shows have shown some of the neglect and abuse in day-care centers or even in privately hired nannies, families are left with the fact that this is TRULY a selfish decision to put our children in these situations. Now if statistics like this can be published FRONT AND CENTER in the newspapers that divorce is higher in two-income families and crime is higher in kids of single parents, THEN I think we just might see a positive change. Maybe I’m being naive but I have to believe that people, in the end, want to do the right thing … they just get duped at times as to WHAT that right thing is. (They are not looking to the Church for their guidance … and the Church isn’t always consistent with her guidance.)
Of course, I didn’t even comment on the parts of the article that is addressing the homosexual desires to marriage … that’s another whole mess. But, as the article mentioned, children need a mother and a father … not care-givers or a loving couple of some sort. Enough data really needs to get collected on the outcome of children from all of these different environments before we can appeal to people’s sense of logic. It seems we cannot appeal to their sense of morals anymore … so I keep thinking that we need to get through their sense of logic and then show how it connects to Church teaching and hope they will come home through the back door. Again, maybe I’m being naive, but without hope it would all be way too depressing.
Oops, I forgot the URL – http://www.corpuschristianum.org
Pingback: For Christ and the Church « Mary Victrix