Wall Street Journal Claims War on Women a “Myth”

I know I like to get my advice about the role of women in today’s society from a person who recently published a book called “Adam and Eve and the Pill,” so I couldn’t wait to learn how there really is no current war on women going on in today’s society.

At least, so claims author Mary Eberstadt, who gleefully debunks the idea that women are happier now that they have the option to be birthing babies.

So let’s look a little closer at her debunking, shall we?

Eberstadt states that because about half of all women polled say they are anti-abortion, “This same diversity of opinion was also manifest in the arguments over the proposed new federal mandate forcing employers to pay for birth control, including abortifacients.”  The implication, of course, being that women are roughly divided in half at the idea of mandatory contraceptive coverage in insurance.  To back up her argument, she points to a letter signed by “over 20,000 women” asking that coverage not be included.

There are roughly 150 million women in the U.S.  If 20,000 women signed a letter, that represents about 0.013 percent of the female population.  According to the CDC, 80 percent of all women have used oral contraceptives at some point in their lives.  That’s a pretty big difference in percentages.

Eberstadt also argues that the myth of the war on women is propagated on the idea of a religious crusade, and that religion has little to do with it.  “Families are smaller, birthrates have dropped, divorce and out-of-wedlock births have soared. Demography has now even started to work against the modern welfare state, which has become harder to sustain as fewer children have been produced to replace aging parents.”

In other words, we have a duty to procreate that isn’t “Biblical,” it’s societal.  If we want all of the niceties like flush social security, economic assistance that is paid for by taxes, and the like well, we’d better make sure we are giving birth to enough children to work and pay for all of that.

But in essence, what Eberstadt really wants to talk about is whether women are “happier” now than they were back when you only had sex while married and for the purpose of making babies.  And, in case you didn’t know this, you aren’t.  “Why do so many accomplished women simply give up these days and decide to have children on their own, sometimes using anonymous sperm donors, thus creating the world’s first purposely fatherless children? What of the fact, widely reported earlier this week, that 26% of American women are on some kind of mental-health medication for anxiety and depression and related problems? Or how about what is known in sociology as ‘the paradox of declining female happiness’? Using 35 years of data from the General Social Survey, two Wharton School economists, Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers, made the case in 2009 that women’s happiness appeared to be declining over time despite their advances in the work force and education. The authors noted that women (and men) showed declining happiness during the years studied. Though they were careful not to draw conclusions from their data, is it not reasonable to think that at least some of that discontent comes from the feeling that the grass is greener elsewhere—a feeling made plausible by the sexual revolution?”

So, since we are allegedly more “unhappy” the more opportunities we have, it’s truly in our best interest to limit our opportunities to wife and mother, by taking away anything that might allow us to be something different, or to be all of the above?

That argument right there is the surest sign yet that the war on women isn’t a myth at all.

Photo credit: Thinkstock


Kathy Perez
Kathy Johnson5 years ago


Sarah M.
Sarah M5 years ago


Saliane Anderssen
Saliane A5 years ago

ah oops! I meant to say a MALE teabagger, although "teabagger" can have a double meaning...

Saliane Anderssen
Saliane A5 years ago

Has anyone given her a trans-vaginal ultrasound just to make sure she is not a teabagger in disguise?

Gina W.
Gina W5 years ago

Just a thought, I wonder if more women are taking anti-anxiety and depression drugs today because effective drugs are now available. Opioids were used to treat major depression until the late 1950s. Amphetamines were used until the mid 1960s. None of those drugs addressed the issue of brain chemistry and serotonin levels. Apparently, anti-depressants don't work on a non-depressed person. It's all about brain chemistry.

At any rate, there is a war on women and anyone who says there isn't is not dealing with the facts. What these men and women are trying to do is to control people's sexuality. Human beings have sex, not only to procreate. This has been true throughout history. It is believed that the use of birth control dates back to Ancient Egypt. The condom was invented in Egypt in 3000 BC from such materials as fish bladders, linen sheaths, and animal intestines. People are having sex for the pleasure of having sex. Deal with it prudes!

This wouldn't be the first time in history that politicians have tried to legislate birth control and it won't be the last.

Mercedes Lackey
Mercedes Lackey5 years ago

Well having grown up in the 50s, and watched all the "happy suburban housewives" in my neighborhood who were on tranks, or made covert daily visits to the corner liquor store, all I can say is, the only reason they were happy is because they were stoned out of their minds.

Robyn Brice
Robyn Vorsa5 years ago

Decades ago it was believed that the world would end through massive overpopulation and that the Earth would literally drown in a mass of people. This theory produced many studies not to mention classics like Soilent Green and other films aand stories like them. What these experts did not seem to factor in was that give a woman an education and a decent standard of living, giver her a choice andshe would more than likey choose to have fewer children. This has been proven time and time again. Sure there are women who still choose to have large families like the Duggars but these days big families like theirs are unusual. Women want to have a choice, they want to control and limit their fertility for all sorts of reasons. Financial, societal and simply because some women just don't want to start a family yet. But why oh why can't people like the Anti-Choice people of Repblicans understand this? What is so hard to accept that a woman is more than a baby making machine?
Is is so hard to accept that women have many facets and we are more than the some of our reproduction parts? I thought all this was put to rest a long time ago but here I am, a woman of fifty and I am still seeing the same old arguments by the same old men (and women) going over the same tired old ground.

Jane Barton
Jane Barton5 years ago

Well that takes the heat off the GOP. There's a WAR ON FISH! HAHAHAHAHA How about let's stop ALL MASTURBATION AND ALL MEN KEEP YOUR HOLY, SACRED SPERM IN

Martha Eberle
Martha Eberle5 years ago

ALL people, female and male, want choices, the freedom to decide for yourself, who you want to be, and what you want to do in your life. It's simple -- it's called freedom, and once you've experienced it, you can never go back to the old way of another, making decisions for you. I suggest that people are less happy, because life is too fast, no time to enjoy and contemplate, and included in that, is all the brands of technology, keeping us looking at our instruments, instead of interacting with the people in front of us. Simplicity is grander than you think.

Georgia L.
Georgia L5 years ago

Wow, a Murdoch owned paper wrote it so it must be true.