Feminist Op-Ed: It Should Be Illegal To Be A Stay-At-Home Mom
Although feminists claim they are all about "choice," anyone with at least two brain cells can surmise that feminists actually despise choice; any deviation from Feminist Dogma is heresy, but no sin is greater than a woman choosing to stay home and raise her children.
Feminist and Australian columnist Sarrah Le Marquand is trying to put a stop to that deadly sin, proposing women be criminalized for being stay-at-home mothers.
The op-ed, titled It should be illegal to be a stay-at-home mum, begins by making the economic pitch, contending the Australian economy would benefit from all parents entering the workforce; Le Marquand cites a recent study from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development to make her point.
But eventually, the real reason for the feminist's fascistic proposal uncloaks itself as a means to true "equality;" and by "equality," Le Marquand means "sameness."
"Rather than wail about the supposed liberation in a woman’s right to choose to shun paid employment, we should make it a legal requirement that all parents of children of school-age or older are gainfully employed,” she writes.
“Only when the female half of the population is expected to hold down a job and earn money to pay the bills in the same way that men are routinely expected to do will we see things change for the better for either gender," continues Le Marquand.
"Only when it becomes the norm for all families to have both parents in paid employment, and sharing the stress of the work-home juggle, will we finally have a serious conversation about how to achieve a more balanced modern workplace," adds the feminist.
To her credit, Le Marquand comes clean about the faux notion of "choice" being a main tenet of feminism, explicitly arguing that we must rid ourselves of choice if we ever plan on reaching true "equality."
"Only when the tiresome and completely unfounded claim that 'feminism is about choice' is dead and buried (it’s not about choice, it’s about equality) will we consign restrictive gender stereotypes to history," she writes. "...only when we evenly divide the responsibility for workplace participation between the two genders will we truly see a more equitable division between men and women."
Of course, criminalizing stay-at-home motherhood would only work toward some generated sameness while driving us farther away from freedom and any true sense of equality. And having government compel women to "evenly divide" workforce participation with men when they already have every opportunity to do so is fascistic, not progressive.
But none of that matters. You see, a woman's freedom of choice is an obstacle to the genderless utopia of the Left, where sameness gets replaced for "equality."