Michelle Obama says her “first real freedom” came when she stopped living for her husband and kids. She calls it empowerment. But is that freedom—or just narcissism dressed up as virtue?
Very insightful article for the extremely Narcissistic society in which we now find ourselves. It contradicts the Lord’s commandment to love thy neighbor as thyself. The brand of “freedom” Michelle Obama venerates is the same one promoted by the DINCS, willfully singles and pro-aborts. Freedom from having some other creature to love and support. For what valuable purpose, then, is the capacity to love and support if one can’t even be bothered to care about one’s own family? Completely self-directed love is like damming a river and letting all the surrounding habitat whither and die so that you can keep all of the energy for yourself. That’s not very eco-friendly, Saruman.
Women have been encouraged to seek power because supposedly that's what makes men have a better life experience. But its long been known that power tends to corrupt. Better develop the power to love than the love for power. Feed your soul, not your ego. Thanks for your voice.
Well, as a young woman who has had no formal college education (aside from a few stray courses), you are an inspration to me. I hope to someday be like you.
"A society that encourages women to measure themselves by the yardstick of male ambition. . ."
I could not have said it better. To me, this started in earnest when Gloria Steinem began lashing out against the so-called degradation of women in the late sixties. The owners of mainstream media picked up on this, and the propaganda machine began churning out its decades-long literal brainwashing of our beautiful mothers, wives, homemakers and loving women, and young girls. This continues to this very day. Gender confusion and mass homosexuality IS NOT ORGANIC. It has been, and is, propaganda-driven via the most vile, despicable minds on Mother Earth. Men in women's private spaces should be a GIANT RED FLAG.
Using quotes for emphasis is grammatically incorrect and replaces prominence with irony. When I read text that says society "discourages" women from self-expression with quote marks, I'm signaled by punctuation to interpret the use of this word with caution, like its use is suspect and not to be trusted. Singling out for emphasis is best done using italics. If the media doesn't allow italics, use asterisks; *that* will please your readers.
Free is quoted because it is being said. They are said to be such. It could also be taken ironically in that context, interestingly enough, but that's irrelevant.
I am indebted to you for bothering to listen to Michelle when I will not, as I also appreciate your take on things, but quotes here appeared unwieldly and overused, drawing attention to themselves as though this were a research project. Perhaps it is, and I misunderstood the medium as being rather a personal reflection. Quoting from original conversational source material *is* acceptable, so I withdraw my comment, but leave it if you wish that others may learn from this short conversation. In general, I find there are few who know how to write with properly.
Very insightful article for the extremely Narcissistic society in which we now find ourselves. It contradicts the Lord’s commandment to love thy neighbor as thyself. The brand of “freedom” Michelle Obama venerates is the same one promoted by the DINCS, willfully singles and pro-aborts. Freedom from having some other creature to love and support. For what valuable purpose, then, is the capacity to love and support if one can’t even be bothered to care about one’s own family? Completely self-directed love is like damming a river and letting all the surrounding habitat whither and die so that you can keep all of the energy for yourself. That’s not very eco-friendly, Saruman.
Women have been encouraged to seek power because supposedly that's what makes men have a better life experience. But its long been known that power tends to corrupt. Better develop the power to love than the love for power. Feed your soul, not your ego. Thanks for your voice.
As a man, Michael Obama don't even know what he's talking about.
lol touché
Ms. Cain I COMPLETELY AGREE with your article wholeheartedly. Thank you
Do you have some kind of college education, Miss Cain? You are very knowledgeable! (Not that college is the source of all knowledge these days...)
Thank you. You're very kind. No, I never went to college. I just read more than most.
Well, as a young woman who has had no formal college education (aside from a few stray courses), you are an inspration to me. I hope to someday be like you.
I don't quite know how to respond to that, except to say that I'm touched. May God bless you.
"A society that encourages women to measure themselves by the yardstick of male ambition. . ."
I could not have said it better. To me, this started in earnest when Gloria Steinem began lashing out against the so-called degradation of women in the late sixties. The owners of mainstream media picked up on this, and the propaganda machine began churning out its decades-long literal brainwashing of our beautiful mothers, wives, homemakers and loving women, and young girls. This continues to this very day. Gender confusion and mass homosexuality IS NOT ORGANIC. It has been, and is, propaganda-driven via the most vile, despicable minds on Mother Earth. Men in women's private spaces should be a GIANT RED FLAG.
Using quotes for emphasis is grammatically incorrect and replaces prominence with irony. When I read text that says society "discourages" women from self-expression with quote marks, I'm signaled by punctuation to interpret the use of this word with caution, like its use is suspect and not to be trusted. Singling out for emphasis is best done using italics. If the media doesn't allow italics, use asterisks; *that* will please your readers.
Discourages was in quotation marks because it was the word Michelle used on her podcast.
And this quote from your article? In slavery, food and lodging are said to be "free", but they are in fact paid for by servitude and bondage.
Free is quoted because it is being said. They are said to be such. It could also be taken ironically in that context, interestingly enough, but that's irrelevant.
I am indebted to you for bothering to listen to Michelle when I will not, as I also appreciate your take on things, but quotes here appeared unwieldly and overused, drawing attention to themselves as though this were a research project. Perhaps it is, and I misunderstood the medium as being rather a personal reflection. Quoting from original conversational source material *is* acceptable, so I withdraw my comment, but leave it if you wish that others may learn from this short conversation. In general, I find there are few who know how to write with properly.
“how to write properly”*
Corrected and discredited, felicitious humiliation is befitting. :-)