« The Hetero Retro Compromise | Main | Sexless Marriages »
May 09, 2006
Feral Cats
My school is recovering much of the Catholic heritage it had allowed to slip away -- not that we had ever lost it entirely. But we suffer a setback now and then. This spring, the new president issued a warning to the students that there would be no undue "celebrating" the evening before finals: no brawling, no drunkenness, and no public nudity. I don't know whether his disciplinarians are now working overtime, but apparently, along with the traditional primeval roar, there were some fifty or so students running about campus last night, in our pleasant forty degree New England thaw, stark naked.
Sure, I would laugh at a streaker -- it is constitutionally impossible for an Italian to do otherwise, I think. And I'd slap a hefty fine and an overcoat on the offender. But there was something odd about this bout of doltishness, something that reminded me of a few recent scenes my family has either witnessed or been informed of by friends:
A few summers ago I took my family to a nearby lake, at an unsupervised but pleasant state park. It's usually quiet there: a couple of fishermen and a family or two with small children. But as we trudged out to the beach with our folding chairs and towels we heard raucous laughter carrying from one end of the lake to the other. It came from three teenagers in the water, talking loudly about a sex act in the shower, and other things I didn't want my daughter or my small son to hear. When I rebuked them for it (and I must confess, "rebuke" is a mild word), what followed was a ten-minute volley of obscenities and crudities, the single filthiest and most shameless spree I'd ever heard in my life. No locker room boasting and ribbing could come close.
A good friend of mine would sympathize. She had to remove her daughter from the local neighborhood Catholic school -- and we are not talking about the inner city here -- because of an incident in her eighth grade class. The teacher left the children unpatrolled for an hour, during which time two of the students decided to strip below the waist and simulate sex acts -- or, for all I know, perform them; my friend was too modest to describe the worst of it -- accompanying their gestures with the appropriate nouns and verbs. When my friend's daughter, scandalized, told her mother about it and word got around, naturally the students in question humiliated her so badly that she could not remain in the school.
Or there's the day last summer when I took my family to a doughnut shop and we had to listen as several teenagers at the next table were describing the naked buttocks of a classmate of theirs, with derision and crude specificity. Or the teenager laughing and spraying foul language and complaining about the mosquitoes, as we stood in a pack of about thirty people, among whom was a Catholic priest in our company, watching fireworks.
I could go on adding examples, and maybe you've guessed by now the cause of my dismay and astonishment. Most of the streakers, and every single one of the other teenagers I have mentioned, were girls. They have liberated themselves, it seems, by clapping on their wrists the vices that beset their brothers; they have not adopted the virtues of their brothers, nor have they freed themselves from vices that are predominantly their own. Yes, now they are foulmouthed, drunken, boorish, and lewd; but not frank, not comradely, not farsighted, and not brave. Nor have they given up gossip, cattiness, manipulativeness, touchiness, and guile. It is a distressing sight; they do not know how sadly they have distorted the surpassing beauty of their sex. I spend most of the year teaching medieval and Renaissance poetry, including praises of women that our drab age can hardly fathom. How I miss sometimes, not the company of females, but the company of women!
A word to the Modern American Woman, if I may. Do you think you might take a little time out from smashing The Citadel, emasculating the YMCA, preaching the damnable lie that kids without their fathers will be fine, just fine, holding your families hostage to your own fulfillment, infantilizing schools and churches and helping to pave (along with a road crew from Gehenna) that great broad highway that brings Washington right into every living room and kitchen in the country -- do you think, I say, that you might take a break playing Evita Peron to teach your daughters to be decent women? I can deal with the boys -- if y'all would occasionally, just occasionally, clear out of the way. You deal with the girls. That, after all, is your business: "Older women should be reverent in their behavior, not slanderers, not addicted to drink, teaching what is good, so that they may train younger women to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled, chaste, good homemakers, under the guidance of their husbands, that the word of God may not be discredited" (Tt. 2:3-5). Could you kindly mind that business, so that before I die I may be able to read the love poetry of Spenser and Dante and not think that I have been deposited on the wrong planet?
Posted by Anthony Esolen at 11:48 PM | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c5ee953ef00d834bea01b69e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Feral Cats:
Comments
BRAVO!!!!! One of your finest contributions ever, Professor Esolen!
Posted by: James Altena | May 10, 2006 4:24:40 AM
Ahh, sweet liberty
Posted by: robert p | May 10, 2006 5:55:21 AM
The reverse (men acquiring the vices of women) also looms low on the horizon. When I asked a class of eighteen-year-olds yesterday who gossiped more, men or women, several students told me there was no difference. Our boys are learning to gossip and manipulate, but never learning to care about the individual, to nurture and esteem.
JPII's Theology of the Body is convicting in this respect: we are to lean into our gender-characteristic gifts, without failing to reach beyond ourselves to grow in the virtues of the other. A father who does not nurture is merely a man, but a father who does not lead is not even that.
Posted by: Daniel Propson | May 10, 2006 6:34:14 AM
When I asked a class of eighteen-year-olds yesterday who gossiped more, men or women, several students told me there was no difference.
Umm, that's nothing unique to teenagers - when I think of the gabbiest, most gossip-loving people I know, of all ages, they include more men than women, up into their 90s. My dad finds out more than he probably needs or cares to know about his childhood farming community from another elderly man who calls with every scoop.
Posted by: Juli | May 10, 2006 6:54:01 AM
As an older woman myself, I have been thinking about these things for a while, and am in agreement that there is something more feral and threatening about, say, a gang of jostling girls in public than all but the most cutthroat males. It is imperative that girls be socialized into strong, winsome, deeply happy and virtuous women. If there is anything unprettier and sadder than our contemporary Dudettes, I haven't seen it.
There is a hideous and endemic perversion however of Tt. 2:3-5, that I call The Female Enforcer. A woman who "forms" her daughters and their cohorts with the motive of pleasing the Alpha Males, rather than out of love of God's truth and her charges, wields an invidious, coercive, alienating club. The primary purpose of the training to which you refer is for the honor/credit of the word of God, not to accommodate the well-schooled aesthetics of men. It's a subtle difference, but any young woman who has experienced it will tell you it's Day, and Night.
Incidentally, if even the church-y American male didn't behave like a 24-karat idiot in reference to women's youth and looks, if he reinforced gravity, character, and duty with attention and obvious brotherly affection [thank God I'm in a church that does!], a lot would change very quickly in the values, allegiances, and behavior of women.
Posted by: dilys | May 10, 2006 7:04:17 AM
"The good Lord shows His great care for us in that the shamelessness of the feminine sex is checked by shyness as with a sort of bit. For if the woman were to run after the man, no flesh would be saved." -- St John of the Ladder (c. a long time ago)
Posted by: Fr Joseph Huneycutt | May 10, 2006 8:10:10 AM
How did it come to this, that these girls are so utterly devoid of what separates us from the lower orders?
Shame is the shawl of Pink
In which we wrap the Soul
To keep it from infesting Eyes--
The elemental Veil
Which helpless Nature drops
When pushed upon a scene
Repugnant to her probity--
Shame is the tint divine.
(Emily Dickinson)
Or, as Mark Twain so wisely put it,
"Man is the only animal that blushes. Or needs to."
Posted by: maria horvath | May 10, 2006 9:29:59 AM
Congrats to Prof for above comments. Now that our young ladies show the worst qualities that boys displayed over the centuries. This is not called Progress.
Posted by: Gerard E. | May 10, 2006 9:54:27 AM
Agreed professor. And agreed as well DILYS.
Posted by: Steve Cavanaugh | May 10, 2006 10:00:45 AM
Very a propos! Bravo, indeed!! More of the same, please!
Posted by: Patricia Gonzalez | May 10, 2006 10:38:53 AM
...do you think, I say, that you might take a break playing Evita Peron to teach your daughters to be decent women?
Because if you don't, there are barbarians waiting at the gate eager to do so -- with burqa, whip, and Koran.
Posted by: Ken | May 10, 2006 11:04:16 AM
I can deal with the boys
Great - I was wondering when someone would offer to do that. What percentage of violent crime is committed by "the boys," would you say?
there is something more feral and threatening about, say, a gang of jostling girls in public than all but the most cutthroat males
As a woman, I've never felt threatened by a gang of girls or women. By the time I was about 13, however, I had learned to cross streets to avoid walking past even small "gangs" of boys/men. One of the benefits of reaching middle age was becoming invisible to men like that, who seem to use women and girls as props to show off for each other.
Because if you don't, there are barbarians waiting at the gate eager to do so -- with burqa, whip, and Koran.
Of course we should raise our daughters to respect themselves, but what is the implied message here? Should we become teetotallers by choice while we still have a choice?
Posted by: Juli | May 10, 2006 11:50:41 AM
The men lead, the women follow. I don't believe for a minute that American women have sluttified themselves over the objections of the men.
Posted by: Gintas | May 10, 2006 1:09:47 PM
I have a suggestion for how parents can teach their daughters to be decent women: don't let them be inundated by idealized images of women behaving indecently.
That means not watching television. I don't see any way around it. You can't expect your young daughter to behave one way when the opposite way is being held up to her as an ideal for hours each day.
But won't children be driven towards rebellion by rules, rules, rules? Maybe. So the answer is to not make the absence of television a matter of rules at all--but simply a matter of how the family lives.
But won't that make them not Fit In with the culture around them? Yes, that's precisely the goal.
It's like the kosher laws: the point is to help you think of yourself as belonging to a different world from the pagan cultures around you. If not watching television makes your children feel like they're "a people set apart," that's a good thing.
Posted by: Abigail | May 10, 2006 1:39:03 PM
Great post. (and it seems to have touched a nerve at open book.)
Posted by: Captoe | May 10, 2006 1:56:02 PM
I have a teenage daughter, and just as teenage girls were when I was her age in the 70s, she is driven by the need to impress her peers. The rules haven't changed: First, girls act shocking within a group. No need to perform without an audience. Second, adults in the audience are strangers. Had the girl at the donut shop looked up and saw Uncle Tony at the next table she likely would have changed the subject. Third, and most important, teenage boys must be impressed by the shocking behavior or the girls wouldn't do it.
So if you want to tame the feral cats, teach your sons not to be attracted to "Girls Gone Wild".
Good luck with that.
Posted by: Sue B. | May 10, 2006 2:25:40 PM
Great post! I laughed at the last line, especially because that is how I often feel as well. My mother taught me that coarse language is the sign of a limited vocabulary. I firmly believe that women inspire men to greatness, particularly in manners, and that if enough women cleaned up their acts, refined their speech and cultivated grace and civility, we would have far fewer brutes running around, both male and female. How to make it happen? I think it starts in the Church with precisely the verses mentioned by Dr. Esolen. How to make that happen? Hmm... any ideas?
Posted by: Lucy | May 10, 2006 2:41:28 PM
I have a suggestion for how parents can teach their daughters to be decent women: don't let them be inundated by idealized images of women behaving indecently.
That means not watching television. I don't see any way around it. You can't expect your young daughter to behave one way when the opposite way is being held up to her as an ideal for hours each day.
Amen.
But you still have to deal with what they see just walking around in the world. When our six-year-old daughter first saw girls with midrifts and/or shoulders exposed, my wife explained to her that these girls were "showing-off" for the boys and that it was wrong. She did not have to go into explicit detail and my daughter understood the message, if not the complete reason. Now, when she sees a girl or young woman so adorned, she says, "She's showing off," in a tone that conveys appropriate disapproval.
The men lead, the women follow. I don't believe for a minute that American women have sluttified themselves over the objections of the men.
Men are pigs and always have been. I know, I am one. I have a good friend with three daughters who says his greatest fear is that they will end up dating someone like him -- that is, like what he was like when he was dating. Fatherhood use to be a curative for this (as it was with my friend), but now we have far too many households without fathers. Real fathers insist on their daughters being modest and teach their sons to aid in guarding the honor of the women in the house. The reason young men use to treat young girls better is in part because the fathers saw to it. If women want to know why fathers are necessary, that would be a good place to start. Left to their own, boys will grow into men but remain pigs all of their lives.
Posted by: GL | May 10, 2006 2:57:19 PM
Dr. Esolen, Thank you! That was a great post!
"So if you want to tame the feral cats, teach your sons not to be attracted to "Girls Gone Wild"."
Exactly! Most young men, indeed the vast majority, ignore nice, modest, well-behaved girls (like me, I'm strongly tempted to say) and run after the feral cats, and even the most grounded of young women sometimes craves a bit of that attention, and is tempted to do anything for it. When you've known what it's like to be the girl whom no one asks out, who never gets asked to dance at a dance or party, and who's never told by anyone but her relatives and girlfriends that she looks nice, you'll understand the temptation.
Agreed, GL. My father is the greatest check imaginable on my behavior and dress, because if I "acted up" it would break his heart. I also fear the scorn, horror, or worse yet laughter of a dearly beloved and admired professor and a close friend at school (who I'd very much like to marry someday, although the chances of him loving someone as plain and as unworthy of him as I am are slim to none) (both are men, obviously) if I misbehave; to lose their respect and friendship would be horrible. Good men can act as a check on women's behavior, so please raise your sons to ignore feral cats and fall for nice little domestic kitties.
Posted by: luthien the nasty den mother | May 10, 2006 3:24:35 PM
In the 1960s, when I was a young woman, I spent a lot of time on public transportation in Philadelphia. Twice I was set upon verbally and slightly physically by groups of teenage girls, and a couple of times just verbally. I never experienced the same thing from boys or men. On the other hand, while hitchhiking (I know, I was stupid!) I was once picked up by a young man who threatened to take me to his house and "do things" to me. I sternly told him he was not to do that and to take me right home, and he obeyed. I was much more frightened of groups of girls than of groups of boys. Of course, what happened to me might have been random chance, and things might be different now, but my point is that girls have been "going wild" for some time now.
Posted by: Judy Warner | May 11, 2006 7:59:08 AM
Another comment on another subject: I agree with those who said to cut out the TV. What you really have to do is to create a subculture for your daughters (and sons) in which there are the proper role models and mores. Choose movies carefully and emphasize old ones where treating women well is taken for granted, and decent women are the norm. Read old children's books to them, not modern ones where the empowerment of girls is the main theme, no matter what the genre or plot. And if you possibly can, homeschool them.
My daughter's games with her friends were almost all based on books, or historical periods read about in fiction. They were Laura and Mary on the prairie, Pevensie children in Narnia, colonial kids in America, wives and daughters of Civil War soldiers, and later, Jane Austen characters. Needless to say, their view of what a woman should be is vastly different from that of the popular culture. And of course this was helped along in my daughter's case by a father who treated her with great respect and with high expectations. (She and her friends have grown up to function extremely well in the larger world, by the way, though I have been accused of bringing her up weirdly.)
Posted by: Judy Warner | May 11, 2006 8:07:18 AM
Bravo, professor, excellent piece.
I'm sure the hysterical reaction to even daring to suggest that women are different and should be raised with a completely different set of virtues than men is building as we speak...
Perhaps reading Spencer and Donne to my daughters and smashing the TV in the street is a good place for me to start their ethical formation....
Posted by: Random.Brown | May 11, 2006 1:19:53 PM
The blessings of "equality!"
Equality, as a mathetmatical concept, is amoral: it doesn't care what is on either side of "=", so long as they are equal. And numbers are abstracts. In real life, it seems to matter.
I have heard the argument that abortion on demand is essential to equality of the sexes, because it puts women on an equal basis with men, who have always been free to abandon their families. [!]
We have? That's news to me. In any case, feminists have a vested interest in male bad behavior, if that's what they want to do, and to justify it on equality grounds.
Back in the 70's, I read a piece by Adela Rogers St. John - ace Hearst female reporter and an old-line suffragette - in the National Observer (not to be confused with the National Enquirer) giving her take on modern feminists. According to her, the suffragettes believed that they offered a feminine perspective on issues - e.g., child labor - which was otherwise missing in our politics, and they felt that femininity was a good thing. Modern feminists, she observed, seemed to want to be men, which puzzled her.
Posted by: Jeff Sawtelle | May 13, 2006 8:47:45 AM








Recent Comments
Bloggers
Popular Threads
Archives
OLD ARCHIVES 2002-2004
From May 2002–December 2004, Mere Comments was published via Blogger.com. Every post is still available at the link above.
Member since 12/2004