Weak, Weak Women
By J. Grant Swank Jr. (04/24/07)
It is stupefying how females can undercut their own children while proclaiming themselves to be 21st-century liberated.
Example: Sheila is married to a philanderer. She was warned concerning him before marrying him. She wedded him nevertheless — against all sanity.
Now she has birthed two children to him. But he has decided the marriage was a mistake; therefore, it is convenient for him to find another woman. "Another woman" is nothing new to him. It’s been a long line of "another woman" for years.
Yet he demands rights to see his two children. There is no legal separation or divorce from Sheila. It’s simply the immoral, selfish male having his dictate abided by his wife.
In the meantime, the rest of us see two children woefully abused. They visit their father who lives with another woman. The children are pre-school age. This is terribly confusing to them.
The little girl said to her grandfather, "My daddy has a girl friend."
That should have been alarm enough for the mother of that female child to defend her offspring at all lengths. No. Mother, still married to father — no legal anything but marriage-on-the-books — permits her daughter and son to see the philanderer at his beck and call.
The children visited their grandparents. The children visited them on terms not agreeable to the father. All that was pronounced by the father after the pleasant visit between grandchildren and grandparents. After!
The father informed his wife — the children’s mother — that HIS boundaries were to be abided by henceforth when the children were seeing the grandparents.
His boundaries? Yes, HIS boundaries.
This boundary business was related to the grandmother by the children’s mother. It was related as though it was now in cement. The philandering father had spoken!
Yet was it not time for all involved persons to quit bowing down before the adulterer’s autocratic decrees? A reasonable person would conclude so.
Question: Why did not mother inform husband that children would visit grandparents any time they wished and how the moral adults wished it? Further, that it was finally none of his business to dictate anything?
Weak.
Females, too many of them, turn weak at this point. They have been blindsided for so long that blindsided once again is merely a matter of course. It’s now "normal." God then rescue the helpless children caught in the devilish web.
All the while these two children are warped.
Who should be at the first line of defense concerning the children? The mother. Specifically, she the female should protect her female child from the abuse leveled against the female child by the father. She of course should also protect her male child.
In years to come, both children will be psychologically damaged by all that is going on in the present. Then will it be that adults knowing what is going on now will look back to wonder what they could have done to protect the abused children? No doubt.
But why don’t all sane, moral, child-sensitive adults in the present tense shut out the domineering, dictating father?
That’s the prime question, isn’t it?
In the meantime, two children continue daily to be abused on the deepest levels.
(Printer friendly version) Email: J. Grant Swank Jr.
