Liberty: Good. Innovation: Good; "tearing old ideas apart and remodeling the world": not necessarily good, not necessarily innovative, and not necessarily expansive of individual liberty. The Devil's in the details.
But I do take your point marron. We see in Iraq, for instance, a greater participation of women in civil society, and this has had a liberalizing effect on society in general, as it tries to move away from authoritarian or theocratic political models. If this trend continues, it ought to contribute to the overall prosperity and security of Iraq in the future, and so I hope and pray it all works out.
I'm just a little touchy about "feminism" in general, which is what I associated with Fowler's term, "Eve-flavored age." Frankly, I find feminism a puzzling term. Is Sarah Palin — a strong, self-determined, capable woman — a "feminist?"
When that term is used, I surmise what we're talking about is a person identifying with a radicalized group of females who either overtly or covertly detest and resent men, and whose "litmus test" of political association is the implacable demand for free access to abortion services at any stage of pre-born life or even after birth. Clearly Sarah Palin could not be described as a "feminist" on these terms, though Pelosi, Feinstein, Boxer, et al., certainly can.
Heaven knows I'm all for the advancement of women in society since I happen to be one myself. But I much prefer the Iraqi model to that of the Feminazis. It seems to me that the Iraqis are at least dealing in First Reality, while the organized feminists want to tear it apart and "remodel the world" in ways more conducive to their liking.
Just some more maunderings FWIW.... Thank you ever so much for your perceptive essay/post marron!
And with good reason. I was trying to re-draw a distinction. Fowler was trying to credit "Eve-flavored" movements with liberty and innovation and I was suggesting that its the reverse; greater liberty for women is indicative of greater liberty all around, and greater liberty leads to innovation (and here I'm assuming "innovation" as a positive).
Liberty isn't really a thing itself, its really a visible indication of something else, which is respect for your neighbor. Respect for your neighbor is the outward reflection of love of neighbor. Where love for your neighbor is generalized it manifests itself as respect for your neighbor and that produces "liberty".
Love for your neighbor must precede the legalisms; the legalisms merely formalize what already exists in the human heart with or without formal law.
This is why you can't impose liberty. Liberty grows as love of neighbor grows in a society and it dies as love in a society dies. What we understand as liberty comes very much out of a judeo-christian understanding of the proper relationship of humans with respect to their creator and with one another. Liberty isn't limited only to the judeo-christian world but it is limited to those societies in which love, respect, for ones neighbor is generalized.
Frankly, I find feminism a puzzling term. Is Sarah Palin — a strong, self-determined, capable woman — a "feminist?"
She's Sarah Palin. Just as you are you.
As I recall, Palin called herself a "feminist" and the head of NOW in Los Angeles agreed that she is and supported the ticket as did some of the Hillary supporters.
But there are probably even more women who call themselves "feminist" but really mean that they believe women are superior to men and that they must have the absolute right to kill their unborn for any cause as if that were proof of their power. Seems to me that such a worldview is an abomination to God and therefore to liberty itself.
In my view, the legal status of women in a society does not prevent the strong woman, e.g. Jael (Judges 4), Naomi and Ruth (Ruth), Esther (Esther). They do what must be done despite the constraints.
More importantly, the legal status of a women in society cannot prevent the woman who loves God above all else, e.g. Mary the mother of the Incarnate Word Jesus, Anna (Luke 2), Mary the sister of Martha (Luke 10), and others.
But weak women like weak men - and women like men who love themselves (or any thing or any one else) more than God - are of no good effect either for themselves or the ones in their sphere of influence.
My two cents...