Direct Link to Latest News


Do Women Have Feminine Instincts?

July 6, 2014


Benjamin, a reader, challenges the idea
that women have a natural
loving instinct to sacrifice for husband and child.
I think he's wrong, but I present his argument for discussion.

"Mama bears are simply being demanding, angry, forceful, and pitiless.  This describes western women perfectly, where they are shielded from their natural state of veritable helplessness.  (Through the welfare state and feminist laws.)"

by Benjamin

Thank you for your article, "How the Rockefellers Re-Engineered Women"

I note, though, that you wrote, "for a woman, love is an instinctive act of self-sacrifice.  She gives herself to her husband and children and is fulfilled by seeing them thrive and  receiving their love, respect and gratitude. A woman makes this supreme sacrifice to only one man who will cherish her and provide for his family."

Dr Makow, I must ask you to look over that notion, again.  Much of it is simply romanticism, which is the fraternal twin of the brainwashing that you were denouncing in your article.

Sir, the truth is that there are approximately 0 women who are self-sacrificing.  And, there is no instinct of self-sacrifice in women; period.  When you wrote that, sir, you were projecting your own masculine virtues onto women.

Men are almost universally self-sacrificing.  (Which is why 94% of workplace deaths are men; and that percentage is even higher for battlefield deaths.)  Men do sacrifice, but are fulfilled when they see their women and children thrive.  None of that is true of women.  

In part because of these virtues, we men are entitled to love, respect, and gratitude.

You wrote that women make this "supreme sacrifice"... but sir I must take strong exception to that language.  Sir, only men make the supreme sacrifice.  Many, many men have intentionally gone knowingly into death in order to save or protect their women and children.  There is no history whatsoever of women exhibiting that behavior.  And, death is the "supreme sacrifice".

It is in no way a "supreme sacrifice", nor is it a sacrifice at all, for a woman to consent to being a wife, where she will be provided with food, clothing, and housing for the rest of her life.  That is not sacrifice... that is the definition of being a welfare recipient.  The opposite of sacrifice.

Likewise, it is not a sacrifice for women to have sex with men.  Women want to have sex, and they want to bear men's children. There is no sacrifice in that.


My dear sir, may I shed some light onto the real heterosexual contract?  Here it is:

A woman (or team of women) cannot produce, through her own efforts, sufficient calories and security to keep herself alive in a competitive environment. A man (or team of men) can produce much more calories and security than needed to keep himself alive in a competitive environment.

Woman offers (or her father offers on her behalf) her life-long service, allegiance, and sexual exclusivity to man.  She agrees to bear every child which he injects into her for 9 months, and nurse them through to the point that they can eat and walk on their own... (Papa takes it from there).  if the man will agree to keep her alive.  (Provision and protection)

In short, the agreement is:  Man receives help and love that he wants.  Woman receives a chance at long life, which she wants.

If she breaks this agreement, then he (and his tribe) revokes her life.  End of story.

You are completely correct, though, sir... that men instinctively want to fulfill this responsibility.  If a woman gives a man love, respect, help, and faithfulness... he wants to be very kind and generous to her.

Many people, when faced with the truth that women are in no way self-sacrificing, like to bring up the story of a mama bear, protecting her cubs.  But, mama bears are never self-sacrificing. They never go into a fight expecting to die, nor anything close to it.  Mama bears are simply being demanding, angry, forceful, and pitiless.  This describes western women perfectly, where they are shielded from their natural state of veritable helplessness.  (Through the welfare state and feminist laws.)

Women are only good to others (their husbands, and even their children) when they know that those men and children are the one reason, the one thing, that is keeping the woman alive.  Women "love" based on utility.  Men love self-sacrificingly.  To paint some other picture than this, is simply rolling back today's feminist propaganda back to yesterday's feminist propaganda.  Chivalry and woman-elevating were Feminism 101.

First Comment from Sean McGuinness:

I read Benjamin's article on your site earlier, and I think he is very incorrect. His views on the dynamic between the male and the female struck me as very despairing, a philosophy of hopelessness, and it seemed like he has already accepted defeat.

His argument is fundamentally flawed, and essentially hypocritical. He asserts that women do not self-sacrifice, because they want to bear men's children. This is very true, it is the natural way, the beautiful nature of womanhood, it is their instinct. He also correctly points out that men have similar instincts, to raise, provide for and protect their families. So why is it, then, that men are self-sacrificing for following their instincts, but women are selfish? Both sexes adhere to their nature because they feel happiest doing so - how can one be selfish, and the other be selfless? It makes no sense, it is a contradiction.

Women are the biggest victims of feminism, as feminism hates femininity and teaches that, to be liberated, a woman must behave like a man. Women who are alienated from their natural instincts often become deeply unhappy. Women are not designed to hate men, or view men as evil, they are designed to work in partnership with their husband to provide a safe and stable incubator in which to raise healthy, happy and well-balanced offspring.

A growing phenomenon is the male equivalent of feminism. It is the opposite side of the same coin - both teach that the opposite sex is working tirelessly to oppress, via the patriarchy/matriarchy. I feel it is very harmful social engineering. Yes, modern women have problems. Most of these problems are inserted into them by the same programming and social engineering we are all inflicted with from the cradle to the grave. Young women are encouraged to be promiscuous, hedonistic and materialistic, and view family and children as oppressive and boring. Young men are encouraged to have the very same outlook, to live life as eternal teenagers.

You have to wonder why, don't you? Dr. Makow, you have written excellently many times on the New World Order's agenda to divide the sexes and thus break up families, which in turn breaks up communities, which in turn makes nations susceptible to globalist takeover. The New World Order is waging a war on families, and not specifically on males alone. Families are the lynchpin of everything else that is good in the world, they cannot exist without the traditional family unit. Feminism is a very useful and effective weapon for them to achieve this aim, and so is the growing "men's rights movement". I urge anyone to look at both feminism and the MRM comparatively and objectively, and identify the differences - there aren't many. They preach the same things.

Women are human beings, equally as (no more, and no less) valuable than men. Both are essential for the continuation of the species. I am male, and many of the best people in my life are women. People should work together and focus on the real transgressors, rather than the opposite 50% of the human population. Doing this is exactly what families like the Rockefellers want, and they laugh when they see people doing it.

Sean McGuinness of

Scruples - the game of moral dillemas

Comments for "Do Women Have Feminine Instincts? "

Joe Ortiz said (July 8, 2014):

I have to agree with Benjamin to a great extent; albeit he may not know why he believes what he wrote. For the most part, a large throng of woman love their children more than they do their own husbands, virtually pampering them for most of their lives. That is not all that bad, a good mother should love their children, but not at the expense of their husbands.

God has a formula as to how a husband and wife should treat each other, and it's found in the book of Ephesians, chapter 5, verses 21 to 33 and it reads thus:

21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.

22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing[a] her by the washing with water through the word,27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

H said (July 7, 2014):

I'm 24 years old female living in Sweden and I've read articles posted at your sites for at least 2 years. There have been many times where I have wanted to comment but this time I felt I really need to send you a comment. Benjamin wrote that there are no self-sacrificing women - while this might be true for a lot of women, this does not apply for my mother. She has been supporting us ever since my father got sick. At one of the workplaces she puts up with bullying from her bosses. She could easily quit but doesn't so that she can support us. She's been doing this for years.

Now I also work to support my family and I do this without hesitation; they are everything I've got in this cold world. She still manages to cook, clean and sit and hang out with us. I know no one who would endure this and sometimes I wonder if I would be able to do this myself! Her self-sacrifice has set an example for me and my sisters and I would love to dedicate my life to my husband and future children - though I doubt I'll ever meet a man who wants to marry and have family now.

I don't want to write an essay, I just wanted to let you and your readers that there are women out there who are more than happy to live in a self-sacrificing way.

Ed said (July 7, 2014):

My experiences completely confirm the authors premise. I worked mostly with women for ten years and have had my education accelerated concerning women. Everything they do is ultimately self-serving. Has this always been the case? I don't know. But, it is the case now.

Through our culture, female privilege is constantly promoted. They simply expect it. I believe it was you who said: "Women like gay men because it normalizes their dysfunctional existence...I would add that it is also an easy source of drugs, which most cannot live without.

Everything a woman does is designed to extract resources from a man or daddy government. Every woman has a male "friend" at work to help out when she is tasked with something over her head. It matters not whether she is a man hating lesbian, or simply a feminist.

I understand some of the comments here defending women; but they are not founded on today's reality. If you criticize anything women do, you're a misogynist living in your mother's basement. The only reason women think they can survive without a man today is because of the above mentioned daddy government and/or modern technology...invented by men.

One glaring example of how far women have fallen is the fact that Tiger Woods had read that digging girlfriends. Did all 13 not know he was married? I think not. It was an easy way to extract wealth from an easy target by manipulating his perfectly natural instincts.

Not one commentary from the media or an Elder about the dangers of women. Tiger-bad; women-victim. For the last 5 years since, I have paid special attention the our Mother's Day and Father's Day sermon. On Mother's Day, it's all about how special mom is and how she sacrifices so much for the family.

On Father's Day, it's the opposite. Dad needs to man up and be better a father and be more romantic. horribly one-sided these messages are. Both of my sisters had their college tuition paid for right out of high school. In fact, I didn't even start college until in my 30's.

Recently my mom offered to help me pay to go to college full time. Sweet mom ( I am grateful ) only made this decision so that I will be in a better position to take care of her when she retires.

My stepdad is much older than her. She knows my sisters won't be there for her in her old age. She knows she can guilt/shame her only son into taking up this responsibility. In fact, she is so sure of it ( for good reason ) she even admitted to this being the reason she has decided to help me out after all these years when asked: "Why now mom?"

Cp said (July 7, 2014):

I challenge this guy to Google woman saves child and see how many stories he sees. It is inherent in woman's nature to save her child before herself, to put the child first, to nurture the child before herself. It doesn't mean it always happens. I think this man has good grounds for what he is saying about women being selfish, demanding pitiless etc.. It is is a trend that continues to grow as society demoralizes. Nevertheless there are women who still love their children and would do anything for them that would help them.
I would say that when it comes to men, women tend to withhold the love more than with their children. However in not choosing a good soul mate and protector for themselves, they adversely affect their children's lives as well as their own. This leads to a kind of bad love for the kids, like giving kids lots of presents to try and fill in for their father.

Women should choose men who will be good protectors, providers, leaders and soul mates to be husbands. Men should choose women who are compassionate, loving, determined and supportive for wives.

Rich S said (July 7, 2014):

Overall I agree with what Benjamin is saying, but I also think that Henry is right for various reasons.

Henry is right in what he is saying also because he is describing how women USED to be, because they WERE taught how to be a woman, a wife and how to take care of their man.

Benjamin is right in that he is describing how women are currently acting today, because they're no longer being taught how to take care of a man, to self-sacrifice or to put the marriage, man and children above themselves.

As the commenter Gabby said;Titus 2:4
'These older women must train the younger women to love their husbands and their children',
Why would the bible encourage the older women to teach the younger women a quality that is supposedly already with them?.

I find it more than curious that men are told to love their wives, but women are NO where in the bible told to love their husbands.

Elsa said (July 7, 2014):

What planet does Benjamin live on? Exactly. There are now several generations of men and women who have no clue as to how to behave towards one another, have never seen the lovely dance that is a true, considerate, Creator-honoring deference for other creatures, but it has not always been so. The warp and woof of society has been so altered by enemies of family that most today treat the idea of its existence as a mythical fairytale, having not seen the now-elusive phenomenon themselves.

As far as women losing a maternal instinct, nutritional studies have shown in human AND animals, that this is much more frequent in subjects consuming depleted foods, including much of what passes for food in modern society, and has been reversed with proper supplementation.

Linda K said (July 7, 2014):

Sean McGuinness said:

Women are the biggest victims of feminism...


Women are human beings, equally as (no more, and no less) valuable than men.

Succinctly written, nothing to add...thank you Sean.

Tim said (July 7, 2014):

Perhaps it's just the women I've met, there's plenty I haven't. But going on experience, I'd agree with the author.

My mother has called me in the past, talked about herself for 15 minutes, then asked how I am. I asked 'do you care'? She said 'No, not really'. We still talk, but that's her true character. I just have to accept her as she is.

I'm a single dad. Forced to take custody of my son because his mother has a severe case of Narcissistic Personality Disorder. I apparently chose a spouse like my mother. Sigh. She does nothing but obstruct, insult, threaten, manipulate etc..

I've met many men who can joke about themselves, who recognize that they are not their ego. I've never met a woman who has this awareness. Jeremy Clarkson made the joke: 'Being a man, I'm simply an ego wrapped in skin'. I can't imagine a woman making that joke.

My experience tells me this:

Men are hard on the outside, but soft on the inside. (They pretend to be tough, but are actually sensitive.)

Women are soft of the outside, but hard on the inside. (They pretend to be sensitive, but are actually self-obsessed)

James C said (July 7, 2014):

Benjamin, you are spot on.

Western men, during the past 100 plus years have been fed a whole lot of malarkey about the nature of the character of women through novels, poetry, magazines, plays, movies, and television. These various media depict women so unlike their real nature. Real-life women are nothing like the fantasy women of the media. This has nothing to do with intelligence, ability, or talent of women. It's about character. One must wonder if spreading all this nonsense about women was done on purpose to destroy the culture of western civilization.

Dan said (July 7, 2014):

I'm sorry that Ben's never been loved by a woman. Now he never will be, unless he can drop that wall of expectations he's erected around himself.

James T said (July 7, 2014):

With regard to Benjamin's article, does he realize what he's writing? His point amounts to presuming that women are incapable of genuine Love (Thus implying they aren't fully human beings), while assuming that it is self-evident in men, this seems like a genuinely misogynistic position to me, and not only is it intellectually untenable, but can be disproved with relatively little research, a point already proven by commenter Annette. His main flaw is the typical one born out of the bad seeds in the MRA movements which presume women are what the satanists in society have contrieved, that is, materialistic, scatter-brained, loving of creature comforts, and focused on worldly status gain... This is not the legitimate model of women, and has been engineered by the puppets of evil, it is a mockery of what women are, if he believes this is what women are naturally, then he is still sorely deceived, and being robbed of Truth.

The misuse of a bible quote in the comments further illustrates the ignorance from which this position is based. Every Christian worth his salt should know that you don't just pluck a sentance out of the bible and read a meaning out of it, you absolutely must have, and consider, the rest of the verses surrounding it to make sure it has the proper Context, if someone does cherry pick a favorable sentance out of a chapter, it is often because it favors their position only when it is separated from it's context. Reading that part of Titus 2 in it's proper context reveals that the verses are about giving good advice to Christians specifically: anyone reading this should be able to see that the verse does not imply young women cannot Love, but rather it is meant to go with the rest, to protect them from the deceptions and bad habits everyone falls into, there is advice for young men to be "self-controlled" as well. The notion that it means "women cannot love" is a grievous mistake, and in need of correction.

Finally, it must be understood that while men and women are Different, neither is more human than the other (Both have full sets of emotions, and are not deficient)... and to conclude anything otherwise, begs a re-examination of one's conclusions, since such conclusions do not line up with reality. Women most definitely have feminine instincts.

Connie said (July 6, 2014):


A man risks his life/health at physical labor to provide for and protect his family. Woman agrees to bear "every child which he injects into her," which amounts to several in the earlier days, and she risks her life with every pregnancy (hemorrhage, infection, etc.). She also takes his name, sacrificing her very identity to meld with his.

The nature of her sacrifice is emotional. It is nothing like the man's. Shouldn't be. If you make her cry, she is not being selfish. You have merely pushed her to the limit.

Modern life...
Of course a lot has been lost. A husband logs in at his job, say, at a bank, which taxes merely his key-striking fingers in calories expended. Someone's wife works alongside him; perhaps she is his boss. She's a mother, but the child is taken care of by someone else. The sacrifices like in the old days are gone.

Annette said (July 6, 2014):

What Ben is missing is that historically with women being dependent on a man through the social set up and childbirth, she gives up control over her whole life to become wife and mother. How many times did we hear stories when growing up of men leaving their wives for someone younger, or for various other reasons- just walking out to make a new life ?

A man can start his life anew until he is quite old; not so for a woman. Once she’s given up being the captain of her own ship, she’s at the mercy of the man. And if he decides he’s out there for any reason, her life is pretty much over with. I call that a pretty big sacrifice.

Ben said, “Sir, only men make the supreme sacrifice. Many, many men have intentionally gone knowingly into death in order to save or protect their women and children.” There is no history whatsoever of women exhibiting that behavior. And, death is the "supreme sacrifice". All I can say to this is, what a crock. What? Only men’s sacrifices count because they are more dramatic and seen outwardly by the world ? What about all the poor woman who sacrifice eating what they need so their children can be fed ? Here are two stories right here of woman sacrificing their lives, or putting them at risk for their children and just about any mother I know would sacrifice her life for her children. When men have sacrificed their lives, it is often been is war situations where only a man could do the physical job of holding off a predator, be they human or animal.

Men encircle the woman who encircles the child. This is the natural order. Ben forgets where all these behaviors originated- in the physical survival of the species. Both women and men have made the sacrifices that they have been called upon for the survival of the family and the tribe. Ben’s POV is nothing more but the same of sexist drivel we heard for hundreds of years. If a man does it, it’s somehow bigger and better, if a woman does it, it doesn’t count.

Mike KW said (July 6, 2014):

Women seem to behave in society as society "allows" them.


I can not remember the last time I saw women being respectful "by nature".....They all seem collectively as though THEY are goddess' and know it,... and us lowly men must "keep proving ourselves" over their "physical form".The endless game.

Countless women have more or less told me they don't want marriage,because then the man won't "try so hard" for her {ie : constant drama for today's over stimulated female masses} The Hum-drum of Daily Life will "Take Hold" {ie : Real Reality.}

So when a man finally gets sick to death of this endless "chase" for the same old gift to unwrap...and nothing else on offer because socially its frown upon to be a decent wife & mother with genuine gratitude resulting.....then you get guys like me that HAPPILY remove themselves from this insulting idiocy....and buy a games console instead.

I'll have to mull all this over again......{but, I'm still not subjecting myself to any more "relationships".I've got too much self respect for that ! lol}

Gabby said (July 6, 2014):

Going by the bible, no they do not. Titus Chapter 2 verse 4 says:

'These older women must train the younger women to love their husbands and their children',

Why would the bible encourage the older women to teach the younger women a quality that is supposedly already with them. Women generally do not naturally love, most need to be taught.

CF said (July 6, 2014):

The article, and all those commenting on it, make excellent points.

In other times, other eras, women were often referred to as «the weaker sex.» Obviously, for many reasons, that label will never fly today. However, in light of this article, that old, anti-PC label should be looked at more carefully.

Obviously, in general physical terms, women may be seen as (generally) weaker. Yet, there are, of course, exceptions, as well as evidence which proves that women may often have more endurance, in some areas, than men. It is in the mental/psychological realm that the differences really get interesting.

Humanity, in general, has unfortunately and repeatedly proved itself «weak», insofar as maintaining its hold on individuality and the reasoned thinking which protect an individual's rights. It may be observed and seen (documented by history itself) that of the two sexes, women seem particularly vulnerable to outside influences and societal peer pressure.

Whether due to circumstances of deprivation, of any and all kinds, or not; after careful review, it becomes clear that the «weakness» of women comes from an «instinctive» dependency on the group-think mentality. Please Note: This is not related to the intellectual capacities of women, which often excel and thrive in the more brainy pursuits and endeavors, far more than men.

The group-think dependency may have been (or still is) a long developed social tactic, enabling women (who do not yet have male «protectors») to survive without harassment and molestation. As society became more complicated, this seemingly innate strategy of social cohesion and strength morphed into what may be called the «weakness» to influence, that may be seen as the essence of that old, un-PC term; «the weaker sex.»

It is THAT weakness that makes women exceedingly vulnerable, in these times of relentless mental and physical manipulation; thus, easily perverting all that is wholesome and good in womanhood - including what some people refer to as «feminine instincts.»

Debra said (July 6, 2014):

I’m in agreement with Benjamin’s article wholeheartedly. I’m also not in disagreement with Magda. Is that a contradiction? No. The difference being, a woman gives and calls it sacrifice. Men (and I’m not one, so, I can only state what I observe) often give without bringing attention to giving as a sacrifice like women who insist on reminding everyone.

Magda said (July 6, 2014):

Pretty sure Benjamin does not have kids based on that article.

Our bodies change for child bearing, our breasts change due to breast feeding (doing the right thing), our weight yo-yos our eyes get dark cirlcles for the many sleepless nights. This altruism for those that practice it continues on to the school years. (highlighting here that there are moms that do not put in these hours by delegating this type of work)

Some of us become advocates for our children with teachers, or other students we are the soft place our families land on when they have no one at their side.

Is that not a is a welcome one.
Okay what about the mom who ensures that the house is quiet when the husband comes home and that lunch or dinner is cooked and that he gets a few hours rest before he chooses to partake in childcare?

See it all is relative, it depends on the family and what sacrifices certain women make for their family.

I myself home schooled for several years to ensure my kids got to figure out concepts at their own pace, this was done wholeheartedly and sadly at times even the children did not see the benefit.

So after clocking in the years and watching my husband's routine not change that much while mine yoyos depending on the stage my children are in...
There is one young man who sees the benefit of what I have done.

My son who told me at 17, that he is the man he is today because of me......

So Benjamin, my friend here it is, I have clocked in many hours of my time for my family without pay........

I have sacrificed material gains and have helped my family stay out of not many extra material stuff.

I deny myself these material things whilst I know that I could work and obtain them, however I realize that I must show the children were true value lies.

In the people and in the relationships and that money and material stuff have no intrinsic value.
I have ensured that my home is a place of beauty and safety for my family and that my person is even tempered for the most part.( have you been around 2 year olds who are going through tantrums and loudness till your head hurts and yet you still love them like crazy?)

I have contributed to raising people who are polite and conscientious.

Not just raising money.

Whilst not trivializing the providing role that men make and we love consistent fathers. Remember real men work regardless of whether they are providing for a family.

We make their work have tangible results, this should be satisfying.

Monitoring our efforts by looking at the fine young men and women who we helped bring to the world rather then just monitoring our bank accounts or our definition of wild fun.
I have, I have.....I have......

Wade said (July 6, 2014):

The author is absolutely correct to state that men are the gender that is by far and away
the most sacrificing. His examples of men's sacrifices are self evidently truthful, and salient points.

We must always keep in mind that the attack on the family by the satanic enemies of all mankind have always been focused and directed at men and fathers. As the Holy Bible tells us... If a household is to be ruined...the strongman of that household must first be bound.

The cult like worship of motherhood over fatherhood and women's so called pure intentions and pure hearts over the stereotype of the womanizing tyrannical husbands and fathers is critical to the Illuminati attempt to destroy the family. Virtually all of American society has fallen for these lies. Just consider the difference in the way we celebrate mother's day over father's day.

The horrible way women are treated in some Muslim Countries is further ammunition for this attack
on husbands and fathers in the West.

Basically the evil side, that would destroy the Western family, has already virtually won the battle. Men today are a dim reflection of the men that made up what we call the greatest generation. Men, women, and children, in the
West, with very few exceptions, are basically already defeated by the enemies of Christ (who are also the enemies of all mankind). The evidence of this defeat is all around us every day and continues to escalate.

John said (July 6, 2014):

I sympathize with Benjamin but he is just reacting to the re-engineered females that feminism has created. As you correctly point out many times, feminism has changed the true nature of women into something else. That is the whole point of feminism: to destroy natural woman. If Benjamin were ever fortunate enough to meet a woman not infected by feminism (very rare these days) he would see that woman's nature is truly giving.

H said (July 6, 2014):

I am a mother of 2 young children and I sacrifice for them everyday. I don't sacrifice for my husband compared to the way I do for my children. My husband does not sacrifice for the children as much as I do, but he does sacrifice for his family. This guy must not have much loving females in his life.

David said (July 6, 2014):

On Benjamin's thought-provoking article, after reading so many horrific stories over the years (and they seem to be increasing in our age) about biological mothers either committing, or conspiring in, the murders of their own children (usually helpless infants), I think the "maternal instinct" is a total myth. There are many women who are blessed with the gift of being good mothers, but it is not something programmed into the genetic makeup of the female of the human species. Sadly, too many stories out there of women sacrificing their offspring rather than standing up to the abusive boyfriend/stepfather/uncle in the relationship.

Eduardo from Brazil said (July 6, 2014):

When talking about the basic structure of the society, and Family, there is no other way to go than the Bible.

After the sin entered this world, things changed, and the objective of man and woman changed also.

God said to the woman:

To the woman he said, "I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you." Genesis 3:15

and to the man:

To Adam he said, "Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, 'You must not eat from it,' "Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat food from it all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field. Genesis 3:17-18

This is what we see over the centuries, the man labor for the Family, and the woman take cares of the children and is submissed (by design) to the man.

Can this submission be considered a punishment? yes, this sentence is about punishment. Same thing for the man, that needs to work very hard to take a few. Both where punished.

Since the beginning of the radio and television era, Satan is trying harder than ever to change this situation. God determined this because it is the way that would work. God does not want to see their children perish, but it is needed a punishment. This is education.

Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at