Feminism and the War on Motherhood (Series: The Embrace of Exile | Part 2)

In the previous article in this series, I argued that many of the problems we face in the church and in society as a whole — abortion, gender-confusion ideologies, sexual immorality, divorce, pornography, and more — are the result of feminism. If we truly want to win this battle on all these fronts, the wisest strategy is not merely to fight the visible symptoms but to abolish feminist ideology and influence from our midst. These sins existed long before feminism, but feminism has laboured to normalize, defend, and institutionalize them.

Many women — and men as well — are confused because they believe feminism has a “good side,” or that some of its waves were beneficial. But feminism has been anti-Christian from its conception. Read the early architects of the movement, and you will find open hostility toward biblical womanhood, motherhood, and marriage. Feminism was never merely about protecting women from injustice; it was about redefining womanhood itself. From the beginning, it sought to erase the distinctions between men and women and to call women to pursue life as men have historically pursued it. (e.g., Shulamith Firestone called childbearing the "heart of woman’s oppression"; Simone de Beauvoir said no woman should be authorized to stay home raising children, as it would reinforce myths; Betty Friedan described homemakers in "comfortable concentration camps.")

Feminism has consistently portrayed the hallmarks of womanhood — motherhood, devotion to the home, gentleness, beauty, nurturing strength, submission to one’s husband — as weakness, insignificance, or even oppression. It tells women that their value lies not in embracing their God-given design but in imitating male patterns of achievement: careerism, public authority, and independence from family structures. According to this ideology, a woman can be anything she wants — except a traditional wife and mother who joyfully embraces her role under God’s design. What was advertised as liberation from male oppression was in reality liberation from womanhood as God created it. It is the ancient temptation renewed: freedom from the “oppressive” rule of God.

One of the clearest distinctions between men and women is a woman’s God-given ability to conceive, bear, and nourish new life. This is not incidental; it is glorious. To women was given the extraordinary calling of generating and nurturing image-bearers of God. Yet feminism has trained generations of women to see this as limiting, burdensome, or even degrading. Rather than being defined by their created nature, women are encouraged to construct their own identity and purpose. But Scripture teaches that true flourishing is not self-invention — it is joyful submission to God’s design.

It is, therefore, no accident that feminism has waged war on motherhood from the beginning. Motherhood stands directly in the way of autonomous self-definition. Women left their homes for the workplace — not because work itself is evil, but because the home was redefined as small, restrictive, and inferior. Even when women have children, they are often encouraged to outsource the daily practice of motherhood so that career advancement remains uninterrupted.

But that was not enough. If career becomes ultimate, children become obstacles. Contraception became essential, not only to avoid pregnancy but to avoid the natural rhythms of womanhood that interfere with uninterrupted productivity. And when contraception fails, abortion stands ready as the final safeguard of autonomy. If motherhood is undesirable, marriage itself becomes optional. Why marry a husband who leads and provides when independence is the highest good? Partnership replaces covenant. Sexual freedom replaces fidelity. Promiscuity carries fewer visible consequences in a culture armed with contraception and legalized abortion.

And what of the men? One of the earliest male sins was abdication of responsibility, as seen in Genesis 3. When women are told they do not need men, that they can pursue independence and sexual freedom, weak men gladly comply. They embrace pleasure without covenant, reward without responsibility. Pornography thrives in such soil. It allows men to consume intimacy without sacrifice, gratification without leadership. Feminism did not create male weakness, but it provided fertile ground for it. And from this disorder flow further confusions — including the broader sexual and gender chaos we now see. That development we will address later.

But we must see clearly: the rejection of motherhood is one of the foundational steps in this decline. When motherhood is rejected, God’s design is rejected. Children cease to be viewed as blessings, as arrows in the hand of a warrior, as an inheritance from the Lord. Instead, they are quietly treated as inconveniences — managed, outsourced, scheduled away. With many sending their children to daycare, to school, to programs, to church Sunday school, to camps — always seeking relief from the very blessing God entrusted to us. We would do well to remember how Jesus spoke of children.

If we desire restoration, women must once again recover a love for motherhood — not as cultural nostalgia, but as obedience to God. And men must lead by providing, protecting, and supporting their wives in that calling. Those who are childless — whether by singleness or providential limitation — must not grow resentful, but instead uphold and celebrate God’s design for the flourishing of society as a whole. When God’s order is honoured broadly, everyone benefits.

The rebuilding of society does not begin in parliaments or universities. It begins in the home. And the restoration of the home begins when we reject the ideology that taught us to despise what God declared good.

Nino Marques