Get PJ Media on your Apple

PJM Lifestyle

Money: Is That What Girls Goddesses Really Want?

Part 3 in a biblical feminist's deconstruction of HBO's controversial portrait of the next generation's values and priorities.

by
Susan L.M. Goldberg

Bio

June 23, 2013 - 7:00 am

moneta

 

Last year Elizabeth Wurtzel issued a feminist tongue-lashing to stay-at-home mothers in the Atlantic. It was a bitter criticism embodying the foundational tenets of feminism: Men control money and because they control money, they are in charge:

And there really is only one kind of equality — it precedes all the emotional hullabaloo — and it’s economic. If you can’t pay your own rent, you are not an adult. You are a dependent. …[O]nce we get away from the scientific need for sustenance, it’s all gobbledygook.

For Wurtzel, being a feminist is synonymous with being independent, which translates into “earning my keep.” She has such a complete dependence on money that she has turned down everything from dates to marriage proposals for fear of becoming even slightly economically dependent on her male partner. While she doesn’t expect every woman to be as stringent a feminist as she is, for the sake of the cause, they should be just as dollar-dependent.

Her argument dates back further than the supposed corporate patriarchy she despises. Juno Moneta, the Roman goddess, symbolized the intertwining of security and money long before career feminists like Wurtzel began burning their marital bridges:

The origins of the modern English words “money” and “mint” lie in ancient Rome. In the period of the Roman Republic, from about 300 BC onwards, coins were made near the temple of the goddess Juno Moneta. It was located on the Capitol (the modern Campidoglio), the citadel of Rome. The goddess’s name, Moneta (“Warner” or “Reminder”) eventually came to refer to the place where the coins were made, the “mint,” and to its product, “money,” both of which derive ultimately from the Latin word moneta.

Under the guise of employing talent (Moneta was also credited with being the mother of the Muses), feminism’s “career drive” is rooted in a financial dependence that grants goddess-like powers of protection to money. In other words, it isn’t so much about “leaning in” as it is about cashing up. Ancient worshippers sacrificed a sow to Juno Moneta, a symbol of her pecuniary fertility. However, today’s worshippers pay a much higher price, sacrificing their own fertility for Moneta’s protection.

Comments are closed.

All Comments   (5)
All Comments   (5)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Articles like this remind me of one sad truth: "Idiocracy" was not a comedy, it was a Documentary from the future.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Girls is very sad - a bunch of losers living grim, unhappy lives so that someone somewhere thinks they are cool for being in New York.

Wurzel is right - motherhood is not a job, and it is part of life. She's also right that feminism is about having a job and supporting oneself. What she - and feminism - don't seem to understand is that jobs pale in importance and pleasure to having a family.

Why do most men want good jobs? So they can attract a good woman to be the mother of their children, then support those children with the proceeds of their employ. Why do non-feminist women want to be attractive? So they can attract a provider for their future children. But why does a feminist want a job? So they can have a job? Does a feminist want to be attractive? If so, why?

Once you are over 60, no cares about you unless you are rich, except your children. Enjoy your old age, feminists. Men and women who have well-raised children will be surrounded by loved ones, including grandchildren. What will you gals be doing during the Christmas holiday? Working? Bitching about your bosses? Hoping to get invited to parties so you can listen to other old people talk about their families? Oh, you can be like the women in Sex and the City shopping for shoes that no one else cares about.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
My take on season one was that these girls were simply lost. See http://clarespark.com/2012/07/29/girls-or-the-new-lost-generation/. It helps to have seen Lena Dunham's indie movie Tiny Furniture first.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
They look lost. I can't say. I'm 52 years old and I don't care about 22-year-old girls. They are, for the most part, not very interesting. They haven't lived long enough to be interesting. Even the great Lena Dunham is just a kid. Her situation, whatever it is, is temporary. By the time she's my age, it won't matter anymore. So who cares?

I'll leave "Girls" to its proper audience - other girls. It has nothing to say to me.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Why people watch this milndless crap is beyond me.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
View All