An Outdated and out-of-touch mentality

I was somewhat perplexed to read George Zammit’s letter Reasons Why Marriage Is On The Rocks (August 2). I found Mr Zammit’s letter to be nothing short of advocating a chauvinist society; a society that does not appreciate the beauty of the term “gender equality”; a society that bears very little, if any at all, respect for women.

Mr Zammit states: “I would not have allowed her to work since I am against married women working. I believed, and still do, that the woman’s place is in the home looking after her children” in reference to his wife’s career as a teacher prior to marrying him. By what right does Mr Zammit feel his wife needs to obtain his permission to have a job? By what right does Mr Zammit feel any man should decide matters for his wife? By what right does Mr Zammit feel that males should hold this air of superiority within a marriage? By what logic does Mr Zammit conclude that looking after the children is a woman’s job and not equally a man’s job? By what logic does Mr Zammit exclude the possibility of the father of the children giving his share in taking care of the children?

Mr Zammit then goes on to state: “Another reason why marriages are on the rocks is the University. Once women go to University and graduate their prime target is their career not the family. Once they get married, graduated women lead a very independent life and their marriage is one of convenience”. Might I ask what Mr Zammit means to imply here? Is he implying that women should be stopped from going to University? Is he implying that women should be deprived of the chance to obtain a higher education? Is he implying that us males should be scared of independent women? Is he implying that a woman has less of a right to have a career and a proper education than a man?

Mr Zammit then makes one final point when he states: “The latest nail in the coffin of marriage is the ‘separation of acquests’ as opposed to ‘the community of acquests’. What this means is that the husband and wife lead a separate life and there is simply nothing to bind them together”.

Perhaps Mr Zammit would have been more honest had he made this statement in a less diplomatic manner but more truthful to his line of thought, namely that what scares him in the separation of acquests as opposed to the community of acquests is that the woman is no longer dependent on her husband in order to make ends meet. What truly scares Mr Zammit is that the husband has lost his financial leverage over his wife.

Mr Zammit then makes a final statement when he states: “In the past 60 years I have never heard the Church leaders – the bishops – condemning the campaign encouraging women to go to work”.

Is Mr Zammit seriously advocating that the bishops should, like himself, join the chauvinist bandwagon of this outdated and out of touch mentality, which bases itself upon massive disrespect towards women? Does Mr Zammit seriously believe that it is Christian to regard women as being simply home carers and nothing else?

Mr Zammit, I too am saddened at the bishops’ silence, only my sadness stems from the fact that the bishops have never openly supported the call for more women to join the working world!

Published in The Times, Wednesday August 3rd 2011