When “Family Values” Mean “Sit Down, Woman”

The problem isn’t feminism—it’s the men too fragile to practice the values they preach.

Last week at a Turning Point USA college tour stop at LSU, conservative commentator Allie Beth Stuckey, just after stating that feminism has failed women, said something that shouldn’t be controversial for that crowd. She told men that porn has weakened them…that it objectifies women and children, commercializes sex, and glorifies violence—hardly a radical statement in a sane society. She didn’t call for a matriarchal revolution or the overthrow of patriarchy; she made a moral appeal that should’ve been applauded by every conservative in the room and beyond. Instead, she was met with the kind of venom usually reserved for feminists, the hosts of The View, and Nancy Pelosi.

Within hours, threads across social media filled with men calling her every name imaginable. Some cited Scripture to tell her to “remain silent”. Others mocked her tone, her marriage, even her looks. A few justified porn as a “necessary outlet” because women “don’t give men what they want.”

The message was unmistakable: moral accountability from a woman—any woman—is intolerable.

And that’s the point many women have been trying to make for years. The misogyny simmering inside parts of the conservative movement doesn’t just target liberals. It devours its own the moment a woman dares to step out of line.

The Fragile Faith of the Self-Appointed Patriarch

Conservatives love to preach about order, discipline, and moral responsibility. But when the topic turns to male accountability, suddenly those principles vanish. The same men who thump their chests about being “leaders of the household” will defend pornography, sneer at women who expect more, and waste entire evenings in front of a screen pretending to be warriors in video games instead of real ones in their own homes.

If men put half as much effort into protecting, providing, and preparing to lead a family as they do into Call of Duty marathons and OnlyFans subscriptions, women might actually see them as viable partners. Instead, many women look around and see a generation of men emotionally stunted, financially unstable, and spiritually adrift.

According to Morgan Stanley’s Rise of the SHEconomy report, by 2030 roughly 45 percent of American women ages 25 to 44 are expected to be unmarried. The report defines “single” simply as unmarried—not necessarily childless or unattached—but even so, the trend speaks volumes. Some interpret it as a failure of feminism. I see it as a failure of manhood. A society can’t sustain itself when too many men are too self-indulgent to build anything worth joining. That failure doesn’t just threaten households—it undermines the very political and moral order conservatives claim to defend. Women aren’t choosing solitude out of spite; they’re choosing stability in a landscape where too few men offer it or contribute to it.

Conservatism that doesn’t produce honorable men isn’t conserving anything.

It’s Not Only Feminist to Expect Men to Be Adults

I grew up in a church that spoke reverently about the biblical model of marriage: the husband leads, the wife follows—even though most real-life marriages I saw functioned as equal partnerships. Somewhere along the line, that teaching warped into an excuse for laziness and control.

Leadership is supposed to be sacrificial. It means serving your household, not expecting your wife to pick up the slack while you spend your evenings listening to misogynistic “Christian nationalist” podcasts and scrolling through Instagram models.

When a woman says she doesn’t want a husband who watches porn, she’s not being feminist—she’s being sane. When she asks for partnership instead of dependence, she’s not rebelling—she’s asking for dignity. Too many of today’s conservative men seem allergic to both responsibility and reflection.

The backlash to Stuckey proves the point: even a complementarian darling who rejects female pastors and preaches wifely submission isn’t safe from male scorn. Because the issue isn’t theology—it’s ego. A man who fears correction from a woman doesn’t want order; he wants obedience.

The Mirror Moment for Conservative Women

And now, conservative women themselves are finding that out the hard way. They are starting to feel the sting many of us felt years ago—when we critiqued spaces that confused male dominance with divine design. They’re realizing that some of their loudest allies in the “war for the family” don’t actually value women’s voices, even when those voices echo Scripture.

I’ve seen conservative women push back, saying: It’s not feminism for a woman to have a podcast. It’s not feminism for a woman to say, “Men, we need you to be better.” And they’re right that these aren’t feminist concepts alone. Speaking moral truth isn’t rebellion—it’s responsibility.

Unfortunately, watching women like Stuckey face this type of backlash feels very familiar for women like me. She’s running into the same wall every outspoken woman eventually hits: the moment she stops flattering fragile male egos, she becomes the enemy.

The question now is whether these women will begin to see that radical feminists were never their enemy at all. We were simply the canaries in the coal mine—warning that unchecked male authority eventually turns inward and starts eating its own.

My Exchange with a Heritage Fellow

Earlier this year, I found myself in a Twitter exchange with Delano Squires of the Heritage Foundation. He claimed radical feminism caused black women’s toxic empathy regarding gender ideology—making them view themselves as oppressors if they didn’t affirm every new rung on the “gender” ladder.

I responded that radical feminism actually opposes gender ideology entirely. It’s liberal feminism, not radical feminism, that tells men they can be women. Radical feminism has always been grounded in material reality—biological sex, the limits of the body, and the power dynamics that flow from them.

Squires cited Shulamith Firestone’s The Dialectic of Sex (1970) as proof that radical feminists wanted to “abolish sex distinctions.” But Firestone wasn’t celebrating gender confusion—she was analyzing how sex-based oppression functioned in a patriarchal society. By 1979, The Transsexual Empire by Janice Raymond had already critiqued transgender ideology from a radical feminist perspective—years before it was fashionable to do so.

I told him plainly: the existence of the slur TERF doesn’t prove radical feminism embraced gender ideology. It proves that women who defend biological reality needed to be discredited.

That’s the irony. Conservative men think they’re battling “radical feminism,” but what they’re really facing is the vacuum left by too many of their own refusing to act like grown men.

Shared Values, Different Language

I don’t believe radical feminism and conservatism are complete opposites. Where radical feminism seeks liberation through accountability—chiefly holding men accountable for the systems they build and maintain—authentic conservatism, when not warped by chauvinism, demands the same: order through self-governance and character.

So when I see conservative men railing against “radical feminism” while their peers defend pornography or mock women who expect better from them, I have to ask—what exactly are they conserving? Lust? Sloth? The illusion of authority without the burden of duty?

You can’t call yourself a traditional man while living like a perpetual adolescent.

The Conservative Feminist Isn’t an Oxymoron

The conservative movement doesn’t need fewer women like Allie Beth Stuckey. It needs more women who expect men to act like men—and men humble enough to prove they can. Because if your masculinity can’t withstand a woman’s moral conviction, it’s just insecurity.

The nation needs a conservatism that treats women not as handmaidens but as partners. A movement where male strength expresses itself in protection, not domination; in provision, not pride. Where moral clarity isn’t dismissed as “nagging” simply because it comes from a female’s mouth.

The truth is, a growing number of women aren’t rejecting marriage because they’re too empowered. They’re rejecting men who aren’t worth marrying. When nearly half of women in their child-bearing years choose singleness, that’s not a victory lap for feminism—it’s a distress signal about manhood.

If men want to reverse that trend, they need to show—not promise—that they are dependable, capable providers; men who can sustain a household, not just daydream about one. Show your intended partner that you are the kind of man who can protect, provide, and persevere—not that you could be someday after you “get your life together.” Responsibility first. Respect follows.

The Reckoning Ahead

This backlash against Stuckey should be a wake-up call to every conservative leader who built a platform on “restoring family values.” If your movement turns on a woman for condemning porn, it doesn’t value family—it values control.

What matters now is how prominent conservative men respond. Who defends her? Who stays silent? Who agrees with the mob because they share the same resentment toward women who dare to speak moral truth?

Either way, the mask is slipping. And women are watching.

For many of us, this moment isn’t surprising—it was inevitable. The men who preached order while living in indulgence were always going to expose themselves eventually. What’s different now is that the women they once used as mascots for submission are finally seeing the rot up close. My hope is that they don’t simply look away.

A Call to Men—and to Women

So where do we go from here? Men, if you truly care about saving the family, start by proving you can lead one. Develop skills. Build discipline. Earn trust. Demonstrate the character and consistency that make a woman believe she can build a life with you.

Women, stop mistaking silence for peace. Stop protecting egos that would gladly sacrifice you on the altar of “male headship.” You don’t have to trade dignity for belonging.

Real conservatism—and real feminism—both hinge on character. And character demands responsibility from everyone, not just women.

So no, it’s not “feminist infiltration” to expect men to be sober, faithful, and honorable. It’s the only kind of conservatism worth conserving.

A civilization where men are too fragile to be corrected by women will inevitably collapse. Strength without humility is tyranny, and any movement that punishes women for saying so has already lost its soul.