Posted on 02/25/2006 9:37:42 AM PST by Khankrumthebulgar
"In their battle to erase sex differences in every facet of modern life, feminists have squared off against Mother Nature, and she's no feminist. All of these women who make the world worse by waging a destructive war between the sexes are at war with Mother Nature." Kate O'Bierne Tamara Scott-Williams
I sat riveted by a television programme on the cable station EWTN this week. Kate O'Bierne, author of the new book Women Who Make the World Worse purported that the feminist movement has hurt (American) women far more than it has helped them over the last 40 years.
O'Bierne's interview cited examples of how feminism has devastated American society: fracturing families; indicting little boys as oppressors and potential rapists; making American schools and workplaces into battlefields to advance feminist causes; and criticisng working mothers who afford their children "a soulless" daycare upbringing.
O'Beirne suggests that the feminist agenda is, at its core, not pro-female at all; it is instead anti-male, and she dismisses the prevailing feminist's line that men are the enemy of women's progress, suggesting that it is the professional feminists (Sen Hillary Clinton, Jane Fonda, Germaine Greer, Gloria Steinem and even "Carrie Bradshaw" of Sex and the City et al), that are most harming America and the rest of the world:
"The men in our lives can shape our views on the most destructive ideology afoot. I have long thought that if high-school boys had invited homely girls to the prom we might have been spared the feminist movement. We live with the destructive feminist agenda because the fathers or husbands of so many of them never failed to fail them. The views of these angry, abandoned women inform the modern women's movement."
O'Bierne is an excellent candidate for the feminist movement: she and her two sisters were raised by a single mother, and went to girl's schools until graduation from university and has the very "unfeminine" job of being the National Review's Washington editor, writing principally about Congress, politics, and domestic policy.
But she is not a feminist. She is the mother of two sons and theorises that American boys are hurting in schools because of the feminist movement. Feminising the classroom, she says, is to the detriment of (our) young men. Today "ants in the pants" disease is first being medicated by Ritalin et al, and diagnosed as ADD, instead of being accepted as normal and usual boy-child behaviour. The cast of Sex and the City (from left) Cynthia Nixon, Sarah Jessica Parker and Kristin Davis
Her position is supported by Michael Gurian, who in a Washington Post "Outlook" piece, Disappearing Act: Where Have the Men Gone?, reports that colleges and universities across the country are "grappling with the case of the mysteriously vanishing male".
He claims that radical feminist academics, theorists, and activists, in the name of "educational equity" are to blame for boys' alienation from the current American school system.
Reading achievement, he says, is one example of what feminism has wrought, what with the rewriting of textbooks to conform to their notions of gender equality.
At its 1973 convention, NOW resolved to take "dramatic action" to see that dangerous sex-role stereotypes were erased from textbooks, and within a year they had the Women's Educational Equity Act to advance their campaign with funding for alternative curricula that yielded stories about adventurous and brave women which little boys have little interest in reading.
Gurian explains that boys "dominate the failure statistics in our schools" beginning in elementary school and continuing through high school. Boys lag behind girls in reading ability, a disparity that persists into college. This diminished educational achievement consigns young men to the lowest-level jobs, lands plenty in prison, and takes many out of the long-term marriage pool.
He lobbies for the American abandonment of the "boys-are-privileged-but-the-girls-are-shortchanged emphasis of the last 20 years". This "emphasis" that has so disadvantaged American boys is the main thrust of feminist educational policy that is subsidised by millions of public dollars in the name of "educational equity".
Both Gurian and O'Bierne put forward that it is actually men - and boys - who are bearing a considerable amount of the actual suffering. "Millions of schoolboys are being feminised in American classrooms; boys' sports are in retreat in schools everywhere; the "gender gap" deforms local and national politics; millions of husbands and fathers (and wives and mothers) believe that men are not needed in the raising of children
The worst thing that the women's movement has done, O'Bierne says, is that it "put us at war with the men in our lives, the fathers, husbands, and sons who love and support us. Because men don't like arguing with women and naively assumed that if they gave feminists what they wanted they would be left alone, the allegedly fierce patriarchy collapsed in the face of the feminist assault.
The moral intimidation feminists inflict on men means that other women have to take on the modern, destructive women's movement. The feminist message is crippling to our daughters, but we mothers of sons in particular have to defend our offspring."
How a seemingly positive ideological push (femininism) applied to education can wreak havoc on the citizens of a country as soon as one generation later is frightening. How feminism - American women are the most empowered in the world - has emasculated American men through the educational system, makes me wonder what damage could be done by teaching our children in patois/Jamaican language.
It strikes me that the American gender politics in education has shown itself to be as divisive and destructive as our our language politics of "Jamaicans who speak English are privileged and Jamaicans who speak patois are shortchanged" could be. And that any move to start teaching our children in patois is not pro-Jamaican but is instead anti-progress.
I sat riveted by a television programme on the cable station EWTN this week. Kate O'Bierne, author of the new book Women Who Make the World Worse purported that the feminist movement has hurt (American) women far more than it has helped them over the last 40 years.
O'Bierne's interview cited examples of how feminism has devastated American society: fracturing families; indicting little boys as oppressors and potential rapists; making American schools and workplaces into battlefields to advance feminist causes; and criticisng working mothers who afford their children "a soulless" daycare upbringing.
O'Beirne suggests that the feminist agenda is, at its core, not pro-female at all; it is instead anti-male, and she dismisses the prevailing feminist's line that men are the enemy of women's progress, suggesting that it is the professional feminists (Sen Hillary Clinton, Jane Fonda, Germaine Greer, Gloria Steinem and even "Carrie Bradshaw" of Sex and the City et al), that are most harming America and the rest of the world:
"The men in our lives can shape our views on the most destructive ideology afoot. I have long thought that if high-school boys had invited homely girls to the prom we might have been spared the feminist movement. We live with the destructive feminist agenda because the fathers or husbands of so many of them never failed to fail them. The views of these angry, abandoned women inform the modern women's movement."
O'Bierne is an excellent candidate for the feminist movement: she and her two sisters were raised by a single mother, and went to girl's schools until graduation from university and has the very "unfeminine" job of being the National Review's Washington editor, writing principally about Congress, politics, and domestic policy.
But she is not a feminist. She is the mother of two sons and theorises that American boys are hurting in schools because of the feminist movement. Feminising the classroom, she says, is to the detriment of (our) young men. Today "ants in the pants" disease is first being medicated by Ritalin et al, and diagnosed as ADD, instead of being accepted as normal and usual boy-child behaviour. The cast of Sex and the City (from left) Cynthia Nixon, Sarah Jessica Parker and Kristin Davis
Her position is supported by Michael Gurian, who in a Washington Post "Outlook" piece, Disappearing Act: Where Have the Men Gone?, reports that colleges and universities across the country are "grappling with the case of the mysteriously vanishing male".
He claims that radical feminist academics, theorists, and activists, in the name of "educational equity" are to blame for boys' alienation from the current American school system.
Reading achievement, he says, is one example of what feminism has wrought, what with the rewriting of textbooks to conform to their notions of gender equality.
At its 1973 convention, NOW resolved to take "dramatic action" to see that dangerous sex-role stereotypes were erased from textbooks, and within a year they had the Women's Educational Equity Act to advance their campaign with funding for alternative curricula that yielded stories about adventurous and brave women which little boys have little interest in reading.
Gurian explains that boys "dominate the failure statistics in our schools" beginning in elementary school and continuing through high school. Boys lag behind girls in reading ability, a disparity that persists into college. This diminished educational achievement consigns young men to the lowest-level jobs, lands plenty in prison, and takes many out of the long-term marriage pool.
He lobbies for the American abandonment of the "boys-are-privileged-but-the-girls-are-shortchanged emphasis of the last 20 years". This "emphasis" that has so disadvantaged American boys is the main thrust of feminist educational policy that is subsidised by millions of public dollars in the name of "educational equity".
Both Gurian and O'Bierne put forward that it is actually men - and boys - who are bearing a considerable amount of the actual suffering. "Millions of schoolboys are being feminised in American classrooms; boys' sports are in retreat in schools everywhere; the "gender gap" deforms local and national politics; millions of husbands and fathers (and wives and mothers) believe that men are not needed in the raising of children
The worst thing that the women's movement has done, O'Bierne says, is that it "put us at war with the men in our lives, the fathers, husbands, and sons who love and support us. Because men don't like arguing with women and naively assumed that if they gave feminists what they wanted they would be left alone, the allegedly fierce patriarchy collapsed in the face of the feminist assault.
The moral intimidation feminists inflict on men means that other women have to take on the modern, destructive women's movement. The feminist message is crippling to our daughters, but we mothers of sons in particular have to defend our offspring."
How a seemingly positive ideological push (femininism) applied to education can wreak havoc on the citizens of a country as soon as one generation later is frightening. How feminism - American women are the most empowered in the world - has emasculated American men through the educational system, makes me wonder what damage could be done by teaching our children in patois/Jamaican language.
It strikes me that the American gender politics in education has shown itself to be as divisive and destructive as our our language politics of "Jamaicans who speak English are privileged and Jamaicans who speak patois are shortchanged" could be. And that any move to start teaching our children in patois is not pro-Jamaican but is instead anti-progress.
Fortunately, most American women never bought into this, thanks largely to Phyllis Shaffley. My own daughter told me that she watched me do the career woman thing and decided it was not worth it. Her life is more like that of her grandmother and a whole lot easier than my own.
This is one reason why we are hated by many countries.
The U.S. is now the mother of harlots, and many nations don't want their poisons and destructions to come to their families. So, they fight back...
Can you blame them
One of my nutty professors (one of the nuttiest) recently discussed the growing evidence that boys, rather than girls, are being short-changed in schools, and inferred it was just a plot by the patriarchal Establishment to cut the feminist movement short.
Bump!
Bump!
I don't think you can blame feminism for all the crap that goes on these days. The blame largerly belongs to liberal idiocy in general.
My Lady Wife (a liberated woman who graduated HS in '70) is in complete agreement with the author of this piece.
"Of course men and women are different." she says often. "Vive le difference!"
An example she cites is that perhaps only 1% of women have the physical size, physical and mental toughness, and (important) the desire to be a police officer or firefighter. Why, then, should we attempt to have 50% of our police officers and firefighters be female?
That being said, if anyone said that a female who meets all the physical and mental requirements to do any job should be denied opportunity based solely on gender, she'd oppose that strongly.
Interestingly, we find our tall, powerful, tomboyish daughter being squeezed into the gender role determined for her by radical feminists. If even the boys are prevented from acting like boys, what about tomboys? Competitive games like tag and dodgeball are being suppressed because they are "too violent, damage self-esteem, emphasize competition rather than cooperation, and involve physical contact between students." She loves tag and dodgeball!
At the same time, she's not supposed to want a home and children. Once she's in a financial position to do so, she wants to start a family (while permanently married to her children's full-time father.) No, no, say the feminists. That's not good.
It's the radical-male-hater feminists that is using the systems to destroy us(God & Family) from within...
Their are alot of good feminists that I love and listen too.
These male-haters types need help, but how can we help them ?
"My Lady Wife (a liberated woman who graduated HS in '70) is in complete agreement with the author of this piece.
"Of course men and women are different." she says often. "Vive le difference!" "
If she'd gone to French class, she'd know it's "Vive LA difference." It takes the feminine article. ;-)
Wealth is more to blame than ideology. People cooperate out of necessity. If one is able to live independently, one does not have to negotiate, argue, kowtow, etc. With the availability of welfare, bonds of family, work, community have weakened. Couple wealth with mass communication indoctrinating false ideas of happiness and you have little motivation for young men to apply themselves in any particular direction.
Feminism is like most of the other isms, part of a long running Communist effort to divide and conquer. Free societies are especially vulnerable to them.
Communism is grounded in class warfare. It was initially mostly an economic system where the haves were set against the have-nots. It later evolved into a sociopolitical system when it became obvious it would be a flop as an economic system.
Setting groups against each other, even if problems have to be artificially created, is a way to fragment a society to make it easier to take over.
Taking the testosterone out of maleness is one way to make them compliant and easy to manage. Destroying natures naturalness creates confusion. All are to set the stage for the demand for a strong government to step in and restore order.
That is what the violations of the 2nd Amendment are about, giving the criminals the upper hand. The same for the demanding of rights for criminals and terrorists, to make them stronger so that we demand a strong government reaction.
Communists intend the opposite of what they pretend! Be ever alert!
She took Spanish and German- not French.
Blame my incompetent transliteration of her frequent quote.
for ater reading
for later reading
Phyllis Schlafly is definitely one of the reasons may American women, politicians and people of influence did not buy into the Equal Rights Amendment. We owe her a debt.
Of course, in my opinion, Mike Adams does a better job than ANYONE today poking fun at the Feminists. Read his most recent article at:
http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/mikeadams/2006/02/24/187680.html
On reason there are so few feminists is similar to the reason there are so few communists in this country...ridicule works, because it is appropriate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.