Wednesday, January 31, 2007

If You Can't Join Them, Beat Them

People sometimes ask me why I have such a beef about feminism. The answer is that my direct personal experience of it has been entirely negative. And that is remarkable because as a Left-wing youth, a Philosophy student, I was one of its natural supporters.

I understand that there are responsible, articulate and reasonable feminists in the world, but the problem is that they are not the ones calling the shots.

I respect some feminists, such as Christina Hoff Sommers, Daphne Patai, and Wendy McElroy. But they are far outweighed by the number of feminists that I regard as a serious threat to civilised society, such as Valerie Solanas, Mary Daly, Catherine Mackinnon and Andrea Dworkin, to name just a few.

The problem with the feminist movement is that it has allowed itself to be appropriated by its own worst elements. I do not hear the rank and file of ordinary, supposedly responsible, women standing up for their men and their families, or challenging the, by any standards, absurd, sick and deluded theories of the radical elements. I do not hear the female majority standing up for its right to be heterosexual, defending jurisprudence, science, academia, classical liberal values, or in the US, the Constitution.

The liberal feminist movement won every victory that it needed to win thirty years ago, and more. Nowadays, it has succumbed to its own excess. It has become simply a cash-cow, a gravy train, a lucrative money-making enterprise which those who benefit just do not want to give up.

I am also tempted to think that women are simply not interested in things like jurisprudence, science, academia, and classical liberal values, and do not consider them worth defending. All they really seem to be interested in is their own social position. When women get access to university, all they want to study is their own 'oppression', and men indulge them, just like we always have.

The academic feminist establishment is little more than a totalitarian religious cult, preaching absurd, self-contradictory and self-serving dogma to gullible students. A degree in Women's Studies is not an education; it is an anti-education, a quasi-political,quasi-religious indoctrination into the belief that education itself is essentially elitist and pointless.

The domestic violence, rape and child abuse industries are lucrative sources of public-sector revenue, often doing their supposed beneficiaries more harm than good.

Feminism now encourages women to shirk every kind of responsibility, to behave like psychopaths, to treat those around them, and the societies in which they live, with open contempt. The only qualities a woman needs to have in order to be a good feminist are to be arrogant, selfish and verbally abusive. What kind of ethical program is that? For if feminism is not a program of ethics, then just what the hell is it? If it is not promoting social responsibility, then what is it there for?

Yet it promotes irresponsibility of every kind. The less ethical a woman is, the more praise she gets from feminists.

The people who pay the price are men, children, and women themselves. Children separated from their fathers grow up as troubled delinquints. Men go to prison on trumped up charges of rape and child abuse that never happened. Women live alone, spending their time scurrying around worrying if the man next to them is a rapist, postponing marriage indefinitely, postponing children until it is too late. The feminist conspiracy to destroy the Western family has wreaked havoc on a generation.

Feminism teaches women that the only path to success is the male path to success. If you are not performing like a man, then you are not really doing anything. Most women I know want to give up work and have a family, but feminism has done its best to prevent them from doing this, and preaches contempt for women who have.

I think there are those in the feminist movement who believe that men are all basically thugs, and that men do not respect anyone except another thug; That men will never respect women unless they are scared of them. This is deeply misguided. If I had been there at the time, I would have willingly fought against the great totalitarians like Hitler or Stalin. Dressing yourself in Stalin's clothes does not make me respect you. Quite the contrary. I will respect you if you appear rational, articulate and humane. If you appear to be irrational, vindictive and culturally destructive, I will fight you with every weapon I have.

I think to understand feminism properly, we have to look at adolescent female group behaviour. There is generally a dominant Queen Bee, who tells everyone else what to do. Like all such people, she is basically a ruthless psychopath. She invents rules for the other girls about what they are allowed to wear, and which boys they are allowed to talk to. The other girls just want to fit in socially, and are too weak and naive to stand up to the Queen Bee's authority. It's better to give yourself over to her dubious care, and belong, rather than to risk isolation. These same psycho-social mechanisms, I suspect, explain the successful takeover of the women's movement by its fascist and lesbian elements.

Such behaviour succeeds most effectively in tight-knit social groups, away from prying eyes, just like a cult religion. Feminism seems to have been immune from scrutiny for much of the last forty years or so. Initially, some men thought feminism was a joke, and didn't pay any attention. Those who took it seriously wanted to participate and were actively prevented. Meetings were always held in secret. A lot of women felt they could not object or divulge, for fear of betraying the sisterhood.

It is time now for some serious scrutiny.

If the female population ever manages to address these issues of who runs the show, and how, and what for, then I might let let up. Until then, as an anti-fascist libertarian, feminism is my principal enemy.

4 comments:

crankshaft said...

Hello heretic,

I like your post, but I'm curious, what do you believe in?

Should women have equal pay and rights to jobs?

The right to a safe abortion?

The right to protection from abusive men/stalkers/rapists?

The right to be who they want ro be - regardless or whether they choose to stay at home or go to work?

Which do you agree and disagree to?

jfpbookworm said...

I think to understand feminism properly

...you should actually read what feminists are saying, and not what conservatives claim they're saying.

Your list of feminists you "respect" appears to consist of those women who have appropriated the label of "feminist" to talk about why other feminists are wrong, rather than to assert any actual position.

On the other hand, your list of feminists who are a "serious threat to civilised society" is out of date and out of touch, and seems to be mostly a list of those most easily demonized by conservatives. (Seriously, Valerie Solanas?!)

Davout said...

Really, jfp,

Here's are some documented quotes by feminists (listed in quotes 18 and 19 in the comments section of the link below)

http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/01/28/a-case-for-feminism-overcoming-four-important-myths/#comments

The radical feminists (Brownmiller/Dworkin/Mackinnon/Russell) are the ones who's laws are on the books right now so while they are very much 'out of touch' with reality and always have been so, they are most certainly not 'out of date'.

I would like to know how either of you, crankshaft and jfpbookworm, would describe feminism?

Fidelbogen said...

We are still living with the LEGACY of those "out of date" feminists. This legacy is built into the foundation of our present world.

There seems to be a trend among younger feminists nowadays to distance themselves from the "nutcases" of yesteryear....

But scarcely any movement toward addressing or cleaning up the mess which those nutcases are responsible for creating in the first place. Instead, they are playing the classic, time-worm game of cognitive fragmentation....as always.

And...there are still plenty of nutcases among the younger generation as well, who are still cranking away to keep the wheels of feminism's perpetual revolution in motion.

The SCUM Manifesto, by Solanas, is an operative template for the entire women's movement, an early sketch of numerous ideas and developments which were later taken up by other feminists and have since become painfully familiar.

To my knowledge, Valerie Solanas was the most "perfect" feminist who ever lived. It's not my fault if some find her embarrassing.

There is a popular feminist grafitti poem which goes as follows:

"Women have their faults/Men have only two/Everything they say/And everything they do."

I don't have time to explain it here, but this little jingle is in effect the "short form" of the SCUM Manifesto. It is easily downloaded into the brain, and has operated quite powerfully over the years as a vector of memetic transmission for feminist ideology to the general female population.