Thursday, August 03, 2006
Feminism - so much has changed - for the worst
Off-hand comments on the following Human Events article, written by a young female college student:
Young Feminist Summit Scares Off Young
by Samantha Soller
Posted Aug 03, 2006
First thing that caught my eye, the use of the term "traditional feminism." I don't know if that makes too much sense, because feminism is so new (historically speaking), and secondly, it has degenerated so fast. In this respect, I don't think feminism was ever something that stood still long enough to be "traditional." I do understand what she is referring to, or so I think - it's more what I would call the women's movement or various currents of the larger women's movements, which started around the 60's and 70's.
Yes, I believe the above was something true when we look back at the beginnings of the women's movement, where major questionings regarding inequality of fundamental rights between men and women were put forth and the fight began for change.
It is almost impossible to define complex social movements and the ideologies that sustain them in just one sentence, but I would enlarge the reference to include three major axis: education, politics, work. These 3 in the public sphere, because the women's movement would have been a different animal altogether if another primordial axis had also not been present: the personal/relationship questionings between ideas/attitudes/behaviors between women and men. This also included vital questions regarding violence against women and sexuality, which also slightly pushed the terrain for questionings regarding violence against children.
This is the sad part about many of these women's movements and groups. What started out as myriad groups being led by and having healthy, brave women as participants, mutated into extremist, unreasonable groups which fueled tremendous hate against men and constructed reality into ultra manichean ideologies (women=great, men=horrible). This gets to be a very tiresome aspect of feminism. Feminist critique has been fundamental to expose inequality and injustice in numerous ways, but then many feminists went past a healthy and pointed critique to fall into nagging, self-pity, and a "blame men for everything" idiocy.
It's curious to note that homosexuals also highly cultivate this "I am a victim" cult, even when it's more than clear that so many of them are starkly privileged and/or perpetrators of various oppressive and/or violent behaviors, i.e., they are oppressors, not victims.
And voilà - the rubbish that a lot of feminism is today: a bunch of sexually dysfunctional women, i.e., man-hating homos, crass bisexuals and liberals; a lot of privileged women claiming to be victims; a lot of obsessed, dogmatic pro-abortionists.
Another fundamental point, it is starkly clear when we observe the attitudes, the mindset, and the behaviors of a lot of these feminist homos is that they behave towards other women in exactly the same way that they attack men for being sexually aggressive and disrespectful. This is one aspect of homosexuality that our society has yet to face. Clayton often blogs about how an abuse experience can evolve into a homosexual personality, but the opposite is also true. A lot of bi-homosexuals have their homosexual dysfunction as a way to victimize others, it's a violence/power dysfunction. This is particularly true for women, who are often in a position where they are unable to victimize men, so they turn their diseased minds towards other women.
How many decades before society grasps this truth? At the rate of current misinformation and ignorance levels, I would say at least ten to fifteen years.
I think I understood the above paragraph, but I am not entirely sure. What I understood was that the big criticism was that the "services" cater only to men - meaning if they had been for homo and bi women, then there wouldn't be such a problem. A lot of feminists are like that: pro-pornography, pro-prostitution, sexual harassers, and evidently these are almost always pro-homosexual.
Perhaps the majority of "feminists" today are homo and bisexuals. It would be interesting to find out approximately what the current ratio is. These ignorant, obsessive, dysfunctional women contaminated and destroyed a lot of the good environment of the early women's movement, they took over many academic Women's Studies dept.s, they took over many organizations and groups, as a result, they drove away a lot of good people and they continue to alienate many young women today.
I think many conservative women today correctly criticize many problems with current feminist and women's groups, but they don't give credit to the enormous beneficial changes that several currents of the women's movement brought to society in the last 40-100 years, sometimes through arduous struggle. This is a reasonably cheap attitude from conservative women. Apparently their way of trying to always keep their noses in the air as well, but one which I don't admire.
Young Feminist Summit Scares Off Young
by Samantha Soller
Posted Aug 03, 2006
When I attended the National Organization for Women’s (NOW) 40th annual conference and its Young Feminist Summit last week, I was trying to understand what happened to traditional feminism.
First thing that caught my eye, the use of the term "traditional feminism." I don't know if that makes too much sense, because feminism is so new (historically speaking), and secondly, it has degenerated so fast. In this respect, I don't think feminism was ever something that stood still long enough to be "traditional." I do understand what she is referring to, or so I think - it's more what I would call the women's movement or various currents of the larger women's movements, which started around the 60's and 70's.
While NOW still claims their goal is “to take action to bring about equality for all women,” that wasn’t even close to their message at the Conference.
Yes, I believe the above was something true when we look back at the beginnings of the women's movement, where major questionings regarding inequality of fundamental rights between men and women were put forth and the fight began for change.
So what is a feminist? Mr. Webster defines feminism as “the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes,” but I think his definition is a little outdated. Feminism, or the original suffragette movement, was about equality decades ago when brave young women fought for the right to vote and work outside the home.
It is almost impossible to define complex social movements and the ideologies that sustain them in just one sentence, but I would enlarge the reference to include three major axis: education, politics, work. These 3 in the public sphere, because the women's movement would have been a different animal altogether if another primordial axis had also not been present: the personal/relationship questionings between ideas/attitudes/behaviors between women and men. This also included vital questions regarding violence against women and sexuality, which also slightly pushed the terrain for questionings regarding violence against children.
As a college student today, I’ve been taught that being a feminist is much different and has nothing to do with equality.
This is the sad part about many of these women's movements and groups. What started out as myriad groups being led by and having healthy, brave women as participants, mutated into extremist, unreasonable groups which fueled tremendous hate against men and constructed reality into ultra manichean ideologies (women=great, men=horrible). This gets to be a very tiresome aspect of feminism. Feminist critique has been fundamental to expose inequality and injustice in numerous ways, but then many feminists went past a healthy and pointed critique to fall into nagging, self-pity, and a "blame men for everything" idiocy.
Their time was also consumed feeling sorry for themselves because they have this idea in their heads that men are the privileged class, and women are merely the oppressed.
It's curious to note that homosexuals also highly cultivate this "I am a victim" cult, even when it's more than clear that so many of them are starkly privileged and/or perpetrators of various oppressive and/or violent behaviors, i.e., they are oppressors, not victims.
The “I’m Not a Feminist, but…” Workshop was designed to explore feminist stereotypes. The audience determined that the average person thinks feminists are butch, sex-crazed, pro-abortion lesbians who never want to get married or have babies. If NOW members want young women -- and the rest of the world -- to respect them and their ideas and not accept these stereotypes, they ought not to perpetuate them.
Based on my exposure to feminists at Bucknell, the Conference, however, was exactly as I expected it to be. Women with spiked hair and tattoos walked around clad in tee shirts reading “I love my vibrator.”
[...]
The NOW feminist leaders praised women’s studies classes that focus on activism, and denounced people and groups that did not see a “rainbow of genders.”
And voilà - the rubbish that a lot of feminism is today: a bunch of sexually dysfunctional women, i.e., man-hating homos, crass bisexuals and liberals; a lot of privileged women claiming to be victims; a lot of obsessed, dogmatic pro-abortionists.
Another fundamental point, it is starkly clear when we observe the attitudes, the mindset, and the behaviors of a lot of these feminist homos is that they behave towards other women in exactly the same way that they attack men for being sexually aggressive and disrespectful. This is one aspect of homosexuality that our society has yet to face. Clayton often blogs about how an abuse experience can evolve into a homosexual personality, but the opposite is also true. A lot of bi-homosexuals have their homosexual dysfunction as a way to victimize others, it's a violence/power dysfunction. This is particularly true for women, who are often in a position where they are unable to victimize men, so they turn their diseased minds towards other women.
How many decades before society grasps this truth? At the rate of current misinformation and ignorance levels, I would say at least ten to fifteen years.
Even while tackling tough, important issues, the feminists turned them around. We were discussing the horrors of human sex trafficking and “sex tours,” and although the oppression and degradation of women was mentioned, many women in the room were more outraged that the services cater to men, the enemy!
I think I understood the above paragraph, but I am not entirely sure. What I understood was that the big criticism was that the "services" cater only to men - meaning if they had been for homo and bi women, then there wouldn't be such a problem. A lot of feminists are like that: pro-pornography, pro-prostitution, sexual harassers, and evidently these are almost always pro-homosexual.
Perhaps the majority of "feminists" today are homo and bisexuals. It would be interesting to find out approximately what the current ratio is. These ignorant, obsessive, dysfunctional women contaminated and destroyed a lot of the good environment of the early women's movement, they took over many academic Women's Studies dept.s, they took over many organizations and groups, as a result, they drove away a lot of good people and they continue to alienate many young women today.
I think many conservative women today correctly criticize many problems with current feminist and women's groups, but they don't give credit to the enormous beneficial changes that several currents of the women's movement brought to society in the last 40-100 years, sometimes through arduous struggle. This is a reasonably cheap attitude from conservative women. Apparently their way of trying to always keep their noses in the air as well, but one which I don't admire.
