Peer into the dark heart of radical feminism, and you’ll get a glimpse of a seething caldron of delusion, phobia, and paranoia.
Visit the N.O.W. website and you’ll see dark warnings that “women are still not receiving equal pay for equal work.” Things are even worse at the National Abortion Rights League, which alerts us that President Bush “has waged a tireless war on women’s reproductive rights and personal privacy.”
But the greatest feminist boogeyman is domestic violence. No other issue so propels the luna-chicks into a wailing convulsion of breast-beating and hair-pulling.
As a service to my readers, I must state the following warning: DV HYSTERIA IS HIGHLY CONTAGIOUS. The only known way to prevent the spread of this condition is to inoculate yourself with the facts. So let’s see what the research has to say.
Recently the Journal of Family Psychology reported on a national survey of married and co-habiting partners. In 4.6% of the couples, the woman had engaged in “severe” partner violence, compared to only 2.1% of couples with male violence. [www.smu.edu/experts/study-documents/family-violence-study-may2006.pdf]
Just two weeks ago University of New Hampshire researcher Murray Straus spoke at a New York City conference to share his latest research on dating violence. His conclusions told the same story: female-only violence is twice as common as male-only violence – not just in the United States, but in 32 nations around the world. [pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/]
Got that? More often than not it’s the woman who’s violent, and the man is on the receiving end of the abuse.
Now prepare yourself for the ideological onslaught.
Here’s feminist icon Gloria Steinem: “Patriarchy requires violence or the subliminal threat of violence in order to maintain itself. . . The most dangerous situation for a woman is not an unknown man in the street, or even the enemy in wartime, but a husband or lover in the isolation of their own home.”
But it’s not just a few miscreant wife-beaters — “It’s every man and in every class of society,” according to Gudrun Schyman, founder of the Swedish Feminist Initiative.
That settles it, hubbies. All these years you thought you were a dutiful protector for your family. But it turns out you’re really a perpetrator.
Sometimes DV hysteria erupts into an incoherent rant. Here’s Lis Wiehl writing for Fox News just last week: “This is one plague that doesn’t discriminate. It affects all women equally, whether rich, poor, religious, non-religious, black, or white.”
Not to interrupt a good catharsis, Ms. Wiehl, but you might want to re-read the fifth and sixth paragraphs of this column. As I’m sure your Harvard Law profs told you, always read the evidence before you render an opinion.
Feminist dementia even impairs persons’ ability to perform simple arithmetic. This month’s issue of Mother Jones features domestic violence statistics. Blithely ignorant of the research, the issue claims that 73% of abuse victims are female and 15% are men. [www.motherjones.com/news/featurex/2005/07/dv_stats.html]
Let’s see, 73 plus 15 equals 88. Whatever happened to the other 12%? Oh there I go again, being so linear.
Ann Coulter’s latest book, Godless: The Church of Liberalism devotes an entire chapter to our national epidemic of “Sobbing, Hysterical Women.” This coming week thousands of these sad-sack fems will congregate in New York City to attend a VDAY celebration organized by Eve Ensler. Anyone who has heard of Ensler’s raunchy Vagina Monologues knows this will be no ladies’ sewing circle.
On Monday, June 12 the faithful are being summoned to attend Ensler’s “once-in-a-lifetime” reading of her play Necessary Targets. The story highlights the plight of female refugees in the Bosnian civil conflict. The moral of the play: if only peace-lovin’ women were put in charge, war would come to an end and the gender utopia could commence.
This time around, a two-week purification ritual is being called for.
So VDAY will continue with late-night monologues, rants, and ritualistic chanting about female genitalia. The festival will conclude on June 27 with a 5K run through Prospect Park to exorcise any remaining demons. [www.untiltheviolencestops.org/go.php]
Feminism has morphed from an enlightened social movement into high-octane mass hysteria, shunning reason and fact in its compulsive quest to flog the long-dead horse of patriarchy. This movement has become the beneficiary of billions of dollars in government largesse, much of which is channeled in programs designed to recruit ever-more women into its seductive fold.
Abuse hysteria is on the move and poses a threat to the well-being of millions of normal, happy women. That makes it worthy of a full-fledged psychiatric diagnosis. Here it is: FIPH – feminist-induced phobic hysteria.
Rate this post:
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
Stumble It!
Hal said,
I wonder how many people will go to see the 5k
“run” in the park? Ugly fat chicks with a really bad attitude. Can’t wait to see that.
Oh sorry, that’s so patronizing of me.
June 9, 2006 at 5:07 am
jimsmith8888 said,
Take an ugly chick, generally fat, make her look and act like a low-class Archie Bunker type man, add a little hate and anger, and guess what you’ve got? Something very, very nasty. You might even say you’ve got a beast on your hands. But what you’ve really got is a feminist! That is what a feminist looks like.
These are women who have never had a guy give them so much as the time of day. They are not happy campers, and as such want to ruin men’s and, of course, other women’s (especially those who are happily married with kids) lives.
Why do these hate filled perverts (yes, perverts! who promote homosexual pedophilia to our kids in our schools) have so much power in our society? That might be the really scary part of the whole story…
June 9, 2006 at 7:57 am
melissaTX said,
Like most liberal projects, why let the facts get in the way of a good rant….all women need to know to be swayed to the dark side is that they are victims and don’t need to think for themselves.
This is succint and yet still priceless:
Feminism has morphed from an enlightened social movement into high-octane mass hysteria, shunning reason and fact in its compulsive quest to flog the long-dead horse of patriarchy.
If you don’t know it already, THIS is their goal:
gender utopia
It’s never been about equality, it’s always been about supercession and domination.
June 9, 2006 at 7:59 am
PolishKnight said,
Feminism has morphed from an enlightened social movement into high-octane mass hysteria, shunning reason and fact in its compulsive quest to flog the long-dead horse of patriarchy.
I suppose the same could be said of marxism: At one time, marxists were enlightened, likable social activists who sought to create government programs to help and protect the poor, the common worker, and the middle class. Now, they’re largely a bunch of raving mad hiding-in-the-attic lunatics or power hungry anarchists.
Was the feminist movement ever truly enlightened? I recall growing up during the 70’s and seeing career women make it a point to pick up the dinner check, but this largely came across due to insecurity rather than sincere commitment to equality. But you know the saying: Morality is about how we act when nobody is looking.
Even in the beginning, feminism’s commitment to equal rights including men has always been a bit lackluster. Do you recall the women’s suffragists making a big deal about women needing to live up to military obligations to earn their votes? Feminism has always sold it’s “egalitarian” agenda to women as getting to put their hands in the cookie jar without having to pay for it.
When women got these rights, it didn’t take very long for feminists to realize that it wouldn’t take men very long to start asking when women would live up to their end of the bargain. At this point, with their backs against the wall, they had to develop a pre-emptive attack: Equality means judging women as perpetual entitled victims and men as perpetual obligated oppressors. It’s no accident.
Feminists do have one point though: There is no dead horse of patriarchy because they’ve been riding that one-trick pony all along. Do you really think that they would have gotten away with such nonsense if chivalry hadn’t given them a free ride all along? Can you imagine racial and ethnic minorities even in this white-guilt society getting away with such behaviour?
Feminists live in a constant fear of the Patriarchy pulling the rug out from under them even as they’ve become increasingly dependent upon it. The current state of world events with Islam puts them even more up against the wall. Imagine… for a moment… after a few decades with Mexican and Islamic immigrants becoming family court judges. Can you see them towing the same chivalrous line?
The gender utopia that was sold to normal heterosexual women was that they would all get high paying hobby jobs with men paying the bills and cooking and cleaning while she went shoe shopping. For a brief period of time, which should be looked back on as “the happy times”, it came true: Aging baby boomers married Gen-X career women and it was possible to double-dip. Women could all seemingly get a breadwinner and housecleaner. Times have changed to say the least. The “big tent” of leftism has come to include so many diverse special interest groups that the upper-class-white-woman no longer can get an audience to listen to how oppressed she is. Fiddle dee dee, it’s all gone with the wind!
June 9, 2006 at 8:24 am
roger said,
And THAT is when they get PISSED.
And THAT is when they get VIOLENT!!
June 9, 2006 at 10:35 am
Denis said,
Polishknight, I agree with much of your post. However, the same-sex marriage movement is all about continuing the worn out feminist agenda although in a stealth-like manner. The radical feminists are largely man-hating lesbians. They’ve had a free ride via feminism for a long time. Feminism is now under attack. That is why those promoting “gay rights”, same-sex marriage have have been making themselves visible, and pushing their agenda so actively (unexpectedly to many American’s). Same-sex marriage is overwhelmingly a lesbian cause. Gay men are too promiscous generally to care all that much about marriage. Women have all the rights in marriage (and elsewhere) today. America is living in a sickening point in history. America is suffocating in sexist policies which openly and unconstitutionally discriminate against a father’s fundamental right to be in the family, to be a property owner, and to raise his children. For all men and for all fathers these are dark days reminiscent of Jim Crow.
Setting up same-sex marriage in law will permanently keep husbands and fathers in these dark days of Jim Crow. There will be nothing special or unique that male husbands and fathers bring to a marriage and family. A: woman + woman will be just as valid as: man + woman. The only problem is that women already have all the advantages institutionalized in their favor because they are women. Lesbians can benefit from these special rights and privileges because they are women also,and are pushing to get additional special rights and privileges for being lesbians.
This will further weaken husbands and fathers and make it impossible for men’s rights activists to turn their situation around, and improve the current situation for husbands and fathers in the law via fair legislation. Additionaly, there will be more harrassment laws, employment laws, etc., all favoring women who are lesbians, at the expense of men. The gay agenda seeks to perpetuate the war on men that the lesbian feminists started via the feminist movement. We’ve had 40+ years of a war on men by the feminists under the guise of women’s rights. Unless men get active and fight the gay agenda there will be another front in this war on men (for another 40+ years) under the guise of gay rights.
June 9, 2006 at 10:58 am
Gus Owens said,
American women have painted themselves into a corner. Only 28% of them identify themselves as “feminists” now. The old “I am Woman, I am Invincible” sounds like an old Nazi marching song. But they can’t admit to themselves or anybody else that they have been conned in a big way. They can either rant and rave hysterically or just not let the subject of feminism come up in conversation. Has anyone else noticed that you can talk about race in social situations but not feminism?
However at some point, maybe 2008, it will become clear that much of feminism was a scam. Remember the soccer boom? Or women in the military? TWO female generals, Barbara harris and Janet Karpinski, were involved in Abu Ghraib along with Lynne England. Thanks for the help.
Time and events, as usual, will tell.
Nice to be back with you guys. Oldbullfrog.
June 9, 2006 at 6:02 pm
DcFather said,
It is now such a widespread pandemic that disputing it with facts will get you anything from a “high tech lynching” to prosecution for not showing remorse for something you didn’t do, to having your children confiscated by the feminist police state and having your wealth and income seized for the privilege of having your children taken away.
Today I’m feeling particularly sorry for the children who will probably have to live in this nightmare all of their lives, and not just the boys but also the girls who will find that marrying their best friend, and making fatherless children and false allegations of rape are the keys to success.
June 9, 2006 at 9:43 pm
Hal said,
Maybe, but I’m not sure. A real man likes to open doors for real women. In the South, you get a smile and a thank you, still. Twenty-five years ago I got the finger when I did it for a New York “woman”. Down here we still teach our children to say “Yes-sir” and “No-sir”. I asked one of those New Yorkers if they do that, and she was offended that I would even ask - “Of course we don’t”, she said. “I’m not going to teach my children to be inferior”. I guess to a liberal (which all feminist wack-jobs are), showing respect is a sign of inferiority.
June 10, 2006 at 5:16 am
PolishKnight said,
I appreciate your concerns about same-sex marriage and would like you to elaborate. I fail to see how this is a larger threat to hetersexual marriage. I also don’t see how “uniqueness” helps heterosexual marrage any. I also see how it hurts lesbians: They would be eligible for same-sex divorce.
And feminism is under attack? Even Ann Coulter doesn’t spend as much time attacking feminism directly so much as it’s by-products: abortion rights and lesbianism. Good ol’ man bashing in the family courts largely is still A-ok.
I think same-sex marriage discussion is useful as a kind of Stalingrad bell-weather issue. But I don’t see it on a practical or even hard-core political level.
While U.S. women are beginning to want to get away from the feminist label, they are still largely contanimated by the demands and expectations that feminism created. Politicians still pander to these women, not just radical feminists. Even so, their grip is fading which is why the Dems are staking their future on the dark horse of illegal immigrants and transforming the U.S. into a third world country rather than lose it (kind of reminds me of the old Hitler Bunker)
June 10, 2006 at 2:30 pm
PolishKnight said,
Maybe, but I’m not sure. A real man likes to open doors for real women.
That brings to mind the ol’ movie scene of a biker chick asking Clint Eastwood “You wouldn’t hit a lady, would you?” and Clint replies: “You’re no lady!”
I find the “real” term to be a bit self-depreciating. Why not just say gentleman? By the same token, a “lady” wouldn’t hold it against a man for not being gentlemanly.
One of the earliest recollections I have of the way American women were transformed into harpies not by radical feminism, but rather by chivalry combined with materialism helped along by feminism was watching a poor, slouch-jawed young man being screamed at, in public, by a young woman standing by the passenger side car door “I’m WAITING!!!!”
In the states and Britain, chivalry because a largely one-sided deal with men being servants and doormats.
June 10, 2006 at 2:40 pm