Two recent news events have confirmed in my mind the fact that radical feminists are the most nefarious force in our society today. Our press labels every story involving one of their organizations as a being a “women’s rights issue” and that gives them an innocent podium from which to bellow their lies. This phenomenon has been written about extensively by William McGowen, Harry Stein and Bernard Goldberg in recent books suggesting that these “feminist” organizations have little to do with women, freedom or civil rights, but the opinions of these sound commentators are ignored by our media. It seems the journalists can’t wait more than a few seconds to unveil to the world their neutered credentials every time one of these statist harridans hyperventilates into a receiver or microphone.

The “big story” today is the Annika Sorenstam spectacle at the Bank of America Colonial tournament. This involves a professional female golfer who has graciously been allowed to play at what is usually a men’s only event. Supposedly, according to the news outlets, she’s “breaking ground” just by walking the links.

One can barely turn on one’s television or monitor without hearing or seeing something about her. From the intensity of the coverage you’d think Amelia Earhart herself had come back from the dead. I saw Sorenstam’s face and her triumphant fist on three different televisions (out of a possible six) while at the gym earlier tonight and Yahoo! has been running updates about her performance throughout the day. In The New York Times online edition all that is pictured for the Sports Section is her face and six print columns concern her. What group of people do these elitists think bother to read the sports pages anyway? Are not six columns on such a happening a blatant example of social engineering? Well, it doesn’t much matter as that paper’s credibility was ruined a long time ago.

This Sorenstam has lived up to her billing as not only is she an excellent golfer but she’s also a feminista poster child. She played up to her fans by saying: “My wedding was not even this big,"…alluding to her 1997 marriage to David Esch. "I must say I'm a little more nervous this week than I was at my wedding." Well, there it is, thirty years of radical indoctrination in two simple sentences.

Of course, it’s far from surprising that such a tale would involve a Swede. After all, the Swedish radical feminists are the ones who tried to pull the urinals out of their men’s bathrooms as urinals are yet another supposed sign of the diabolical “patriarchy.” Oh, I’ve never actually met a living breathing person who agrees with such an extremist view but that doesn’t matter to the hallucinogenic feministas. They’d explain away real people’s opinions as being corrupted by a “false consciousness” anyway. These savages spend their whole lives obsessed with men in the desperate desire to flee their own depressed, dysfunctional selves and it’s time everyone wakes up to the fact. Hopefully, they’ll stop treating them as hothouse flowers and more like the aggressive agitators they actually are.

So far I’ve only attacked the privileged cliques at NOW and Ms. Magazine but at present I will delegitimize the essence of this Sorenstram publicity circus once and for all. There’s no reason to be coy as the radical feminist carnival over her playing golf at a PGA event is all a ruse. Humanity is supposed to be cheering for this person as a great civil rights champion, even though the exact inverse of this situation would never be tolerated. Can you imagine a man being allowed to play a LPGA event? Heck no! That would be discrimination and sexism whereas Sorenstram is played up as representing freedom, dedication and perhaps even Krispy Kreme doughnuts. No, what this is all about is a vicious double standard disguised by mascara and mirrors. Neither the radical feminists nor their media sycophants want fairness or equality in any respect. If they did we’d see Tiger Woods line up at LPGA events and then protests would crescendo from here to Bellingham, Washington.

No, fairness for men is absolutely not in the feminista tarot cards. Soon we’ll see on one of their websites a piece that is an appropriate follow up to the Swede affair about how it is a fundamental American right for a woman to be allowed to earn two paychecks from two mutually exclusive guilds. It’ll become, in the radical feminist protocols, equivalent to the right of college students to free sex toys.

Any self-respecting journalist should be able to point out that radical feminism is antithetically opposed to the concept of fairness. The last thing these people would want is to be treated fairly or equally because that would mean a loss of privileges.

Another reason to resist going along with the tide of this “feel good” story is that it has been constructed on a sinister foundation of socialism. It assumes that a government or a court will “protect” females from more talented competition in their own leagues but simultaneously will allow them to dig for publicity and cash in other leagues that lack tariffs of their own. That is reason enough to hate the Sorenstram stunt because all hell, or the womyn’s law cabals, would be unleashed if a man tried to appear at a LPGA tournament.

The solution for this unfairness is the greatest invention on this earth which is, of course, the free market. The free market solves the whole problem for everybody. Male only events discriminatory? Fine, let all LPGA golfers play PGA events but we’ll also celebrate diversity by allowing the reverse. Then what will happen? Four or five female golfers may get purse money each year and the rest will get nothing. Men will win all the events and then guess what will happen? The radical feminists will shout sexism. Hence my point is proven that the radical feminist ideology and organizations are federally funded irrationality societies that find equality to be nauseating. However, if we end the protectionism the whole problem fizzles away.

What about the Martha Burk Masters fiasco? This is the other feminista cause celebre. Here we have another non-sequitur plot. In this orchestrated whine the tyrannical gender feminist belief system in all its anti-glory is illuminated (and dressed up in a pair of cargo pants and wondering when girls’ night out is set to begin).

I need only a couple of sentences to refute five thousand bloodless pages of PC claptrap on this topic. First, freedom of association is an inherent reason why people die to come to this land in the first place and if a bunch of fellas want to have their own private club that’s their own business. Second, we can see the malignant hypocrisy of it all with one small counter-example that we’ll call: “Bernard at Women’s Workout World.” Let’s say a ya-ya like myself goes down to the aforementioned exercise facility with a checkbook and a desire to join. They then respond by saying “This club is for women only.” What happens next? Answer: nothing. No lawyers, no organizational protests and no Boston Herald coverage. Nobody cares. The story is a non-starter. Even though I would love to work out at Women’s Workout World as it give all new meaning to the phrase “a room with a view” there’s no way anybody would rise to my defense. Where would all the radical feminist activists be? Why, they’d be on the other side of the club’s door trying to make sure I stayed out.

We are conditioned in our society to accept discrimination against men yet to be outraged every time a women’s organization hears the word “no.” The conditioning must now extinguish itself. We can’t let all the lapdog journalists run out of their sensitivity seminars to start a crusade over someone setting a simple boundary for these over-pampered miscreants. My suggestion to these radical feminists is that they find a little religion. My recommended destination for them would be to start attending services at “the church of minding your own business.”

Bernard Chapin