"In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world." –John 16:33

San Pedro Garza Garcia

Tag: feminism

An article on the ignorance and evil of Marxist Feminism and Women’s Studies programs

There is little doubt that radical aspects of some stripes of feminism have done great damage to American society. There has been some pretty serious push-back against much of this ideology, not only by the likes of constitutional lawyer Phyllis Schlafly, but even by many avowed feminists intellectuals like Camille Paglia and Christiana Hoff Sommers. I ran into an incredible article titled Marxist Feminism’s Ruined Lives that starkly addresses this. It is on the evils of a particularly insidious variety of feminism called Marxist Feminism. This article is a must read for anyone with school age daughters. It was written by Mallory Millet, the sister of one of a radical feminist “intellectual” named Kate Millet who authored a notorious screed on feminism titled Sexual Politics.

Mallory spent years as an ex-pat in third world countries and it opened her eyes to the frivolity and evil of the Kate’s ideology. She was stunned when she finally returned to the United States and learned what Kate was doing.  The following is part of a prayer-like question and response heard by Mallory at a “consciousness-raising” event to which Kate invited her on her return to the United States:

“And how do we destroy the American Patriarch?” she replied.
“By taking away his power!”
“How do we do that?”
“By destroying monogamy!” they shouted.
“How can we destroy monogamy?”

Their answer left me dumbstruck, breathless, disbelieving my ears. Was I on planet earth? Who were these people?

“By promoting promiscuity, eroticism, prostitution and homosexuality!” they resounded.

Mallory thoughts on hearing this mantra are telling:

… I had seen factory workers and sex-slaves chained to walls.

How could they know? Asia is beyond our ken and, as they say, utterly inscrutable, and a kind of hell I never intended to revisit. I lived there, not junketed, not visited like sweet little tourists — I’d conducted households and tried to raise a child. I had outgrown the communism of my university days and was clumsily groping my way back to God.

How could twelve American women who were the most respectable types imaginable — clean and privileged graduates of esteemed institutions: Columbia, Radcliffe, Smith, Wellesley, Vassar; the uncle of one was Secretary of War under Franklin Roosevelt — plot such a thing? Most had advanced degrees and appeared cogent, bright, reasonable and good. How did these people rationally believe they could succeed with such vicious grandiosity? And why?

This article is a must read for anyone who has daughters heading off to college–especially to Women’s Studies programs. There is much to conclude from Mallory’s observations and she has many observations. One of the scariest one’s is this:

By the time Women’s Studies professors finish with your daughter, she will be a shell of the innocent girl you knew, who’s soon convinced that although she should be flopping down with every boy she fancies, she should not, by any means, get pregnant. And so, as a practitioner of promiscuity, she becomes a wizard of prevention techniques, especially abortion.

The goal of Women’s Liberation is to wear each female down to losing all empathy for boys, men or babies.

Please read the whole article.

Betty Blonde #168 – 03/09/2009
Betty Blonde #168
Click 
here or on the image to see full size strip.

Feminism, career women, and the stay at home mom

I wrote this post on career women a little over a week ago and got some interesting responses.  Matt Walsh very thoughtfully responds to a blog post titled I Look Down On Young Women With Husbands And Kids And I’m Not Sorry that characterizes the attitude about which I wrote.  Feminism is going to have to confront and defeat that kind of thinking if it is ever wants to be taken seriously, let alone capture the pro-life, high moral ground held by the early suffragists in America.

Boys are not well served in government school

Day 758 of 1000

There is an article by a self-described feminist, Christina Hoff Sommers, on how government schools serve boys (as opposed to girls) very poorly.  This is a fairly hot topic amongst homeschoolers.  I recently discussed this with Eric, a fellow homeschool parent with boys of school age.  We probably have different ideas about how boys should be raised and encourged in their masculinity, but we agree whole-heartedly that it necessary to raise and educate them differently from girls.  It is interesting that there is such a strong argument from a feminist worldview for allowing boys to be boys and avoid shoving girls toward career paths they might now want to follow.  Typical of her answers is the following:

Q: They would see this as a result of gendered socialization: of boys and girls being pushed down different paths. I assume that you see it as indicative of different preferences?

A: Yes. Of course gender identity is both biological and cultural. But we have had three generations of feminism encouraging children to enter different fields. And very little has changed. If you look at college majors, boys are still engineers and girls go into the helping professions. Many children will defy the stereotypes of their sex, but the majority seems to embody them. I think that’s a reality.

Sommers talks about faulty research and claims about research that do neither withstand scrutiny nor support the idea that girls should be raised, educated, mentored, and encouraged in the same way as boys.  I liked the article a lot.  It confirms my belief that we were saved from a lot of things by homeschooling that we never even considered.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén