“Feminists” versus the Truth
“They insist that women’s choices are not truly free.”
There’s nothing more offensive to me than an article that leaps off the cliff in the first sentence by dropping the “as a woman, I…” bomb.
It doesn’t matter how the sentence ends; what matters is that the author, whoever she may be, believes that on some level her gender proves her point for her.
We’re meant to accept everything that follows because to dissent is to deny not only her opinion, but her equal footing in society.
Fortunately, conservatives are doing the work to fight back this flawed idea that feminism consists entirely of the full acceptance of womanhood as victimhood:
Women in America are the freest in the world, yet many feminists tell us women are oppressed. They advocate this falsehood through victim mentality propaganda and misleading statistics, such as the gender wage gap myth. In five minutes, American Enterprise Institute’s Christina Hoff Sommers tells you the truth about feminism.
One of the biggest mistakes the GOP has ever made is to think of women as this mysterious demographic, unattainable and uncomprehending in their pearls and their Ann Taylor sweater sets. For too long, we’ve let the left control the narrative and push this toxic idea that women are somehow “less than” because of policies Republicans support.
Like Christina says in the video, women today are the “freest and most liberated in human history.” Women like Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and the founders of the first female fraternities are remembered not because they asserted their gender as the worthiest part of themselves, but because they asserted their personhood in a world that resisted their participation in history-making.
I can’t be the only one who believes that Susan B. Anthony would literally gag on her own irrepressible anger if she saw this happening in society:
From spearheading a constitutional amendment securing the right to vote, to dressing up as vaginas and yelling at passers by about coat hanger abortions, you’ve totally come a long way, baby.
Totally.
Meanwhile, women as a group are doing great, but modern feminists are so wrapped up in their own dogma that they literally are incapable of acknowledging how far we’ve come:
These feminists hardly acknowledge women’s progress. Yes, they concede that some advances have been made, but the fact that most women reject their activist brand of feminism and think of themselves as “free” is for this crowd proof of just how entrenched patriarchy and inequality truly are. Women are so oppressed, they don’t even know it.
Feminists do everything they can—even going so far as to use flawed statistics on the gender wage gap, depression, eating disorders, and even criminal victimization—to convince women that “their choices are not truly free.”
This isn’t education—it’s manipulation.
And they call the patriarchy oppressive.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Women are not vaginas; they have brains and hearts.
And they work hard with brain, arms and legs.
Obviously, some of them are useless self appointed victims, as we can see in the video. But those don’t count.
If the modern feminist movement was interested in fighting real female inequality in the world it would focus its efforts on genuine female oppression: child brides, sex slavery, female genital mutilation, public stonings for women who’ve been raped, denying women the right to walk unaccompanied in public or to drive, etc. But, no, instead it’s topless rallies against calling women “sluts.” It’s declaring that women are just as capable as men while expecting men to continue to do all the heavy lifting and bare all the actual risks. It’s impassioned cries for a woman’s natural born right to kill her unborn baby the minute she decides she’s too busy to raise it or no longer wishes to date the father. And it’s reasoning that any time a woman regrets having sex then, clearly, she was raped and the man whom she enthusiastically coupled must be brought to justice.
The average feminist truly believes they are striving for equality but modern feminism is not about equality; It’s a first world female supremacy movement. Oh, they can chant “equality” until the cows come home but at the end of the day for what are they actually striving? Look closely at their arguments – they always boil down to a world where women have much less personal responsibility than men, experience far fewer negative consequences for their own choices than men, and where every first world male is considered a potential villain – even 5-year-old boys.
Deranged. Keep up the outreach efforts!
“There’s nothing more offensive to me than an article that leaps off the cliff in the first sentence by dropping the “as a woman, I…”
It must be really sad for you knowing that women are allowed to express themselves without your permission. 🙁
Because men preface their every statement with “As a man I …” especially when they are in family court where their voice is never heard. Because they need to feel that the world sees them as a man, not a person.
Take you and your crappy sexism and your bs racism to ISIS, maybe they will care about you as a unique snowflake of a human being.
Oh the tears. It must be so hard being so oppressed.
Isn’t that how you preface everything Tex Detriot? Because I am 100% sure that you are a man, and my guess an unmarried one a la pajama boy.
No. That’s how the straw-men in your head preface everything.
LOL and you never refuted what I said.
Why is it that men need to stand up for women? Can’t they do it on their own? I know that my wife doesn’t need my help but I guess that you will never know a woman that intimately.
You do understand that this article was written by a woman, doncha?
So?
Did you actually watch the first video start to finish? Do you disagree with anything in the first video? Or did you just skip it and jump directly to the comments?
You mean, did I sit through more of the same fact-free, self-serving propaganda? Not all of it.
What does that have to do with whether the author is a woman – you know, your first lame gotcha attempt?
Tex Detroit | September 23, 2014 at 1:11 pm
You mean, did I sit through more of the same fact-free, self-serving propaganda? Not all of it.
What does that have to do with whether the author is a woman – you know, your first lame gotcha attempt?
Project much? This is my first post on this article. I did not say anything about the author being a woman. I did asked if you even watched the video you are slamming and your response is “don’t have to”. How tolerant of you. For your information (since you said you did not watch the video) the video is full of facts. Facts that you might learn from if you are open to learning. Facts that show how modern feminists are twisting the truth to drive an addenda. I guess you don’t care if you are being used and long as it is by other women?
Well, you do all share the same hive-mind, so its easy to get y’all confused – especially when you but into to conversations you’re not apart of. So I apologize for not recognizing your delicate uniqueness.
And my response wasn’t “don’t have to”. It was more or less, “some of it”. See it before – the same fact-free ramblings in a new package, this time with a pleasant woman doing the selling rather than someone of actual power and influence among the GOP.
And unsupported musings, speculation, and value judgments aren’t “facts”. The video is a fact-free opinion piece. Learn the difference and maybe you’ll persuade more people.
Tex Detroit | September 23, 2014 at 3:44 pm
Well, you do all share the same hive-mind, so its easy to get y’all confused – especially when you but into to conversations you’re not apart of. So I apologize for not recognizing your delicate uniqueness.
And my response wasn’t “don’t have to”. It was more or less, “some of it”. See it before – the same fact-free ramblings in a new package, this time with a pleasant woman doing the selling rather than someone of actual power and influence among the GOP.
And unsupported musings, speculation, and value judgments aren’t “facts”. The video is a fact-free opinion piece. Learn the difference and maybe you’ll persuade more people.
WOW, again project much? So, “not all of it”. Does that mean you watched the first 3 seconds, made up your mind and moved on? It was not that long. You have [likely] spent far more time typing in comments dissing the video than it would have taken you to see the entire thing. If you had bothered to see the entire video you would have learned that it was full of facts. It just contradicts your “faith” about feminism and so you believe it can be safely ignored. Sounds like you are a full fledged member of the “community based reality” crowd. Good luck with that and have a nice day.
Like so many civil rights advocacies, the first step is to silence dissent among non-blacks, or among non-gays or in this case, among those who aren’t female. So, thank you Amy for speaking up for the silenced.
But I have a question, while feminists like to argue that men have no standing to comment on a range of issues, on what male issues do they reciprocate? I see none. And what is the justification for this nullity, perhaps that the decisions men make may affect the lives of women? Yet again, that reasoning does not reciprocate.
Can anyone distinguish between the new feminism and what we historically understood as fascism?
“Can anyone distinguish between the new feminism and what we historically understood as fascism?”
Yes. Sane people.
And isn’t this vapidly glib dismissal precisely the way of the fascist? Substantive dissent must not be honestly engaged; fascists direct their minions and media to put such dissent down with slanders of extremist, or racist, or sexist, or misogynist, or homophobe, or insane person. Where would disingenuous advocates be without ad hominem, the straw man, and hyperbole?
Those feminists. They’re hysterical.
The great feminist movement accomplished its goal and its members turned to other interests. The present-day “feminist” movement has little in comment with those women (actually, men, too. I know very well who passed most of that legislation.)
Title VII and Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, which provided that if the government spends money it must do so without regard to sex, accomplished the goals of the movement that sponsored the Equal Rights Amendment. The legislation got banks out of the business of denying mortgages to young families because the bank would that the wife of a family was going to quit working once she had kids.
The Equal Rights Amendment did not get passed because people recognized that the Constitution itself did not discriminate against women. The people in the various states, however, passed the ERA and imbedded it in their laws. This piecemeal approach gave the people of the individual states a more reliable mechanism for controlling the far-reaching cultural changes that were sure to result.
After that, all the healthy feminists were satisfied, and decided to put their energy into living their lives and raising their families in the manner that they chose.
The issues that gave the feminist movement in the United States its force are gone, because they were resolved in the feminists’ favor. Those who want to continue to call themselves feminists don’t have any popular issues, except opposition of the mistreatment of women by oppressive cultures outside the United States.
Before the ERA era ended, Ms. magazine used to regularly publish articles condemning the treatment of women in other countries, and most especially the practice of female genital mutilation (they called it “FGM”). I know this, because at one time, I read Ms. every month, and this is where I first encountered a description of the awful way women are treated under the laws, and more important, the customs, of some countries.
I find it odd that NOW can no longer even bring itself to comment on honor killings, much less FGM.
I cannot relate to the current-day “feminists.” These people have a lot of free-floating anger and they are disrespectful of both their freedoms.
I would appreciate an edit button. I really hate typos.
It literally takes 5 seconds to check out NOW’s work on FGM, honor killings, etc.
http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/5996/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=1899
http://www.now.org/cgi-bin/search.cgi?q=Honor+killing&x=45&y=16
How about OTC birth control? What is NOW’s stand on that? How about Ayaan Hirsi Ali where does NOW stand with her? Seems like the information about NOW’s stand on Ayaan Hirsi Ali is nothing.
But other women’s groups aren’t not very enthusiastic about her.
You mean, what is NOW’s stance on issues you ascribe value to because you think they advance your political goals? I’m not sure that’s how they work.
But I suspect that since NOW’s position on OTC birth control is that it’s bad alternative to what women have now because (a) it’s more expensive; and (b) hardly any of it is approved by the FDA for over the counter sale. Plus, as we all know, the “rights” sudden and spontaneous interest in OTC birth control is just a transparent attempt to try to woo women voters. But it doesn’t matter; you don’t think you have a problem, and thus won’t change your policies. And you don’t understand that your rancid policies and candidates are the problem. You think that women are just too stupid to know what’s good for them – which is another part of your problem, one you have no understanding of.
Alli is a advocate for the end of FGM, that was a goal you stated.
Or maybe PP makes a large percentage of their profit from running women through the infuriating process of getting a prescription for something that would have been long ago classified as OTC in any other context. Could it be that PP is all about money?
Interestingly I know women that face this stupidity every time they need a new birth control prescription. Take the hint NOW isn’t about women’s rights any more than liberals are for the downtrodden.
“Alli is a advocate for the end of FGM, that was a goal you stated.”
No. It was a goal several of you described as something that NOW DOESN”T ADDRESS/
“Or maybe PP makes a large percentage of their profit from running women through the infuriating process of getting a prescription for something that would have been long ago classified as OTC in any other context.”
And I’m betting you have evidence to support that speculation. Right?
“Could it be that PP is all about money?”
Yeah, they really rake it in providing low or no-cost services to women who can’t otherwise afford it.
“Interestingly I know women that face this stupidity every time they need a new birth control prescription.”
(a) Sure you do. (b) Argument by anecdote is neither “interesting” nor persuasive.
“Take the hint NOW isn’t about women’s rights any more than liberals are for the downtrodden.”
That would be the fact, and evidence-free “hint”, yes?
You posted “It literally takes 5 seconds to check out NOW’s work on FGM, honor killings, etc. .. ”
Did you forget what you posted?
“And I’m betting you have evidence to support that speculation. Right?”
Yup, check out the right wing site that tells you what to look for and then check out the financial statement by corporate to verify the numbers. Not that you will bother to read it because it is too much work to yah know actually understand and form an opinion.
“Yeah, they really rake it in providing low or no-cost services to women who can’t otherwise afford it.”
Wow, you are really are an idiot. I guess that because you are a liberal money doesn’t apply to you. Check out the financials corporate puts out. A huge percentage of their income comes from fees from the clinics. And where do those fees come from?
“(a) Sure you do. (b) Argument by anecdote is neither “interesting” nor persuasive.”
But no argument is even better.
“That would be the fact, and evidence-free “hint”, yes?”
Since it is difficult for you to form an opinion based on anything other than a liberal echo chamber. I have conveniently provided you some evidence just like mommy and daddy do when they let you stay in their house.
Wow, one student group ….
Multiples, but I know that sipping hot chocolate and thinking about how women are victims, could distract you from actually reading something.
You mean like how NOW repeatedly campaigns against FGM and honor killings? – you know, stuff that actually matters that you pretend they ignore?
Then why can’t they stomach FGM’s biggest detractor. She is black, she is she and she is an atheist. I wonder why they don’t help and support her?
Isms (racism, feminism, etc.) go corporate over time and when their existential offenses become rare, well, you just have to gin some up.
These purported feminists have resurrected the argument about compelling women into back-alley abortions. But they also agitate full-throated against having any kind of clinical standards for abortion halls, and fiercely resist any enforcement of those standards.
The resulting charnel houses are every bit as filthy, as dangerous, and as deadly as any of those so-called back-alley abortionists. Yet this is what they strive for; this is what they want to preserve.
In the face of this, we can no longer accept their fear-mongering screeching about back-alley abortions. Such houses of filth are exactly what they agitate to preserve.
This is how we know the feminist movement is no longer about feminism, but is just using feminism as a mechanism towards other leftist goals, even at the cost of the original feminism ideals and goals. Co-option. Same thing happened to Greenpeace, NAACP, etc.
The modern feminist movement is just like the modern environmental movement; usurped by Marxists, Communists and Anarchists. Go to a big rally for either cause and listen at the anti-capitalism. Often it’s discussed more than what they presume to be rallying for.
Deranged. And dishonest. It’s amazing that women haven’t come around to your thinking.
And you know what women are thinking, pajama boy?
Yeah. “Vote (D)”.
Right, because women are so stupid that they all fall off of the Democratic cliff, or according to you they should.