Showing posts with label feminism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label feminism. Show all posts

Sunday, February 26, 2017

Suckers!

Are you a feminist in the 21st century?  Sucker!

Every once in a while, the curtain is momentarily pulled back and we catch a glimpse of the sordid underbelly of Leftist politics.  Just this happened during the campaign for DNC chair.

Everybody understands First Wave Feminism.  Women should have the vote, they should be able to make contracts, inherit property, and so on.  Adult female citizens should have all the rights (and the obligations, with the possible exception of military service) of adult male citizens.  So, "Yes" to First Wave Feminism.

Second Wave Feminism seemed like a fraud from the start.  It's the lies, you see.  Betty Friedan was never the house-bound house-frau she claimed to be.  Feminists still man the barricades for equal pay even though equal pay has been the lay of the land for at least the past 30 years.

Or, how about domestic violence?  Remember when Super Bowl Sunday was the most dangerous day of the year to be a woman?  No?  That's good, because it ain't so.  But feminists made up this lie and successfully promoted it for years before it finally died a slow, painful, and long delayed death.

My personal favorite is the Rule of Thumb.  Legacy systems of weights and measures arose organically.  The inch is approximately the width of a man's thumb at the first knuckle, a foot is a man’s foot, a yard is his stride, a grain is actually a grain of wheat or barley, a stone is a stone, and so on.  To this day horses are measured as so many "hands" high at the shoulder.  So, a carpenter marking off wood might in some cases naturally use his thumb for an approximate measure---the Rule of Thumb.

So, the Rule of Thumb seemed an obvious, and innocuous, concept until the feminists explained that Medieval Common Law allowed a man to beat his wife with a stick no thicker than his thumb.  According to the feminists, the Rule of Thumb was a limiting concept, a first effort of a barbaric society to limit the brutality of men (who are still brutal and something should be done about them, like taking away their Super Bowl).

Except it ain't so.  The Rule of Thumb means exactly what you think it means, and nothing else.  Feminists just made up the rest.  (Really, they took a Medieval joke and dressed it up as a modern truth.)

Why all the lies?  Because feminism, the Second Wave stuff, is not about women.

David Horowitz, author, publisher, founder of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, and former far-Left radical, explains it this way:  “The cause is never the cause.  The cause is always the revolution."  Feminism is not about women, racial justice and the BLM movement are not about Black people, gender dysphoria is not about gender, immigration is not about foreigners, etc.  All these seemingly disparate things are really about one and the same thing.  They are about the revolution.  The socialist revolution.  And to implement any revolution, first you have to tear down the Existing Order.  That is why the Bolsheviks shot dead the Tsar and his entire family.

In the 21st century, the single greatest impediment to the socialist revolution is the spectacular success of Western Civilization, so that has to go.  And to tear it down, you have to undermine its foundations.  That is what Antonio Gramsci’s “Long March Through The Institutions” is about.

To undermine the West, you have to undermine democracy, undermine the family, even cast doubt on the biological reality of men and women.  And, you have to find allies.  Here is an icon of Western feminism finding an ally in a representative of the greatest oppressor of women in the modern world, "Gloria Steinem Endorses Keith Ellison for Democratic national Committee Chair."

And here is a socialist finding an ally in a representative of the greatest retrograde force in the modern world, "Join Bernie Sanders and Support Keith Ellison for DNC Chair."

Birds of a feather flock together? You bet! And enemies of the people make common cause.

Thursday, August 25, 2016

Donna Shalala and the Clinton Foundation

How interesting that Donna Shalala is president of the Clinton Foundation.

Shalala made a big impression on me some years ago when she was president of the University of Miami.  At that time, she made a big deal of how women in the sciences are not treated fairly Bias Is Hurting Women in Science.  How odd, I thought, that she was in a position to actually do something about that, but did nothing.

If it is true that women are not treated fairly in the sciences, this implies there is a large, untapped pool of scientific talent, out there.  Shalala said as much.  So, why not tap that talent?

The main business of university presidents is raising money.  Shalala could have raised some money and created, say, the Department of Female Chemistry.  Bring in some of that top scientific talent, run the department on principles favorable to women, and watch all that prolific research come rolling in.  They could even found their own "Journal of Female Chemistry".

Does that sound unusual to you?  It shouldn't.  That is exactly what many universities have done with women's studies, ethnic studies, "Africana" studies, and urban anthropology.  The feminists could not find a home in an existing department, so the made their own.  The ethnologists could not find a home in an existing department so they made their own, and so on.  I completely respect that.  They raised their own money, they funded their own departments, they publish their own journals.  What's the problem?

Donna Shalala did none of that.  All she did was monger grievances.  And now she is president of the Clinton Foundation.  I wonder what that says about the Clinton Foundation.