“Behind the stubble and the too prominent brow and the male pattern baldness, I sensed your feminine longing. And it just slew me.” – Being John Malkovich

Maybe it’s good we guys aren’t more in touch with our feelings?

Last Monday’s post (American Apartheid: Resurrecting Communism’s South African Playbook – In America) provided ample evidence of the singular goal of communism: power. Raw, naked power. In order to get this power, ripping apart the fabric of society to either foster or create ethnic strife is clearly on the table.

What else could socialists attack to destabilize Western Civilization?

The family structure itself.

The family structure is difficult to attack. It is based on thousands of years of cultural evolution, and is inherently stable. Recognizing that men and women are fundamentally different, the family structure plays to the strengths of each. Mothers are warm and nurturing and like margaritas. Men are stoic and strong and willing to die to protect the family and like beer. Mothers depend on fathers to provide for the family. Fathers depend on mothers to be faithful and care for the hearth. The family structure is built on mutual interdependence. Add in extended family, and a marriage is the atom of society.

Enter socialism. To make it worse than just plain socialism, it was a French socialist, Charles Fourier, who coined the word feminism in 1839. Fourier used feminism as a concept mainly to indicate that women should be able to have lots of sex without marriage, presumably with Charles.

But even a curmudgeon (say, me) will admit, feminism started admirably enough: the idea that women should have at least some of the same rights to education as men. It evolved to the more advanced concepts that women should be able to have custody of children after a divorce, own property, and eventually vote, with Iran(!) granting women the right to vote before it was granted in France, probably because Charles was still sore that his idea of “getting women rights so he could have sex” scheme didn’t work.

If it would have stopped there, it probably would have been fine. Maybe. But it didn’t.

Fast forward to 1960: Women’s Liberation® was the next idea that attacked the West, and it was firmly led by Marxists such as Betty Freidan who wrote The Feminine Mystique, which made lots of bored middle-class suburban housewives upset, for some reason. Mainly because things were too good? Stupid patriarchy, feeding us and keeping us safe and creating a prosperous economy. We’ll show them!

But the 1960’s also provided a huge technological change through the availability of the birth control pill. Add in other leftist and feminist goals achieved such as no-fault divorce, welfare for single women with dependent children, changing family court laws to favor women in child custody, alimony, universally legal abortion, and you have fundamentally changed the institution of the family.

Attitudes towards children changed drastically at this time – look at how children were viewed in cinema: Rosemary’s Baby was literally the devil’s spawn. The Exorcist was exorcising a little kid. Damien from The Omen (again, the devil’s spawn) was yet another kid, and Michael Myers from Halloween starts the movie as an evil child. Although Generation X was the first post-pill generation, it was also the genesis of the latch-key child, the child who was less important than mother’s career or her search for self, and a generation of children that were marked by parental strife in ways that their predecessors weren’t as the divorce rate peaked in the 1970’s. No wonder children were shown as figurative monsters in this decade.

And it was all due to the success of feminism.

The previous contract between men and women was broken. Women no longer relied on a man, in many cases it was sold that woman could break from her oppressive husband and have freedom with her new provider and husband-replacement: government. Government would enforce alimony. Government would enforce child support. It would provide housing and food for children. Government could stay out late and drink too much and not even call and flirt with Stacy, that tramp. There was no need to stay in a marriage that wasn’t fulfilling in every manner or even have a husband – or so the promises went. Actual quote from that era: “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.”

Be unhaaaaaappy? Get a divorce.

Source Dalrock (LINK)

And, yes. There are valid reasons for divorce. Unhaaaaaappy? Not one of them, which is why no-fault divorce is so corrosive.

Many people didn’t fall for the trick, and stayed married. My parents did, probably because they realized it would require both of them working together to beat some semblance of civilization into me. Those stable marriages provided a much greater degree of prosperity and wealth than their divorced compatriots. Stable marriages provided great role models for stable children that didn’t go to jail. Stable marriage provided the anchor for civic life. Thankfully, this wave of feminism crashed on the rocks of pornography – one group decided it was horrible exploitation and should be outlawed, and the other thought that it was an expression of womanly power and should be celebrated. You can guess which group was cuter.

Leftism itself waned during this time, and one primary exporter of communism went out of business – the USSR. And if that was the end of feminism, well, it had already greatly hurt the viability of Western Civilization, but maybe we can heal. So, we’re done, right?

No. In the last few weeks the work of communism feminism continues.

The first thread is the 36 page guidelines of the American Psychological Association® (APA™) that seeks to classify traditional masculinity as a mental health problem. It reads like a bad Marxist senior thesis from an elite liberal school. Here’s an example from the report (LINK):

“Because of the pressure to conform to traditional masculinity ideology, some men shy away from directly expressing their vulnerable feelings and prefer building connection through physical activities, talking about external matters (e.g., sports, politics, work), engaging in “good-natured ribbing,” exchanging jokes, and seeking and offering practical advice with their male friends.”

Yes. This is how males work. This is how males form hierarchy. This is why we aren’t known as women.

Wait, John Wilder, you’re telling me that men and women are different? I have been clearly told that they are exactly the same.

Dear reader, it is clear that men are different. Why else would Gillette© have an entire commercial telling men how awful we are, which happened just last week? Clearly, we don’t have a commercial from Playtex™ telling women not to kill their kids by drowning them in a car which would be equally as valid, but it’s still not there. So, men and women are different, in that men are evil. Men are so evil that a razor company, which theoretically sells to men, can spend nearly two minutes telling men how awful they are.

How bad was the commercial? This bad:

(H/T Bookwormroom LINK)

But at least The Woman’s March which happened this weekend is non-partisan, right? Just seeking to help women, right?

Here are excerpts from their goals (LINK):

We believe that gun violence is a women’s issue and that guns are not how we keep our communities free from violence.

We believe it is our moral imperative to dismantle the gender and racial inequities within the criminal justice system. The rate of imprisonment has grown faster for women than men, increasing by 700% since 1980, and the majority of women in prison have a child under the age of 18.

We believe in Gender Justice. We must have the power to control our bodies and be free from gender norms, expectations and stereotypes. We must free ourselves and our society from the institution of awarding power, agency and resources disproportionately to masculinity to the exclusion of others.

Immigration reform must establish a roadmap to citizenship, and provide equal opportunities and workplace protections for all.

All workers – including domestic and farm workers, undocumented and migrant workers – must have the right to organize and fight for a living minimum wage.

So, we have it. Feminism is strong and growing. Feminism is clearly leftist. And not just a little leftist, but full blown Marxist. There are other implications of feminism that are flowing through society now, but those will have to wait for a future post. But feminism continues.

Strangely, I didn’t see this list on the Women’s March website.

Again, the idea is clear: Create a victim culture. Create alienation with the social norms that underpin Western Civilization. Divide a nation.

The goal?

Power.

The irony? In every single socialist paradise, from the USSR to Cuba to China, feminism isn’t tolerated.

Why?

Once they have power, they won’t share.

“There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever.” – 1984

Like this: Like Loading...

Related