@JanetheActuary is an outside-the-box thinker you should follow on Twitter, and her musing today on Patheos deserves notice:

The increasing unmarriagableness of men is often identified as the reason why the rates of unwed motherhood have climbed so much . . . Women report thinking of the father of their child as “just a child himself” — whether because young women tend to be more mature than their same-aged counterparts or whether motherhood itself makes those women more mature. . . .

She then notes an apparent tendency toward bisexual/lesbian “experimentation” among young women and considers the possibility of women forming what might be called pseudo-lesbian families:

If women, to a significant degree, give up on men and form all-female households, no specific woman has harmed any specific man. But the harm to men, and society, in general, would be significant.

She asks if this is “too far-fetched,” but in fact this is already happening in various ways. Most women in their 20s nowadays are unmarried, and most of those women share apartments with other young women. Although the vast majority of these women do not think of themselves as bisexual (and certainly not lesbian), the shortage of marriageable males results in these young women experiencing conflicts and instability in their relationships with men, so that their female friends and roommates are a more enduring emotional influence in their lives than are their on-again/off-again boyfriends. We should not be the least bit surprised if some women in this predicament “give up on men,” and feminist theory would certainly encourage women to do this:

“In terms of the oppression of women, heterosexuality is the ideology of male supremacy. In order for men to have a justification for exploiting women and an ability to enforce that exploitation, heterosexuality has to become, not merely an act in relation to impregnation, but the dominant ideology.”

That was first published 40 years ago in a book co-edited by Charlotte Bunch, who subsequently became a distinguished academic at Rutgers University and in 1999 was honored with the Eleanor Roosevelt Award for Human Rights by President Bill Clinton. (Click here to see C-SPAN video of Hillary Clinton’s speech at the December 1999 ceremony.)

You must never forget: Feminism Is Queer!

Feminism is Queer is an introduction to the intimately related disciplines of gender and queer theory. While guiding the reader through complex theory, the author develops the original position of “queer feminism,” which presents queer theory as continuous with feminist theory. While there have been significant conceptual tensions between second wave feminism and traditional lesbian and gay studies, queer theory offers a paradigm for understanding gender, sex, and sexuality that avoids the conflict in order to develop solidarity among those interested in feminist theory and those interested in lesbian and gay rights.

You see this is not “fringe” feminism or “extreme” feminism. This is simply what feminism means for university students in the 21st century. Feminism is Queer is a 2010 textbook whose author, Mimi Marinucci, is a professor of Women’s and Gender Studies at Eastern Washington University. Accepting feminist gender theory, as I’ve explained, requires the de-normalization of everything:

To be a feminist means that you cease to believe that there is anything natural about the human condition and, furthermore, you must reject everything “normal” as inherently oppressive. . . . By constantly sharing everything, all their feelings and stories and selfies, feminists forge the bonds of Radical Sisterhood, as they struggle to overthrow the power of Male Supremacy.

My book, Sex Trouble: Radical Feminism and the War Against Human Nature, explains this in depth. Based on the writings of dozens of feminist authors — Kate Millett, Susan Brownmiller, Dee Graham, Judith Butler, Sheila Jeffreys, et al. — who are quoted at length, Sex Trouble exposes the anti-male/anti-heterosexual ideology of what can only be described as a Totalitarian Movement to Destroy Civilization as We Know It.

"Romance is rape embellished with meaningful looks." — Andrea Dworkin, 1979 pic.twitter.com/I1x50oclJi — Robert Stacy McCain (@rsmccain) January 30, 2015

"Feminism is fundamentally inhumane … a rationalization of hate." SEX TROUBLE, p. 81 #tcot http://t.co/SqNKYKNyCc pic.twitter.com/M0V4kIqBBG — Robert Stacy McCain (@rsmccain) June 28, 2015

* * * * *

A quick note: The issue about Amazon reportedly prohibiting sale of the Confederate flag — see my article “A Dangerous Precedent” — has caused ironic harm to the conservative movement, and to me in particular. Online sales through Amazon Associates are an important source of revenue to my blog as for many other conservative bloggers who derive commissions from these sales. Amazon has been very good to me over the years, and so you can see why I am disturbed when I see people demanding a boycott of Amazon. Whose fault is it that Amazon was directly attacked by Democrats and the news media (but I repeat myself) with demands that they cease sales of Confederate merchandise? If executives at Amazon unwisely folded under this pressure, who is to blame? We can discuss these things reasonably, but how does it make sense to punish me by attempting to punish Amazon? Please do not deprive my family of income in the misguided belief that you will hurt Amazon more than you hurt me. God knows my family has already suffered a lot on account of my stubborn willingness to speak unpopular truths and defend unfashionable traditions, and I ask that readers not add to this suffering. — RSM











Amazon.com Widgets

Share this: Share

Twitter

Facebook



Reddit



Comments