• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
The Real Goal Of Feminism: Transforming Society
by Antonia Feitz 
Speech delivered at the Inverell Forum 2000, March 2, 2000
Sections
1. The Problem 2. The Theory 3. The Achievements 3.1. The sexual harassment industry 3.2. The affirmative rip-off  3.3. The Law 3.4. The military 3.5. Education 3.6. Religion 3.7. Language Finale References 
1. The Problem
Top Ladies and gentlemen, my topic is feminism and some of you may be wondering why, given our country's parlous state. Our national sovereignty is being destroyed by the overriding of our domestic laws and thesigning of UN treaties — with no consultation and with no public or even parliamentary debate.So why feminism? Because feminists are at the vanguard of the phalanx of fools, the useful idiots, theideologues, who are destroying our hard won rights and our national sovereignty.We live in an age of ideology. God has been pronounced dead, and Chesterton's witticism has proven true:when people no longer believe in God, they'll believe in anything. And the post-Christian people of the Westare proof, holding beliefs which their grandparents would have dismissed as absolute nonsense, and contraryto all common sense, let alone morality.Take extreme environmentalists. Apart from literally worshiping trees, they exalt the welfare of frogs and eveninsects over that of people. Believe it or not, there's even a Voluntary Human Extinction Movement [1].Homosexuals demand their relationships be accorded equal status with marriage, including the "right" to adoptchildren. And under the banner of multiculturalism, Australian children are either kept ignorant, or taught to be ashamed of their own heritage and history, while simultaneously being taught to value ethnic and especiallyindigenous cultures. But arguably, feminism is the most pernicious of the ideologies that plague us, simply because the relationship between men and women affects all of us.
 
I must stress that modern feminists are not the heirs of the suffragettes who fought for equal rights such as theright to vote and property rights. Modern feminists are not seeking equal rights for women. They want totransform society, and that's no conspiracy theory because they freely admit it.TakeCEDAW.It's the acronym for theConvention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women.(You can discriminate against men till the cows come home). This convention's goals are notreformist, but revolutionary. It openly calls for the elimination of traditional sex roles, and the re-writing of text books to purge them of alleged sexual stereotypes. The UN's call for the total disarmament of the world's people is embedded in CEDAW's preamble.According to the feminists who constitute the CEDAW Committee, until nations achieve a 50-50 sexual splitin everything — in occupations, in public life, and even in the domestic sphere — they are discriminatingagainst women. Now that might sound far-fetched, but article 5 of CEDAW advocates "a proper understandingof maternity as a social function." Note the socialist bullying in the word, "proper." This "proper understanding" demands that child-rearing — universally! — should be "a fully shared responsibility...by bothsexes." It also insists that society has an obligation to extend child care services to "allow individuals tocombine family responsibilities with work and participation in public life."The message to women is: you will participate in work and public life whether you want to or not. In a nownotorious interview with Betty Friedan, Simone de Beauvoir said: "No woman should be authorized to stay athome and raise her children. Society should be totally different. Women should not have that choice, precisely because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one." [2]So much for freedom of choice. These bully-girls demand "a change in the traditional role of men as well asthe role of women in society and in the family...to achieve full equality of men and women." Their version of equality is complete identity. It's reminiscent of communist China in Mao's time. The communists were allfeminists too. Remember?To achieve the goal of sexual identity, Article 10c mandates the revision of textbooks, school programmes andteaching methods with a view to eliminating stereotyped concepts. This must be why one of my children'sFrench textbooks showed Dad in an apron washing the dishes while Mum, dressed in a chic suit and carrying a briefcase, waved ta-ta to the baby in the high-chair. A French textbook! Textbooks in all subjects are beingused to indoctrinate children in our schools. It's just too bad if individuals prefer the traditional roles whenthey have young children — as most people actually do.According to CEDAW's Preamble, all nations are "obliged to work towards the modification of social andcultural patterns of individual [emphasis added] conduct in order to eliminate prejudices and customary and allother practices which are based on...stereotyped roles for men and women."These intolerant ideologues who so loudly criticize Christian evangelists are far worse. At least religiousconversion is voluntary! But incredibly, the CEDAW Committee has instructed Libya to re-interpret its sacred book, the Koran, in ways that are permissible under CEDAW. The Algerian government was castigated for "using religion as an excuse" for failure to comply with CEDAW. The Committee has also instructed China tolegalize prostitution. [3]Whatever happened to national sovereignty? And how hypocritical is the UN? On the one hand it supposedlyvalues the diversity of the world's nations and cultures. But on the other hand, with CEDAW, it demands thatthe world's nations and cultures must conform to the deranged and frequently immoral opinions of Westernfeminists who themselves are a minority in their own countries.If you think CEDAW is bad news, theOptional Protocol to CEDAWdrafted in March 1999 is even worse. If governments want to maintain any vestige of national sovereignty, they'd better not sign it. Previously, nationssigning or ratifying international treaties could add RUDs — reservations, understandings and declarations.These are statements limiting or modifying the effect of the provisions of a treaty; or of giving notice of matters of policy or principle; or of simply clarifying matters. But true to feminist tyranny, the Optional
 
Protocol to CEDAW will forbid any reservations.Feminists have been frustrated that too many countries included RUDs when they signed CEDAW —  precisely to protect their cultures, religions and sovereignty. The Optional Protocol will forbid any suchreservations. It is an unprecedented and massive assault on national sovereignty and if signed, will set aterrible precedent for the signing of other treaties.Maybe the ancestor of CEDAW — the1946 UN Commission on the Status of Women— had good intentions.But those good intentions have been highjacked by CEDAW. Instead of improving the welfare and securing basic rights for women in the poorer nations, CEDAW's main game is transforming society in the West. TheOptional Protocol will be used by individuals and NGOs in the West to achieve radical social change thatnational parliaments would never dare consider, because their members have to face voters. It's through UNtreaties such as CEDAW and theUN Charter of Human Rightsthat homosexual relationships will achieve thelegal status of marriage.The most cursory glance over the countries that have signed and ratified CEDAW makes the whole thing asick joke. The first three are Albania, Algeria and Angola, hardly well-known for their equal treatment of women. Burundi — where people regularly hack each other to death with machetes — has signed. So hasCambodia, of the killing-fields fame. China has signed too, even though it performs third trimester "abortions" — read "infanticide" — on unwilling women. Needless to say, Canada and Australia, both of whose governments are heavily feminist influenced, havesigned. To its eternal credit, the United States has not.So, that's the overall picture. Now let's look at what's behind feminism.
2. The Theory
Top Modern radical feminism is founded on contradictory lies. The fact that they're lies doesn't matter, becausetruth is always secondary for ideologues. The fact that they're contradictory is no source of shame, becausefeminists believe that logic is just a tool of the patriarchy to oppress women and that women have other, andsuperior, ways of knowing [4].The first lie is that men and women are interchangeable, and that there aren't any differences between thesexes apart from anatomical ones. In fact, feminists claim that there aren't two sexes at all but at least fivegenders, which are socially constructed. They regard heterosexual men and women as being hopelesslyrepressed in gender stereotypes forced upon them by society. Their life's mission is to liberate us from theseimposed stereotypes.To achieve the interchangeability, feminists at first tirelessly promoted the traditional male life pattern of uninterrupted full-time work as the norm for women. Creches and childcare were demanded to free womenfrom domesticity, whether they wanted to be "freed" or not. In Australia, groups such as theWomen'sElectoral Lobbyfought to change Australia's tax system from a family-friendly one to a profoundly unjust onewhere a married man with a family pays virtually the same tax as a single man. They won, and their victoryclearly shows the contempt for ordinary women that is the hallmark of feminism.But seeing as ignoring babies doesn't go down too well with most mothers, feminists have changed tack. If they can't force women to be like men, then they'll force men to be like women. The sexes must beinterchangeable for their gender theory to work. This is behind the increasingly hectoring calls for men toavail themselves of the "opportunity" of part-time work and to do more domestic work out of "fairness."
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...