This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Let us organize and start a powerful anti-feminist movement.
There is no question that men and women have equal natural rights, although it was not implemented by the American Constitution until 1920 when the Nineteenth Amendment finally gave women the right to vote. Men and women, however, are fundamentally different. They have different bodies that reflect their different roles in life. No man will ever be able to give birth to a child. Women also have special responsibilities. Their unique mission in life is keeping families together as fundamental building blocks of society. As equal members of society, women may also naturally want to succeed outside their homes as businesswomen, scientists, politicians, teachers, assembly workers, etc. This is, however, very difficult if we do not provide them with special priorities to make it possible for them to continue as wives and mothers at the same time. These priorities are absolutely necessary if we do not wish to destroy our society by destroying our families. We need ample time for mothers to stay at home during pregnancy and childbearing with a guarantee of their jobs thereafter. It is also necessary to have adequate childcare facilities for small children while their mothers are working. Such programs became reality in most European countries a long time ago. Unfortunately, society has failed to help women to satisfy their special role in the family and be successful in their careers at the same time. The working woman is also raising her children and doing the housework, in fact, working at three jobs for one salary. She does not live a better life than her grandmother did when the man was the only wage earner in the family. The feminist movement fails to understand this. It concentrates instead on the problem of numerical underrepresentation of women in most positions of power. As in many other cases, women’s problems have become ‘rights’ issues. Nowhere is this as evident as in the battlefield of abortion. America is one of the few countries where abortion is a ‘rights’ issue, a conflict between the “right to life” and the “right to free choice,” a war with no winners. It hopelessly divides the country, and it will never be possible to reconcile these rights. In most civilized countries abortion is a medical problem left for physicians and counselors to decide. Generally, it is not good to kill a fetus but there are hundreds of circumstances when it is necessary (e.g., in case of rape, ill health, or bad social situation of the mother). In most cases abortion can and should be avoided by modern birthcontrol devices. As Ross Perot put it, “We are not rabbits. We should not create a human life if we do not want a human life.” If we ceased the politization of abortion and viewed it strictly as a medical issue, where it belongs, we could begin healing a deepening rift within the country. A battery manufacturer was accused of violating women’s rights by barring women from working with lead that causes birth defects. The Supreme Court agreed with the accusers. A university professor was convicted of “prolonged and intense staring” at a woman in a swimming pool. A policeman was dismissed because of his “annoying staring” at his female colleagues. Two former female police officers were awarded $3.1 million because of the sexist atmosphere at their police department.i A woman was awarded $6.3 million for having been passed over for promotion in favor of men. Sexual harassment codes cite “sexually charged stares” and “inappropriate hints” as harassment or even rape. Some feminist leaders have declared that any heterosexual encounter, even with the consent of the female, is rape because “coitus is punishment.” Therefore, most women do not even realize that they are
constantly raped. As a consequence, family bedrooms are nothing less than “settings for nightly rape,” and “pregnancy is used by men to control women.” Women who prefer heterosexual sex to lesbianism are called dependent and weak. This ‘reasoning’ continues without limits and produces such masterpieces as the definition of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony as “a murderous rage of a rapist incapable of attaining release,” meat as “a means of conditioning women to accept a subservient status,” and science as “an act of aggression—a passive [female] nature had to be interrogated, unclothed, penetrated, and compelled by man to reveal her secrets.”ii The woman can decide herself if she was harassed or not. She does not have to be touched or threatened. If management wants to get rid of someone without a cause, it is easy. Just accuse him of sexual harassment. A harassment lawsuit can be initiated for a “failure to greet [a woman] in a friendly manner.” There is a new standard of the ‘reasonable woman’ whose feelings are taken as grounds for court decisions on harassment, as if sexual harassment were just a female problem and not a violation of common values. Thus, no American standards or human standards exist, only a separate standard for each group, or even each individual. A humble request for a date can easily become harassment. To say: “You are so smart and pretty” is sexual harassment. A Goya reprint is sexual harassment. At the same time, rap music lyrics that advocate tearing up women’s vaginas, inserting rats into women’s bodies, and forcing women to lick excrement are OK because they happen to be expressions used by other powerful special interest groups. Women cannot walk safely on our streets; 700,000 of them are raped every year, but don’t you dare smile at them at work. There is no difference between trivialities and serious crimes, or between groundless accusations and guilty behavior. This insanity makes it difficult to take real harassment complaints seriously. A Lesbian student complained that she was “forced to write a term paper on a heterosexual novel.” A board game that included “supermom” as a career for girls but failed to list such professions as astronaut, business executive, or government official, was labeled “insensitive” by a US government agency. A woman sued a female doctor for allegedly raping her during a physical examination. According to some feminists, the word ‘wife’ should be dismissed as “phallocentric,” the word ‘female’ is a social artifact that has nothing to do with biology, and the spelling of the word ‘woman’ must be changed to “womin” (with the plural forms “wimmin,” “womyn” or simply “people of gender”). “Who needs a man?” asked a feminist article. They need sperm only to make babies (in the best case), not families. Some of them go as far as setting their goal as the elimination of higher education (“a male system serving the interests of the ruling class”), the family, and heterosexual relationships. The sad selfcontradiction of this extreme feminism is that it demands a unisex world, but at the same time wishes to construct a female knowledge system and society. It degrades women (who are superior because they have brains equal to those of men plus bodies that can bear children) by representing the ideal woman as a substitute man. It promotes negative feelings and resentment toward women. Sally Quinn rightly put it: “Many women have come to see the feminist movement as antimale, antichild, anti family, antifeminine.” The feminists managed to emasculate America. It is a return to the puritan and Victorian hypocrisy. As a British journalist wrote: “Extreme feminism is now a state religion in America ... People are being disentitled to their own sexuality ... This all goes fundamentally against a free society.”iii There is no question that prejudice against women does exist. For example, a female financial consultant refused to talk to my wife. “I prefer to discuss business with the gentleman of the house,” she said. The main issue, however, is that all this is going on when women have real problems which are not
being addressed. An American woman is 26 times more likely to be raped than her Japanese counterpart. In 1991, twentyfive percent of American women had babies out of wedlock. Finally, and most importantly: nobody tries to ease the triple burden of working mothers. The clamor of the ‘rights’ crowd often forces our attention away from important topics, such as genuine family values.
Source: US News & World Report, October 21, 1991, p. 40.
Source: John Leo, “A political correctness roundup,” US News & World Report, June 22, 1992, p. 29. This article also contains a list of 76 ‘evil isms’ like angloism, heteropatriarchalism, phallocratism, androcentrism, etc.
Barbara Amiel, Sunday Times, London, October 12, 1991.
Excerpted from How To Save Our Country by Mike Szilagyi
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.