A woman named Mary took the open microphone. Hello, my name is Mary Man-Hating-is-Fun, she explained. Ever since I learned to embrace my feminist nature, I found great joy in threatening mens lives, flicking off frat brothers and plotting the patriarchys death. I hate men because they are men.
The 40 women in the audience, many wearing scissors around their necks, laughed and clapped, then broke into a light-hearted song about castration.
This event, advertised as the Patriarchy Slam, took place at the University of New Hampshire on March 10. [www.rense.com/general63/dur.htm]
Some might be tempted to explain away this event as an aberration, perhaps some strange Wiccan initiation ritual performed at the end of a long New England winter.
For years, disdain for men has been nurtured in Women’s Studies programs around the country. Required reading for these courses typically includes the works of Andrea Dworkin, author of such books as The SCUM Manifesto. SCUM is an acronym for “Society for Cutting Up Men.”
How’s this for warm-hearted commentary on gender reconciliation: Every man is “the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman” and “Hatred of women is a source of sexual pleasure for men in its own right.” Those insights earned Dworkin the status of a feminist cult-hero.
But on April 9 Andrea Dworkin unexpectedly left this earthly existence.
Five days later arch-feminist Catherine MacKinnon, grief-stricken over the passing of bosom-buddy Andrea, showed up on the Stanford University campus. There MacKinnon launched into a paranoid rant about the ever-lurking patriarchy: “Just like terrorist attacks, acts of violence against women are carefully planned, targeted at civilians, and driven by ideology.”
Under normal circumstances, anyone making such irrational claims would be quietly led away to a padded cell.
But Stanford Law School dean Kathleen Sullivan only saw fit to add to the loonier-than-thou atmosphere: “There are many other prominent feminist theorists in our times, but none of their philosophy is as sweeping and profound as MacKinnon’s.”
Then on April 16 MacKinnon published an article in the New York Times in which she extolled the mentally-deranged Dworkin as “an inspiration to so many women.” Seeking to turn her into a feminist martyr, MacKinnon argued, “How she was treated is how women are treated who tell the truth about male power.” [www.nytimes.com/2005/04/16/opinion/16mackinnon.html?ex=1271304000&en=62 6a94afad2e2a76&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss]
But Boston Globe columnist Cathy Young took sharp exception to MacKinnon’s fig-leaf eulogy. “To put it plainly: Dworkin was a preacher of hate,” Young countered, and “if she deserves ‘credit’ for anything, it’s helping infect feminist activism.with anti-male bigotry and paranoia.” [www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/04/18/th e_misdirected_passion_of_andrea_dworkin]
Anti-male bigotry and paranoia can have harmful consequences for women, as well.
Last November 17 Desiree Nall, a student at Rollins College in Winter Park, FL was cornered in a campus bathroom and raped. The police placed the campus on “high alert,” warning female students to stay indoors. Women were in a panic. An investigation ensued, eventually costing $50,000.
But the case began to unravel when Nall, a local women’s rights activist, gave inconsistent details about the incident and refused to assist with the composite sketches. Two days later, Nall called the police and admitted the whole thing was a hoax. Police officers later speculated that Nall was trying to “make a statement” about sexual violence. [www.ifeminists.net/introduction/editorials/2005/0420.html]
Equally worrisome is how some persons dismiss feminists’ malicious antics as harmless fun.
A few days ago Jeffrey Zaslow wrote an article in the Wall Street Journal about girls who wear T-shirts with the slogan, “Boys are Stupid, Throw Rocks at Them.” Festooned with the light-hearted title, “Girl Power as Boy Bashing,” the article implies that hate speech is somehow a legitimate expression of female empowerment. [http://mensnewsdaily.com/blog/nononsensedating/2005_04_21_nononsensedat ing_archive.html]
Sometimes I feel a little silly stating the obvious, but girls wearing clothes that preach violence and hate is not normal.
It’s no coincidence that feminist hate speech revolves around the issue of domestic violence. That’s because years ago the rad-fems highjacked the federal Violence Against Women Act, and have relentlessly milked the issue to inflame the fears of women. This, despite the fact that women are just as likely as men to commit domestic violence. [www.law.fsu.edu/journals/lawreview/downloads/304/kelly.pdf]
The Violence Against Women Act, which underwrites the radical feminist cause to the tune of $1 billion a year, is set to expire on September 30 of this year. As of this writing, no renewal legislation has been introduced, and time is running short.
Is it possible that the end of feminist hate speech is at hand?