by Carey Roberts –show me more like this
Every era has its utopian movements that hold out the promise of social perfectability. One such movement is feminism, which claims the path to social nirvana is the liberation of women and the creation of a genderless society.
One hundred years ago, feminism claimed that equal rights under the law was its goal. Once women won the right to vote in 1920, many predicted that having achieved its objective, the women’s movement would close up shop and fade away.
But feminism did not lapse into the dust-heap of history. It merely went underground.
For 40 years, the feminist cause was sustained and nurtured by the Communist Party of the USA. This was accomplished by establishment of the CPUSA Women’s Bureau in the 1920s, and later through the creation of a front organization, the Congress of American Women.
Recognizing its Communist origins, the US Department of Justice placed the CAW on its list of subversive organizations in 1948. (Go to the CPUSA’s web page at www.cpusa.org, and you will see how they have cleverly combined the Communist icons of the hammer and sickle to form a logo that closely resembles the radical feminist hand-mirror symbol.)
When the Civil Rights movement swept the nation in the 1960s, feminism came out of the woodwork. Although feminists still claimed to be working for gender equality, their actions would soon reveal a very different agenda.
Their true intentions became apparent in the feminist position on abortion. In their view, the decision to keep or dispose of an unborn child was the woman’s, and only the woman’s prerogative. No mention of gender equality there.
And the matter of who would gain custody of the kids in the event of divorce – would it be the mother, the father, or both? In the 1970s, the answer became clear, as chapter after chapter of the National Organization for Women came out in opposition to joint custody. This, in spite of the fact that this co-parenting arrangement affords equal rights to both parents – not to mention its benefits for the children.
Next the breast cancer crusade came along. Before long, the National Institutes of Health was spending three times more money on breast cancer research than prostate cancer. Where’s the equality in that?
Then came a series of laws that purported to protect women from predatory males: sexual harassment, domestic violence, and broadly-worded rape statutes. In theory they sounded good. But in practice, they violated men’s fundamental Constitutional protections of due process and equal protection under the law.
Affording equal opportunities to men and women is laudable. But in practice, feminism cares nothing about mere equality. Now, white women have become the most legally-protected and economically-privileged group in America.
At their core, all utopian movements seek to remold human nature. The Marxists demanded that the New Socialist Man place the interests of the state above the needs of the individual. And the feminist movement seeks to achieve a society in which the social and psychological differences between the sexes are eradicated.
But history reveals the populace inevitably begins to resist such extreme psychological make-overs. So the utopians soon look to the government for a solution. That entails placing ever-increasing power in the hands of petty bureaucrats.
When their policies begin to infringe upon individuals’ basic civil rights, the utopians inevitably explain that the ends justify the means. Thus the totalitarian state begins to emerge.
The feminist utopia is a social nightmare to women. Because feminism endeavors to remake women in the image of men. Feminism seeks to remove women’s choice to marry, bear children, and devote themselves to child-rearing.
The feminist utopia is a social nightmare to men. Because feminism wants to remake men in the image of women. In the feminist vision, men are a continual threat to women, so their rights and freedoms must be gradually curtailed.
And the feminist utopia is a nightmare to children. At best, gender feminists see their offspring as an impediment to maternal self-fulfillment. At worst, children are viewed as a contraceptive-abortive failure.
In 1870 Queen Victoria of England wrote, “I am most anxious to enlist everyone who can speak or write to join in checking this mad, wicked folly of ‘Women’s Rights,’ with all its attendant horrors …Were women to ‘unsex’ themselves by claiming equality with men, they would become the most hateful, heathen and disgusting of beings and would surely perish without male protection.”
One hundred and twenty-five years later, we should give her prediction a second look.