The Politics of Sex

Having attained awareness of the ongoing revolution of our times - the Matriarchy's usurping of the Patriarchy to subvert civilization - I've been avidly researching and reading everything I can find online whenever I get the time.

One of the author's I've discovered is the former Reagan Supreme Court Nominee, Retired Justice Robert Bork. He is a phenomenal writer and in his book "Slouching Towards Gomorroah" he nails radical feminism to a "T." This is one book I will be ordering when I have the spare $.

From Chapter 11, The Politics of Sex, excerpted by Fathers For Life.org

Isaac Newton's Principia Mathematica is a "rape manual" because "science is a male rape of female nature"; Beethoven's Ninth Symphony expresses the "throttling murderous rage of a rapist incapable of attaining release." (1) These and other ludicrous pronouncements may incline sensible people to dismiss today's feminism as a mildly amusing but utterly inconsequential fit of hysterics. That would be a mistake.

Indeed it would be...as I can attest to the fact that I and my peers are/were largely unaware of just how radical the effect feminism has had on society and culture in the past 40 to 50 years. I can recall my mindset was the general consesus of most of my generation: that namely it is a generally positive thing, and that the fringe kooks are just humorous lesbos that have taken their attitudes a bit too far - but that overall feminism is a good thing even though 95% of American women would not really describe themselves as 'feminists'. This is instructive as to how the destructive, anti-Patriarchical attitudes and actions of the feminist movement have become today's paradigm. In the section entitled "Feminism Past and Present, " Bork writes:

Many people suppose that feminism today is a continuation of the reform movement of the past. They occasionally notice a ranting Bella Abzug or an icy Gloria Steinem but imagine them to be merely the froth of extremism on an otherwise sensible movement. That is not the case; the extremists are the movement.

Now that I have become aware, I see the cultural rot begat by this poisonous ideology everywhere - yet I am also dismayed that the popular image of feminism as a "sensible" movement endures.

Radical feminism is the most destructive and fanatical movement to come down to us from the Sixties. This is a revolutionary, not a reformist, movement, and it is meeting with considerable success. Totalitarian in spirit, it is deeply antagonistic to traditional Western culture and proposes the complete restructuring of society, morality, and human nature.

Looking at the marriage statistics, demographics on reproductive rates, the epidemic of divorce, the rising average age of marriage and an entire generation of children enstranged from their Fathers, I would say that Bork's description of "considerable success" may in fact unfortunately be understating how much success radical feminism has achieved.

America has seen women's movements before, reform movements seeking for women the political and cultural privileges held by men. They represented what best-selling author and professor of philosophy Christina Hoff Sommers calls "equity feminism" to distinguish them from "gender feminism", the radical variety. She identifies herself as an equity feminist. (4) It would be better, I think, to drop the word "feminism" altogether since the movement no longer has a constructive role to play; its work is done. There are no artificial barriers left to women's achievement. That fact does not mollify the radicals in the slightest. Revolutions, it is commonly observed, often break out not when circumstances are next to intolerable but when conditions begin rapidly to improve. There are now more female than male students in universities, and women are entering business, the professions, and the academy in large numbers. Yet this seems only to fuel the rage of the feminists.

Indeed, Midge Decter thinks improvement is precisely the problem. She asks "why there should have been an explosion of angry demand on the part of women who as a group were the freest, healthiest, wealthiest, longest-lived, and most comfortably situated people the world had yet laid eyes on." (5) She answers that "It is a freedom that frightens her [today's woman] and disorients her and burdens her terribly ... The appeal to her of the women's movement is that in her fear and disorientation, the movement offers her the momentary escape contained in the idea that she is not free at all; that she is, on the contrary, the victim of an age-old conspiracy that everything troubling to her has been imposed on her by others." Decter has a profound point. A woman who formerly had a constricted range of choices "must now decide everything essential to her." Whether to be serious about a career, whether to marry, whether to divorce, whether to bear children. Everything is in her hands "to a degree possibly unprecedented in the history of mankind, a degree experienced by her as bordering on the intolerable." The responsibility is too much, the choices too many.

The radical feminist movement not only explains that any dissatisfaction she may experience is the fault of others, namely men, but also comforts her with a sense of solidarity and common purpose in the way that some men find the battalion a welcome relief from the freedom of civilian life. There is probably more to it than that, however. Radical feminism is not merely a way of discovering that a woman is not free. It is also a cause that creates an orientation and a meaning in her life that unstructured freedom destroys. Radical feminism is thus similar to causes such as the identity politics of the racial and ethnic programs on campuses.

Bork introduces an interesting concept here as to why feminism can be such an attractive ideology for the young women of today: radical feminism is a mental crutch for women of today's society set adrift from the Patriarchy by the Feminist Matriarch Revolution. Much like the old, hard-liner communists in the early 90's of Eastern Europe who longed for the rigid structure of communist totalitarianism once the Soviet Empire collapsed, many radical feminists simply cannot handle the responsibility of so much freedom...because along with freedom comes consequence. Rather than deal with the consequences of their choices, feminists point the finger of blame at scapegoat class to avoid looking at their own inadequacies and failures...in this case, the entire Male gender. Now where in history have we seen that particular facet of scape-goat blaming behavior before?

I think Rush Limbaugh's coining of the term "FemiNazi" may be a more apropos term than I first thought.