The thought is certainly most appealing...but I'm not going to hold my breath, waiting for it to happen...the cultural norms, political zeitgeist, and most importantly the behemoth of a system that has been developed to profit from feminist ideology is too large, too pervasive and too entrenched to be declaring the death of the movement anytime soon. It's going to take a cataclysmic event of epic proportions to deliver the wake up call that kills feminism...Nevertheless, Townhall.com columnist, Kathryn Jean Lopez has written a pretty good article about Hillary Clinton and her gender-based campaign to become the first commander-in-chief. Though I disagree with her premise that Clinton's blatant sexism and radical feminist ideology being exposed in her national campaign is a precursor to the eventual death of feminism, she still has a lot of good points in her column:
Enough is enough. Hillary Clinton has made history already; she has shown us that a woman can be a major presidential candidate. But as we are here living history, I'd like it to now be history.
Simply put, I don't want a woman president. Not if she's running to be a "woman president" and not the leader of the United States.
Amen, Sister.
I'm deeply grateful to my junior senator. Her defeat this year would be a significant milestone for American women: The death of the feminist movement. It would mark the end of the silly-women-talk on the national political scene. The beginning of female candidates running as candidates, without a heavy serving of identity politics.
Well, I'm all with you on the defeat part, but as long as family courts continue to define the role of Fatherhood as nothing more than subsidizing the ex-wife in destroying her family; as long as "Women's Studies" continues as a major course of "higher" educational vocation; as long as the holocaust known as "CHOICE" continues to mercilessly slaughter millions of babies in the womb; as long as the media and popular culture continue to promote the "female good/male bad" stereotype, feminism will be far from dead.
But OF COURSE, that doesn't mean defeating Hillary Clinton would not be any less satisfying...
Despite disagreeing with Lopez's statement that a defeated Clinton would be the death knell for feminism in America, I whole-heartedly agree with the conclusion of her piece:
...I have the audacity to hope the next woman who runs will run because she's qualified to be commander in chief, not because she's a Uterine-American.
1 comment:
I only wish it were the death knoll but many women are saying they want to vote for her because she is a woman and "it is about time a woman controlled the White House." The same goes for a number of Obama supporters who want him solely for the color of his skin.
There is a sizable portion of our population that believe men have historically oppressed women. That there is much evidence to the contrary doesn't matter when you have been brainwashed from childhood with this nonsense. So a lot of there people think they will right the ship just by putting a someone with a xx chromosome in the White House. Just as some women cheer that more women than men get college degrees nowadays to make up for the alleged past wrong of more men getting degrees than women( with no evidence that women are actually helping improve society with their new educations which I thought was the point, or interest in the fact that very few men actually went to college in the past.)
I disagree that a woman ever should lead a nation. Arlington is lined with the graves of many young men and very few women for a reason. Men earn leadership with the sacrifices they make. Women can't win battles. It is a disaster to put women on the front lines(IDF tried and no longer does it.) As such, leadership should be for the men only. We are not equal in this regard and no social engineering can fix that. Men will risk your life to protect our freedom and we should defer and submit to you in return.
Post a Comment