I recently came across the following website,
NEW: The Network of Enlightened Women.
At face value, much of what this group represents is a somewhat positive development - they are a conservative-based backlash against the feminist liberal culture of college campuses across the country...a reaction to religious-minded women to the Womyn's Studies curriculum.
What's wrong with that, you might ask?
Plenty, if you read further into their agenda and their ideology.
The most glaring point for me is the assumption these "enlightened" women advocate - while they oppose the liberal/libertine excesses of modern feminism, that they reject promiscuity as empowering, that they oppose the inculcation of victimology in women, that they encourage their members to revel in femininity and modesty (all of these are good things), they still accept the basic premise that is the foundation for promoting the feminist movement: that women are morally superior creatures to men, that men were oppressive, and that the initial feminist movement was just and necessary because women were in-equal and oppressed in the past.
In this way, they are actually just as subversive and destructive in promoting their agenda as any other feminist group.
From their "
Educate" page, in discussing promiscuity, we get this gem:
By women’s view of empowerment being linked to sexual promiscuity we in fact undermine the very foundations of femininity. This promiscuity devalues women by men seeing them as something that can be used for their own ends and women accepting this status as the tools of men.
Feminists threw away the moral superiority of women, a beautiful counteraction to the physical superiority of men.
If they had used any other term, like emotional bonding, or nurturing or some other feminine asset as a superior trait that balances out men's physical superiority, there would be nothing wrong with this statement.
But no...what we get is elitist, hubris-laden femininity.
It is a manifestation of "benevolent" Matriarchy...
..but it is Matriarchy nonetheless.
See, "moral superiority" has nothing to do with gender. It is a personal character trait that does not develop innately...but rather, it is a conscious decision to adhere to an abstract principle, even if it painful or detrimental to the person that decides to adhere to it.
Just how "morally superior" is ANY woman that ascribes moral INFERIORITY to an entire class of people, based on nothing but their gender?
Just like the most ardent, man hating feminazi, these upstanding, modest and feminine women of religious conviction are just as convinced of their superiority over men when it comes to the idea of
character.
It gets worse too.
On the next issue of the educate page, they resort to the old shaming language of any other strident feminist...
Since January, students have been nominating male ASU students for performing a gentlemanly act. The ten most-nominated gentlemen will be honored at a catered dinner event.
To promote the Showcase, the NeW chapter at ASU has created a short video asking students four questions: What is a gentleman? What are the characteristics of a gentleman? Are there gentlemen at ASU? Are gentlemen an endangered species?
Student answers range from the serious to the comical. For example, some student responses to the question “What is a gentleman?” include, “just a man that has manners I guess,” “well, we don’t know. We haven’t ever seen one before,” “someone who opens doors, is chivalrous, and a nice guy,” “a gentlemen is a person that likes to do nice things and doesn’t really ask for anything in return” and “someone who is nice and courteous and is always looking out for other people before themselves.”
Oh the irony.
You conservative, modest women long for the days of chivalry! If only Men would be Gentlemen again! If only men would be nice and courteous and look out for other people (that should be replaced by "female"), before themselves, everything would be just fine and dandy again!
See...it's an attitude that is still based on female superiority.
These conceited ladies completely fail to understand the truth of their predicament.
There are no gentlemen anymore, because there are
no more ladies.
