Answering our Femail: Glinda the Good on Feminism
The Czar isnt sure what Island Dweller was ranting about the other day, but obviously Glinda the Good was following it pretty carefully, as she provides her thoughts in response.
My Gracious Leader;
In reading the contribution of Island Dweller I cannot help but think that somewhere in this topic of ‘feminism’ we (females) have lost sight of what the goal of this movement should have been. Perhaps there was a different course that, had it been taken by the ‘Gloria Steinems’ of the 60’s and 70’s, society would have benefited from the movement as opposed to the dissolution of our moral order.
It is all too easy to confuse absolute freedom with absolute power. We see tale after tale via novels, films and other media where the person yielding to this power ends up realizing that they have abused same and in the process ruined their future and security. In this manner women have initiated the destruction of the family unit in our society as well as unraveling the strengths that made our nation possible to begin with.
Instead of bringing themselves to an equal status with the men in society during this ‘feminist revolution’, the temptation of self gratification has taken them on a far different path with the aforementioned consequences. Instead of strengthening the family unit, it has been rendered obsolete and this has been with the full blessing on our government who is using this to increase its very control over every aspect of our lives. By fracturing the family structure the connection with our past and the foundation created by our forebears has made the government the power and structure that people seek.
With the elimination of the need for a male role model in the family the result is more males with no real role in society except as to wield that power of self gratification much as the ‘feminists’ suggested women should do. These men engage in self destructive as well as destruction of others. The lower the economic station in life, the worse this disparity becomes. Inner-city male on male crime rates support my claim. This is due to the wholesale increases in benefits given to single mother families therefore eliminating the need for any bread winners within that family either male or female. In a traditional family, both parents work to provide for their children and way of life. Now, it is not necessary to have a partner and be guaranteed sustenance and shelter in society. I point to the sad state of affairs that is the urban blight in the poorer sections of any town or city. This epidemic of dependency is growing every day.
In my lifetime I have seen the mighty nation that could feed the world and protect freedom for all become a socialist mess where success is punished and dependency on the state rewarded. As I am nearing my 7th decade I know that my parents and grandparents are spinning in their graves as their hard fought for (WWI and WWII) nation’s ideals are being destroyed.
While ‘feminism’ is not the sole culprit in this process, it is a large part of the tools being used by the ‘progressives’ to accomplish their ascent into total power. At this juncture I fear we may have past the ‘point of no return’ as a nation of family values and the only means in which we may resort to restoring this are beyond the electoral process.
I am, as your loyal minion, dedicated to the need to restore sanity to our society and to rebuild and reinforce the family unit. I hope my comments are found to deserve your favor and respect.
Glinda the Good
Most assuredly they are, and your writing is strong and inspiring. The Czar earnestly hopes both you and Island Dweller continue to write in with submissions on whatever topics you deem worthy to share; most enjoyable reading.
To your points, the Czar agrees. In fact, you definitely see through the mask for what feminism is: a political movement. Like many progressive messes, it follows a familiar history.
A small group of smart women decide that women could be more productive to society if traditional constraints were not so binding. This, of course, is a natural and logical extension of post-war activity: in World War I and World War II, as you say, women took over a lot of male-dominated work roles and proved exactly as capable as men. Why not allow women the chance to keep that momentum going? A lot of women liked working outside the home, enjoyed the pay, and were damned good at it. The term feminist was used because, despite the expanding importance of women in power, they wanted to retain their feminine values and unique aspects to problem solving.
So far so good; then the Progressives realized there was powerful momentum in that idea and decided it was better to be ahead of it than in its way. The Progressives introduced themselves to the movement and offered political power and a path to expansion. Within ten years or so, the feminist movement became another Progressive mouthpiece for abortion, government spending, and lesbian studies. One supposes the original founders would in no way recognize their movement today, and would reject everything the Progressives added to it. Today, the word feminist has strongly charged connotations: specifically, when a feminist is involved, you can expect a protest or a lawsuit based on something stupid.
The same trajectory happened on civil rights: a disenfranchised group made some smart political points and gained enough respect that most Americans recognized they were a potential force to be considered. Suddenly, the Progressiveswhose record on race was and remains extremely horrificwere wining and dining them. Now, the movement consists of nothing but boycotts, hollow charges of racism everywhere, and protests.
The gay community is already seeing this happen to them, and shortly the Hispanic community will see their hard-won gains corrupted by this toxic process.
One good thing about Progressivism: because they work in little steps, it tends to be easy to predict their overall strategies.
Божію Поспѣшествующею Милостію Мы, Дима Грозный Императоръ и Самодержецъ Всероссiйскiй, цѣсарь Московскiй. The Czar was born in the steppes of Russia in 1267, and was cheated out of total control of all Russia upon the death of Boris Mikhailovich, who replaced Alexander Yaroslav Nevsky in 1263. However, in 1283, our Czar was passed over due to a clerical error and the rule of all Russia went to his second cousin Daniil (Даниил Александрович), whom Czar still resents. As a half-hearted apology, the Czar was awarded control over Muscovy, inconveniently located 5,000 miles away just outside Chicago. He now spends his time seething about this and writing about other stuff that bothers him.