January 28, 2005

Small Dead Feminist

I don't believe I've expressed my views on feminism.

This bit at I Could be wrong has prompted me to share.

If there are prejudices in Universities against women in science, they are remarkably subtle. The prejudices against men are institutionalized and overt. Concerning institutional restrictions against any speech the feminists don't like: these restrictions are massive, overpowering, and virtually 100% intimidating. On the rare occasion such speech is uttered by a professor in a prominent university, it tends to be national news.

I speak as a woman who has worked in a male work setting for all of my adult life. I can say with some authority that the time has come to dismantle organized feminism.

Allow me to first acknowledge the pioneering work of those who did break ground in the struggle for equality rights for women - the right to vote, the right to equal opportunity in politics and employment and property rights. I have gratitude and the deepest respect for the accomplishments of those who were, at the time, considered little more than legal property, subject to the authority of male family members.

As they say, though - "that was then, and this is now". The "then" that "was" has been consigned to the dustbin of history for quite a long time. What loose threads remained in women's equality were tied up a long time ago.

If women were the rational, thinking human beings our acronymed advocates claim we are, "organized feminism" could even choose to commemorate the moment of the movement's modern obsolescence  - if "organized feminism" wasn't such a monotonously predictable leftist waste of female flesh.

The moment occured in 1979.

It came in the person of a woman named Margaret Thatcher.

Alas, in the eyes of organized feminism, this didn't "count". Margaret Thatcher's ascent to the Prime Ministerial post in Great Britain - and two time re-election? Meaningless. An irrelevant footnote of history not worthy of true feminist recognition.

You see, Maggie Thatcher was a conservative, which unfortunately, made her a man.

(Had the grand "Iron Lady" only had the good sense to be a lesbian, the feminist movement would have died a natural death in an uncontrolled chain reaction of spontanious head explosions - but such was not to be.)

25 years have now passed, and Maggie Thatcher has lived long enough to see her accomplishments safely consigned to history. If her tenure as three-time Prime Minister of Great Britain are not sufficient to put the feminist movement to bed with a warm pat and a "well done", well, this whole "equality" thing was just not meant to be.

Though women of today have demonstrated the ability to accumlate vast wealth and govern great nations, while women represent, numerically, the majority of humankind, we must accept that true "equality" can never be ours. The feminist movement has failed, through no fault of our own. It's just that the goal wasn't valid to begin with.

There's no way around it, girls. It is time to throw in the towel and accept our inferiority to men.

Posted by Kate at January 28, 2005 2:26 AM

Estrogen Week: Putting A Bow On It 1 from Ilyka Damen
We're wrapping up Estrogen Week with a couple of link round-ups featuring posts from women bloggers. Here's your first round-up filled with estrogen from the right side of the political spectrum. Of All People from Not Exactly Rocket Science (who,... [Read More]

Tracked on February 26, 2005 8:22 PM

Estrogen Week: Putting A Bow On It 1 from Plum Crazy
We’re wrapping up Estrogen Week with a couple of link round-ups featuring posts from women bloggers. Here’s your first round-up filled with estrogen from the right side of the political spectrum. Of All People from Not Exactly Rocket Scienc... [Read More]

Tracked on February 26, 2005 8:25 PM


Coulter, Ann. How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must), Crown Forum, New York 2004, pp324-330.

Posted by: JJM at January 28, 2005 5:13 AM

Don't be too pessimistic. It is true that in academia, most women are of the sort that reject the accomplishments of Lady Thatcher. However, in the real world, there is something good happening, I think. Women who meet with great success by way of their own merits are getting very fed up with women who have no merit but expect success to be their right. It will be the successful women who put an end to organized feminism, or, at least, that will remove its legitimacy. In the meantime, on campuses across the nation we will continue to see Cultural Seminars with C. Parrish and J. Rebbick as plenary speakers.

Posted by: keith at January 28, 2005 7:44 AM

Sorry Kate, I have to disagree, please correct me if I'm wrong but I beleive the forces of repression are on the march here in Canada and worldwide.McGinty's plan to bring in Shiara Law shows that Women's rights in this country are in danger of being reversed. There is a huge male segment in our society who treat women as property right now! It's also exasperated by the fact that there are some prominent feminists who support this here in Ontario. As a male conservative living here, I can only wonder why they would do this!

Posted by: Headshaker at January 28, 2005 7:52 AM

They still have a cause, they just don;t have a mission to go along with it.

"accept our inferiority to men".

Well, okay, if you really have to.

Posted by: Jay at January 28, 2005 9:10 AM

Although I'm sure you've read it, Kate, I suggest Christine Hoff Sommers' Who Stole Feminism.

Before I read that book I thought feminism was a little weird and radical but worthy movement that just wanted equality.

After that, I realized feminism was just an overarching totalitarian movement with the pretension of world domination.

I was literally scared, as a man.

Now I just laugh. It will be interesting to see how deep the complete indifference to Condi Rice will alienate many women

Posted by: Raskolnikov at January 28, 2005 9:34 AM

This is "Kate Classic," if I may say, and worthy of inclusion under "Best of SDA."

Posted by: Charles MacDonald at January 28, 2005 11:06 AM

The on-going feminist movement, considering the goal has already been accomplished, is an embarassment to women who are proud to be female. It is the reason that women cannot stay home and have babies anymore. One extreme always seems to lead to the opposite extreme, and girls dressed and talked and acted like men for so long that we now have pre-teen girls dressing like slutty night-club goers.

Posted by: ld at January 28, 2005 11:52 AM

This was a fairly eloquent dissertation on the subject, but it was completely defeated by the way it ended. "...accept our inferiority to men??" No way, women are NOT inferior to men! Both have made critical contributions to the evolution of humankind in accordance with their respective biologies. Albeit different contributions, but certainly not UNEQUAL contributions.

Posted by: Big Momma at January 28, 2005 12:03 PM

Was this sarcasm, or do you think in terms of a balance of powers,ebbing and flowing on a perpetual chit list,subject to tallies, and then the inevitable recrimminations? I'd hope it was the former, but maybe your style is drier than a chinook ;-)

Please advise those of us, east of Lake Kenora ;-)

Posted by: howie meeker at January 28, 2005 1:07 PM

Kate: spoken like a true woman, who knows where her power really rests.

Methinks thou will rule thy roost with grace and feminine wiles.

Posted by: Jeff H at January 28, 2005 1:38 PM

Seriously mis-paraphrasing Groucho Marx:

"I would never want to be a member of any club that gives you a merit badge for destroying your own offspring."

Posted by: Cal at January 28, 2005 2:50 PM

settle for mere equality and you sell yourself short, go for all the market will bear.

Posted by: JSAllison at January 28, 2005 5:00 PM

Generally, at SDA, if you're in doubt about my commentary, default to sarcasm.

Posted by: Kate at January 28, 2005 6:23 PM

If the feminist movement still had any legitimacy after Margaret Thatcher, it certainly didn't after sticking up for Bill Clinton, who embodied everything they claim to oppose.

Posted by: Van Helsing at January 28, 2005 7:11 PM

...Bill Clinton, who embodied everything they claim to oppose.

Not quite. Clinton supported a woman's "right" to choose (to kill her unborn baby rather than endure nine months of significant bloating, physical discomfort and inconvenience).

So all was forgiven. And the women assaulted by Clinton? They were necesary sacrifices on the road to freedom.

Posted by: Terry Gain at January 28, 2005 7:39 PM