Radical feminism actually drew a line in the sand and declared war against men without the backing of most women in America. Feminism gave us the war of the sexes. Among other outlandish claims, Wikipedia reports that radical feminists “assert that all men benefit from the oppression of women.” Radical feminists wanted to compete with the male brutes. They wanted to compete like the male brutes. Thanks to the elite leaders of feminism, the wish was granted. Females to a minor extent glorify in becoming brutes. A glorious legacy to feminist leaders whom have the temerity to show their face and claim it is their gift to society giving us the elite female brute.
Radical feminists and their ideology over time found their way into government, television and news media and everywhere else that controls the means of propaganda and legislation. One only has to remember that these women are the elites. They have a college education paid for by rich parents and many of them have trust-funds taking them through life. Much of the work of life and thinking has been done for them. Now as adults thinking is foreign to them and they have only what has gotten them this far in life and that is emotions, money, power, and greed. So, when the women’s movement then and now wants to be heard they have friends in high places and push their agenda through just like any other group of bullies no matter if their agenda is bad for other women which means most women because the elites are quite few.
Radical feminists gave us “political lesbianism”. Heterosexuality was seen as another construct of the patriarchal society. Sex was something men invented and used as a tool to further oppress and dominate women. One notable feminist said all heterosexual sex is rape. That is the thinking of the radical feminists. Basically, it is better to be lesbian than give into heterosexuality and become an unwitting accomplice to the patriarch dominance. It is little wonder that radical feminists were then labeled as “man-haters”. It was then as it is now an appropriate term that still does not capture the full breath of radical feminists. They are much more than man-haters. Radical feminists hate themselves for not being men. They hate other women who are feminine and not aligned with their agenda. In other words, they hate other women for being women. Most of all, radical feminist hate men.
“I feel that ‘man-hating’ is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them.”
—Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor
Feminists Against Pornography
Radical feminism gave us a war against pornography in the 1970s. Radical feminists saw pornography as another patriarchal construct and vehicle to denigrate and objectify women. Never mind that some women held opposing views on the subject. Never mind that many of the women in pornography were in it for the sex and of their own free will. Feminists could care less that some women are in the adult video industry for the money. Who cares if women employed in the adult video industry work of their own free will? Radical feminists took it upon themselves to speak for all women and of course they were heard and you know why. With religion standing behind them, the war against porn was begun and ended simply ruining the lives of select individuals. The war was a bust! Pornography or the adult video industry continues and flourishes to this day only raking in upwards of $15 billion annually.
Feminists Against Beauty
High heels and other female accoutrements were thrown in bins and on stage to protest the Miss America Pageant in 1968. The radical feminists were at it again. What did feminists have against beauty? They must have seen beauty pageants as a means of objectifying women and as such demeaning them. Beauty contests were part of the patriarchal construct and a part of the system to be torn down according to feminists. Never mind if women participating in beauty pageants and women watching beauty contestants compete did so of their own free will. Feminists never seem to take free will into account when they form and push their agendas on other women and the rest of America. Though it was largely unsuccessful, the war against beauty continues to this day as a testament to the long life of zombies and their poisonous concepts.
Speaking off the cuff at a fundraiser in California, President Barrack Obama called California Attorney General Kamala Harris “the best looking attorney general in the country.” Soon after his comment he came under fire from feminists as we should now expect. Just who those feminists were complaining about his comments is a mystery. Radical feminists hold top positions at every major television network in the country. Was it a radical feminist who complained from some feminist organization or was it someone in the media? I should like that person or persons to stand up and identify themselves. Stand up and be counted. Stand and defend your complaint against the Obama. I believe your claim is that to call a successful woman beautiful is to objectify her and demean her intellectual achievements. Is that about right? The President should apologize and did apologize for his statements because it demeans women? Did California Attorney General Kamala Harris complain about Obama’s comments? No answer. Once again the feminists take it upon themselves to speak for all women in America. All women in America have never been in line with the feminist agenda. Most women in America would not follow a bunch of man-haters who also hate women and beauty. It is for Kamala Harris to respond to Obama’s comments and not some organization of female brutes with friends in high places who hate themselves, other women, and especially men.
Beauty is beauty and as such is in the eye of the beholder. Beauty is a value to humans as much as intelligence is depending on job qualifications. Beauty will always be a value in human relationships. A person has as much to do with their beauty as they do with their height. We are born with what we are born with and we go from there. Physical values some of us have are greater than others. Beauty is one of the values that are subjective. Still, it is a value. All values can and should be complimented in humans. Feminists wish to negate a value. Why?
Could it be that feminists wish to eradicate beauty because it really does demean women? How does calling a woman beautiful objectify her? That is to say, does calling a woman beautiful turn her into a mere object and not a human being? How? Are feminists once again foisting their morality and agenda on the rest of America no matter that it is completely untrue and in fact anti-human? Yes. Anyone walking into a room walks in with their appearance first which will be judged to be beautiful by some people. Unless such a person is reciting Shakespeare as they enter the room then the first reaction will be to appearance. There is nothing wrong with such a reaction and to negate it for any reason is to negate a natural part of humanity. In the case of Kamala Harris, that she would have high intellect to achieve her position as California Attorney is a given. Even if she should go on to great achievements in her position as Attorney General she will still be regarded by a great deal of men and women for her beauty. Other people, depending on their values, will regard her first for her theoretical great achievements. As neither position is negative and in fact compliments her, why would anyone wish to negate such opinions or reactions? Could it be that feminists wish to negate beauty out of jealousy?
Nature has decided that the male of the species needs to be attracted to the females in order for the species to propagate. No attraction and there will be no propagating. Men find women attractive and often that attractiveness elicits a response. Unless such a response is in some way vulgar or otherwise offensive, how would a woman be demeaned? Whatever attractive qualities a woman has that are noticed to the point of eliciting a response from a man have got to be good qualities. It is a part of being human to notice such qualities and sometimes react. When humans lived in caves, the dynamic was the same but more brutal. How does one demean a woman by complimenting her good qualities? Are we only allowed to say a woman is really smart? Are we only allowed to compliment her intelligence? Why? How does calling a woman beautiful demean her when it in fact is existentially the greatest compliment one can pay to a woman? Who made feminists God?
Feminists want equality alright. They want equality with beautiful women. By eradicating the term beauty, they then can compete on an equal playing field. Beauty is to mean nothing at all. Did the feminists ever once ask themselves if some women enjoy being objectified? The entire modeling and fashion industry is built on objectification. The war against beauty was about as successful as the war against porn. Still, something lingers over the porn industry just like it lingers over beauty and that is the spirit of evil. Feminists may have had good intentions in their fight for equality but that which results in evil by the way of good intentions is just as evil to the masses as if it were just pure evil. There is no difference in the end. Furthermore, feminists have had plenty of time to reflect on their insane anti-human agenda. To be against beauty in women is to be anti-human.