Also, Richard is right in that what occurred in the 20th century was irrational, and I think that even the premise laid out in Kapital and the manifesto was irrational, but I think that ST’s point is that the demands were based on a rational thought process (as opposed to religious divination).

My late wife was a Filipino immigrant, and the training manager of an international corporate law firm. She earned well in excess of what most feminist women earn. She was the most vehemently anti-feminist person I’ve ever encountered. She was an entirely traditional Filipino woman, and she excelled as an artist, a business woman, a mother and as a wife.

The notion that feminism is responsible for achievement by women is a lie. The notion that feminism is essential to achievement by women is a lie.

Feminism is a religion. I’ll repeat that as many times as you wish. The hysteria and hyperbole of your responses are, in fact, the proof. You folks are quite thoroughly brainwashed.

What I’m telling you is quite different, something you have not heard before. Listen, little brainwashed boys and girls. The past, as depicted by feminists, is a lie. The villification of the past that is feminism is a wretched lie. Everything you’ve read and heard about how society functioned in the past, as related by feminists, is a lie.

Take some time to consider this.

It is interesting that this site is premised on challenging the most cherished of notions, the leftist propaganda about Vietnam. What cannot be challenged is the lie, the religion, that is feminism.

Leftist women really have you by the balls, boys. It’s funny and tragic at the same time.

The custom that female suffrage replaced had been the rule of human society… The notion that human custom and tradition should immediately be transformed in response to rational demands was, in fact, the idea that led to the slaughter of over 100 million souls in the 20th century… I think we have not adequately considered the damage that the destruction of custom and tradition causes… The damage is to the soul of humans. What we have created in place of the traditional human is a stunted creature lacking in emotional and psychological dimensions…

So let me see if I understand the argument. 1. Women’s sufferage replaced a long-standing tradition. 2. Changing some traditions led to 100 million people dying. 3. Therefore, woman’s sufferage, as a change of tradition, did lots of damage. 4. We are now “stunted creature[s] lacking in emotional and psychological dimensions” because of women’s sufferage.

How’d I do ST?

1. A lot of traditions have changed. Slavery was a pretty long-standing human tradition, and it changed rather suddenly in most (but still not all) parts of the world. Please tell me how we’re suffering from this.

2. It was “changing traditions” that led to mass slaughter in the 20th century? You might say it was new technologies, or a larger world population, or any number of things. It’s a neat trick to pin every death on the boogeyman of “changing traditions.”

3. This is logic of the type a) Thomas is a man, b) some men are assholes, therefore c) Thomas is an asshole. Even if we accept 1. that woman’s sufferage was a change, and that 2. some changes were bad, it doesn’t follow that 3. the change of women’s sufferage was bad.

4. We are? I can’t say I feel “stunted” by the fact that women can vote. Maybe you do? And I’d venture to guess the women themselves feel a whole lot less stunted.

All in all, you’ve failed to convince me of a single deleterious effect of woman’s sufferage. You’ve made a weak analogy to, I think, the rise of communist and fascist ideologies, waved your hands a bunch, and declared us a race of stunted men. This isn’t an argument, Thomas, this is whining.

It’s one thing to say that men sometimes serve as whipping boys in modern society, or that violence against men sometimes gets overlooked. Fine. But you have taken the most extreme reactionary position of advocating against basic rights for women! And indeed, against change per se. If you really want to live like they did 5000 years ago, I suggest you move to the middle east. Leave us in peace in the US of A.

(Note: right before publishing I noticed ST’s latest post. He writes the resort to feminism as a justification is not only weak… it’s a disaster. We’re attacking the traditional societies of Arab cultures unjustly and insanely. Again, this ridiculous love of “tradition” and apologia for mysogynist violence. I meant the “move to the middle east” thing as hyperbole, but maybe ST really would like it. Also, A better rationalization for U.S. actions would be to assist in bringing democracy to the Middle East. What kind of democracy do you have in mind ST? One in which only half the people vote? I’m starting to regret taking the time to respond respectfully to you, as it’s become increasingly clear that you deserve no respect.)

(1) Go to: http://www.HarleysCars.com

The posting of January 25, 2005 is in the archives.

(2) I’ll post the full URL in three parts separated by carrier returns. Stick them together without spaces. (In other words, delete the carrier returns.)

http://shoutingthomas.typepad.com/
harleys_cars_girls_guitar/
2005/01/a_slow_boat_to_.html

http://shoutingthomas.typepad.com/harleys_cars_girls_guitar/2005/01/a_slow_boat_to_.html

The modern feminist movement grew out of the failure of American men to properly defend their country in Vietnam. That failure enabled radical feminism to take root.

Leftist men have become completely manipulated men, struggling with one another in combat over “sensitivity.”

I’ve asked the author of this blog before, and I’ll ask it again. You’ve carefully reconsidered the sledge-hammer brainwashing you received about the Vietnam War. When will you begin to reconsider the sledge-hammer brainwashing in feminism that took place concurrently?

Feminism is a religion, as the tone and hysteria of my respondents makes quite clear. I support the U.S. efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan because I am a patriotic American.

But, the resort to feminism as a justification is not only weak… it’s a disaster. We’re attacking the traditional societies of Arab cultures unjustly and insanely. There was never a rape epidemic in the West. There was never a domestic violence epidemic. These are fabrications of feminist ideology. I suspect that the depictions of Arab societies in western publications is mostly fabricated, focusing on the most extreme instances of behavior. And, I’ve been answered by my respondents with Feminism 101 dogma.

A better rationalization for U.S. actions would be to assist in bringing democracy to the Middle East. In fact, I think that we should use force to defend the enormous Western investment in producing oil in the Middle East. It is indicative of the weakness of Western men that they cannot say: “We bought and paid for the oil and we will fight for what we own.”

The left used to call this kind of attack on another society “cultural imperialism.”

Once again, I wonder when this blogger will begin to consider the endless indoctrination in feminist dogma that she endured, side by side with the leftist indoctrination in the Vietnam War. This seems to be the one dogma that cannot be questioned. Feminism is a religion.

no one has said that men have never been victimized. that is simply not the discussion here.