The Feminist Movement has Cannibalized Its Own Core Values, Become Its Own Worst Enemy,

and Eats Alive Anyone, Man or Woman,

who Dares Challenge It.

Ouroburus

Like the Egyptian Ouroburus, which is a union of the Sun God and the God of the Underworld and devours its own tale, the American Feminist Movement has turned on itself, dragging its initially enlightened values into a realm of darkness.

Merriam-Webster defines “feminism” as “the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes”, and it was recently the 13th most popular word in their online look-ups – a popular topic, but not a popular personal identity (see poll results below).

“Feminism emphasizes the importance of such values as co-operation, tolerance, nurturance, and the freedom for each person to achieve her or his potential. Feminists are not against men as individuals. What they are against is the oppressive and outdated social structure which forces both men and women into positions which are false and antagonistic.”

– “Rethinking Feminism“, the Alice Paul Women’s Center at Swarthmore College (1981)

For an ostensibly progressive social movement – based on the principles or aimed at the goals of equality, cooperation, tolerance and individual freedom of expression – US feminist history has been marked by profound divisions, dissension and exclusion, and has become something bordering on sociopathic.

Some prominent early feminists – such as Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton – opposed the 15th Amendment because it gave suffrage to “ignorant” black and immigrant males while excluding educated native-born women like themselves. Later, women of color felt marginalized or entirely excluded from mainstream feminism, which they saw as a lily-white middle-class movement; and then gender-queer women felt marginalized in the movement. Betty Friedan, the founder of the National Organization for Women, lamented the “lavender menace” of lesbians infiltrating the women’s movement, and later “women-born women” did not want to include transgender women into their ranks.

But the most profound rift in the feminist movement began with what was later called “second-wave feminism”, or the women’s liberation movement of the 1960s that achieved prominence and vast cultural impact in the 1970s, changing our language, our perspectives and our laws. It was in 1972 that both the Title IX amendment to the 1965 Higher Education Act and the Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution were passed in Congress (the ERA, of course, never achieved the necessary state approval).

I will label this new form of feminism as Victim Feminism, to differentiate it from the Equity Feminism of the 19th and early 20th centuries (and that the more thoughtful contemporary feminists espouse).

A Brief History of the Movement

[For a more complete perspective, see When Progressive Social Change Becomes Regressive Ideology: From Women’s Liberation to Cultural Misandry.]

The Feminist Movement, begun in America by Quaker-influenced abolitionist women who believed that men and women were equal under God and should be treated equally under the laws of the State had, by the latter half of the 20th century, shifted to one focused on empowerment rather than equality, one based on a political philosophy of oppression in which women are universal victims and men were universal villains.

This shift began in the 1960s, with separatist and gender identity strands of feminism, including a distinct lesbian feminist element, and with a strong ideological belief in women’s superiority coupled with an overt expression of man-hating – jettisoning the goals of gender equality and mutuality, and becoming profoundly intolerant, exclusive and divisive.

Selfie from Tumbl Page Women Against Feminism

Selfie from Tumblr Page Women Against Feminism

With an ideological foundation built on a re-definition of patriarchy (turning a neutral anthropological term into an all-encompassing form of oppression, which I will note as capital-P Patriarchy), the second-wave feminist movement devolved into a new form of Puritanism (which once hung Quakers from trees), with an absolutist belief in women’s purity (e.g. “women never lie about rape”) and an equally absolutist belief that men as a class are guilty of oppressing women (and have been since the beginning of time).

The US feminist movement, which was begun based on spiritual principles of gender equality and aimed at legal and political inclusion, morphed into a self-serving and in some ways culturally regressive cult-like movement with unquestioning allegiance to a theoretical dogma that is more invention than truth and which has reversed social and legal inequalities to the detriment of men as a class (not by accident but by design) and of women as well.

Feminist Popularity Today

By 2013, a HuffPost/YouGov poll found that just 20% of Americans (23% of women and 16% of men) considered themselves feminists. But asked if they believe that “men and women should be social, political, and economic equals”, 82% of the survey respondents (equal percentages of men and women) said they did.

This suggests that most Americans distinguish “feminism” from the equal rights movement. Interestingly, of the men who considered themselves feminists, 42% felt they were “strong feminists”, while of the women feminists only 22% considered themselves to hold the view strongly, suggesting that women’s loyalty to the movement was quite weak, and that men may be holding onto the label in order to please and protect women (an expression of paternalism, which itself is an element of patriarchy).

In a 2014 Economist/YouGov Poll, just one in four Americans (one in three women) called themselves feminists. When told that one dictionary definition of “feminist” is “someone who believes in the social, political and economic equality of women”, even then 40% of Americans – including half of men and nearly a third of women – said they did not think of themselves as a feminist. One in four adults (28% of men and 24% of women) agreed that the term “feminist” was an insult, and only 14% (11% of men and 18% of women) thought of it as a compliment.

This suggests that most Americans – male and female alike – do not associate being a feminist with either support of equal rights or anything progressive or constructive. They may well be correct in that assessment.

Selfie from Tumbl Page Women Against Feminism

Selfie from Tumblr Page Women Against Feminism

The Devolution of Feminism – The Rise of the Rape Culture Myth

A woman as powerful as Catherine Comins, assistant dean of student life at Vassar College, was quoted in a 2001 Time Magazine article “When Is It Rape”?, that men who are unjustly accused can sometimes gain from the experience.

“They have a lot of pain, but it is not a pain that I would necessarily have spared them. I think it ideally initiates a process of self-exploration. ‘How do I see women?’ ‘If I didn’t violate her, could I have?’ ‘Do I have the potential to do to her what they say I did?’ Those are good questions.”

As esteemed Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz told Time magazine, referring to the new Harvard policy on campus sexual assault complaints (similar to those mandated at every university), it “was written by people who think sexual assault is so heinous a crime that even innocence is not a defense”.

When California, in September 2014, became the first state to pass an Affirmative Consent or “Yes Means Yes” law, Ezra Klein, Editor-in-Chief of Vox, admitted that under this new definition “too much counts as sexual assault” and that innocent students will be branded as rapists. Yet he supported it anyway because “men need to feel a cold spike of fear”.

That same 2001 Time Magazine article noted that activists “see rape as a metaphor, its definition swelling to cover any kind of oppression of women”. Hence “rape culture” has come to be a synonym for “Patriarchy”, and “rape” has come to mean any subjective experience of disempowerment  or disrespect experienced by a woman. Thus women speak of visual, verbal and psychological “rape”.

Google Analytics - "Rape Culture" US Trends Online

Google Analytics – “Rape Culture” US Trends Online

“Politically, I call it rape whenever a woman has sex and feels violated,” wrote Dr. Catharine MacKinnon in her 1987 book Feminism Unmodified, rendering rape a subjective experience rather than a definable objective reality such as can be codified in law.

“Sexual violence includes any physical, visual, verbal or sexual act that is experienced by the woman or girl, at the time or later, as a threat, invasion or assault that has the effect of hurting her or degrading her and/or taken away her ability to control intimate contact.” – Dr. Liz Kelly, Surviving Sexual Violence, 1991. This has become the basis for the myth that rape and sexual assault is a common problem on America’s college campuses, by extending its definition to include any word or look as well as deed that a women initially brushed off but is later convinced was something far more pernicious than it seemed at the time.

Since the early 1960s, Robin Morgan was a leader of the radical feminist movement, in the US and internationally. Her 1970 anthology Sisterhood Is Powerful  has been widely credited with helping to start the second wave feminist movement in the US, and was cited by the New York Public Library as “one of the 100 most influential books of the 20th Century”, along with those of Sigmund Freud and Karl Marx. She was also the editor of Ms. Magazine (a contributing editor since the mid-1970s and editor-in-chief from 1989 to 1994), which first publicized the “1-in-5” college sexual assault myth in 1987.

As the 1974 Iowa State University keynote speaker, Robin Morgan said that feminists hate men and that the movement wasn’t about equality but about women attaining power. In her book, Going Too Far: The Personal Chronicle of a Feminist (1978), Morgan wrote “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.”

“I claim that rape exists any time sexual intercourse occurs when it has not been initiated by the woman, out of her own genuine affection and desire.” – Robin Morgan

Radical lesbian feminist and theologian Mary Daly argued that sexual equality between men and women was not possible and that women, due to their superior capacities, should rule men. In a 1999 interview for EnlightenNext magazine, Daly argued: “If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic reduction of the population of males.”

“Under patriarchy, every woman’s son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman. Heterosexual intercourse is the pure, formalized expression of contempt for women’s bodies.” – Andrea Dworkin, Our Blood (1976)

“All men are rapists and that’s all they are.” – Marilyn French’s character Val, a militant radical feminist, in The Women’s Room (1977)

Rape “is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear.” – Susan Brownmiller, Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape (1975), identified by the New York Public Library as one of 100 most important books of the 20th Century

“When a woman reaches an orgasm with a man she is only collaborating with the patriarchal system, eroticizing her own oppression….” – Sheila Jeffreys, radical lesbian feminist

“The social requirements of heterosexuality… institutionalizes male sexual dominance and female sexual submission… For women it is difficult to distinguish [sex and rape] under conditions of male dominance.” – Catherine MacKinnon, Feminism, Marxism, Method, and the State: Toward Feminist Jurisprudence (1983)

“Men’s sexuality is mean and violent… Satan-like, men possess women, making their wicked fantasies and desires women’s own. A woman who has sex with a man, therefore, does so against her will, even if she does not feel forced.” – Judith Levine, My Enemy, My Love: Man-Hating and Ambivalence in Women’s Lives (1992)

“Marriage as an institution developed from rape as a practice. Rape, originally defined as abduction, became marriage by capture. Marriage meant the taking was to extend in time, to be not only use of but possession of, or ownership … The penis must embody the violence of the male in order for him to be male. Violence is male; the male is the penis; violence is the penis.” – Andrea Dworkin, Pornography: Men Possessing Women (1981)

“Sex is the cross on which women are crucified … Sex can only be adequately defined as universal rape.” – Hodee Edwards, ‘Rape defines Sex’

Ironically, by stipulating that all women are at all times subject to the oppression of a male-dominated society, and that all heterosexual PIV (penis-in-vagina) sex is rape, these highly influential feminists, as conservative commenter George Will accurately stated, celebrate the victimhood of women. They also demonize both men and masculinity. (George Will, of course, was savaged for his remark, the president of NOW demanded he be fired from the Washington Post, and some media outlets dropped his syndicated column.)

Will’s indictable offense was this:

“Colleges and universities are being educated by Washington and are finding the experience excruciating. They are learning that when they say campus victimizations are ubiquitous (“micro-aggressions”, often not discernible to the untutored eye, are everywhere), and that when they make victimhood a coveted status that confers privileges, victims proliferate. And academia’s progressivism has rendered it intellectually defenseless now that progressivism’s achievement, the regulatory state, has decided it is academia’s turn to be broken to government’s saddle.”

The Equity Feminist Reaction to Victim Feminism

In 2002, Charlotte Hays (senior editor of The Women’s Quarterly), wrote: “That the anti-male philosophy of radical feminism has filtered into the culture at large is incontestable; indeed, this attitude has become so pervasive that we hardly notice it any longer”.

Feminist author bell hooks (a.k.a. Gloria Jean Watkins) has criticized separatist strands of feminism as “reactionary” for promoting the notion that men are inherently immoral and inferior. In Feminism is For Everybody, she argued that the anti-male strand of feminism led to an unnecessary rift between the men’s movement and the women’s movement.

Naomi Wolf in Fire With Fire  contrasted “power feminism” with “victim feminism”, arguing that the latter promotes the “angelization” of women as victims that speak with a pure voice and inversely demonizes men as inherently amoral. Wolf’s analysis of victim feminism echoes the criticism that Betty Friedan made of female chauvinism which she defined as “the assumption that women have any moral or spiritual superiority as a class”.

Wendy McElroy, an individualist feminist, wrote in 2001 that “a hot anger toward men seems to have turned into a cold hatred”. She argued it was a misandrist (male-hating) position to consider men, as a class, to be irreformable or rapists. McElroy stated “a new ideology has come to the forefront… radical or gender feminism”, one that has “joined hands with the political correctness movement that condemns the panorama of western civilization as sexist and racist: the product of dead white males” (Sexual Correctness: The Gender-Feminist Attack on Women, 2001).

In 2001, novelist Doris Lessing delivered a speech at the Edinburgh Books Festival criticizing a “lazy and insidious” culture that had taken hold within feminism that reveled in flailing men. Lessing stated “I find myself increasingly shocked at the unthinking and automatic rubbishing of men which is now so part of our culture that it is hardly even noticed”.

Barbara Kay, a Canadian Journalist, has been critical of feminist Mary Koss’s discussion of “rape culture”, describing the notion that “rape represents an extreme behavior but one that is on a continuum with normal male behavior within the culture” as “remarkably misandric”.

In “Sexism, Misandry, and Male-Bashing” by Redstocking (Cassandra Woolf, 2012):

“I attended Fordham University as a sophomore the year they admitted women as freshmen and was often the only woman in my classes… Misandry, hatred and disdain for men in general, is probably the most underused word in progressive political debate. Although a lifelong feminist, I have always loathed knee-jerk male-bashing and defended men against stereotyping… Both men and women can be sexists; both men and women can be the victim of sexism.”

“All of us are crippled by such sexist attitudes. Preschools and elementary schools are a better match for most girls. Boys too often wind up on medication so they can conform to classroom rules and expectations. The idea that every man is a potential rapist or sexual predator is hideously sexist.”

Religious Studies professors Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young, in their 2001 three-book series Beyond the Fall of Man, agree that misandry as a form of prejudice and discrimination has become institutionalized in North American society.

“The worldview of our society has become increasingly both gynocentric (focused on the needs and problems of women) and misandric (focused on the evils and inadequacies of men)…We argue that ideological feminists have played an important role in creating the gynocentric worldview and disseminating it.”

– Katherine K. Young and Paul Nathanson, Spreading Misandry: The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture (2001).

Camille Paglia is professor of humanities at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia, and Christina Sommers is an associate professor of philosophy at Clark University. In her book, Who Stole Feminism, Sommers accuses activist women of betraying the women’s movement. She wrote the book, she says, because she is a feminist who does not like what feminism has become. The two were interviewed on PBS in 1995. Both women consider themselves “equity feminists”, as distinguished from “gender feminists”. Following are excerpts of their conversation.

Ms. Sommers: The orthodox feminists are so carried away with victimology, with a rhetoric of male-bashing that it’s full of female chauvinists, if you will. Also, women are quite eager to censor, to silence. And what concerns me most as a philosopher is it’s become very anti-intellectual, and I think it poses a serious risk to young women in the universities. Women’s studies classes are increasingly a kind of initiation into the most radical wing, the most intolerant wing, of the feminist movement.

Ms. Paglia: I wrote a piece on date rape for Newsday in January of 1991… [that] begins with the line “Rape is an outrage that cannot be tolerated in civilized society.” I absolutely abhor this broadening of the idea of rape, which is an atrocity, to those things that go wrong on a date – acquaintances, little things, miscommunications – on pampered elite college campuses.

I believe, for example, in moderate sexual harassment guidelines. I lobbied for their adoption at my university in 1986. But I put into my proposal a strict penalty for false accusation. I don’t like the situation where the word of any woman is weighed above the testimony of any man.

Ms. Sommers: I think we have to save young women from the feminists. That’s at the top of my agenda. And I say that as a very committed feminist philosopher

Ms. Paglia: The time for hostility to men is past… What we have to do now is get over that anger toward men, and we have to bring the sexes back together. Reconciliation between the sexes is the first order of business.

A Gen-Xer Denounces Victim Feminism

The ground-breaking book, The Morning After: Sex, Fear, and Feminism by Katie Roiphe (1994), describes how the feminist movement has begun to cannibalize its own core values and become its own worst enemy.

When Katie Roiphe arrived at Harvard in the fall of 1986, she found that the feminism she had been raised to believe in had been radically transformed. At Harvard, and later as a doctoral student at Princeton, Roiphe saw a thoroughly new phenomenon taking shape on campus: the emergence of a culture captivated by victimization, and of a new bedroom politics in the university, cloaked in outdated assumptions about the way men and women experience sex.

Twenty-four-year-old Katie Roiphe was the first of the Gen-Xers to speak out publicly against the intolerant turn the women’s movement has taken, and in The Morning After she casts a critical eye on what she calls the mating rituals of a rape-sensitive community. From Take Back the Night marches to rape-crisis feminists and the growing campus concern with sexual harassment, Roiphe shows us a generation of women whose values are strikingly similar to those their mothers and grandmothers fought so hard to escape from – a generation yearning for regulation, fearful of its sexuality, and animated by a nostalgia for days of greater social control.

To Katie Roiphe, feminism had always meant freedom – but she was shocked to discover that the same movement that had once promised women a voice was now being used to tell them what they ought to say and think and feel. The Morning After arose out of her frustration with today’s feminism and with the hypocrisy of a culture that idealizes freedom of speech but refuses to tolerate dissent.

The federal war on campus rape is unfolding amid a revival of what Katie Roiphe dubbed “rape-crisis feminism” – a loosely defined ideology that views sexual violence as the cornerstone of male oppression of women, expands the definition of rape to include a wide range of sexual acts involving no physical force or threat, and elevates the truth of women’s claims of sexual victimization to nearly untouchable status.

“Rape-culture feminism promotes not only a toxic view of relationships but a skewed and dangerous view of justice. Its key tenets: 1) Women almost never lie when they report a sex crime, and to doubt them is to perpetuate rape culture; 2) rape is any sexual act in which the woman feels violated – unless she suffers from false consciousness and needs to be educated about her violation; 3) rape includes situations in which the woman agrees to sex because of persistent advances, “emotional coercion” or intoxication – or because she doesn’t have the nerve to say no; 4) no matter how willing the woman appears to be, it is the man’s responsibility to ensure explicit consent – or he may be guilty of rape.”

“The inroads these ideas could make in the actual justice system have been limited by constitutional protections for the accused, including the presumption of innocence, a high standard of proof, and the right to confront the accusing witness. But colleges are almost perfect laboratories for feminist rape prosecutions, even if the penalty can be no worse than getting expelled.”

– “Guilty Until Proven Innocent: How the Government Encourages Kangaroo Courts for Sex Crimes on Campus“, by Cathy Young.

Cathy Young continues:

“The campus is a place where sex happens a lot – including sex in random, often drunken encounters rife with potential for misunderstanding and regret. The Online College Social Life Survey, collected from nearly 25,000 students on 20 campuses from 2005 to 2011, found that women and men alike drink heavily when hooking up with a casual partner: an average of five alcoholic drinks for women, six for men. When you try to criminalize much of this confused and confusing sex, subjecting it to second-guessing by secretive quasi-judicial panels operating under arbitrary rules and influenced by the deference to feminist orthodoxy that prevails on many campuses, the results will not be pretty.”

“Complaints from all sides about the way colleges handle sexual assault reports raise the question: Why should an offense as serious as rape be “prosecuted” by a college, rather than turned over to the police? The answer is that the vast majority of these charges would be unlikely to survive the most basic legal scrutiny.”

“The wheel has come full circle: Forty years ago, feminists argued that rape should be treated the same as other crimes against persons. Today the progressive position appears to be that since rape is harder to prove than other crimes (particularly when it is defined so that it does not require physical coercion, threats of violence, or incapacitation), it should receive special treatment.”

Reverse Gender Discrimination Goes Mainstream

Moreso than in the anti-racism movement (which is often accused of this), modern-day feminism has demanded – and achieved – a reverse discrimination, one that favors women over men, particularly when anyone cries “rape” on college campuses.

And anyone, man or woman, who dares challenge or even question the “rape culture” orthodoxy or the government and college over-correction, is viciously attacked and trashed as a “rape denialist” or a “rape apologist”. Men are dismissed as MRAs (Men’s Rights Activists) or misogynist, as if to be supportive of men’s rights not only denies women’s rights but necessarily requires misogyny (this is particularly ironic given the profoundly misandrist nature of Victim Feminism, and is itself a form of denial and projection).

 

Women's Studies

Ironically, this new form of Victim Feminism infantilizes women by denying their personal agency (making men 100% responsible for what happens behind closed doors), diminishes women by insisting that those who do not recognize their oppression are suffering from Patriarchal consciousness and require forced re-education, and negates women’s individuality and intelligence by establishing a required dogma that demands uncritical acceptance.

Of course, it also diminishes, dismisses and demonizes men, thereby creating two classes based on biological sex, with women being the superior beings (who nevertheless require extensive government protection).

When even the President and dozens of US Senators and Representatives write legislation or establish policies to address a “rape culture”, it has become evident that the Victim Feminist perspective has established itself in the heart of American culture, thought and law. And this demonstrates how successfully feminism has cannibalized its own core principles and devours anyone, woman or man, who dares challenge the current orthodoxy.

***********************************************************************************

Postscript 

I Aborted My Baby – Because it was a Boy

***********************************************************************************

The selective abortion of female fetuses is most common in areas where cultural norms value male children over female children, especially in parts of People’s Republic of China, India, Pakistan, the Caucasus, and Southeast Europe. It is a practice often criticized by feminists, who find themselves caught between support for women’s right-to-choose, and the ethics of choosing based on an anti-female or pro-male cultural bias.

While the following story cannot be verified, there is no reason to discount its veracity, since the author, identified only by the first name, Lana, describes receiving hate mail and death threats because of its publication on the website Injustices(dot)com, a blog “dedicated to sharing stories of social injustice. Hatred is not allowed here, this is a safe zone for everyone.”

The administrator of the site, who identifies himself only as “Robert”, insists that it’s real. In an email to Jezebel(dot)com (which insists it has to be a “click-bait” hoax), he wrote:

“All the stories are emailed to me from other readers, except for Lana, who I know personally. As far as why I created the site and the message I’m trying to convey, it was mainly about my friend who went through a lot when she shared the true reason for her abortion with her family. I figured there would be more support for her online so I encouraged her to type it out and we could make a website together.”

 

I Aborted My Baby – Because it was a Boy

Over the past 3 years, I have lost many friends, and several of my own family members have completely cut off communication with me. I now know that these are “adults” who just cannot handle the fact that I have the right to make choices, and that these choices ultimately hardly even affect them.

In the spring of 2012, I found out that I was pregnant. I had a good idea who the donator was, but money wasn’t really an issue, and I knew that I would be a good mother-like figure for the child by myself. I have always believed in the right for all women to have a choice in terminating their pregnancy, but when I confirmed the diagnosis about a month into it, I decided that I WAS ready to have this child.

My journey has taken me to many different places fighting for women’s rights and carrying the banner of the Feminist Movement, even to the point of eschewing a career. One of the more prominent themes that I saw in these places was that men generally would look down on us, refuse to help us, or hardly even lend an ear so that we could air our grievances. This didn’t surprise me, the patriarchy has been well entrenched since the dawn of time, but here I was, here I am, ready to change it.

One of the more alarming incidents happened while I was on my way to San Francisco to participate in an Occupy Wall Street rally. I sat down in my seat on the plane, which happened to be extra full for that day, and a particularly well dressed man happened to be sitting in the seat beside me, in the aisle. After takeoff, he asked me what I was going to San Francisco for, while I generally wouldn’t talk to a man sitting next to me on an airplane, I told him I was going to the OWS rally.

The man literally scoffed when I spoke those words and leaned in and quietly said to me “Bitches like you need to learn their place”. Stunned, I screamed “ASSAULT!” while other passengers looked at us, the woman across the aisle from him immediately told him to get away from me, but not 5 seconds passed before a flight attendant had rushed over to intervene.

As I explained to the flight attendant what had happened and I demanded to move seats, I was told that there were only 2 other open seats available, both back in Economy.

*Trigger warning* – Extreme patriarchy

By this time, a male flight attendant was on the scene and I told him to have the man moved. The woman-hater just laughed as the flight attendant continued to press me on if he made any physical contact with me. For a moment, I contemplated bending the truth in order to get the woman-hater away from me. His words had violated both my feelings, and my trust, perhaps as much of a violation as actual physical touch. In the end, I confirmed that no physical contact was made, to which both flight attendants told me they couldn’t make him move.

I was flabbergasted, and then betrayed as they recommended that I move to one of the empty seats. This left me in tears. I knew the only way to get away was to move seats so I did so tearfully and having felt as though I had been verbally and emotionally raped.

By the time we landed, my outlook had changed, I could no longer depend on men to be an ally of the cause.

As spring turned into summer and my belly started to grow, my mind ran wild with the thoughts of teaching my daughter from a young age tolerance and feminist ideals. Choosing the right all-girls daycare, then elementary school, all so that she could grow up and thrive in an environment where women are told that they can do anything that they want to do. No man will be around to hurt her progress, no boys there to demean her or call her names.

I had already started buying gender neutral clothing since I did not want outside influences affecting what gender she would ultimately become. My research on nannies one day came to an abrupt end when my cell phone alarm went off – time for my 5 month appointment. These early appointments had gone well enough, my baby was progressing in a healthy manner.

Today, my doctor, who I will call “Sandy” did an ultrasound and everything appeared to be fine. “Would you like to know the gender?” Sandy asked. I thought to myself “That machine is an ultrasound, not a crystal ball, you couldn’t tell me the gender of my baby even if you wanted to”

“Sure” was my response.

“It’s a boy”…..

……

“What?” I managed to sputter. Sandy then showed me on the ultrasound how exactly my body had betrayed me even worse than the misogynistic suit jockey on the airplane so many months before. I was in shock, I started crying, weeping at the thought of what I was about to curse the world with.

On my way home, my driver asked if I was ok and if I needed anything. “JUST STOP RIGHT HERE” I yelled. Deciding to walk the 4 blocks back home. My home became my prison and my fetus became my warden the next 48 hours. Crying, sobbing, uncontrollable weeping, mental anguish the likes of which may only be experienced by those who have had their lives destroyed by war, I was a refugee, and my home was my refugee camp, an unfamiliar place that was just…sheltering me.

By the third day, I started regaining some of my mental strength and knew what I had to do. I couldn’t bring another monster into the world. We already have enough enemies as it is. It didn’t matter that I would be raising a son, he would still come into contact with boys, men, perhaps even the suit jockey who would inevitably twist his carefully constructed upbringing with their kindness. He would think “These men aren’t so bad, why would mom say that they are holding me down?”

Not all men are bad, my driver showed genuine concern for my well-being that day and I may have taken my anger out on him. That may have been uncalled for. But I knew what I had to do.

A few days later, I went in for the procedure, as it was fairly later in my pregnancy, I was aware there were certain risks, but it went off without a hitch. My body’s betrayal was no more, I was free, and for the first time since the airplane incident, I felt strong. I had done something positive, something that would actually make a difference, something good, even though as I would find out, many others wouldn’t see it that way.

Today, I have a beautiful 1 year old female who will hopefully grow up to be just as strong and driven as her mother. I have endured a lot regarding my first pregnancy, but I don’t care. Sometimes, even allies will turn on you, but I don’t care.

I stand by my decision to abort my baby because it was a male.

I don’t hate men, I hate the patriarchy, what men, and even some women, turn into, I wasn’t going to let that happen with my offspring. The chances were greater that it would with a male, it was unacceptable.

If the curse returns, I would do the exact same thing all over again.

Lana Responds to the Criticism About her Abortion

I cannot believe some of the emails that have been forwarded to me, do people really exist who want to see me dead because of what I chose to do with my own body? Those are the minds of mentally disturbed individuals.

The thing that I hope everyone takes away from all of this is that I own the reasons why I chose to have an abortion. Most of you reading probably have no idea what it is like to go through the process of debating whether or not to abort a pregnancy, let alone the actual experience of it.

To me, the experience was liberating, the emotions I felt when deciding what I should do, and after learning my fetus was male was something I wouldn’t wish on my worst enemy. Coming out of it a liberated woman though was more than worth it. If I had to do it all over again, I would do it in a heartbeat.

I suspect that many of you reading this will be the kind of people who are sending emails from their mom’s basement, leaving comments on here and on social media websites as you degrade mentally more and more while sitting on your crusty computer chairs. Do everyone a favor: GROW UP!

I find it hard to hate anybody, their faults are not their own, but usually rather the product of an environment or social circle they have been exposed to. I beg most of you, for your own good, take a look at yourself and decide right now if you want to spend the rest of your life angry on the internet, or if you want to fight for a woman’s right to do what she wants with her body.

***********************************************************************************

See also: Emancipation From Feminism – My Personal Journey in the New Left and A Dissident View on Feminism

by Robert Riversong: may be reproduced only with attribution for non-commercial purposes and a link to this page

Advertisements

5 Responses to “Feminism has Cannibalized Itself”

  1. Sputnik said

    Excellent overview!

  2. Jeremy Yanopoulos said

    Robert,

    Thank you so much for putting this research together. I have been lamenting the harsh conditions of the university environment for males for quite a while, and I am glad to see solid research such as this being presented on the topic. I have a two year old son, and I am truly concerned for his future in academic settings, due to my own experiences with hostile feminists.

    Kudos, and keep up the good work!

  3. This is nothing short of awesome, and the amount of work you put into it is admirable, and matters. Sharing to my Facebook page for the second time. Thank you for all your efforts!!

  4. Ana said

    VERY interesting point of view indeed!
    Factual and clear.
    Good arguments also.
    But I’ll keep to my RadFem standpoint, Thank you!

  5. Riversong said

    No surprise, as all extremist ideologies are immune to fact and reason.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: