Feminism's Third Wave

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare

Last
Friday’s article
on date rape
by Murray Rothbard in these pages brought back
a lot of college memories (not many of them good). By the
end of his essay Rothbard cut to the real motive of the feminists:
the campus date-rape campaigns of the early 1990s weren’t motivated
by a genuine concern for the well-being of women. They were
part of an ongoing attempt to delegitimize heterosexuality to young,
impressionable women by demonizing men as rapists.

The
only point I’d add is that the regulations the feminists were proposing
applied only to men, not to the hordes of lecherous dikes teaching
in "Wymyn’s Studies" departments whose most prized occupational
perk is brazen sexual harassment of young women with complete impunity.

What
a difference ten years makes. The newest twist of feminism
finds men guilty again, but in an exquisitely tortured way (e.g.,
Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, Why
There Are No Good Men Left
). Taking their cues from
Betty Friedan’s Second Wave (the First Wave of feminism being suffrage),
young women since the late 1960s have increasingly bought into the
idea that building a career instead of a home and family are of
central importance to their lives during their early twenties to
mid-thirties (ironically their prime years for bearing children).

Today’s young women thus climb the corporate heights, entering dream
careers earning six- and even seven-figure incomes. They acquire
beautiful sports cars, commodious homes, and the respect of hundreds
to thousands of subordinates in hectic Palm-Pilot worlds.

Sometime
in the midst of this material utopia, New Single Woman suddenly
finds herself in an epic crisis: she’s 35 to 40 and still
unmarried with no prospects in sight and rapidly expiring eggs in
her ovaries. This leads to a furious hunt for a hubby who’s
every bit as brilliant, gorgeous, sexy, hip, financially successful,
and personally accomplished as she is and guess what? He’s
nowhere to be found. Ergo, "There are no good
men left."

If
you think this is a joke, it’s not. It’s feminism’s Third Wave,
where women run to expensive relationship consultants like Barbara
DeAngelis (who’s been divorced 4 times), join speed-dating groups,
and post photos of themselves on Yahoo! Personals to few
takers. What could be the problem? First, guests who arrive at the
party five hours late can’t legitimately complain that the buffet
has been cleaned out. Gorgeous men (like women) go to the earliest
and highest bidders. If you’re a 35 to 40-year-old corporate spinster,
it’s time to give up on Brad Pitt, honey. If you want a hubby bad
enough, you’ll just have to settle for a…(gag!)…average mortal
man. Sorry.

(What’s
interesting is that absurdly high standards – or inexplicably low
ones as we’ll see later – is the obvious diagnosis with most of these
women, but it’s never the diagnosis that our popular culture gives
them. It’s always, "Oh, you poor thing. You’re
so wonderful and men are just too stupid or mean to admit it.")

Feminism
proclaimed that for women to be fulfilled they had to adopt the
career ambitions of workaholic men, the sexual promiscuity of John
F. Kennedy, and the cynicism of Gloria Steinem (the pre-married
one, that is). Can you think of any demographic group other
than women who would have bought into this prescription for complete
disaster and then cried victim when the Bunker Buster of Inevitable
Biology crashed through the roof and blew up in their faces?
Think Wile E. Coyote. No, think of someone much dumber.

Women
were designed by God for marriage and motherhood and deep down they
have an innate desire for it, no matter how sublimated nature can
be to social idiocies such as feminism. What’s so remarkable
about the feminist charade was how long a run it had before a few
women caught on to it. It didn’t even pass muster as a leftist
ideology, focusing on material objectives such as money, prestigious
jobs, and physical possessions. It was utopian ("You
can have it all") but in the end really not much more than
pseudo-intellectual hedonism.

There’s
a saying from some older culture to the effect that the quickest
way to destroy a rival society is to ruin its women. It’s
a dictum undoubtedly coined by some man who probably didn’t begin
to grasp the stunning magnitude of the self-destructive instinct
that is so much a part of Collective Woman. (These are the
inexplicably low standards alluded to above.) While I have
a great deal of sympathy for her family, no one will ever convince
me that Laci Peterson didn’t see an abundant number of red flags
before marrying the creepy Scott. Sociopaths aren’t made overnight.

Out
here in California the Peterson case is being compared to the O.J.
Simpson murders and yet an O.J. verdict is entirely possible if
Peterson gets even a majority-female jury. Women on the Menendez
jury almost got their wish to free the murderous Lyle and Erik just
because they found them handsome. (One female juror actually
expressed sympathy for the brothers "because they no longer
had parents." Uh, the brothers no longer had parents
because they murdered them, stupid!)

As
for the Peterson case, forget the grisly discovery of the needle-nose
pliers on Scott’s boat with Laci’s hair in them. Anyone with a brain
knows that innocent men don’t bleach their hair and beard and run
off to San Diego with a load of cash and survival gear. And yet
Scott gets dozens of love letters, cards, and flowers every day
from women all over the country who want to marry him and have his
baby because he’s good-looking. It’s not easy to imagine a similar
phenomenon vis–vis men, as down in San Diego all Kristin Rossum
ever got from men over the last two years were death threats for
running off with her boss and fatally poisoning her husband. Ditto
for even better-looking women such as Susan Smith and Pamela Smart.

The
problem goes way beyond Laci Peterson, Nicole Brown Simpson, and
the 36 women murdered by the handsome but thoroughly evil Ted Bundy.
(Michaud
and Aynesworth
report that scores of beautiful blondes were
vying for Bundy’s attention at the July 1979 trial in Miami where
he was first sentenced to death. Bundy’s last wife Carole
Boone married him on February 12, 1980, the day of his third death
sentence for slitting the throat of 12-year old Kim Leach, mutilating
her genitals with a knife, and stuffing her lifeless body under
an abandoned hog shed. Incredibly, Boone believed in Ted’s
innocence until Ted himself finally dissuaded her right before his
1989 execution.)

Earlier this year many men were so taken with the beautiful and
supposedly genteel star of The Bachelorette, Trista Rehn.
Rehn, who eventually chose handsome firefighter Ryan Sutter as her
husband, has to be glad her new hubby didn’t look too close into
her past. Some of the disturbing skeletons include, among
heavy slutting with different men, a significant stint with a very
creepy-looking tattooed ex-con. The man, with the ironic name
of Brian Bachelor, bears an uncanny resemblance to the tattooed criminal
wife beater Tommie Lee, whom the beautiful actresses Heather Locklear
and Pamela Anderson both married and divorced.

Average
men continue to be outraged by this perennial female adulation of
either sociopaths or extremely good looking men who use them up
and move on. They see no rationality in such a warped set
of preferences. The key word here is rationality. The
default mode of thought in women is not rational, it’s emotive.
Criminals and philanderers are interesting and mysterious – that’s
the key. It’s irrelevant that they offer no real future.
In a nutshell, they’re crass entertainment like ditzy afternoon
soaps. (I know so many of you men were certain there was some
stunningly profound answer to this question, but there isn’t.
Sorry for the letdown.)

All of this is exactly what decent men should wage a revolution
against. They are the ones called upon to pick up the pieces
of shattered relationships and foot an enormous bill as both stepfathers
and taxpayers. Today, the staggering cost isn’t just financial
in terms of ready-made dads drafted to foot the bill for two or
three of another man’s kids (or thousands as taxpayers). The
cost is emotional as well. Good men don’t like to admit it – for
fear of being pegged as wimpy – but off the record many express
deep resentment at having to struggle to build sexual intimacy with
women who have been sexually plundered by so many past partners.

My
great interest is in the churches (Catholic and Evangelical alike)
where it’s an even sadder story in singles groups, where innocent,
bookish, never-married men like my brothers who have been in the
church since their teens, are perversely brought together with cynical,
used-up, divorce-battered women still looking for either criminals
or movie stars. The ones who finally wake up (usually in their
30s at the earliest) have nothing to offer these men as they either
don’t want or can’t have any more children. (The age of 27 – not
40 as many women mistakenly think – is when a woman’s fertility begins
its rapid decline.)

The largest immediate hurdle is that our society is so steeped in
feminist double standards that not even most men recognize them
anymore. Can you ever imagine a book being written by a man (never
mind published by a big New-York house such as Broadway) entitled
Why There Are No Good Women Left? You can
already hear the howls of indignation from Oprah, The
View, and conservatives such as Joe Farah who recently
cheered the cause of automobile murderer Clara Harris
. (Thankfully
Farah didn’t express a desire to marry Harris. He’d have to be female
to do that.)

Can
you imagine Hollywood making a movie such as Shallow Hal
(2001), only this time with two average-looking career women who
discover that it’s better to choose their mates on the basis of
their personalities rather than their physical appearance?
You can’t, and it’s not because today’s women aren’t superficial:
indeed, most are now as bad as the worst men precisely because they’ve
so insulated from criticism on that point. It’s "sexism"
or "misogyny" to point it out. Indeed, the most
brazen female superficiality is now sold and encouraged as "female
empowerment."

If
there is ever going to be any restoration of sanity, it’s decent
men who have to lead the way back and first by understanding what
all the upheavals of the 1960s are now costing them (not just the
sexual revolution which turned today’s dating women into prostitutes).
Keep in mind that running after sociopaths while simultaneously
claiming that "There are no good men left" is just the
latest twist in this 40-year-old female Superscam – and the tip of
the iceberg at that.

A good start would be to look at how the 52% female portion of the
population got classified as a minority and thus eligible for unofficial
affirmative action. A second interesting question is how the
sex with the higher life expectancy got its own wing in most hospitals
(along with children). A third angle would be a comprehensive
study of the family court system to see how the average man’s probability
of winning custody of children stacks up to the average woman’s.
After that take a look at which demographic group is most fervently
eroding the Second Amendment and leading the charge toward the full
federal takeover of U.S. health and day care. (All of these
latter horrors would never have been a reality in Canada without
the decisive support of women at the ballot box.)

Maybe
not with respect to marriage, but in terms of resistance to all
this escalating nonsense, the question of where all the good men
went is a valid one. To the decent men, if you think you’re
getting the shaft economically and socially now, just continue to
sit back like a bunch of feminine cowards and let things continue
to deteriorate. You ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

May
23, 2003

Angela
Fiori [send her mail]
is an occasional contributor to AgainstTheCrowd.com.

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare