The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

What Women’s Studies Teaches

Posted on | January 15, 2016 | 24 Comments

Toni Airaksinen (@Toni_Airaksinen on Twitter) attends elite Barnard College, but she is on scholarship and comes from a blue-collar Midwestern background, which probably accounts for both her common sense and extraordinary courage:

As a student at Barnard College, one of the few women’s colleges in America, identifying as a feminist is de rigueur. Just like lamenting the cost of tuition or complaining about dining hall food, feminist ideology is a hallmark of the conversations here. Yet, I adamantly shun the contemporary feminist movement that sweeps liberal arts campuses like mine, and you should too. . . .
Contemporary feminism inculcates adherents into a cult of victimhood and exquisite vulnerability — it panders to women’s traumas and teaches them that they have been victimized solely because they are female. Women’s only sin? Living in a world dominated by the patriarchy. . . .

Here I will interrupt Ms. Airaksinen to call attention to the fact that (a) she is saying what any intelligent observer of contemporary feminism knows to be true, and yet (b) she is one of the very few young women who is willing to speak this truth. Feminist hegemony in academia — not just at Barnard, but pervading our institutions of higher education — exercises a frightening power to intimidate its critics into silence, as George Lawlor discovered at England’s Warwick University.

Even where self-identified feminists are a minority, these True Believers are very vocal and active, and the radical mob will use terroristic tactics to smear and harass anyone who dares to stand up against them. The same dynamic typifies the gay-rights movement or any other progressive “social justice” cause. If you have read Tom Wolfe’s Radical Chic and Mau-Mauing the Flak-Catchers, or Destructive Generation by Peter Collier and David Horowitz, you understand how these movements always become radicalized. But now let’s return to Ms. Airaksinen’s personal account of campus feminism:

My indoctrination into the feminist orthodoxy began when I was 15 and still in high-school, while taking classes at Cleveland State University. I signed up for Women’s Studies courses, and after reading books written by feminist luminaries like Gloria Steinem, I was hooked.
In one year, I took three Women’s Studies classes. My professors taught me that, because I was a woman, I was victimized and oppressed. Prior to enrolling, I did not see myself that way. Students were told that we are supposed to be angry. Rage was a “normal” reaction. To dismantle the systems of oppression, confrontation was required. For me, and many of my peers, these classes made us feel heady with righteousness. . . .

Again, I will interrupt Ms. Airaksinen (because I’m a patriarchal mansplainer like that) to remind you how my Sex Trouble series has highlighted the Feminist-Industrial Complex of Women’s Studies programs. Some 90,000 U.S. students annually undergo the “indoctrination into the feminist orthodoxy” Ms. Airaksinen describes, and anyone who examines Women’s Studies textbooks (e.g., Feminist Frontiers, edited by three lesbian professors) understands how these courses teach young women that they are “victimized and oppressed” and that they “are supposed to be angry” about these “systems of oppression.” It’s not just the elite schools, either. Cleveland State has a Women’s Studies department that offers both a major and minor in studying “the role of gender in shaping human societies of the past and the present.” This interdisciplinary program includes such courses as “Psychology of Women” (PSY 255), “Race, Class and Gender” (SOC 201), “Sociology of Gender” (SOC 317), “Gender Issues in Literature” (ENG 363), “American Sexual Communities and Politics” (HIS 327), “Class, Gender and Sexuality in China” (HIS 381), and “Women and the Goddess in Asian Religions” (REL 363). The department’s interim director, Professor Mary Ellen Waithe, is editor of the 4-volume series A History of Women Philosophers. In 2010, Professor Waithe’s salary was $88,567, whereas median household income in Cleveland is $26,217. So the Women’s Studies director is paid more than three times the annual income of the average Cleveland family and runs a program that teaches college girls to view themselves as victims of “systems of oppression.”

Nice work, if you can get it.

Toni Airaksinen became disillusioned with Women’s Studies at Cleveland State, but found an even worse climate at Barnard College:

I did not set out to attend a women’s college. However, as a first-generation student from a welfare household, I was on the hunt for colleges with generous financial aid. Barnard fit the bill. I brushed off my prior uncomfortable entanglements with feminism (or “social justice,” the more inclusive term), and gave it another chance at Barnard. However, not only did the same paradigms manifest themselves that I saw in my classes at Cleveland State, in fact, it was worse. The overarching narrative of victimhood and vulnerability pervaded itself through all parts of campus life, from the school newspaper to the conversations I had with other students.
My first week, for example, I was warned never to go to “East Campus” — the Columbia University residence hall where “all the rapists live.” [It is important to note that Barnard and Columbia share a campus and have intertwined academics] Men were all potential rapists, especially Columbia men. When I brought up the fact that I was probably more likely to be assaulted while in my urban home neighborhood than on the pristine Columbia campus to a friend, I was told I was definitely wrong. “Columbia protects rapists,” and “rapists live here,” I was told. My rebuttals and questions fell on deaf ears.

This deliberate slander — the insistence that every male student should be feared as a rapist, and that university administrators “protect” these sexual predators — has become so widely accepted among young feminists that Toni Airaksinen’s skepticism could result in her being labeled a “rape truther,” to use Amanda Marcotte’s term. Yet it is impossible to believe that girls at Barnard College are in more danger from male students at Columbia (annual tuition $51,008) than from random dudes on the streets of New York City, where there were 348 murders in 2015. Perhaps some Women’s Studies majors at Barnard should research the question, who is raping whom in New York City?

The fifth and final suspect in the horrific gang rape of a Brooklyn teen was nabbed at school Tuesday — while two of his accused pals claimed the girl was having sex with her dad before they got there and that she gave them consent, law enforcement sources said.
Two of the suspects — Shaquell Cooper and Ethan Phillip, both 15 — grinned as they were being hauled off to court to face charges Tuesday.
Cooper, Phillip and two alleged cohorts — Denzel Murray, 14, and Onandi Brown, 17, of Brooklyn — were charged as adults with rape, forcible compulsion, criminal sex act and sex abuse.
The fifth suspect, Travis Beckford, 17, was taken into custody at Samuel J. Tilden High School at about 11?a.m. Tuesday, according to authorities. Police filed the same charges against him, and he too was expected to be prosecuted as an adult, sources said.
Two of the teens admitted to cops that they had sex with the 18-year-old girl after finding her drunk in the Osborn Playground in Brownsville at about 9 p.m. last Thursday, but they insist it was consensual, sources said.

My hunch is that the Brooklyn gang-rape victim was not a Barnard College student, nor are Shaquell Cooper, Ethan Phillip, Denzel Murray, Onandi Brown and Travis Beckford ever likely to be residents of Columbia University’s East Campus, where “all the rapists live.” One notices that feminists only seem to care about rape when it fits their preconceived ideological beliefs about the pervasive evil of white males who are allegedly “privileged” under “the systems of oppression.”

So-called “intersectional” feminism involves the idea that it is not merely sexism which feminists must target, but also other “systems of oppression” such as racism, capitalism, imperialism and, of course, homophobia. Feminism Is Queer, as Professor Mimi Marinucci says. A movement that is anti-male, anti-marriage and anti-motherhood must ultimately also be anti-heterosexual. Yet, despite the fact that many eminent feminist intellectuals have made this point explicitly — “heterosexuality as an institution and an ideology is a cornerstone of male supremacy,” to quote Professor Charlotte Bunch — any critic of feminism who calls attention to this will be denounced as a homophobe. When feminists make heterosexuality the target of a political attack, however, is no one allowed to say a word in defense of heterosexuality? Certainly, I enjoy it and many women seem to like it, too.

If 97.7% of Americans are heterosexual, must we remain silent while the 2.3% minority denounce us as perpetrators of oppression? We are not supposed to notice the extraordinary influence of radical lesbians in academic feminism, even though this is openly acknowledged within the movement, as I explain in Sex Trouble (pp. 109-120):

In 1980, Australian feminist Denise Thompson described how “countless numbers of lesbians” joined the feminist movement because it offered them “the possibility of a cultural community of women whose primary commitment was to other women rather than to men.” Furthermore, Thompson added, the rise of the feminist movement produced a “mass exodus of feminist women from the confining structures of heterosexuality” in such numbers as to raise questions about “the institution of heterosexuality in the consciousness of those feminists who, for whatever reason, chose not to change their sexual orientation.” And why shouldn’t this have been the expected result?
Women “changed their sexual/social orientation from men to women,” Thompson explained, “in response to the feminist political critique of their personal situations of social subordination.” If the personal is political (as feminists say) and if women’s relationships with men are “confining structures” of “social subordination,” why would any feminist be heterosexual?

Once we understand this, what is the most obvious logical inference we could make about the shrieking hysteria of campus feminists who have falsely claimed that our nation’s universities are in the grip of a “rape epidemic”? If we know that there is no such epidemic — that rape is quite rare at Columbia University, no matter what her Barnard classmates tried to tell Toni Airaksinen — what could possibly explain these false assertions? Is it merely a coincidence that many campus feminists are lesbians who seek to inspire other female students to adopt an attitude of hatred, fear and resentment toward their male classmates?

“Don’t go over to East Campus,” lesbians at Barnard College tell the pretty freshman girl. “All those Columbia boys are rapists!”

This feminist propaganda requires the Barnard girl to believe that Columbia boys — brainiac nerds with 4.0 GPAs and near-perfect SAT scores — are insatiable sexual beasts. Pardon me for believing that former high school Science Club presidents and National Merit Scholar finalists are less prone to rape than Shaquell Cooper, Ethan Phillip, Denzel Murray, Onandi Brown and Travis Beckford

“Women are a degraded and terrorized people. Women are degraded and terrorized by men. … Women’s bodies are possessed by men. … Women are an enslaved population. … Women are an occupied people.”
Andrea Dworkin, 1977 speech at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, in Letters from a War Zone (1993)

Feminists get angry whenever “women’s bodies are possessed by men,” and they also get angry when women don’t support feminism’s totalitarian movement to destroy civilization as we know it.





  • Guest

    Those Brooklyn rapists look demonic in that picture. Looking at it actually chills me to the bone.

  • Evi L. Bloggerlady

    What do they teach you at Women’s Studies? Seth loathing and manhate?

    Especially after you start getting the sallie mae bills for the next 30 years.

    F*** The Patriarchy! Oh wait, they don’t do that either.

  • Valerie Stewart

    I can relate with Toni, especially what happened in high school. Fortunately, my parents taught my brother and I common sense and conservative values, so we were well insulated against the proglib nonsense the teachers were trying to indoctrinate.

    If you look at the rationalwiki page on radical feminism, you’ll notice it says nothing about it’s inherent nuttiness until the bottom of the page, but only then it mentions it’s crazy proponents, I.e. Dworkin. The article implies by its structuring and wording that radfems are correct on several things.


  • mole

    How many of the early feminists were strangers to the mental health system?

    Heres a seminal feminist picked at random with the words “Germaine Greer, breakdown”

    The story is her being hospitalised after a breakdown because a boy rejected her advances. Seems like the sort of rational person you should take life advice from doesnt she?

  • mole

    Im in 2 minds about that case. Its *possible* what they have said is true because its such a bizarre attempt at an alabi I struggle to see why anyone would make it up, its so unlikely.

    Or it could just be evil people sliming the father/daughter in the most vile way possible.
    Im happy to sit back and keep quiet on the guilt until the cops work it out.

  • Finrod Felagund

    This just came onto my radar: two months ago, Eric Raymond reported that the “women in tech” group Ada Initiative was attempting “honeytraps” by getting women alone with open-source leaders then crying “attempted sexual assault”. Linux leader Linus Torvalds now reportedly is never alone with anyone at any conference to prevent this from happening, and other open-source leaders are now taking this Billy Graham approach to avoid potential trumped-up charges, and they are also no longer mentoring women in tech for the same reason:

  • robertstacymccain

    After reading some of the lawsuits filed by male university students who say they were falsely accused of sexual assault, I have begun to suspect something similar is at work among campus feminists. Of course, we are not supposed to mention the possibility that women lie about such things, but there is as reason I keep advising young men NEVER TALK TO A COLLEGE GIRL.

  • NeoWayland

    The very notion that females would lie about rape is obviously a trigger event.

  • Rodrigo

    A couple of popular rom-com movies with the “bad girls” being femi-nazis would do a world of hurt to the narrative being maintained at these schools. What a shame that Hollywood is also in the hands of the SJWs.

  • Joe Joe

    While I understand your feelings of vindication–and anger–it would have been more effective to have allowed the young woman’s article to stand alone. It is extremely powerful all by itself.

    To get the complete read:

    It is about time that women who oppose this brand of radical victim feminism come out and say so. Those of us on the outside have been railing about it for a long time, often to no avail.

  • Robert What?

    Seems to me me from the picture of the typical radical feminist that being “possessed” by a man is not something they need to worry about.

  • Fail Burton

    This cult is so embedded the science fiction community it no longer gets the slightest pushback. I was looking at one single page at SF Signal of authors recommending authors and identified over 20 feral rats who would be completely at home in the KKK. They spend their time doing round-robins on Twitter demonizing straight white men every single day and use that so-called “oppression” to power themselves into positions on the pitiful excuse of “diversity.” One married woman with a child was self-described as a “genderqueer” author. In her bios she never mentions the former. That community is a disgrace of virtue-signaling and racial/sexual defamation.

  • Zhytamyr

    I had a fraternity brother talk me into taking a women’s study course with him at a tiny Midwestern university in ’94. It was terrifying. There was maybe a dozen women in the course & my buddy and I. Every woman in the course (as well as the professor) would work themselves into a lather & go apescat on my buddy & I every single class.

  • Kaiser Derden

    Am married to a wonderful lady who was raised and indoctrinated on womens study propaganda in the 80’s and 90’s … she spouts supposed facts about the world that are one step away from black helicopters crazy … every time I ask her if she thinks I’m part of society that is suppressing women she’ll give the standard unproveable answer … of course you are, YOU JUST DON’T realize it because its so deeply ingrained you don’t realize you do it …

    … riiiiiight … nothing I do can prove that I’m not a misogynist because I’m too ignorant about my own feelings and motives to see it … (white male of course)

    We were recently discussing an article about young men checking out of society that SHE BROUGHT UP and I mentioned that there was nobody today advocating for white males … and she said, with a straight face … “Of course there is … anyone who talks about family values is an advocate for white males” …

    For my own sanity we don’t discuss this stuff very often …

  • Daniel Freeman

    She is 18, they lost contact when she was 3, and they just recently got back in contact. That is the kind of circumstance that can result in lack of an activated incest taboo to counteract genetic sexual attraction.

    Also, he was so drunk that he couldn’t explain to people why he was asking for their phones. It’s not as implausible as it should be that they were screwing on a playground that was unaccountable unlocked after-hours.

  • Daniel Freeman

    Poor Seth. 🙁

  • Finrod Felagund

    For your sake, I hope you have no daughters.

  • Finrod Felagund

    You deserve +1 for the word ‘apescat’ alone.

  • Ilion

    Really? She’s “a wonderful lady”?

    For my own sanity we don’t discuss this stuff very often …

    In other words — as it typical in male-female interaction — the man lets the woman get away with all manner of crazy shit he’d never put up from another man.

    It’s just that this particular crazy shit is not merely bad for the marriage, but bad for society as a whole.

  • Kay Dunn

    1?my neighbor’s mate is getting 98$. HOURLY on the internet?….

    A few days ago new McLaren F1 subsequent after earning 18,512$,,,this was my previous month’s paycheck ,and-a little over, 17k$ Last month ..3-5 h/r of work a day ..with extra open doors & weekly. paychecks.. it’s realy the easiest work I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months ago and now making over 87$, p/h.Learn More right Here
    ??? http://GlobalSuperEmploymentVacanciesReportsClear/GetPaid/98$hourly?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.

  • Pingback: Remember my last post, when I said Feminists are Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs? – If You're Left()

  • Quartermaster

    The Black Helicopter thing does have one thing going for it, as opposed to feminist insanity. Black Helicopters do exist.

  • Quartermaster

    There is pushback. Go over to Vox Popoli.

  • Pingback: News of the Week (January 17th, 2016) | The Political Hat()