Posted on | January 4, 2017 | 1 Comment
The headline on your Inside Higher Education column made me laugh.
This involves three things that all academic feminists are against:
What is fascinating to me, after more than two years of in-depth research into modern feminism, is the arrogance of feminists in assuming that men are too stupid to accurately assess the movement’s agenda. Do you think men are so illiterate that they can’t comprehend simple sentences?
Feminism Is Queer — that’s pretty simple, huh? It’s also the title of a Gender Studies textbook by Professor Mimi Marinucci, as well as a concise summary of the anti-male/anti-heterosexual ideology of the feminist movement in the 21st century. Since beginning the Sex Trouble project in July 2014, I’ve stacked up such a massive pile of quotes to document the truth — Feminism Is a Totalitarian Movement to Destroy Civilization as We Know It — that readers have ceased to be surprised when I show them the latest example of anti-male hate propaganda I’ve uncovered, e.g., “Queer Feminism vs. ‘The Fragile Male Ego’” (Dec. 28) or lesbian feminist Jill Gutowitz’s man-hating anti-Trump rage (Dec. 24).
This is what feminism means in the 21st century, and if you’re a feminist wondering why Hillary Clinton lost, the answer is: YOU.
Studying feminism calls to mind something I first observed back in the 1980s. If a guy’s wife or girlfriend ever says to him, “We need to talk about our relationship,” he is in big trouble. She’s got a problem, and she has decided that the problem is you. No woman has ever used the “we need to talk about our relationship” line except with the intention of making the guy accept 100% of the blame for her unhappiness.
If a woman is happy, she doesn’t need to talk about your relationship, and no unhappy woman can resist blaming her problems on her boyfriend or her husband or her ex-boyfriend or ex-husband or maybe, if no other male scapegoat is handy, she’ll blame her Daddy for her unhappiness.
Every married man understands this. Whatever the wife is unhappy about is always her husband’s fault, and there is no point trying to argue about it. The secret to avoiding divorce is two words: “Yes, dear.”
This is what feminists mean when they blame “patriarchy” for everything wrong in the world. This is just collective scapegoating, as opposed to the individual scapegoating that every husband must endure when his wife is unhappy. And so, when feminists start ranting about “objectification” or “rape culture,” men are expected to answer, “Yes, dear.”
However, there are certain benefits involved in marriage which make men willing to cope with their wives’ anger, whereas men derive no benefit at all from being lectured by a university Gender Studies professor, or by a man-hating blogger like Jessica Valenti. Being a married man means there is only one woman who is authorized to insult me and, in case you didn’t notice, I never asked any Gender Studies majors to marry me.
Yeah, that’s a really subtle message, Dr. Lieberman. It’s about as subtle as your dishonest method of promoting your perverted agenda:
How I got a group of straight male college freshmen to take a course on gender, sex and sexuality is simple: I didn’t tell them the topic before they signed up. . . .
I was teaching the required English composition class, but since the course catalog didn’t permit me to list a topic, none of the students knew the focus of the course until they attended the first day of class. I was worried that all the straight guys would flee the minute they read the syllabus and learned what the topic was.
See how it works? Students at a taxpayer-supported state university sign up for a basic English composition class required for graduation and, instead of being taught what they paid tuition to learn, they get a Gender Studies lecture from Professor Dildo, the feminist sex-toy specialist.
So, just to recap, Dr. Hallie Lieberman of the University of Wisconsin (a) wants to mandate health insurance coverage for dildos, (b) advocates providing pornography to minors, (c) is anti-marriage, (d) is pro-butt plug, (e) believes men should be required to own prosthetic vaginas and, in case you didn’t guess (f) hates Republicans. Well, let’s return to see what she was teaching in freshman English class:
By the time I taught about transgender representation in the media, the semester was more than halfway done. I was worried that even though trans issues are having a moment, many of my straight male students would be made uncomfortable by discussions of transgender. So I left this topic for later in the course . . . . Giggling and being visibly uncomfortable is a legitimate response for kids who’ve never met a trans person, whose parents are die-hard Republicans who oppose gay marriage, as many of my students’ parents were. . . .
As the week went on, I realized that there was subversive potential in teaching teenagers about transgender issues with no apologies . . .
As a graduate student, I’d taken multiple courses on gender and sexuality, but I never saw a straight man in my course. . . .
And why do you think that was, Dr. Lieberman? Because (a) Gender Studies programs are run by lesbians who hate heterosexual men, and (b) even if a heterosexual man somehow got a Gender Studies degree, no university in America would hire him, because the institutional purpose of having Gender Studies departments is to help meet “diversity” quotas by providing faculty employment for man-hating lesbians.
You dishonesty — the unethical bait-and-switch by which you defrauded those freshmen who had signed up for a required English course — is typical of the entire fraudulent enterprise of academic feminism.
You should be ashamed of yourself, Dr. Lieberman, but if you had any capacity for shame, you wouldn’t be Professor Dildo, would you?
Guess Who Finished Her Dissertation on the History of Sex Toys? http://t.co/M376elljpd
— Hallie Lieberman (@hallielieberman) June 19, 2014