Feminist Tumblr: Justifying Hatred With Radical Ideology and Also, Witchcraft

Posted on Comments

Feminism justifies anti-male attitudes by promoting an ideological belief that I call feminism’s Patriarchal Thesis:

  1. All women are victims of oppression;
  2. All men benefit from women’s oppression;
    therefore
  3. Whatever.

Believing that normal human life is a system of injustice in which all women (collectively) are victimized by all men (collectively), feminists can justify anything they say or do as part of their struggle against historic oppression. Even hate is not a bad thing, according to Feminist Tumblr:

WOMEN ARE ALLOWED TO HATE THEIR OPPRESSORS
Society hates women. Misogyny is the societal norm. Society justifies men’s rape and abuse towards us, society lets men tell themselves that “boys will be boys” and their gender gives them the right to harass us, rape us, treat us as if we are their property.
Our society is founded upon a history of the destruction of women’s culture and heritage during the witch hunts, our society is founded on the institution of marriage as a system of property ownership whereby women are expected to use their time and effort to the benefit of males, to use their bodies to the benefit of males by bearing them children. . . .
This society we live in devalues the labor of women, that devalues our physical athletic ability, that devalues our minds and thoughts. It does not view us as complete people, it does not view us as whole humans without attachment to men.
After all that women have endured in this society, we deserve to hate those who have made it like this — especially lesbian women, who have no want or need of men yet society subjects to compulsory heterosexuality, as this patriarchy can not conceive of women who live full rich lives without male influence.
The anger of the oppressed is not the same as that of the oppressor.

There are several things to notice here, including the blogger’s claims about “the destruction of women’s culture and heritage during the witch hunts.” No matter how many times feminists repeat this, it is still false. The myth of witch hunts as “the destruction of women’s culture” was created largely by two 1970s radical feminists, Andrea Dworkin and Mary Daly. Dworkin and Daly promoted a mythology of medieval witches as wise healers, depicting them as victims of a Catholic conspiracy to destroy these bearers of ancient wisdom and thus suppress an incipient revolution against the patriarchal order.

This feminist myth, which sometimes depicts witches as inheritors of an authentic pagan tradition of goddess worship that allegedly survived for more than a thousand after the advent of Christianity in Europe, was constructed from diverse elements. Among these were the 19th-century French anti-Catholic academic Jules Michelet, whose 1862 book La Sorciére (“The Sorceress,” available in English as Satanism and Witchcraft) was an imaginative work that waxed poetic about these allegedly wondrous women:

She is born a creature of Enchantment. In virtue of regularly recurring periods of exaltation, she is a Sibyl; in virtue of love, a Magician. By the fineness of her intuitions, the cunning of her wiles — often fantastic, often beneficent — she is a Witch, and casts spells, at least and lowest lulls pain to sleep and softens the blow of calamity.

Michelet’s hatred of the Catholic church — he hoped for nothing less than the “death of Christianity” — inspired him to depict witches as having been victimized by an ignorant clergy who were envious of the witches’ knowledge of nature and miraculous healing powers. This interpretation (witches good, Christians bad) was seized upon by an eccentric American suffragette, Matilda Joslyn Gage, whose 1893 book Woman, Church and State became the source for the oft-repeated feminist claim that 9 million witches were killed in Europe in a 300-year span between the 14th and 18th centuries. This preposterous figure (which, by simple math, would require the deaths of 2,400 witches per month, every month, year after year for three hundred years) is not merely a ridiculous exaggeration, but a gross libel against Christianity. As strange as it is to modern minds that anyone could be executed for witchcraft, in fact the total number of such executions in Europe during that era, according to the best historical estimates, was less than 100,000, and perhaps as few as 40,000, and fully a quarter of the victims were male. However, because feminists are willing to believe anything that depicts men as evil oppressors and women as innocent victims, this myth of the witch-hunts as a patriarchal atrocity continues to be recited even after it has been completely debunked by historians. (I recommend The Triumph of the Moon: A History of Modern Pagan Witchcraft, a 1999 book by Professor Ronald Hutton of the University of Bristol in England.)

Daly’s celebration of witchcraft in her 1973 book Beyond God the Father relied heavily on the British academic Margaret Murray, whose books The Witch Cult in Western Europe (1921) and The God of the Witches (1931) depicted witchcraft as benevolent paganism. Daly also cited Witches, Midwives, and Nurses: A History of Women Healers (1973) by feminists Barbara Ehrenreich and Deirdre English, who claimed to show that the modern “medical establishment” was a system of male-dominated oppression that originated from European witch-hunters.  British historian Hugh Trevor-Roper’s The European Witch-Craze (1969) was added as a source for Daly’s 45-page chapter on witches in her 1978 book Gyn/Ecology: The Metaethics of Radical Feminism. Dworkin, meanwhile, repeatedly cited British author Pennethorne Hughes (Witchcraft, 1952) in the 33-page chapter on the subject in her 1974 book Woman Hating.

Beyond their bogus claims about witches as intuitive healers, millions of whom had been martyred in a European “gynocide,” as Dworkin called it, feminists also promoted the false idea that witchcraft was a vestigal remnant of the worship of the “Great Goddess,” which was alleged to have been the religion of a neolithic matriarchal society. British writer Jaquetta Hawkes popularized this myth of a peaceful, nature-loving prehistoric culture ruled by women which, alas, had been conquered by violent adherents of patriarchal religion. This feminist myth of ancient matriarchy and pagan witchcraft functioned as propaganda against both Christianity and modern science, which were portrayed in feminist literature as elements of the male-supremacist conspiracy against women. Feminism thus not only promoted mystical superstition, in terms of neopagan Wicca as practiced by Z. Budapest, Starhawk, Ruth Barrett and others, but also encouraged belief in dubious (and possibly also dangerous) “alternative medicine” practices.

Feminist Tumblr blogger Wit Witch’s claims about “the destruction of women’s culture and heritage during the witch hunts” show how this myth fosters a belief in the oppression of women as systematic and historical. The young feminist — today’s 20-something woman born decades after Daly, Dworkin and others created this mythology in the 1970s — is encouraged to think of herself as inheriting the suffering of ancient witches as her legacy. This in turn helps the most privileged college-educated woman to believe she is victimized by a “society” that the feminist blogger declares “hates women,” a society that “justifies” rape and violence against women, “devalues the labor of women” and treats women as “property” to be used for “the benefit of males.” Because she thinks about the oppression of women is historical terms, it does not matter to the young feminist that she herself is extraordinarily privileged. She has inherited her victim status.

 

This sense of kinship with the victims of witch-hunters, and the rejection of Christianity as oppressive to women, is encouraged by academic feminists in university Women’s Studies programs. In the textbook Women’s Voices, Feminist Visions (fifth edition, 2012), Oregon State University professors Susan M. Shaw and Janet Lee blame “religion’s oppressive function” (p. 596) for promoting the “underlying assumption . . . that men are more Godlike than women,” so as to “maintain women’s oppression very directly through church laws that . . . regulate women’s sexuality, and create highly defined gender performances” (p. 597). Professors Shaw and Lee portray this oppression as historical:

In the “burning times” (between the 11th and 14th centuries), millions of women in Europe were murdered as witches. for many of these women, “witchcraft” was simply the practice of traditional healing and spirtuality and the refusal to profess Christianity. For other women, the charge of witchcraft had nothing to do with religious practices and everything to do with accusations rooted in jealousy, greed, and fear of female sexuality. But in the frenzy of the times, defending oneself against an accusation of witchcraft was practically impossible, and an accusation alone generally meant death. (p. 598)

Having offered this condensed version of the Daly/Dworkin feminist witch myth (Daly is cited by name on pp. 608 and 635 of Women’s Voices, Feminist Visions), Professors Shaw and Lee provide students this encouragement on page 602:

In the early twenty-first century, many women participate in revivals of ancient women-centered religions and have become empowered through the revaluing of the feminine implicit in this spirituality. Wicca, or witchcraft (although not the witches we popularly think of at Halloween), is a Goddess- and natjure-oriented religion whose origins predate both Judaism and Christianity. Current Wiccan practice involves the celebration of the feminine, connection with nature, and the practice of healing. As Wiccan practicioner Starhawk suggests, witchcraft encourages women to be strong, confident, and independent and to love the Goddess, the earth, and other human beings. This notion of witchcraft is very different from the cultural norms associated with witches that are propagated in society.

This praise of Wicca — contrasting sharply with the professors’ condemnation of Christianity — is amplified by a quiz on page 603 of Women’s Voices, Feminist Visions, “How Well Do You Know the Goddess?” Here students are asked to identity 15 different female deities including Asherah (Mesopotamia), Astarte (Assyria), Demeter and Artemis (Greece), Freyja (Scandinavia) and Kali (India).

Feminism has become a sort of 21st-century pagan cult whose high priestesses are Women’s Studies professors like Susan Shaw and Janet Lee, who declare on page 170 of their textbook that sexual relationships are political “because they occur in the context of a society that assigns power based on gender and other systems of inequality and privilege . . . reflected in the concept of heteropatriarchy, the dominance associated with a gender binary system that presumes heterosexuality as a social norm.” This academic ideology is echoed by the Tumblr feminist’s claim that lesbians are victimized by “compulsory heterosexuality.” Hateful anti-male beliefs that are taught in the classroom are repeated by the blogger who argues that, because of “all that women have endured in this society, we deserve to hate those who have made it like this” — men.

Readers who are shocked to encounter a Tumblr blogger justifying anti-male hatred as the “anger of the oppressed” may be tempted to dismiss this as an expression of fringe extremism. However, we see how this blogger’s rant expresses the same beliefs found in Women’s Voices, Feminist Visions, a textbook published by McGraw-Hill, which calls it a “leading introductory women’s studies reader.” The back cover of this textbook is emblazoned with endorsements by Utah State University Professor Camille Odell (who is affiliated with the university’s Center for Women and Gender), and by Profesor Maria Bevacqua, a lesbian activist who is chairwoman of the Department of Gender and Women’s Studies at Minnesota State University. In academia, radical anti-male ideology is not “fringe” feminism or “extreme” feminism, it is simply feminism, and no one on the 21st-century campus dares to criticize the feminist cult for fear of being accused of sexism and misogyny.

“[T]here is simply no substitute for the intact traditional family. Meaning, when children are removed from the protection of an intact traditional family, the chances of bad things happening to them, of being mistreated and abused in whatever situation they find themselves placed in, go way, way up. . . .
“Leftists hate this sort of talk. They absolutely hate it. It just drives them into psychosis.”
— Oregon Muse, AOSHQ (hat-tip: Ed Driscoll)

Despite the Tumblr feminist’s assertion that society “justifies men’s rape and abuse” of women — because “their gender gives them the right to harass us, rape us, treat us as if we are their property” — such abuse is harshly punished by society. In fact, these crimes are in some ways abetted by feminism. In July 2008, a Connecticut judge sentenced Adam Gault to 50 years in prison after he was convicted of kidnapping a teenage girl and sexually assaulting her while keeping her captive for more than a year. Gault, 41, was assisted in his crimes by two women, Ann Murphy, 41, and Kimberly Cray, 27, who both pleaded guilty and were sentenced to prison. In addition to the help of his female accomplices, Gault also got assistance from Planned Parenthood. After impregnating his 15-year old captive, he forced her to get an abortion at Planned Parenthood in West Hartford, which did not report the procedure to authorities. The non-profit group Life Dynamics has reported more than 50 criminal cases in which sexual predators took their minor victims to abortion clinics that failed to notify police:

  • In May 2012, Vincent Gregory Wallace was arrested in Sarasota, Florida. Wallace was accused of sexually assaulting his two stepdaughters. When the oldest girl got pregnant at age 12, her mother took her to get an abortion at a clinic that failed to notify police.
  • Steven Rivas was 23 when he began molesting his girlfriend’s 12-year-old sister. When she became pregnant at age 16, Rivas took the girl to an abortion clinic in San Bernardino, California, which did not notify authorities. The girl became pregnant twice more before she turned 18, and each time Rivas took her to have an abortion, but the clinics never made any report. It wasn’t until 2007, when the victim was 20, that police learned of Rivas’ crimes. In 2009, Rivas was sentenced to 18 years in prison.
  • John Szorady was released from an Ohio prison in 2004 after serving 14 years for sexually assaulting a nine-year-old girl. Four months later, Szorady began raping his girlfriend’s 13-year-old daughter. When the girl became pregnant, Szorady took her to an abortion clinic that failed to notify authorities, so that Szorady was able continue raping her for several more months before a school counselor learned about the situation and called police. In 2010, Szorady was sentenced to 74 years in prison.
  • In 2011, a Florida judge sentenced Jermaine Jones, 34, to 15 years in prison for sexually assaulting the daughter of Janet Marshall, a woman he was dating. The girl was only 12 years old when the abuse began and she soon became pregnant. When her mother took the girl to an abortion clinic in Gainesville, however, it was learned that the girl was already almost six months pregnant. The Gainesville clinic could not perform such late-term abortions, but after contacting the hotline of the National Abortion Federation, the mother was directed to another clinic 300 miles away near Fort Lauderdale that could do the procedure. Neither of these clinics notified police of having treated a pregnnant 12-year-old, and it was not until after the girl was taken for a checkup by a pediatrician, that police investigated and Jones was arrested.

These are among dozens of cases documented by Life Dynamics that demonstrate how the abortion industry turns a blind eye to the sexual abuse of minors. Feminists oppose all efforts to regulate clinics or to hold abortion providers accountable for their criminal negligence that enables sexual predators to victimize minors. Even when undercover video showed Planned Parenthood officials casually discussing illegal traffic in the organs of babies killed in their clinics, feminists defended Planned Parenthood and instead demanded prosecution of those who produced the videos! When Republicans in Congress sought to eliminate federal funding for Planned Parenthood — which gets more than $500 million annually from U.S. taxpayers — Hillary Clinton called this “a full-on assault on women’s health” and declared: “I’m proud to stand with Planned Parenthood, I’ll never stop fighting to protect the ability and right of every woman in this country to make her own health decisions.” Of course, the only “health decision” feminists care about is abortion, even when Planned Parenthood is helping sexual predators.

Contrary to what any feminist may claim on her Tumblr blog, it is not “society” which “devalues” women and “justifies” their abuse, it is their friends in the abortion industry who do this. Enraged by an ideology that can justify any evil, feminists celebrate the death of unborn children and defend this gruesome business as “women’s health.” Feminists hate babies and they hate men, but they hate God even more. If medieval witches really were feminists, no wonder people wanted to burn them all.

Loyal readers have been funding my research into radical feminism, thanks to the Five Most Important Words in the English Language:

HIT THE FREAKING TIP JAR!





 

88 comments

  1. Intersectional gender feminism is practically a crash course on how hate speech is mainstreamed as something noble. People who live in insulated ideological bubbles or even have mental illness should not be teaching students. How these daffy women get away with distributing morality to only half the population of the entire planet is a testament to America’s lack of principles and character. Any normal and healthy society would laugh these people out of academia. They produce nothing but gripe and hatred.

  2. I have a friend who is a general surgeon. He was called to assist in a procedure which resulted in the discovery that the patient was riddled with stage IV tumors throughout his body. Even if you wanted to try to remove the cancers, you wouldn’t know where to start.

    I read Wit Witch’s paragraph you cite at the outset and think the the same thing. She’s too far gone. Where do you start correcting such misconceptions?

  4. I find it interesting that there are not more dissenters among the young women who are forced into these courses. Consider the following assertion she makes:

    . . .[O]ur society is founded on the institution of marriage as a system of property ownership whereby women are expected to use their time and effort to the benefit of males,

    Obviously, such an assertion is false, both from an historical perspective and a modern one. How did she miss it? How does she not say, “Wait a minute. In late 20th and early 21st centuries where two spouses work, how is that work not mutually beneficial? In other words, was her upbringing so screwed up; did she live in a neighborhood where everybody was so screwed up that such a assertion seems to be a valid observation about society?

    It boggles the mind.

  5. It’s worth asking why, in extremis, medieval and Early Modern Europeans burned witches.

    It’s fashionable to assume we’re so much wiser and cleverer than our ancestors, and to paint them as ignorant savages benighted by bigotry.

    But who are the real savages? The medieval man or woman would surely reel in horror if they were transported to a modern-day abortion clinic. They would likely be unable to fathom how a society which has killed 50 million unborn in the past forty years can put “In God We Trust” on its money.

    The medieval man – dirty and backward and bigoted he may be – would never, in his darkest dreams, think of tearing the babe from his mother’s womb, and then selling the body parts.

    And about those witches – perhaps our ancestors had good reasons for executing them. Perhaps there really were monsters in human form who believed they had made a pact with Satan, and whose actions were so repugnant to medieval sensibilities that they had no choice but to condemn them.

    Perhaps, in a way, some of the medieval witches really were the forerunners of modern feminists, who have turned infanticide into their sacrament.

  6. Some thoughts on witchcraft that will drive feminists insane–
    America got witch hunts out of our system more than three centuries ago. They still go on almost daily in Africa and other parts of the world. Perhaps feminists’ arguments are not with Western Christianity, but with sub-Saharan animists (see President Obama’s recent comments on the trade in albino body parts). Won’t THAT make their heads spin!
    Secondly, all of those millions of burning witches of the Middle Ages should have caused Global Warming, shouldn’t they? Instead, we had the Little Ice Age. Must have been magic.

  7. The “unbroken line” and “Never again the burning times!” bits haven’t been a part of serious scholarship since the early 1980s.

    None the less, there are certain womyn’s groups who proclaim it as part of their heritage. It’s not really an issue until certain persons insist that their beliefs (more accurately their politics) must govern my behavior simply because we share the label “pagan.”

    Most of those discussions weren’t online, and it makes the dust-ups I’ve had here look like Sunday tea with scones.

  8. Great book: “Murder and Witchcraft in England: 1550-1640.”

    It contains the legal accounts of witchcraft trials, and they are NOT the religious lunacy of the overly pious. The actual accounts are far more mundane: neighbors mad at each other over a stolen pig, etc. One neighbor accuses the other of being a witch, just out a spite. As far as accusers and accused, it’s in no way male against female. It’s just people.

  9. I think the issue is that when young people do dissent they’re shouted down by the mob, sometimes with the help or consent of the professors. When this happens it’s difficult to speak up again. Especially when the grade is on the line.

    Before I moved on to a marketable major I majored in Philosophy and when I objected to students going along with socialist principles, which they didn’t understand, only the other Philosophy majors objected. Luckily our professor said – hey kids, they’re actually right, this was a trick question to see if you would accept socialist/communist ideology if presented in a pretty package but then this was the late 80’s. I can’t imagine how bad it is now.

  10. Surely a basic understanding of anthropology would debunk this feminist nonsense for all time. Over thousands of years (spontaneous generation fans would suggest more), human beings have evolved mentally and culturally from basic hunter gatherer existence to the decadence and debauchery of modern society. It is logical to assume that most of this evolution occurred as a combination of external pressures – food, safety, shelter, reproduction – and simple suitability for the roles necessary to secure those basic needs. I dare to suggest there was no male dominated conspiracy at work – just simple practical necessities for survival.

    Fast forward to today and we seem to have all the time in the world, mostly free from those basic external pressures, to ponder the totally nonsensical – even reproduction is no longer a compelling requirement. Why don’t we try a simple test as a nod to gender equality and eliminate all gender segregation in all sports? I am pretty sure much ironic hilarity would ensue, though the way this same experiment is panning out in the destruction of our military capability is much less of a laughing matter.

  11. In the textbook Women’s Voices, Feminist Visions (fifth edition, 2012), Oregon State University professors Susan M. Shaw and Janet Lee blame “religion’s oppressive function” (p. 596) for promoting the “underlying assumption . . . that men are more Godlike than women,” so as to “maintain women’s oppression very directly through church laws that . . . regulate women’s sexuality, and create highly defined gender performances” (p. 597).

    Given that women tend to have lower libidos than men, one would have thought that “church laws that… regulate… sexuality” (I assume she’s referring to the bits about pre- and extra-marital sex) would actually be more of a burden on men than on women.

    a gender binary system that presumes heterosexuality as a social norm.

    C. 97% of the population is heterosexual. Does that not represent a “norm”?

  12. I’m reminded of a course I took as part of an honors program in college.

    In general, the class fell into three broad categories: the people who agreed with the professor, the people who vehemently disagreed with the professor (and given this was a small town college in the midwest, and the liberal was a flaming liberal, this wasn’t too small a group), and (I believe was the largest) the group that disagreed with the prof but publicly went along with him to get the grade.

    One of my classmates asked me one day after class, “Why do you bother? You know exactly what he wants to hear and what you need to say and write to get an A.” To his perspective, it didn’t matter – get the grade, don’t buy into what he says, and move on.

    I stood on principle instead. It got me in trouble a few times in college.

  13. Exactly.

    The Ward & June Cleaver sexual model is a way better life for women than “free love” or “celebration of the libido.”

    Wherever you have “free love” it’s the women who suffer.

    My yardstick for civilization is: If it’s something that makes a 14-year-old boy yell, “Awwwriiiiight!” then it’s going to be poison to civilization. Don’t encode it into law.

  14. Funny how 2 of the most destructive ideologies of our times stem from a “pre-history” which cant be checked.

    “..which was alleged to have been the religion of a neolithic matriarchal society…”

    Which directly echoes Marx’s magical time before capitalism where everyone lived in a big commune and shared everything. Also conveniently before any recorded history.

    Even in the most primitive tribes, untouched by the civilized world neither of these 2 models has been seen in “pure” form.

    And they are illogical anyway, even the most primitive hunter gatherer is unlikely to give the spear he spent 2 days making to another hunter without a promise of a share in the results.
    The descriptions of the treatment of women in Australian Aboriginal society was from all accounts from the earliest days of contact rather more like chattel slavery then wicca.

    So where do any of these mythical lefty arcadias come from?

  15. A Christian would say it’s a secularized, axe-grinding retelling of the story of the Garden.
    A Freudian would say it’s a longing for the womb.

  17. “Wicca”?
    You mean, “the coed naked/light-S&M *Special Peoples’ Club* that Freemason Gerald Gardner concocted in the early 1950s out of Blue-Lodge Masonic rituals, bad anthropology, and his own perverted imagination?”
    That “Wicca”?
    (Personally, I know several “Neo-Pagan” types who are earnestly trying to rediscover or reinvent the pre-Abrahamic rites of cultures like the ancient Greeks, Egyptians, etc. They’re basically decent sorts, but even they buy into too much of this misandrist pseudohistory — our friend NeoWayland excepted.)

  19. Fair enough. I can understand regurgitating something to get a grade in a mandatory course in order to move on to one’s core subjects. But what explains the the continued embracing of “facts” which are demonstrably untrue. Even in the “Cleaver” household, Ward was sitting around on his ass while June did everything for him, Wally and the Beav. Ward was off stage for half the episode at some office doing office stuff.

    Or, even a cursory review of property laws going back to Henry II demolishes her assertions about married women. In fact, married women had a mandatory interest in their husband’s property which could not be divested from them, even by the king.

    I could go on.

  20. Taking another course or just sitting there while the nonsense swirls around you is probably the easiest way to deal with the madness. Obviously arguing with the nitwits and dingbats is pointless.

  21. Well sure it’s pointless, Walls, but it can be tons of fun if you’re bored, you think fast, and you have a smart mouth on you.

  22. Well, consider that she starts out by claiming that “society hates women”, then later, speaking of lesbians, makes the statement that “this patriarchy can not conceive of women who live full rich lives without male influence.”

    Witch (heh heh) brings up a couple of points:

    1. Doesn’t “society” include women? So they hate themselves? I would agree that both feminists and lesbians do, but the majority of women – who are normal – do not.

    2. If lesbians are currently leading “full rich lives”, doesn’t that make “society hates women” a complete lie?

    Unless I don’t understand the definition of the words society, hate, women, full, rich, and lives, I believe that my witchy feminist bs alarm is going off.

    Essentially, her whole statement is irrational, incoherent and completely without merit. This is what happens when someone barfs up talking points without thinking through the implications.

  23. To your point, Jules Michelet, the witch worshiper quoted above, describes the witch as a “Sibyl”.

    I happen to agree with that characterization, as sibyls were pagan prophetesses, most often giving prophesies under the influence of hallucinagenics, required in order to “channel” the pagan god, i.e., allow the demon possessing them the ability to speak freely.

    They were also often temple prostitutes or conducted sex rituals within or without the temple, including the bisexual switching of partners.

    So sure, I can see why various groups throughout history might see the death penalty as appropriate.

  27. This praise of Wicca — contrasting sharply with the professors’ condemnation of Christianity — is amplified by a quiz on page 603 of Women’s Voices, Feminist Visions, “How Well Do You Know the Goddess?” Here students are asked to identity 15 different female deities including Asherah (Mesopotamia), Astarte (Assyria), Demeter and Artemis (Greece), Freyja (Scandinavia) and Kali (India).

    They need to take their own “test”, because all of these “goddesses” are the same, and also including Diana, Isis, Ishtar and others, all offshoots of, evidently, Semiramis, the wife of Ninus, or Nimrod.

    As ancient Mesopotamian civilizations were conquered and either assimilated or driven out, they took their earth mother/goddess paganism with them. Over time, these groups spread and added their own myths and flourishes to these pagan belief systems.

    I read books! “Boring”, non-fiction ones!

  28. I was required to take 1 women’s studies course in undergrad, and a large percentage of the students did not seem to pay attention or do the reading so what would they protest? There were a few who really got into it, but I’m not sure they believed it so much as they liked to play victim and find sexism and or racism everywhere sort of like a game of one upmanship (can I say that?) with each other. Goes without saying there was no academic rigor – this is the class where I learned the scientific method was no more legitimate than the feminist/women’s method and that assuming the scientific method was more legitimate than women’s ways of knowing was sexist and oppressive.

  29. Well….there you go again…..

    ..undermining yet another poor creature’s hysteria with your logic.

  31. These women Dworkin and their type aren’t interested in reality at all because that detracts from their agenda of spreading the hate. These grown women who should and probably do know better have no excuse for their bullshit and corruption of others.

    For the young women I chalk it up to being young and stupid for some and maybe being young, angry and having issues for others. Both groups are fed this crap and it’s easy to just go with the flow rather than think for yourself just like so many other silly emotional lefty isms. If these kids don’t have a good home life or have lefty parents forget it, lost cause.

  32. Begin every discussion with feminists with the following statements:

    1. Men gave women the vote.
    2. When women had no say in the political process, men made rape the second worst crime one could commit, next to murder.

  33. And for all the useful idiots taking up this cause in the mainstream, the very definition of mainstreaming is promoting French Queer Theory and all it’s newer racial sidecars like white privilege without ever having heard of French Queer Theory or Audre Lorde.

  35. Feminism, like leftism in general, “justifies” its false and absurd claims by appeal to port-modernism — that is, on a foundation of denial that there even *is* any such thing as truth and right and wrong and moral obligations and justice and injustice.
    Think about this — they (absurdly) claim that normal everyday society is a grave and organized injustice against themselves, even as they there is any such thing as justice by which one might determine what is unjust.

  36. you’re supposed to say something like “patriarchal heteronormative cismale logic”
    C.S.Lewis had these people pegged decades ago in his little essay on “Bulverism”

  37. Hell, even the pagan Romans killed witches (and “witches”).
    Generally, pagans have been far less fastidious than Christians in trying to determine whether accused witches really were witches.

  38. She doesn’t mind that. Just don’t mention any profanities like “B***er King,” or W**dy’s.” She gets really upset with such things.

  39. “Smelling Out” was something the Zulu were doing when whites arrived at the cape. Mostly it was men who were victims and they didn’t burn you if you were “smelled out.” No, nothing so messy as burning you, they impaled you instead. If you ever saw the mini-series “Shaka Zulu,” it gives you an idea of what that meant.

  40. “When women had no say in the political process, men made rape the second worst crime one could commit, next to murder.”

    [channelling typical feminist]

    Ah! But you see, the *reason* that men made rape the second-worst crime was because the rapist “stole the property” of the “owner” of the rape victim.

    Surely, you didn’t image that men prefer to put rapists to death because they (the non-rapists) cherish women and want what is best for them? How absurd would that be!

    [/channelling typical feminist]

    Still, it is odd, don’t you think, that now that feminists (of both chromosomal configurations) call the political shots, rape is no longer a capital crime?

  42. “Goes without saying there was no academic rigor – …”
    WOAH!!!! WAIT!!! But…but…Title IX, and “affirmative action” say that…
    *sigh* nevermind

  43. There is a tort called, “loss of consortium.” It is a cause of action for damages sustained by one spouse as a result of tortious personal injury to the other spouse. It is predicated upon the notion that spouses have a property interest in the health and well-being of each other and are entitled to compensation if they are deprived of that. That tort has been around forever and is sex neutral. See also, the tort of “Criminal conversation.”

    Note also, in the way back when men died in their fifties, children took care of their widowed mothers. Having children did not solely benefit the husband/father. They provided women with support and sustenance in their dotage.

    Before “no-fault” divorce, a wife had a property interest in her husband’s income such that, if he absconded with the secretary, she received alimony which was in the nature of “breach of contract” damages. Thanks to feminism’s support for no-fault divorce, that property interest has disappeared.

    In most states, the moment a woman marries, she acquires a property interest in all of her husband’s real estate, even if he acquired it before the marriage. He cannot dispose of it without his wife’s permission, and any attempt to do so is void ab initio.

    Again, all of these things are historical facts and/or current doctrines of law. A minimal amount of Google-Fu will lead one to the truth and obliterate 95% of a lunatic assertions existing on “Femblr.”

  45. A,couple of thoughts
    1. For a group of people that hate organized religion. That they appear to love organization of goddess and witches, seems counter intuitive.
    2. Noticed in more than a few references cited there was bleed over to the rise of the ecology as religious beliefs movement. Which is double interesting since on one hand we all know Green is the new Red. Second the tying of RadFem thoughts to ecological thought as if we had just stayed in worship of goddess or witches and we wouldn’t have had any ecological hazards. The history of humanity says otherwise, but it’s RadFem thought.
    3. Not sure of half these folks who are lesbian RadFems got on the logic train with this worship of goddess. Yet, half of it was worship of fertility and happy harvest sort of stuff (see point 2 and the history of Green hatred towards farming). Do they get that the hetronormative oppression existed even when folks were polytheistic and worshiped goddess?

  46. You know these silly Pagans call Christianity a “death cult” and claim they are pro life, a lot are vegetarians and yet they are all fine with dismemberment of tiny precious unborn humans

  49. Another thought crossed my mind. That if you research the material about the goddess and the oracles of the goddesses. Most of them were young girls taken away and abused by the temples that these religious places where located. They were taken away because they had what we called mental issues today but then the belief they were conversing with the diety of choice. Interesting correlation there that mental health issues then and mental health issues now draw people to a minority religious order where sexual abuse of children priestess was common to get the blessing of the diety on the common and rich alike.

  50. The answer is simple; we didn’t use to listen to stupid people. Now everyone shares some kind of equal credibility, especially if they whine about oppression.

Comments are closed.