Godless Commies: ‘The Concealed Enemy Against Which We Are All Fighting’

Posted on | August 17, 2018 | Comments Off on Godless Commies: ‘The Concealed Enemy Against Which We Are All Fighting’

“The story has spread that in testifying against Mr. Hiss I am working out some old grudge or motives of revenge or hatred. I don’t hate Mr. Hiss. We were close friends, but we are caught in a tragedy of history. Mr. Hiss represents the concealed enemy against which we are all fighting, and I am fighting. I have testified against him with remorse and pity, but in a moment of history in which this nation now stands, so help me God, I could not do otherwise.”
— Whittaker Chambers, testifying before the House Committee on Un-American Activities, Aug. 25, 1948

One reason I become so frustrated with politics in the 21st-century is that so many young people — and, alas, not a few old people, too — know next to nothing about the history of the previous century. You cannot speak intelligently about public policy if you don’t know history, and far too many Americans simply cannot pass that test.

Some years ago, when my oldest daughter was a teenager, I was driving her and a friend to a Christian music festival in Pennsylvania. Trying to make conversation to while away the time, I began to talk about Communism, and the decades-long ordeal of the Cold War, which young people can scarcely imagine. At one point I shouted, “Godless Commies!” in a vehement tone, which phrase has since entered into family lore.

The point I was trying to make in that rant was that the reason Americans so strongly opposed Communism was because we are a Christian people, and Marxism is an atheist ideology, whose adherents have persecuted God’s people wherever the specter of Communism has gained power.

My generation grew up with the fear of nuclear Armageddon, citizens of a nation leading what President John F. Kennedy called a “long twilight struggle” to save the world from the Communist menace, and our children’s generation knows almost nothing about what that meant.

America’s triumph in the Cold War, which consigned the Soviet Union’s “evil empire” to the “ash heap of history,” to quote Ronald Reagan, has been followed by a sad retreat from the values that enabled freedom to prevail in that long ordeal. We are today less of a Christian nation than we were when the Berlin Wall collapsed in 1989, and part of the reason for this loss of values is that our nation’s education system is now to a shocking extent controlled by godless Commies. Although they generally do not identity themselves as such, we should be under no illusions about the ideological loyalties of our nation’s university faculties, and the Democrat-controlled public-education bureaucracy. Recall that Sen. Elizabeth Warren — who now wants to “nationalize everything,” as Kevin Williamson says — once taught at prestigious Harvard University, and this should give you a general idea of what sort of latter-day Bolsheviks are now teaching America’s impressionable youth.

It is easy to joke about this. When a Red State blogger writes an article entitled “Why The Left Hates Western Culture,” Ed Driscoll quips, “You’re gonna need a bigger blog,” but it’s not really funny. Our nation’s youth are being quite literally indoctrinated with an anti-Christian, anti-capitalist, anti-constitutional worldview that threatens to destroy the legacy of liberty bequeathed to us by our patriot forefathers.

Yet there is still hope. At least one young man has kept the faith, and studied the history that our schools don’t generally teach. Only 26 years old, and an alumnus of Hillsdale College, Caleb Whitmer has taught at Sacred Heart Academy in Michigan, but now lives in the D.C. suburbs. He has written an excellent article for The Federalist:

Seventy years ago this month, Washington politicians were trying to sort out a case involving dodgy characters and Russian collusion. One man involved described it as “a tragedy of history” (Following Marx’s maxim, Paul Manafort’s trial would be the farce). Like today, it was a time of growing sympathy for harder leftist ideology, one that provides some clarity to our own socialist moment.
In early August 1948, a senior editor of Time magazine was subpoenaed for testimony before the House Committee on Un-American Activities. That editor was Whittaker Chambers, a former member of the Communist underground who had coordinated the infiltration of various government agencies by Soviet sympathizers in the mid-1930s.
Among others, his testimony unmasked Alger Hiss, a former senior State Department official. Their subsequent legal showdown, recorded by Chambers in his 1952 memoir, “Witness,” would become a classic saga of the Cold War, a minor epic in the larger struggle between the United States and Soviet Russia.
At first glance, in the eyes of this millenial born six months after Mikhail Gorbachev’s resignation dissolved the U.S.S.R., “Witness” appears dusty. On my copy, Regnery brands the book a “Cold War Classic,” a true, if limiting, title. Part of the appeal of “Witness” is undoubtedly historical: Chambers drops us into a world of fedoras and smoke-filled rooms. On cold nights, the oblivious drivers of Ford Model-Ts pass plotting Soviet agents tramping in the rain between Manhattan street lamps, and the voice of a relatively unknown congressman from California, 35-year-old Richard Nixon, crackles with mid-century professionalism in packed and sweltering D.C. court rooms.
Just barely predating Ian Fleming’s first Bond novel, Chambers’ story shows us 1930s Soviet espionage unpolluted by either cliche or nostalgia. . . .

You definitely should read the whole thing. I’m going to print out copies for my kids. This should be required reading for all young people, lest they fall prey to the indoctrination of those godless Commies.

Category: Education, History

More News About ‘Rape Culture’ That Feminists Won’t Notice, for Some Reason

Posted on | August 17, 2018 | 2 Comments

Huddersfield is a town in northern England, about halfway between Leeds and Manchester. Authorities say at least five girls ages 12-18 in this Yorkshire community were systematically raped and prostituted over a span of several years by a gang of Pakistani immigrants:

Thirty men have been charged with raping and trafficking five girls in West Yorkshire.
The allegations against the defendants relate to non-recent sexual offences dating back to between 2005 and 2012. They relate to five women who say they were abused as children in the Huddersfield area between the ages of 12 and 18.
One woman, Fehreen Rafiq, 38, from Huddersfield, is charged with two counts of facilitating the commission of a child sex offence.
The 31 accused will appear at Kirklees magistrates court on 5-6 September 2018. They are:

Banaras Hussain, 37, of Shipley, charged with one count of rape of a female over 16.
Banaris Hussain, 35, of Huddersfield, charged with one count of rape of a girl aged 13-15.
Mohammed Suhail Arif, 30, of Huddersfield, charged with rape of a girl aged 13-15.
Iftikar Ali, 37, of Huddersfield, charged with attempted rape of a girl aged 13-15 and three counts of rape of a girl aged 13-15.
Mohammed Sajjad, 31, of Huddersfield, charged with four counts of rape of a female aged 13-15, one rape of a girl under 13 and facilitating the commission of a child sex offence.
Fehreen Rafiq, 38, of Huddersfield, charged with two counts of facilitating the commission of a child sex offence.
Umar Zaman, 30, of Huddersfield, charged with two counts of rape of a female aged 13-15.
Basharat Hussain, 31, of Huddersfield, charged with two counts of rape of a female aged 13-15.
Amin Ali Choli, 36, of Huddersfield, charged with two counts of rape of a female over 16 years old.
Shaqeel Hussain, 35, of Dewsbury, charged with rape of a female aged 13-15 and two counts of trafficking.
Mubasher Hussain, 35, of Huddersfield, charged with rape of a female aged 13-15 and sexual assault.
Abdul Majid, 34, of Huddersfield, charged with two counts of rape of a female aged 13-15.
Mohammed Dogar, 35, of Huddersfield, charged with two counts of facilitating the commission of a child sex offence.
Usman Ali, 32, of Huddersfield, charged with two counts of rape of a female aged 13-15.
Mohammed Waqas Anwar, 29, of Huddersfield, charged with five counts of rape of a female aged 13-15.
Gul Riaz, 42, of Huddersfield, charged with rape of a female aged 13-15.
Mohammed Akram, 41, of Huddersfield, charged with two counts of trafficking with a view to sexual exploitation of a female and rape of a female aged 14-15.
Manzoor Akhtar, 29, of Huddersfield, charged with trafficking and three counts of rape of a female aged 13-15.
Samuel Fikru, 30, of Camden, charged with two counts of rape of a female aged 13-15.

Recall that Tommy Robinson was imprisoned for reporting on another trial of another Pakistani sex-trafficking gang in England. When feminists talk about “rape culture,” “misogyny” and “violence against women,” it is always in the context of demonizing “privileged” white males. Therefore, when crimes against women are committed by those who do not fit this template — e.g., Muslim immigrants — feminists have nothing to say, except perhaps to lament the “backlash” of “Islamophobia.”

What this suggests is that feminists aren’t actually interested in improving the lives of women, in general. Rather, what feminists seek is to increase their own political power, a goal they expect to obtain as members of a broader coalition of the Left. Because the Left — in England, as in America — is organized on the basis of identity politics, appealing to the grievances of minorities, this requires feminists to avoid any criticism of their left-wing coalition partners.

Feminists expect us to believe that it is only “privileged” white men who are responsible for the oppression of women, just as white men are also to blame for the oppression of racial minorities and homosexuals. This “intersectional” analysis, based on the scapegoating of white males, is convenient for the political Left, providing a preemptive excuse to ignore any wrongdoing committed by anyone (including white men) who supports their destructive left-wing agenda. All of this is derived from a rigid ideology of “social justice” in which human beings exist only as members of collective groups (not individuals, responsible for their own lives) in a world defined by systemic oppression. This theoretical conception becomes a sort of cult religion, and any evidence that does not support this worldview is ignored or explained away as irrelevant by the cult priesthood (politicians, academics, journalists, etc.) who bombard their disciples with atrocity tales of wrongdoing by the demonized scapegoats — “privileged” white males who are, to the Cult of Social Justice, what Satan is to Christian theology.

Certainly, I do not mean to demonize Pakistani Muslims the way that feminists demonize white heterosexual males. I do not assert that all Pakistani Muslim immigrants are complicit in the crimes committed by Hussain, et al., whereas feminists habitually assert that “rape culture” is a universal phenomenon for which all men are to blame.

What I mean to illustrate, by calling attention to such cases as this, is a very simple fact — feminist ideology is wrong.

The world does not work the way feminists say it does. Their mindless adherence to a theory of “social justice” — collective privilege, collective victimhood, systemic oppression, etc. — leads feminists to propagate falsehoods, with results that are harmful to women.

Like I keep saying, people need to wake the hell up.

RECENTLY:

July 30: Illegal Alien Sentenced for Raping Girl
July 29: Pimp Who Trafficked 16-Year-Old Girl Sentenced to 30 Years in Federal Prison
July 29: Two Men Sentenced to Federal Prison for Sex Trafficking of ‘Fun Size’ Girl, 15
July 29: Suspect Charged With Trafficking Girl, 17
July 29: ICE Seeks Fugitive Sex Trafficker

Category: Great Britain, Immigration, Islam, Sex Trouble, Violence Against Women

Poll Finds Most Young Women Do Not — Repeat, DO NOT — Identify as Feminists

Posted on | August 17, 2018 | Comments Off on Poll Finds Most Young Women Do Not — Repeat, DO NOT — Identify as Feminists

Imagine their screeching fury:

Feminist website Refinery29 got more than it bargained for when it teamed up with CBS to poll 842 women ages 18-35 about — among other things — feminism. When asked, “Do you consider yourself to be a feminist, or not?” over half (54 percent) of respondents said, “No.” Not only that, only 19 percent of respondents identified as Republican. In fact, the largest group of women polled (34 percent) identified as Democrat, with 27 percent identifying Independent, and 20 percent unsure of their political party.
“These are surprising results,” writes Refinery29’s Ashley Alese Edwards. “Feminism seems to be more en vogue than ever,” she insists, “even men call themselves feminists now.” And what about “the Women’s March, the ‘resistance’ (which is largely women-led) and #MeToo,” Edwards laments. How could you not be feminist?!
To her credit, Edwards actually interviewed some of these strange non-feminist creatures, presumably to find out what on earth was wrong with them. Leah, a 22-year old independent, told Edwards, “I feel like the movement has been largely taken over by far-left wing activists that make it nearly impossible for me to identify with.” She also called feminists “disingenuous” for denying “any negative emotional backlash or health risks for women having an abortion.” She continued, “Although not all women suffer emotionally or physically after an abortion, many do, and their stories are ignored by mainstream feminism because it doesn’t fit the narrative of abortion being a good thing for women.”
A 25-year-old Republican named Stephanie, whom Edwards spoke to, even went so far as to say, “I don’t think women in the modern western world are oppressed.” Stephanie continued, “I think modern feminists try to create a boogeyman out of what they call the patriarchy and hunt it down, but it’s not necessary…. Men and women have different strengths and weaknesses. Acknowledging that is not sexist.”

(Hat-tip: Sarah Hoyt at Instapundit.)

Let me say that the arguments for feminism have not improved one iota since 1871, when R.L. Dabney published “Women’s Rights Women”:

In our day, innovations march with so rapid a stride that they quite take away one’s breath. The fantastical project of yesterday, which was mentioned only to be ridiculed, is to-day the audacious reform, and will be to-morrow the accomplished fact. Such has been the history of the agitation for “women’s rights,” as they are sophistically called in this country. A few years ago this movement was the especial hobby of a few old women of both sexes, who made themselves the laughing-stock of all sane people by the annual ventilation of their crotchet. Their only recruits were a few of the unfortunates whom nature or fortune had debarred from those triumphs and enjoyments which are the natural ambition of the sex, and who adopted this agitation as the most feasible mode of expressing their spitefulness against the successful competitors. To-day the movement has assumed such dimensions that it challenges the attention of every thoughtful mind.
If we understand the claims of the Women’s Rights women, they are in substance two: that the legislation, at least, of society shall disregard all the natural distinctions of the sexes, and award the same specific rights and franchises to both in every respect; and that woman while in the married state shall be released from every species of conjugal subordination. The assimilation of the garments of the two sexes, their competition in the same industries and professions, and their common access to the same amusements and recreations, are social changes which the “strong-minded” expect to work, each one for herself, when once the obstructions of law are removed from the other points. . . .

Read the whole thing. It might help to know that Dabney, a Presbyterian theologian, served as Stonewall Jackson’s chief-of-staff.

Category: Sex Trouble

Denver Teenager Murders Nephew, 7, After Argument With Lesbian Girlfriend

Posted on | August 17, 2018 | Comments Off on Denver Teenager Murders Nephew, 7, After Argument With Lesbian Girlfriend

Jennie Bunsom (left) is accused of murdering Jordan Vong (right).

On the evening of Monday, Aug. 6, Denver police were alerted to the disappearance of 7-year-old Jordan Vong. Police went door-to-door searching a 20-block area around the home and called in the FBI. A police spokeswoman said: “We’re asking everyone, if you’re up this morning, you’re having your coffee, take a look in the backyard, look in your shed, check in your car, check anywhere you think a little 7-year-old who is 3-foot-7 could hide because he could be hunkered down somewhere cold. So if he is in the area, please give us a call.”

Tuesday night, Aug. 7, police found Vong dead, his body hidden in the family’s home. The accused killer was his own teenage aunt:

The 16-year-old girl accused of killing and hiding the body of her 7-year-old nephew Jordan Vong names her girlfriend as an accessory to the crime, according to the arrest affidavit.
The Denver Police Department said 16-year-old Jennie Bunsom suffocated the boy, wrapped his body in a blanket and placed him in her bedroom closet.
Bunsom was scheduled to be in juvenile court Tuesday morning, but because the Denver District Attorney’s Office is charging her as an adult, her appearance was waived until Thursday morning.
Bunsom was charged Monday as an adult with first-degree murder after deliberation and first-degree murder of a person under the age of 12 by a person in a position of trust.
Court papers say on the afternoon of Aug. 6, Bunsom got in an argument with her girlfriend over the phone and was upset.
Jordan came downstairs and asked her to play video games. She said no. He then laid down on her bed, according to the affidavit.
Bunsom asked him to leave and when he didn’t, she reportedly shoved Jordan, causing him to hit his face on the floor.
He began to cry. Bunsom allegedly told police she placed her hand over his mouth and plugged his nose. Jordan was struggling to breathe, then stopped moving.
The affidavit says Bunsom put his body under her bed, then called her girlfriend and told her what happened.
In an interview with police, Bunsom said her girlfriend “told her she had to hide Jordan’s body and told her to put his body in the closet.”
The girlfriend has not been identified because she is 17-years-old and a juvenile. The district attorney’s office said as of now, no one else is facing charges.

“Love is love.” “Diversity is our strength.”

Nothing to see here, folks. Move along.

Category: Crime

Late Night With In The Mailbox: 08.16.18

Posted on | August 17, 2018 | 2 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

OVER THE TRANSOM
EBL: Aretha Franklin RIP
Twitchy: Kris Paronto Replies To John Brennan’s Principles Tweet, Leaves Smoking Crater
Louder With Crowder: Portland Police Chief – Why Isn’t Antifa Ever Held Responsible?

RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: A Final Solution To The Problem Of Mosquitoes In The Bedroom
American Power: California Looks To Block Further Offshore Drilling For Oil, also, Jeremy Corbyn Is Too Extreme To Be PM
American Thinker: Fahrenheit 404
Animal Magnetism: Animal’s Daily Social Security News
BattleSwarm: Texas News Roundup For August 16
CDR Salamander: From Strangelove To Merkwuerdigeliebe
Da Tech Guy: Pennsylvania Bishops Rendering Unto Caesar What Is Caesar’s, also, Sorry Senator Warren, Climate Change Didn’t Cause The Tornado That Devastated My Town
Don Surber: Trump Has Red China Reeling
Dustbury: The Once And Future Queen Of Soul
The Geller Report: Hungary Victorious! Soros Defeated, also, New Swedish “No Go Zone” Police Station Rammed By Car, Attacked By Masked Arsonists
Hogewash: A Retro Form of Progressivism, also, Team Kimberlin Post of The Day
Legal Insurrection: Fauxcahontas Wants To Federalize & Weaponize Corporations For Social Justice Activism, also, LA Times, Wall Street Journal, And San Francisco Chronicle Don’t Participate In Organized Denunciation of Trump Press Attacks
The PanAm Post: Drugs, Mercenaries, & Communist Ideology Fuel Nicaraguan Paramilitaries
Power Line: The Brennan Factor, also, Ellison On The Brink
Shark Tank: Democratic Poll Shows Curbelo Winning
Shot In The Dark: This Is Minnesota’s Gun Control Movement In Action
The Jawa Report: RIP Aretha Franklin
The Political Hat: Light Posting For About A Week
This Ain’t Hell: Mad Dog Wants More UCMJ, also, National Airborne Day!
Victory Girls: NM Terror Camp Razed By Authorities – Why?
Volokh Conspiracy: Federal Court Rejects EPA Attempt To Suspend WOTUS Rule
Weasel Zippers: American Couple Believing “Evil Is a Make-Believe Concept” Bike Through ISIS Territory; ISIS Stabs Them To Death, also, AZ GOP Candidate Gaynor Wants End To Non-English Ballots
Mark Steyn: The “Leaders Of Violence” Smashing The Past

Featured Digital Deals
Amazon Warehouse Deals
Outlet Deals

Category: Linkagery

The ‘Deep State’ Is Real: Whistleblower Punished for Pentagon Spy Complaint

Posted on | August 16, 2018 | Comments Off on The ‘Deep State’ Is Real: Whistleblower Punished for Pentagon Spy Complaint

Rowan Scarborough reports at The Washington Times:

A Trump-supporting Pentagon analyst was stripped of his security clearance by Obama-appointed officials after he complained of questionable government contracts to Stefan Halper, the FBI informant who spied on the Trump presidential campaign.
Adam Lovinger, a 12-year strategist in the Pentagon’s Office of Net Assessment, complained to his bosses about Halper contracts in the fall of 2016, his attorney, Sean M. Bigley, told The Washington Times.
On May 1, 2017, his superiors yanked his security clearance and relegated him to clerical chores.
Mr. Bigley filed a complaint July 18 with the Pentagon’s senior ethics official, charging that Mr. Lovinger’s superiors misused the security clearance process to punish him. He said his client complained about excessive “sweetheart” deals for Mr. Halper and for a “best friend” of Chelsea Clinton.
“As it turns out, one of the two contractors Mr. Lovinger explicitly warned his ONA superiors about misusing in 2016 was none other than Mr. Halper,” Mr. Bigley wrote in his ethics complaint, which called the contracts “cronyism and corruption.”
Mr. Lovinger filed a whistleblower reprisal complaint in May with the Defense Department inspector general against James Baker, director of the Office of Net Assessment. The complaint also singles out Washington Headquarters Services, a Pentagon support agency that awarded the Halper contracts totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars. . . .
Mr. Baker was appointed chief of the Office of Net Assessment in 2015 by Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, Mr. Obama’s appointee.
The Washington Headquarters Services, which revoked Mr. Lovinger’s clearance, is headed by Barbara Westgate, who was appointed in 2016. . . .
Press reports identified Mr. Halper as a paid FBI confidential human source, whose mission was to make contacts with Trump campaign workers. The FBI was investigating any Trump ties to Moscow at a time when its intelligence officers were hacking Democratic Party computers.
The Daily Caller website documented Mr. Halper’s outreach to George Papadopoulos, a Trump campaign volunteer. He also contacted another volunteer, Carter Page. . . .
Mr. Halper was paid $411,000 by Washington Headquarters Services on Sept. 26, 2016, for a contract that ran until this March.

Who are these Pentagon bureaucrats, James Baker and Barbara Westgate? Are they partisan Democrat hacks — or adherents to some “internationalist” ideology — burrowed into the civil service? Why else would they seek to destroy the career of Adam Lovinger, who had the temerity to raise questions about the funds paid to Stefan Halper?

It is not a paranoid “conspiracy theory” to say that government bureaucracies often operate in ways harmful to the public interest, and that bureaucrats often display a greater concern for their own job security than for whatever work the bureaucracy is intended to do.

Let us consider the situation in early 2016, when it became apparent that Trump would win the Republican presidential nomination, which was what started this apparent effort to sabotage his campaign with ginned-up accusations of “Russian collusion.” The fact that the Kremlin actually was seeking to influence the election is irrelevant to the propriety of the Obama administration conducting surveillance of its political opponents, using government resources for partisan purposes. The question is why Pentagon bureaucrats like Baker and Westgate would cooperate in this scheme to sabotage Trump. Are they partisan Democrats?

Well, both were appointed to their current positions during the Obama administration, and we might suppose that no bureaucrat known to be a Republican would get a promotion in a Democrat administration. But consider this fact: From 1993-2017, Democrats occupied the White House for 16 years (Clinton 1993-2001, Obama 2009-2017) compared to only eight years for Republicans (G.W. Bush 2001-2009). In other words, a long-serving bureaucrat at the Pentagon (or in any other federal agency) would have become accustomed to working for Democrats who served in presidentially appointed positions as Cabinet secretaries, etc. Regardless of their own political opinions, then, we might expect that senior employees of the Pentagon would be less troubled by the idea of Hillary Clinton becoming president than by the idea of the disruptive outsider Donald Trump winning the 2016 election.

Trump’s avowed intent to reorient U.S. foreign policy, away from the internationalist status quo toward an “America First” approach, may well have concerned Pentagon bureaucrats. We don’t have to debate the wisdom of U.S. post-Cold War strategy (e.g., the effectiveness and utility of NATO) in order to say that Trump was willing to ask questions that no one in the bipartisan Beltway policy-making establishment had bothered asking for many years. Clearly, Trump meant to shake things up, and that almost certainly would have frightened a lot of bureaucrats who had spent years crawling their way up the career ladder at the Pentagon, the State Department, the FBI, the CIA, etc. Thus, to speak of the “Deep State” in the context of efforts to prevent the election of Trump, and to sabotage his presidency after he won, is by no means advancing a paranoid conspiracy theory; it is a realistic conclusion based on a common-sense interpretation of available evidence.

The allegations in Adam Lovinger’s lawsuit show how this “Deep State” conspiracy may have worked at an operational level. Anyone in the bureaucracy who opposed the effort to sabotage Trump — for instance, by asking why Stefan Halper was being paid so much by the Pentagon — would become a target of ostracism and potential disciplinary actions.

Allegedly, I hasten to add. A certain amount of journalistic caution is necessary when you’re dealing with situations like this.

(Hat-tip: Charlie Martin at Instapundit.)

Category: Conspiracy Theories, Corruption, Donald Trump, Russia

Feminist Professor Denounces Belief That ‘Fathers Are Valuable Parents’

Posted on | August 16, 2018 | Comments Off on Feminist Professor Denounces Belief That ‘Fathers Are Valuable Parents’

Males are worthless, according to feminist ideology, and thus government programs encouraging fathers to be involved with their children are bad:

A feminist professor at California State University-Fresno recently published an article lamenting that federal programs to promote “responsible fatherhood” among vulnerable men in fact perpetuate “patriarchy,” “gender norms,” and “hegemonic masculinity.”
The article, “‘Manning Up’ to Be a Good Father: Hybrid Fatherhood, Masculinity, and U.S. Responsible Fatherhood Policy,” was published in the new issue of Gender and Society by Jennifer Randles, who teaches sociology classes at the California school.
The goal of Randles’ research was to assess the feminist implications of “responsible fatherhood” programs. Such programs began in the 1970s, first received federal funding in 1996, and are currently overseen by the Department of Health and Human Services.
“Studies have shown that involved fathers provide practical support in raising children,” according to the government website, which explains that “children with involved loving fathers are more likely to do well in school, have healthy self-esteem, and exhibit empathy.”
Currently, the government funds 36 programs to promote healthy fatherhood. These programs vary in scope and mission, but must align with one of three federal goals: promoting healthy marriage, responsible parenting, or economic stability.
“How can a seemingly progressive revision of fatherhood promoting men’s emotional engagement with children operate as a discursive mechanism for the reproduction of gender, race, and class inequalities?” asks Randles. . . .
She laments: these programs “reinforce patriarchal ideology” by encouraging “hybrid masculinity,” which encourages low-income fathers to be “emotionally engaged,” and perpetuates the myth that mothers “cannot compensate” for the lack of a father.
These programs aim to “reshape men’s gender identities in line with a type of hegemonic masculinity focused on well-paid work and family breadwinning,” she laments, claiming that they “legitimate patriarchal power.”
By teaching men to “man up,” not repress their feelings, and avoid “absentee” fatherhood, these programs promote a “hybridized gender identity” that ultimately does nothing to challenge the patriarchal status quo, Randles writes.
“This strategy reaffirms essentialist ideas that fathers are valuable parents because they are men and legitimates patriarchal ideologies,” she writes, adding that they perpetuate “patriarchy by concealing the power of privileged men and devaluing women.”

(Hat-tip: Instapundit.)

Professor Randles teaches sociology, reminding me of Thomas Sowell’s quote: “The next time some academics tell you how important diversity is, ask how many Republicans there are in their sociology department.”

P.S.: Enrollment at Fresno State is 59% female and less than 20% of Fresno State students are white. That’s what “diversity” means in California — deliberate discrimination against white males.

Category: Education, Sex Trouble