by Connie Chastain*
Perhaps by now, regular readers of The False Rape Society may be wondering about my adamant opposition to feminism. In the interest of disclosure, here's a bit of background.
I grew up surrounded by a sea of good, honorable, gentlemanly men (and very good women, too, despite their not being feminists) -- men of principle, high-minded men who exercised self-control and who had huge hearts full of love, men who continuously did good things for others, and not for praise or honor, because most of it was unknown and unacknowledged except to and by a few others.
These were ordinary men untouched by celebrity, unacknowledged by the world -- men who lived quiet lives in small towns in the South, who worked at a variety of occupations and earned various incomes. Among the hundreds upon hundreds of wonderful, loving men in the churches where my daddy preached when I was growing up, there were a few bad apples. I can count them on my fingers.
The eight or ten bad apples I knew personally are likely the only men feminism would acknowledge. It would try to smear all men with the deeds of those few. It's the same thing with patriarchy. All they have eyes for is the bad it "caused." But when it comes to good things, feminism basically ignores the good men have done, including things that greatly benefited women, things they would have gotten no other way.
That's why I have so little respect for feminism. I'm much more willing to acknowledge the few good things it has produced for women -- far more than feminists are willing to credit men's accomplishments. But just because some good things resulted from feminist efforts doesn't mean I have to swallow every chunk of bitter falsehood they're trying to cram down my throat.
Like claims of rape culture.
While I don't engage in male hero worship, I acknowledge and respect the differences between men and women and I don't denigrate men for being the way God made them. I do love, respect and honor men who are loving, respectable and honorable, and even some who aren't, when caught up in circumstances beyond their control. And I don't try to smear all men, or maleness itself, with the bad deeds of some, as feminism does.
Yes, patriarchy has its negatives; it's an institution of flawed humans and cannot help being flawed--but it is not the total evil feminism would have us believe. I will always be grateful to those wonderful, honorable men of my youth, who showed me the positive reality of maleness and manhood, and thus inoculated me against the virulence of radical feminism.
*Connie is a regular contributor to FRS. Her principal blog is http://conniechastain.blogspot.com/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
30 comments:
nicely put, theres good and bad in everything and its important to acknowledge the good that woman have achieved as well as the bad, same with men and patriarchy
The standard feminist/liberal response to this would be to point out that there was racism and discrimination in the small towns of the south during that time period, and that fact is supposed to negate everything else.
What they tend to forget is that crime used to be very, very low in the African-American community, and the chances of a young black man going to prison were far lower. During the depression people still left their doors unlocked at night.
Does this wash away the stain of racism? No, but it is a myth to suggest that the America of the past was pure evil (for everybody except for white men) and that everything that has happened since then has been a story of progress.
Communities were indeed much better off -- producing the sorts of men described in the article -- when society was more patriarchal.
85% of violent crime in America comes from the matriarchal underclass. This is a statistic that the gender / Raunch elite do not parot around town much.
http://www.photius.com/feminocracy/facts_on_fatherless_kids.html
Con garden: Forty-three percent of prison inmates grew up in a single-parent household -- 39 percent with their mothers, 4 percent with their fathers -- and an additional 14 percent lived in households without either biological parent. Another 14 percent had spent at last part of their childhood in a foster home, agency or other juvenile institution.
Source: US Bureau of Justice Statistics, Survey of State Prison Inmates. 1991
Canada: Falsely accused Quebec teacher struggles to cope
http://news.aol.ca/canada/article/falsely-accused-quebec-teacher-struggles/1088442
Sickening, isn't it?
It is a perversion of a law enforcement system that enables women and girls to lie to the whenever they want to.
Break the gender feminist / law enforcement missinformation Alliance. It is a perversion that is perverting society, and it is un-constitutional.
Someone should reach out to this falselly accused in quebec guy and see if he will do a story for us here.
"Break the gender feminist / law enforcement missinformation Alliance."
Enough already.
Imho, there is no such thing as a "patriarchy". It's an imaginary bugbear dreamed up by feminists.
you see, we are slowly createing two distinct classes of people..
1. The upper white middle class Gender/ Raunch elite.
2. The matriarchal underclass who are stuck in a perpetual underclass of no education, and no help from the Gender / Raunch elite who are manufacturing the new gender/ raunch "construction" that villifies the underclass males, which in effect justifies that they are pushed into the matriachal underclass of uneducated laborers.
This would seem silly if it were not the truth.
2. The matriarchal underclass who are stuck in a perpetual underclass of no education, and no help from the Gender / Raunch elite who are manufacturing the new gender/ raunch "construction" that villifies the underclass males, which in effect justifies that they are pushed into the matriachal underclass of uneducated laborers.
This would seem silly if it were not the truth.
May 29, 2010 11:26:00 AM
THATS WOT YOU CALL A RUN _ON SENTENCE, BUT ITS THE MESSAGE, NOT THE MEDIUM THAT IS IMPORTANT!!
I, too, grew up in the south in a very safe and loving environment. I think it's extraordinary that, even though the writer of the post was protected by a cacoon of love, she still managed to personally acquaint herself with 10 bad apples! How'd that happen? I knew none.
Trouble with those wormy apples is that they contaminate and enable other apples, until pretty soon you have a whole barrel of rotten apples, and there you have it -- rape culture.
There is no 'rape culture.' That is a feminist myth.
There are two mistakes being made in these comments: 1/ dismissing patriarchy as being nothing more than a feminist construct, and 2/ babbling on at length about "the matriarchist underclass.
If the definition of patriarchy is a social and/or political structure which is dominated by men, then very obviously it does exist, and is the norm throughout history. But this is such a broad category that generalizations about it are bound to be meaningless -- it is certainly absurd for feminists to cast patriarchy as the ultimate villain of history. Saying "patriarchy is bad" is tantamount to saying "social structure is bad."
Matriarchy -- the largely imaginary alternative to patriarchy -- is all but non-existent throughout history; practically no society has ever been a true matriarchy, not even the ones that are matrilinear. To talk about a "matriarchist" underclass is to imply that women are running the show in our inner cities. That's nonsense.
The problem is that broken homes lead to broken neighborhoods, and then you have a situation in which nobody is in charge, and criminals have disproportionate influence.
When you take fathers out of the picture, you end up with anarchy, not "matriarchy."
If you don't like the term 'rape culture', how would you describe the long-standing issue in the greek fraternal world that emphasizes hegemonic masculinity and sexual exploitation?
Do you think the greek system at UNC is being revamped, based on a myth?
I would call it a hook-up culture, Jeana (or is it Georgia Liar?). Certain feminist trolls I could mention have trouble grasping the difference between sex/carousing and rape.
That's what happens when women can't accept responsibility for their own behavior.
Anon@2:29, is that you Georgia Girl?
Gentlemen and ladies: I know bring to you: (drumroll) the wit and wisdom of feministing, May 29, 2010. (Yes, this is real.)
*****
Dear Professor Foxy,
I'm sure you get this all the time, but I feel like my issue may be the first you've heard. My boyfriend and I recently had sex (both of our first times), and have had sex a handful of times since, and he has never cum.
{And now for Dr. Foxy's enlightening reponse!}
You don't need to go out of your comfort zone, but you should actually see what makes him cum. Has he jerked off in front of you yet?
***
Yes, this is the voice of The New Woman, the Liberated, the Wise Females Who Know Better Than Our Sad, Misguided Forefathers. These are the women whose vision has been adopted as our new cultural mainstream.
Some jokes are worth repeating, especially when they were unintentional:
***
I'm sure you get this all the time, but I feel like my issue may be the first you've heard.
"Has he jerked off in front of you yet?"
Haahahahahahahahaha.
Read the comments -- they're hilarious. Apparently this is a common problem suffered by the boyfriends of feminists.
Some of them make me wonder if these women have ever even had sex with another flesh and blood person. For example, this one:
******
Has he jerked off in front of you yet?
This. It can be a big turn-on to watch your partner masturbate, and it can also be really helpful to see what he does and how he does it - and what he does as he gets closer to having an orgasm both voluntarily (making sounds) and involuntarily (twitching limbs, his balls changing position, etc).
Also, nothing says you can't stimulate him in other ways while he touches himself - one of my favorite things to do is to snuggle and touch different parts of my partner's body while he touches himself. Sometimes he gets himself off, other times I take over, but it's a nice way to relax and explore and learn about his body and his turn-ons.
Has he jerked off in front of you yet?
*****
I really hate to side with the feminists here, but this is a very good way to increase sexual and emotional intimacy in a relationship. Especially if she continues to make eye contact with you.
Or you can try masturbating while keeping eye contact with yourself in a mirror. For me, I just started sobbing after I ejaculated.
It can be intense. There's a lot of emotion wrapped up in jacking off.
Anonymous @2:29:00 PM said...
If you don't like the term 'rape culture', how would you describe the long-standing issue in the greek fraternal world that emphasizes hegemonic masculinity and sexual exploitation?
Hegemonic masculinity? LOL Madam, you are a queen sized wanker. Another silly little feminist idea spawned by women who have absolutely no concept of what it is, or takes, to be a man. More hypocrisy from bigots who would be outraged at any man theorising similarly about women.
Do you think the greek system at UNC is being revamped, based on a myth?
Given that UNC graduates the likes of Crystal Mangum it would be a myth that their diplomas are worth more than toilet paper.
"More hypocrisy from bigots who would be outraged at any man theorising similarly about women."
... which is why we simply MUST do it!
"Or you can try masturbating while keeping eye contact with yourself in a mirror. For me, I just started sobbing after I ejaculated.
It can be intense. There's a lot of emotion wrapped up in jacking off."
I'm not sure whether to laugh or start sobbing myself.
I am a feminist, and I don't understand why I am being accused of misandy in this context. I fully recognise that men have produced great triumphs for people everywhere. However this doesn't mean a patriarchy is good nor does it mean the men achieved these results because of patriarchy. Linking the two makes no sense, other then if you mean that men were better educated then women within a more patriarchial society then the one we have now, which gave them a bit of an advantage.
Also I want to draw an analogy here. I think of a lot of feminist (or alleged feminist)statements and theory as similar to the bible. It is easy to group all christians into one category, eg, homophobic however this is grossly inaccurate and an insult to those open minded christians. Much the same attributing this feminist "gospel" (originating mostly from radical feminism) to traits inherent in all feminists is not going to be correct.
A inconsistency I would also like to point out with your logic is that fact that you deride feminists for grouping all men together upon the basis of what a few "bad apples" do, however you do the same to feminists.
To feminist open to criticism:
I was born a man, and am happy to be one, but I didn't choose to be one. Nor is being a man an ideology. It is a biological fact.
You, in contrast, choose to ally yourself with a movement that is riddled with misandry and whose leaders and most prominent spokeswomen have no use for men.
The gaps, or more accurately, the chasms, in your argument, are breathtaking.
I fully recognise that men have produced great triumphs for people everywhere. However this doesn't mean a patriarchy is good nor does it mean the men achieved these results because of patriarchy. Linking the two makes no sense, other then if you mean that men were better educated then women within a more patriarchial society then the one we have now, which gave them a bit of an advantage.
******
Throughout most of history, only a very small number of privileged people were able to do anything beyond subsistence farming and other menial tasks (including mining, military service, etc). Housework consumed a ridiculous amount of time and effort, and child mortality was so great that women had to have many children just to maintain the population.
Under these circumstances, there was no way that an idealized feminist society could have existed. It is remarkable that some women -- Queen Elizabeth I, for example -- did rise to great heights of power.
'Patriarchy' is a very, very broad category, and it need not mean 'a system in which men are unfairly favored over women.' Something like 98% of CEO's and that vast majority of US senators and congressmen are men, for example, but there is nothing in our laws preventing women from achieving these positons -- in fact, our laws favor women unfairly in certain areas. In this sense, in spite of being the most feminist-influenced nation in history, the US is still a patriarchy (at least at the top).
When we discuss patriarchy as being a good thing, usually we are referring to the home, and in particular to all of the problems caused when children grow up in broken homes. Many of us believe that the problem of rampant divorce is related to the plunge in male status that has occurred over the past few decades.
"To feminist open to criticism:
I was born a man, and am happy to be one"
Well, Archivist, you've broken feminism's first two cardinal rules ...
Post a Comment