A brief history of feminism, part one.

Fascism. Half the fat, all the taste. That's the Fascist promise. -- ABOF&L

Course, it's well known that Shakespeare didn't really exist. And that if he did, he was lots of people. And they were all women, and that all his plays were written by Alan Bleasdale. And that Shakespeare shot Kennedy, and that Lee Harvey Oswald was nothing but a pansy. They don't put that on Newsnight, though, do they?

When I was unceremoniously booted off the Straight Dope message board for arguing about the prevelance of false accusations of rape (Kanin) there was only one board member who supported me, one calling himself Malacandra. He was English, as are a disproportionate number of anti-feminist bloggers. I think this is very interesting, although I'm not sure why.
On the RI board there have been several threads of late in which I've become involved. About feminism, of course. Most of my posts there have probably been on that issue.

This is criticism of the feminist movement. It's the movement itself I'll be criticising, not the doctrine which is absurd enough.

One warning: patriarchy.com/debunker.com is a CSICOP front, so you don't know where the information's been. I may refer to it later.

Another anti-feminist I've come across on the internet was a fundamentalist Christian who used to post on soc.men, years ago. Interesting ideas on the milk of human kindness. Don't approve of him, though, as he advocated shooting people in self defence while I'm more of the turn the other cheek school of thought.

We'll start recently and stretch out backwards.

I could start with the anti-free speech antics of Naomi Wolf, a "third waver" or the death threats to Suzanne Steinmetz or the persecution of Erin Pizzey, who needs police protection when she visits her own coutnry. Or there's this: http://the-daily-behemoth.blogspot.com/2007/10/journalist-calls-for-population-control.html, very recent indeed. As Branton says in his "Underground Nazi Invasion of the United States", America lost world war two. Or at least the Germans won. No doubt a lot of American foot soldiers would see that as a defeat, but they aren't America.

No, let's start with Steinem. Some would say that's going to the start of feminism, but they're ignorant of history. As remarksman and Ben Fairhall are so correct in pointing out, we're seeing a reawakening of something ancient, although it's not the idealistic Matriarchy or psychic egalitarian goddess-worshippers gobbled up by those hideous Kurgan patriarchalists and their warlike ways. Read Theozoology? Those Baltic Aryans brought down by the Jews and deprived of their paradise and super-powers have inspired many things. But onward.

Yvette Cooper, then Public Health Minister revealed that the NHS spends eight times as much on women as on men. It's on the web. That's far from the only way the taxpayer gets scalped by the movement.

Gloria in Excelsis

That from Conspiracy Nation. See also Makow, who a lot don't like.

Long before Steinem teamed un with Gunderson to distract from Monarch (of which there's speculation she may be a product, and who knows what went on during her time in India) she was working for the CIA. Her original assignment was to go to left-wing youth meetings in Europe and cause disruption as an agent provocateur. That was then her role, provoke trouble and bring the left-wing into disrepute. Later on the feminist movement did a lot of this. The original movements of the sixties were pacificist, not feminist. "What is the position of women in SNCC? The position of women in SNCC is prone." He didn't mean that, of course, but his organisation was trouble. Anti-war, pro-black power and so on. The leaders of the movement were removed and their left-wing followers, still needing a relatively similar movement to follow had their reformist instincts channeled into harmless, anti-establishment chic, feminism. That's how it works. Steinem, David Shayler, much the same thing.

Pottinger, Pinochet. Forsling Harris, JFK. Cord Meyers. Good list of Steinem's known associates, there. Perhaps she was a presidential model for Kissinger.

Divide and conquer is the tactic. Feminism is a hate movement. The idea is to turn people against each other. It's worked too. Feminism is a powerful movement.

Rather, a strong puppet. There's no independent movement, it was formed from the top down. The leaders were found, get the right people, give them the right scripts, the right image and persona, then give them a group of followers who will easily enough be recruited by publishing deals and so on. Most important, co-opt the revoultionary chic. Take over and destroy the left and the anti-war movement, that's the main target. Make "anti-oppression" mean "feminist", not "unionist". Of independent feminists there were none.

Feminism is the belief that women are all victimsand its all men's fault.-- feministhate.tripod.com

That's not a correct belief, therefore it's not a natural belief. It's been inculcated by those with something to gain. In this case the tail hasn't been wagging the dog, it's created the dog and led it around by the nose, if you'll pardon the mixed metaphor.

That doesn't pardon the rank and file, as far as I'm concerned. We've got to get past "I was only following orders". Those books might be popular because they're written and advertised, but no-one's forced to read them, let alone take everything on board. they're corrupted, even if it isn't their fault.

UNICEF, well, look and see:

When I was a kid, people knew there was inefficiency and waste at the United Nations. But everyone would still look to UNICEF as the one agency that was really making a difference, helping children to stay healthy and get a grade-school education.

That was true until the day Jim Grant, visionary UNICEF leader, died.

So in 1995, President Bill Clinton — no doubt at the urging of Hillary — nominated Carol Bellamy as Grant's replacement. Bellamy is as doctrinaire a feminist as you will find. While serving as a state senator in New York, Bellamy had voted against a bill that would have granted legal rights to an infant who managed to survive a botched abortion.

Once she settled into her tony digs on New York's Upper East Side, Bellamy quickly became bored with UNICEF's mundane programs that doled out measles vaccines and oral rehydration tablets. She wanted to launch UNICEF into the uncharted realm of gender ideology and social engineering.

Feminist dogma teaches that correct ideology should prevail over good science. Take the breastfeeding issue, for instance.

Breastfeeding is known to be healthier and safer than bottle feeding, especially in low-income areas of the world where sanitation is poor. But the feminists charged the UNICEF breastfeeding program portrayed women "as the human equivalent of milking cows." So no more of "breast is best."

Bellamy advocated favoring girls over boys, a practice the United Nations euphemistically refers to as "positive discrimination." She pushed through her pet Go Girls! program, which ignored the fact that in some parts of the world, the schooling of boys lags behind girls.

At an April 3, 2003 press conference, a hyper-inflated Carol Bellamy issued this chauvinistic claim: "Women are the lifeline of these southern African communities. They put food on the table, and they're the ones that keep families going during such crises."

Call that the end of part one, if you like. It is, in a way, we're now going back a few years.