Robert “Stacy” McCain’s book Sex Trouble: Essays on Radical Feminism and the War Against Human Nature is an investigative report on the origins of the feminist movement of its roots in the changing political landscape of the 1960’s and its continuing evolution. McCain goes into great detail on the writings of the radicals at the time, narrating the backgrounds and tragedies of their lives.
Using his Southern influenced Christian Conservative values as a prism, he charges straight into the differences of the nuclear family and its American values against the feminist ideology; that western family values are a result of the “patriarchy” and is responsible for enslaving women to their established roles unfairly, depriving them of true freedom.
As you read, you get the sense that these women are, in fact, crazy (as he states at the beginning of his three rules), and he pulls no punches when describing their life choices. Certainly they aren’t the same “crazy” as McCain; McCain has a reputation amongst his peers and friends as being “crazy” but not in the way associated with delusional psychotics, unless of course, you’re a liberal. Liberals have some mental issues of their own, but that’s another story.
The most compelling narrative is the evidence he gives on how feminists are slowly and discreetly, but purposefully, hijacking the institutions of elite higher learning with the tacit consent of university administrators and regents. By portraying themselves along the faux liberal doctrines of women’s rights and equality, it is that ruse that politically paralyzes institutions from rejecting their curriculum, much less have oversight on their teachings and intended goals.
The most shocking revelation (it is to me anyway) is how he paints this movement: By getting young girls to take courses to satisfy degree requirements, the principles actually being taught are that women are slaves to the patriarchy and, as such, have no freedom, especially through sexual expression. And the teachings of the earlier radicals is that to be truly free, to express yourself as a woman, break the bonds of patriarchy, and shed coerced family values, you must become a lesbian.
Indeed, it is this underlying theme that women aren’t free until they become lesbians, can they ultimately achieve the status of a true feminist. In short, they are using this extremist narrative to recruit new members to the movement much like an army. Except this is not an army of enlightenment; it is one to help break down and destroy western civilization as a whole. It is truly an attempt at a marxist revolution dominated by lesbians and the destruction of men And it is entirely a politically movement.
Can you imagine sending your wholesome, loving Christian daughter — who has aspirations of becoming a woman with a career, marrying a good man, having a family and living happily ever after — go off to college, only to see her come back with a very different view of you and the world? And she now holds a grudge against you as a father and as parents because you have repressed her sexually and as a human being, not to mention she is now a lesbian.
Unfortunately, the book isn’t quite finished. McCain concludes that this is a first draft, if you will, and that there is more to come. Suffice it to say, I am excited for the next version.
Assault and Flattery
After reading that book, I grabbed the next book in line. Katie Pavlich’s Assault and Flattery: The Truth about the Left and their War on Women describes in great depth, how the “patriarchy” heroes of the left, have in fact, used and abused women during their ascent and achievement power, and how women on the left, have, in fact, ignored these transgressions in order to have them support the women’s movement.
Pavlich is a young and rising media star of the Conservative movement, offering fiery, no-holds barred analysis on the hypocrisy of the left on cable news programs, and is greatly respected by her peers on both sides. Her lengthy and comprehensive research into this book is shown by the many pages of supporting bibliography and footnotes. I like reading bibliographies as a matter of habit, and I can say with some certainty, it will be a while before I finish.
Refreshingly, she starts by covering the most important aspect, which I believe is essential in understanding the left’s motives: The Democrat Party has always been the party that supported and promoted the ideals of hate, bigotry, misogyny, and racial suppression. She then goes into detail of how the Democrat Party managed to take over the conservative message, including the beginnings of the Woodrow Wilson administration and beyond. It is a fascinating read into history and she lays it convincingly in great detail.
Throughout the book, she describes the truth about the Conservative movement: It is the real champion of women’s rights. She brings up a myriad of supportive facts, studies and anecdotes that reinforce how women who follow Conservative ideals of being married, raising families, and having career options, have improved women’s wealth and health status. She also shares the personal stories of women who have been harmed by the abortion narrative, along with damning studies and facts of how much more it hurts than helps. For sure, a stunning indictment of the uncaring proponents of the pro-choice narrative. She even demonstrates through the story of Julia, the administration’s fictional character following liberal programs and being supported by government, will never be as successful, and how the Democrats have made that lifestyle to the detriment of women.
In addition, she covers the contemporary Liberal icons and other characters with their histories of misogyny and lack of regard for women in their bid for power. At the same time, she makes references to the women who have ignored the allegations: the wives of the men in power, as well as the women who also support the narrative in the political world. Nothing is more hypocritical than seeing women who claim to be for women’s issues ignore the insidious indiscretions of the womanizer’s that falsely claim to support their ideology.
Pavlich’s book brings it together very nicely. In one story, Pavlich attempts to cover the NOW convention in 2013 using her press credentials. Two days before the convention, she is denied her press credentials with no explanation. Since the plane tickets and hotel booking had been bought, she was going to go anyway. So she decided to become a member immediately. Now she could attend, even though she was member of the media without credentials for this event.
After arrival, she quickly discovered that the event was more a propaganda machine for the Democrat party. None of the convention materials included any considerations for conservative women. In fact, the arrival packet she received had leaflets containing political messages about how the right-wing is continuing to stop progress in legislatures around the country. If there was any doubt about the implication that NOW didn’t want to include conservative women, taking away her press credentials probably strengthened it.
This begs the question: Aren’t conservative women also women that deserve equality and equal rights? Pavlich covers this throughout the book in various ways, but it is glaring that a convention that is supposed to include all women, only shill for the Democrat party, As she went through the various organization booths being showcased, it was clear that Conservatives in any form were not welcomed.
It was here she discovered that the convention included an enthusiastic “Socialist Party of America” group, which was selling marxist books and materials. As she later describes, the roots are embedded within the communist movement itself. An organization that is supposed to be advocates for women’s equality and freedom is really nothing more than a front for the anti-western communist expansion. To be a feminist, you need to accept marxist doctrine. How fitting.
What drives it home is in a later chapter, that despite the central marxist themes of the women’s movement, they ignore, deflect, sweep under the rug, however you want to phrase it, the wickedness of liberal icons of the Democrat party just to be able to coat-tail the movement and grow members, something the Democrats don’t mind because it keeps them in power, especially when they portray themselves as being “for women’s equality.” As she recounts the Kennedy clan’s sins and the public indiscretions of Clinton, she also goes through a list of other liberals, some who have masqueraded as independents or even right of center, to demonstrate the breadth of men in power who have accepted this voting block. In some instances, these same men use the women’s movement itself as means to find other victims to satisfy their perversions, while the female leaders of the movement turn a blind eye.
How it ties together
While McCain talks about how marxist feminism is a political movement that is infusing itself into the academic world, Pavlich goes to show how the movement has attached itself to the Democrats to the same end. In order for the movement to succeed, it means ignoring the insidious violations of the “patriarchy”, even openly supporting the men that see women other than sexual beings, blatantly against feminist dogma.
For the naive, the feminists want you to believe their movement is for the “uncompromisingly moral” stance of women’s rights and equality. However, if you disagree or challenge this stance, be prepared to be shouted down and labeled as bigoted, misogynist, racist, and even homophobic.
I would have no problem being labelled as such for challenging a feminist because, most likely, whatever I said would have upset them. Generally, when one of the puppets resort to name calling and shame labelling, it’s because they themselves, have no clue about their own movements history, and generally dismiss such talk as right-wing conspiracy. Except the truth has already been spoken by the founding members of the movement, including patriarchs such as Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground.
Part of the reason for the daily Rule 5 on this site is to irritate feminists, and not just to promote attractive women, even though people do like to look at a pretty girl. Heterosexuality is extremely important for the survival of the species, which contradicts one of the fundamental tenets of the radical movement. While someone of a conservative religious background might also be offended, look at it this way: God makes beautiful people. He didn’t put them on here for the benefit of our own societal beliefs, but rather, understood the nature of physical attraction. We can all agree that looking a pretty woman is far better than being subjected to communist rule. I am not completely insensitive to a religious man’s convictions. I make sure that the women are not shown in the summaries on the front page. You have to click to see them.
These are great books to read and very informative.
On Amazon and Kindle: