|
Feminism: A Reality Check
by Angry White Female
What I am about to write will offend feminists. Let me say right off the bat that I
promise to write a follow-up soon focusing entirely on men, lest I be accused of
woman-bashing...
* * *
Every parent knows that in order to raise a healthy and productive child, he needs to learn
his strengths and his limits. If a child has warped ideas of these, he will have a
difficult time growing up, because part of him will stay in the egocentric stage of
development. As an adult who has not learned his limits, he will damage society by
attempting to force others to pander to his self-delusions. When his limits are exposed by
objective reality, the egocentric person will blame society and attempt to force it to
change to meet his demands. We are now under the leadership of the first generation of
children who were never taught limits, and we are raising the second.
Women and egocentrism....
Ladies, how many times have you told those toddlers not to run into the street after that
ball? Why do you do this? At the same time you are cultivating their strengths, you are
also teaching them sensible limits for their own safety and well-being. You wouldn't
expect your younger child to do something an older child can do, because this would lead
only to frustration and a feeling of powerlessness when the child fails. But today's
child-development "experts" want you to teach your kids, especially the girls, that they
have no limits outside of safety considerations. Later in life when they learn that there
are limits, they are frustrated and angry and attempt to alter their environment to meet
their egocentric needs.
As a result of the propaganda pouring in on today's girls from every sphere, women are
encouraged to believe their natural limitations are society-imposed, products of the
"patriarchy," just as blacks are encouraged to blame "racism" when they encounter obstacles.
Girls' natural trust and naivete are turned against them by the feminists who use them for
their political ends. If society did not reinforce feminist dogma and female self-delusion
at every turn, women would have to honestly face the fact that they have limits, and we'd
all be better off. Only the left, the feminists, the lesbians would suffer.
But few people today want to hurt females' self-esteem by telling them they do not belong
on oil rigs or in the middle of war zones. In fact, in the Army the very expression of
this view is a career-ender, as cant about female fighting abilities is graven policy,
thanks to Congressional feminists, male and female.
Like children, women want to explore, but many don't explore safely, for example White
liberal Amy Biehl, who was murdered by the black South Africans she devoted her life to
helping. The generation currently rising in the work force had no one teach it limits and
biological reality, thanks to the '60s and quacky feminism. We all of us -- man, woman,
child -- suffer the consequences of women estranged from their natural role.
Testosterone envy...
There is this subconscious envy feminists feel towards men, which they project onto other
women. Feminists deceived themselves as well as healthy women when they asserted, at the
outset, that men did not value women's roles as wives and mothers. The feminists
themselves undervalued women's strengths and admired male attributes. They truly are
MASCULINISTS, not feminists. All of their male-feminization programs are aimed at
neutralizing their competition so they, the penis enviers, can take up the male
niche.
Today we have a society that looks down on women who know of the importance of raising
their own children. The media term their jobholding sisters "working mothers" rather than
"mothers who don't raise their children." The jobholders are treated as "normal" women,
rather than those pursuing an "alternative lifestyle." Yes, alternative lifestyle. The
"children as pets" trend has been the norm for only a few decades. Day-care and latchkey
kids are the lab rats in an experiment with an alternative lifestyle.
But the media do not tell us that this experiment has failed miserably, nor that working
mothers have turned all of society upside down. Most problems with children today, ranging
from emotional to mental to physical health can be explained in one way: Mothers are not
raising their children. Fathers are expendable. The vital importance of the woman and
family unit is now staring us down, but we as a society are looking away. We won't even
entertain the idea because children are no longer a priority, they are window dressing.
What do they add to my life? -- that's all we care about.
Women and rights without responsibility...
The sky, ladies, is not the limit. You teach those toddlers not to go near that fence by
the road, because if you don't, then climbing the fence will be their next challenge.
Likewise for you, do not touch that fire hose, because if you are ever charged with
carrying a large man from a burning building, he will die unless you have pumped yourself
up with male hormones. Not knowing your limits is not only dangerous to you, but to others
as well. This may make you angry, but the truth hurts. If I have a large prowler on my
property, I WANT A LARGE MALE COP TO PROTECT ME (if I can't get a clear shot at the prowler),
not a 130-pound girl who says "hold it" in her tiny voice. The Gods forbid she has to
chase him without a male backup. Recently, a female cop in the next county was carjacked.
Easily carjacked and also disarmed in the process. The county gave her an award for
bravery because she tried to fight the criminal. Oh, she is so brave, and I feel so damn
safe now!
Listen, some work is simply MAN'S WORK. Dangerous jobs are man's work. Why? Not because
you are undervalued, but because you ARE valued, loved and cherished by men and they want
to protect us women. It is recognized by rational people that men should be in charge of
our safety and security, and that of the nation we live in. But for some reason, many
women translate male chivalry and duty into something ugly and sexist. So now we have a
military that panders to female delusions of non-limitation.
I remember during the Gulf war, men and material had to be pulled out to transport a very
large number of pregnant women from the war zone. These women demanded equality, then,
belatedly recognizing they were unfit for masculine tasks, used their womanhood as a means
of ditching responsibility -- at the very time the services they pretended to provide were
needed most. Is it unfair, military ladies, that you are the one responsible for worrying
about your womb? Well TOUGH. You were born with it. Nature dealt you that hand. You do
not belong in a war zone. If you don't like it, move to San Francisco and take advantage
of Willie Brown's complimentary sex-change operations. If there had been actual
competition on the battlefield, you would not have had the "option" of getting pregnant and
taking the transport aircraft home.
Outside of this readiness issue, I am uncomfortable with the prospect of male warriors
being distracted by women when national security is at stake. And yes, men without sex for
long periods of time will look at anything, and that is a biological fact they cannot
control. You cannot counter that assertion unless you have taken a stroll in their
jockstraps. But you CAN control whether or not you get pregnant, and to use the womb as a
means to abandon your post at a crucial time is a most serious dereliction, one that should
have cost you your jobs at least. There is no room for sex games in war, ladies. National
security is not a game. You will never be real men, you can only "play" men, and in war
only you have the "choice" to become damsels in distress. You have the right to go to war,
but not the responsibility to stay. You cannot eat the cake of privilege and have the cake
of equality, too. But that's just what you demand.
Facts...
1) Breasts are for production of milk to feed babies.
2) The lower sexual organs are for inserting penises and pushing out babies.
3) Penises are made to deliver a liquid that impregnates females.
4) Without that liquid, females would be sterile.
5) Females have more body fat not because of sexism but for purposes of procreation.
6) Males are larger and have more muscle mass and testosterone because their job is to
protect women and children, and bulk and aggression help in that task. Strength is also
needed to build things and make roads. Think of that while you road-crew gals stand on the
street holding up your stop sign, making equal pay to the men pouring the concrete, doing
the hard labor, thanks to affirmative action.
7) Women have natural nurturing capacities for purposes of rearing children and tolerating
men.
The anti-woman...
Woman's natural tendencies to nurture, smooth over and cooperate have been redirected from
the family. She no longer looks to her husband for leadership and support, she looks
toward those who are hell-bent on displacing him as the head of his family and nation. The
television is her authority. It tells her she is powerful only if she pawns her children
off on $4-dollar-an-hour babysitters to seek glory in the corporate world. The upper half
of the Bell curve hears the message and responds, and is further indoctrinated during the
college education which is necessary for many professional careers. As her best breeding
years pass, the female may feel some doubts, but her salary grows, and the agitprop complex
continues to put out propaganda that counters her instinctive feeling about what she ought
to be doing.
Still, most women do end up married with children at some point, and it is in marriage that
the daughter of feminism, for the first time, learns there are limits to personal power.
She doesn't like it: Why should she have to stay married if her husband "takes her for
granted," or if it gets a bit too boring for her taste? It's better to divorce than to
work through a few unpleasant years of hardship, or to compromise for the sake of the
family unit. To stay married is to accept being dominated, to be at the mercy of men; to
be oppressed. She is CHAINED to children and husband, unpaid for domestic services rendered.
FORCED to empower the patriarch. Not taken care of with his paycheck, but kept down by
it. Sexually enslaved, not free to experiment with sexual pleasure from a variety of
sources. It's better for the kids to have divorced parents than ones that are not "in
love," ones that bicker... We certainly wouldn't want the children to learn how to stick
it out, to work through problems and show what committment is all about. Instead, we teach
them instant gratification. No, no limits at all. No hardship. An instant solution is to
run away from problems to show how tough we are.
If you feel ashamed of motherhood, what better way to avoid it than by going to work with
the excuse of providing more consumer goods for the kids. College tuition so they won't
have to work for it. The television teaches us that financial nourishment is more
important than nourishing your children's character. Impoverishment is if you don't have a
large home and two new cars. Never mind that your children are growing up to be mentally
and morally impoverished.
But if your children have a good moral character, they will WORK for the college tuition,
no? If they have the security of knowing mom is always there, they are less likely to grow
up with emotional insecurity problems and their relationships will be healthier. If mom is
at home, the children are less likely to develop Attention Deficit Disorder, which can be
traced to unhealthy eating habits, and especially processed foods. But since the television
disapproves of stay-at-home mothers, working mom's kids eat foods that come from
Jack-in-the-Box or processed food plants. Mom just doesn't have time to tend to the
family's health, so to solve this Attention Deficit problem, she gives them drugs to make
them easier for her to deal with. Oh my, what a great sacrifice mom makes when she picks
up that Ritalin at the pharmacy on her lunch hour. Geez. How come SHE has to be the one
to run all these little errands?
"Me" generation gives way to Generation Wigger...
Due to the self-serving anti-family values of the "me" generation, women en masse
have remained in the egocentric stage of development that they should have left in childhood.
But still, under it all, mom's instinct is to worry about how this will affect her kids.
Not to worry, she is assured that the kids are better off in day care and healthier mentally
and physically for it. The feminists comfort her and tell her not to feel guilt over
allowing strangers with alien values to raise the children. After all, how else will they
be socialized if not raised in a day-care center?
"Quality" time is more important than quantity time. Spend time with the kids BEFORE work,
while you are getting dressed! Have a quality experience with them at McDonald's over a
grease-laden breakfast sandwich. Look really sad while your child SCREAMS for you after
being dropped off in the germ-infested day-care center with the day-care worker who is
pulling her hair out because ALL OF THE CHILDREN are crying because they want their
mommies. Don't worry, you'll have QUALITY time with them in 10 hours, when you pick them
up. When you get there, you can chew out the teacher for putting the child in time-out,
since you want to show the child you are on his side. Talk to your kids about their day
over a TV dinner, then watch TV for an hour with them. Enjoy your time struggling to put
them in the bathtub and have even more fun getting their PJs on after. It sure will be
nice to have that quality time as you spend five minutes reading a book to them to get them
to sleep. When they are older, you can spend quality time making them do homework and
rushing them to after-school ball games. How comforting it is to them that you take time
from your busy life to watch them play ball. All the while, your job is on your mind.
That's quality time? I'm sure the kids feel real loved and secure.
If you are uncomfortable with this scenario, the television says it is socially acceptable
to COMPROMISE and stay home for three years as a way to assauge your guilt. "Society" says
you may stay home with your children during their formative years, as long as you make sure
to go to work after your three years of total nurturance. If mom is at home and her
children are 8 and 10, people look at her like, "What are you doing with your life?" But
children need guidance and supervision until they leave home.
The television would have you believe that a 7-year-old is not in need of constant
nurturance or that an adolescent has intrinsic values and doesn't need constant
supervision. Just give them a condom and teach them responsibility because "they'll do it
anyway." No, ladies, they need to be policed at all times and THAT IS YOUR JOB AS THEIR
MOTHER. The early years are the easy years, don't let them lie to you. It is AFTER the
so-called formative years when they really need mother at home (and a responsible father at
work). Do you remember going through all those growing pains and hormonal changes? How
could you let your children fend for themselves while going through something similar to
what you call "mid-life crisis?" The difference for you is that you are mentally cabable
of handling it, and even then it often ends your marriages. Do you think a child can
handle his hormonal changes any better?
Speaking of hormonal changes, there is also another new "option" that the television gives
you if you are still uncomfortable with letting this society raise your children. You can
"delay" motherhood until you've fulfilled your career aspirations. Uh-huh. Personal needs
first, children later. One problem is that after you've had a career, you have difficulty
conceiving at 45. Let's move that back 5 years and let's say you have no difficulty
conceiving at all. You have a healthy baby boy and then when he is five, you begin going
through menopause. You have marital difficulties, you are getting fat, having hot flashes
and getting even more depressed. Your husband is going through his mid-life crisis and the
boy is learning the art of turning agitated, aging parents against each other. A couple
years later there is a divorce, then your ex marries a woman 15 years younger than you.
And since you are divorced, you gotta go back to work at 48. When your son, who is now
bigger and heavier than you, is going through adolescence, you begin having health
problems. Since you are a very bitter woman by this time, your ex does not come around
anymore. Your son is a wigger, and he is out of control. I won't go on, but I will say
this is a product of feminist "options" for self-absorbed women. It is easier just to
raise your kids and have the career later. You CANNOT HAVE IT ALL, that was a BIG
lie.
Today's social problems are the direct result of the experimental alternative lifestyle of
having an adult- , rather than a child-centered society. Your kids are the rats in a
social experiment that has already dismally failed, but you are so selfish you won't even
consider sacrificing anything but a lunch hour and wad of cash for babysitters for your
kids. You have spawned a generation of wiggers. Our grandparents and their parents and
all before them had it right.
Raising children and holding together a family is THE most important CAREER in society.
Anything outside of the home, ladies, is a JOB.
ANGRY WHITE FEMALE
|