Jump to content
Kingdom of Adventistan
B/W Photodude

The Plague of Radical Feminism

Recommended Posts

B/W Photodude

Another look at the effects of radical feminism on American society and on the churches of America (and the Western World) including the Seventh-day Adventist church. 

Its internal assailants are myriad ... But perhaps the most sinister and destructive of its homegrown adversaries is radical feminism, which seeks the ruin of motherhood and the breakdown of the relation between the sexes. The authors listed a number influences on the decline of American culture, but radical feminism landed on top as the worst influence. I have posted articles before regarding the intentions of this movement going back to the sixties which included the destruction of the family.

How is it, she asks, that the women’s liberation movement “has demolished so decisively the moral and social structures of American society?” “There must be something more,” she answers, “than simple human vice behind the fact that millions of women have betrayed the most sacred and fundamental of relationships, that of mother and child,” leaving “husbands wondering what happened to their wives, fathers wondering what happened to their daughters, and children wondering what happened to their mothers.”

Moreover, it is not only strident and embittered women responsible for the calamity we are witnessing, but the vast sodality of compliant men, aka beta males and “white knights,” who have surrendered their manhood and paved the way for the feminist takeover in government, in the media, in schools and universities, in the military, in corporate culture and in the legal system, at the expense of both their well-being and the nation’s political and economic vigor. I look at many of the "men" who are leading this movement for women's ordination and consider the term "beta males" and "white knights."

It is no accident that many feminists are Marxists, whether professedly or as “social justice warriors.” Very few seem even remotely familiar with the virtues of kindness and charity, and very few seem capable, obviously, of celebrating the love between a man and a woman.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/the-plague-of-radical-feminism-descends-upon-the-nation/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you find some value to this community, please help out with a few dollars per month.

Bravus

Counterpointed by the plague of MRAs, which start out by saying they're protecting traditional womanhood and end up just straight up hating on all women.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B/W Photodude
1 hour ago, Bravus said:

Counterpointed by the plague of MRAs, which start out by saying they're protecting traditional womanhood and end up just straight up hating on all women.

That's funny right there! Granted that any time you have a large group around a certain philosophy you will have misbehaviors. However, the amount of men who MIGHT actually hate women is miniscule compared to the hatred of men that occurs in the feminist movement. Even in your very own country that far exceeds the feminist misbehavior that occurs in the US. Well, here! This is the latest crazy thing going on in OZ. Good luck in your next war! Love those purple jets!

Pilots must consider feminist theory before dropping bombs

The madness in this document is so profound that pilots must now navigate feminism and feminist theory before taking off. Apparently, it is also important that they understand the difference between sex and gender before they engage in aerial combat.

http://bernardgaynor.com.au/2019/04/08/pilots-must-consider-feminist-theory-before-dropping-bombs/
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
2 hours ago, Bravus said:

Counterpointed by the plague of MRAs, which start out by saying they're protecting traditional womanhood and end up just straight up hating on all women.

I am pleading ignorance here. What are "MRAs?"  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
42 minutes ago, B/W Photodude said:

Pilots must consider feminist theory before dropping bombs

The madness in this document is so profound that pilots must now navigate feminism and feminist theory before taking off. Apparently, it is also important that they understand the difference between sex and gender before they engage in aerial combat.

There was a good point (sort of) in the UN document  about bombing the bridge that women in certain countries also need to use to do such things as getting water. men are too lazy and send the women on said errands. But I dont see how social theory like this can possibly be relevant in all out warfare and military operations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B/W Photodude
5 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

I am pleading ignorance here. What are "MRAs?"  :)

MRA - Mens rights activist:

Someone who believes that the honorable cause of providing rights for women has exceeded justice in several areas, with some laws now favoring women instead of being neutral.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
2 hours ago, Bravus said:

Counterpointed by the plague of MRAs, which start out by saying they're protecting traditional womanhood and end up just straight up hating on all women.

Now that I know what MRAs are, I can ask the question: "where on earth has this actually been happeniing? I know there are men that do "hate on women," but what I dont know is how you can tie it in so neatly to MRAs in action? Where is the evidence? How could you show that this is actually a fact and is happening? Or, are you just informing us of "another viewpoint?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B/W Photodude
8 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

There was a good point (sort of) in the UN document  about bombing the bridge that women in certain countries also need to use to do such things as getting water. men are too lazy and send the women on said errands. But I dont see how social theory like this can possibly be relevant in all out warfare and military operations.

Oh yeah, I forgot. Hillary said that women have always been the primary victims of war. Usually remembered when I drive by a veteren's cemetery or see pictures of the acres and acres of grave markers at Arlington.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
Just now, B/W Photodude said:

Oh yeah, I forgot. Hillary said that women have always been the primary victims of war. Usually remembered when I drive by a veteren's cemetery or see pictures of the the acres and acres of grave markers at Arlington.

I agree, majority of the grave markers are for men. Its the same here. The other day in a local park I walked past a memorial for Canadian Korea War vets...no women at all on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bravus

The OP is one case in point. For example, men who enlist in the 'honorable cause of providing rights for women' are described as beta males and white knights.

Every online discussion I've ever had with MRAs is another.

They start out with the reasonable position provided above as a definition, but within a very few rounds of the conversation the hate comes out.

We're all human together, with equal human rights. Our society - as have almost all human societies in history - has a systematic bias against women (and against ethnic and religious minorities, people with non-majority sexual orientation and gender, and so on).

Feminism is simply applied humanism: work to disassemble systematic inequality. The backlash from those who have historically benefited from systematic inequality and experience losing that unfair benefit as oppression is disappointing but not surprising.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bravus

More men in war graves? Um... who started and fought those wars. Only if the default assumption is that war is necessarily and inevitable are those sacrifices any sort of positive marker. No wars, no war graves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B/W Photodude
5 minutes ago, Bravus said:

More men in war graves? Um... who started and fought those wars. 

Apparently you are unaware of Pankhurst and the White Feather movement. And while women did not actually fight many wars, they did eat the spoils of the wars. All profit, no loss!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GsBg4aW0Ag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
3 minutes ago, Bravus said:

More men in war graves? Um... who started and fought those wars. Only if the default assumption is that war is necessarily and inevitable are those sacrifices any sort of positive marker. No wars, no war graves.

this is an adhominem argument

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bravus

It's really not. The argument that the number of men in war graves should be counted as a positive for the contribution of men might be true if we were talking about fighting against natural disasters, but if someone causes a problem in the first place, there is little credit in then trying to solve it, particularly when thousands or millions of people of all sexes and ages die in the process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
28 minutes ago, Bravus said:

It's really not. The argument that the number of men in war graves should be counted as a positive for the contribution of men might be true

IMO, in this context, it IS definitely an adhominem. NO ONE is  counting those graves as any sort of "positive."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bravus

If that's the case, perhaps I'm misunderstanding why they were raised in the first place.

What point is being made by saying that there are fewer women than men in war graves?

How is that point relevant to the concerns raised in the OP and the topic of this thread?

Genuine questions in a quest to understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
1 hour ago, Bravus said:

How is that point relevant to the concerns raised in the OP and the topic of this thread?

well, to put it in correct context, if thats whats being sought, I was replying to a comment about it by another forum member. MY COMMENT had nothing to do with the OP. It was a reply to a specific comment. You can decide what that means just as well as anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bravus

Sigh. 

I think I'm just gonna take my beta white knighting self and withdraw from this conversation: I can't see it going anywhere positive from here.

As ever, lurkers are free to read all perspectives and make up their own minds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gregory Matthews

I have read some of the  comments in this thread related to women. war and viewed the pink military aircraft.  People who have never had any significant training in military operations and the conduct of war, attempting to interpret what they were reading.

I am reminded of a time in the U.S. when people were reading a set of U. S.  Army training manuals and informing the public on that basis that the U.S. expected the Soviet Union to invade the U.S. and we ought to be prepared to defend our homes and to take protective actions, on the actual land of the U.S.  

In actual fact those training manuals were accurately cited.  However, there was not one word of truth in how they were presented to the U.S. public.  The purpose of the military is to be prepared to go to war.  As such, it constantly trains people in the art of war and how it is conducted.    I  once was assigned with a group of people who over a three (3) month period conducted a training operation in which a situation occurred in which this nation went into total mobilization and deployed to an area of combat operations. I have been assigned to other nations that were considered to be under combat threat from another group/nation.  I have read the classified operational instructions as to how we located in that country would go into combat upon invasion by another nation.  In such countries, I have actively practiced how we would attempt to safely evacuate U. S. citizens, and my family members, from that country.  I have been assigned to a unit that had an actual, potential, country in which we might go into combat.  In such a situation, we trained and prepared to do so.  I have actually gone into combat  in a unit that had never expected to be in combat in that nation and had not prepared in any manner to operate   in that nation.

The bottom line is that in this time national military forces do need to address issues of gender and sexuality.  I have served in combat with a unit that had both male and female members, at a time when women had never before served in that role in which they were now serving.  I had to deal with such issues while in a combat role.  There are real  issues that the military has had to address.    As I read/view material cited above,  I do not see many of the comments   coming from people who actually understand the real issues and who seeming come from people who have never had to deal with them.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


If you find some value to this community, please help out with a few dollars per month.



×
×
  • Create New...