Feminism is not pro-woman, it is pro Leftism

Feminism, we are told, is about empowering women. Empowering women to make their own choices, control their own bodies, run their own lives. In short then, feminists will tell you that women NEED feminism because of sexism and inequality. That is the message and rhetoric of Feminists, but the truth is quite different. In truth, feminism is about pushing leftism, and embittering, and thus controlling women, thus empowering feminists, and, again, furthering leftist ideology.

Again, if you might be thinking I am way off base here, consider how Feminists walk the walk on “empowering women” to make any choice they wish. Much like the self-appointed civil rights leadership seeks to keep Blacks from thinking for themselves, and leaving the Plantation of Liberal Ideology, feminist leaders seek to keep women “in their place” which, of course is bitter angry, and indoctrinated into the Left’s definition of feminism.

If a woman is pro-abortion, she is empowered. If she dares be pro-life, however, she cannot really be a woman.

If a women speaks “truth to power” on equality, and shrieks constantly about the evil Patriarchy, and sees every male glance or flirt as sexism, she is a member in good standing with feminists. Let a woman speak out and say she likes being attractive to men, or that she sees nothing evil about being flirted with, or complimented by a man, and she is a disgrace.

If a woman rails against traditional gender roles, and marriage (which any good feminist will tell you is rape), and stay at home moms, she is a warrior for social justice. But a woman who defends typical gender roles, and marriage, and raising her kids by actually raising them, then she is called a fool and a traitor to feminism.

If a woman uses her voice to bash the NRA, and gun owners, then she is a valued voice to the Left. But a woman who defends gun ownership, concealed carry, and actually trains with and carries a gun herself, she is bashed. Never mind that such a woman IS the true definition of what feminism ought to be. Such a woman is thinking for herself, and speaking out, and is actually walking the walk. But to feminists, she is a cancer, and must be ostracized and belittled.

In short, being a good feminist means being a woman who toes the lines correctly, and only makes life choices that the Left finds valuable. Consider a few more examples.

A woman should be free to control her own body, unless she wishes to control her own medical insurance and care. Or unless she chooses to pose for pictures men will enjoy, of course. Then she is serving the Patriarchy and betraying women somehow.

A woman must NEVER enjoy being attractive, and any men must never ever look at a woman, or direct any compliment towards a woman’s looks. Somehow noticing that an actress, or news anchor is attractive demeans her intellect somehow. Funny, I never knew that only unattractive people can be smart.  This of course, goes against nature. Men are, by definition attracted to women, and vice-versa. Trying to change that dynamic is as likely to succeed as trying to pet a wolverine is. 

Women must use their voices to help further certain causes, unless those causes are against leftism of course. This is why women like Michelle Malkin, and Stacy Dash and S.E. Cupp, or Katie Pavlich are so savaged by the Left. They do not “know their place”. Odd isn’t it? There is likely no greater form of sexism than feminism. Especially towards very attractive women. And yes, I find the four women I named very attractive, I also find them intelligent and fascinating and admirable. See, you CAN indeed appreciate a woman’s mind, ideals, and looks. Well, unless you are a feminist that is. After all, that whole equality thing is only for women who follow the feminist rules.

Amazing Douchebaggery: Defense Department Claims Bible, Constitution And Declaration Of Independence Perpetuate Sexism

Defense Department: The Bible, Constitution And Declaration Of Independence All Perpetuate Sexism – Daily Caller

According to a Defense Department approved “sexism course,” the Bible, the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence all contribute to modern sexism.

Those three cherished texts all count as “historical influences that allow sexism to continue,” according to a presentation prepared by the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute, whose mission is to give a ”world-class human relations education.”

.

.
According to the course, the Bible has “quotes” which can be interpreted as sexist by readers.

The Declaration of Independence is also an historical cause of sexism, as the document refers only to “all men” – not “men and women.”

And the Constitution, the Pentagon argues, is an historical source of sexism because “slaves and women were not included until later in history.”

Of course, members of the Armed Forces take an oath to defend the Constitution – which is, according to the DEOMI course, an “historical influence that allows sexism to continue.”

“The content of the lesson is provided to generate academic discussion concerning how these historical documents have been included in discussions about the topic of sexism,” Lt. Cmdr. Nate Christensen, a Defense Department spokesman, told The Daily Caller.

But following TheDC’s request for comment, the sexism course – as well as two other courses listed on DEOMI’s website, entitled “Prejudice & Discrimination” and “Racism” – were taken offline.

“This course is currently offline and under revision,” a notice says under all three courses.

.

.
Asked about the sudden update, Christensen replied, “DEOMI online materials are periodically pulled to review to ensure accuracy and relevance. The racism, sexism and Prejudice & Discrimination are currently undergoing that review process.”

TheDC obtained copies of all three courses prior to their removal.

The “Prejudice & Discrimination” course was recently required for some Navy personnel who work in hospitals and clinics.

In the course, discrimination is divided into two categories: institutional and individual. Institutions can be a source of discrimination, as well as actions – or inaction – made by individuals.

Institutional discrimination, according to the DEOMI course, can be found in employment, education, housing and the military.

Examples of institutional discrimination in employment, according to DEOMI, are education requirements for employment:

.

.
The course teaches, “Individuals who have been segregated to inferior schools cannot find employment in businesses that hire according to specified credentials that inferior schools do not offer.”

Therefore, when employers institute education qualifications for prospective employees, they are engaging in a form of discrimination.

The DEOMI states more examples of institutional discrimination can be found in education:

.

.
Academic tests “may have inherent cultural bias,” the presentation argues.

Textbooks also perpetuate discrimination since they “provide little or no information on minority groups, especially minority histories and the contributions that minorities have made to American culture.”

DEOMI teaches students that they can also contribute to discrimination on an individual level.

The presentation asserts individuals can perpetrate discrimination through both active and inactive ways, including “refusing to acknowledge one’s own privilege.”

.

.
Active contributions to discrimination include verbal and physical assault, as well as “considering prejudices and discrimination to be a thing of a past.”

Inactive discrimination, according to DEOMI, includes failing to acknowledge personal “privilege.”

In the glossary provided by the course, “privilege” is defined as “a special advantage, immunity, permission, right, or benefit granted to or enjoyed by an individual, class, or caste.”

.

.
By an individual refusing to believe that he is inherently better off than another person as a result of his race or gender, DEOMI teaches that the individual is engaging in an act of discrimination.

At the same time, it is also viewed as inactive discrimination if an individual believes “you have experienced and fully understand the oppression of the target group.”

In addition to the presentation on “Prejudice & Discrimination,” DEOMI offers a broader course on the topic of “Racism.”

In the “Racism” presentation, individuals are cautioned against using “antilocution” — or using phrases that could have a racial connotation.

The graphic which accompanies the slide lists an array of naughty words, including “white men can’t jump” and “Jew.”

According to the presentation, the Defense Department also bans the word ”Redskin” — pitting the Pentagon against its hometown NFL team.

.

.
Lt. Cmdr. Nate Christensen said information in the DEOMI courses accurately reflects Department of Defense policy: “The Department of Defense Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity [ODMEO] in collaboration with the Military services review DEOMI’s education and training materials designed for Equal Opportunity Advisors [EOAs] to ensure that DoD policy is accurately reflected. DEOMI staff develops, in coordination with the ODMEO and the Military Services, standardized training templates to ensure only approved training materials are used during local training sessions.”

“While there is no DoD Policy that requires persons to take these online courses,” Christensen told TheDC, since 2011, 2,075 Department of Defense personnel took the “Sexism” course, 3,448 took the “Prejudice & Discrimination” course, and 3,028 took the “Racism” course.

.

.

Men Working signs cause outbreak of Offendeditis

Here they go again, the perpetually offended, are always finding something inane to get their dander up. Via Lee Stranahan at Big Government

At Ohio’s Sinclair Community College, Elizabeth Verzi, the school’s Manager of Construction and Planning, ordered the crew to remove a Men Working sign that she called “sexist.”

The incident occurred the Wednesday before Thanksgiving, as an all-male construction crew from the company JCrane was working in an area of Sinclair Community College in Dayton, Ohio. The crew was told to immediately cease all work until the “sexist sign” was removed. Crew foreman Matt Peters initially thought the request was a joke, and the work continued. Sinclair employee Jim Fauzy appeared on site to say that the men needed to stop immediately until the Men Working sign was gone.

Breitbart News spoke to foreman Matt Peters, who confirmed that Liz Verzi told him in a meeting that the sign was sexist and should be replaced with a “Crew Working” sign. Peters quoted Ms. Verzi as saying, “That sign is sexist and it’s not up for discussion.”

The incident caused serious fallout. Jcrane, Inc. owner Jack Stull said in a letter that he would continue the work but would not replace the sign. “I’m through with appeasing, I’m tired of political correctness, and I’m no longer fearful of their media or their lawsuits,” he insisted. “I will stand for truth.”

The response from Mr. Stull is EXACTLY what is needed when these miscreants start whining that they are offended. Anyone with a clue would never see the sign as sexist. In other words, the problem here was not the sign. The problem, as it always is with PC, are the malcontents and their victim mentality. The more we, the normal people, stand up to them, the sooner they will shut the Hell up and let us alone. But, the more we appease their fanaticism, the more they will bully us.

 

Latest source of outrage to Feminist with more time on her hands than brains in her head is…..

M & M’s! Yes  those great little candies apparently come in regular, peanut, almond, pretzel, peanut butter, and  now coconut now SEXIST!

You just thought they were innocuous chocolate candies in a candy shell that melt in your mouth, not in your hand, didn’t you? HA! Shows how brainwashed you are. Thankfully, Ms. Magowan is here, leading us to the light:

It’s been a while since I blogged about the intensely sexist marketing of M & Ms candy. 

I Wake Up Screaming (1941) ...  “Should I Do I...
Feminut reacts to M&Ms

So sorry we’ve missed that.

But then, someone posted about the new Coconut M & Ms on my Facebook page, and I was so disgusted by what I saw.

Um… a bag of candy? Lighten up on the puritanical diet, dearie.

By now, we’re all familiar with Ms. Green, her high heeled white go-go boots and spidery eyelashes.

And how she’s always depicted as too cool for school and smarter than all the boy M&M’s put together. Well, we’re familiar with that. Ms. Magowan, alas, not so much.

Now she’s got a pink flower pasted on her head.

Good thing for Ms. Magowan it’s not a pink triangle, or her head might explode.

And there is Yellow (Mr. Yellow?) above her, falling out of a tree while trying to catch his binoculars.

Go read it all. Suffice it to say, you will not know whether to laugh at the sheer, uadalterated asininity of this moron’s rambling, incoherent victim-pimping screed, or shake your head in disbelief that an adult would waste one second being so petty and foolish. By the way, it goes without saying that Magowan has earned herself a Marxist Moron award for hr tireless digging in The Pit of Leftist Stupidity! And Goldfish and Clowns has earned a coveted spot on our blogroll!