In yet another nail in the coffin, another reality check, here’s a headline from the Associated Press. (shuffling paper) I have the story right here: Feminists Face Tough Times After Election. “America’s feminist leaders and their critics agree on at least one current political fact: These are daunting times for the women’s movement as it braces for another term of an administration it desperately wanted to topple.” Ladies and gentlemen… By the way, I need to clear something up. I am often accused of being against the women’s movement, and that’s really not true. I love the women’s movement, especially when walking behind it. So don’t let all this hype out there convince you that I’m opposed to the women’s movement. I’m a hundred percent male and healthy, and in the right vantage point, the women’s movement is fine. Now, when you look at a bunch of feminists from the front it becomes a challenging thing to do; then when you listen to them speak it gets even more challenging. The Feminist Majority Foundation, which is… Well, that’s headed by Eleanor “Squeal” Smeal and Kim Gandy runs the NAGs, the National Association for
She said, “The next four years are going to be tougher so we must be tougher. Our health, our rights, our democracy are teetering on the brink.” See, they actually believe this or they are trying to make their followers believe this. If their health “is on the brink” and it’s Bush’s fault, I want to know how. If their rights are on the brink I would say they’ve done more to endanger their rights on the policies than Bush could ever do, and our democracy is not teetering on the brink because the Democrats don’t have any control over it anymore. It’s healthier than it’s ever been. A democracy is never healthier than when Democrats are losing elections, and they are losing elections. So the NAGs and the Feminist Majority Foundation “and numerous like-minded groups campaigned zealously against Bush contending his economic agenda would inflict disproportionate harm on women and that his potential judicial appointments could jeopardize abortion rights. To the feminists’ utter dismay, Bush not only won but he sharply reduced the Democrats’ gender gap edge among women’s voters. Republicans also increased their majorities in Congress. New GOP senators include several staunch foes of abortion.”
It’s not just these people are foes of abortion. Abortion is a declining position in terms of the number of people who agree with it. It’s not been a majority position in this country for the longest time. It’s been a big
I mean, it’s a fact. It’s a fact. But, you know, the feminist movement, let me tell you the big reason they’re in trouble. It’s not just their politics. I mean, they’re liberals, and that’s I guess their #1 problem is their ideology. But if you go look at what the modern era of feminism based its survival on, it was a combination of things that all added up to one thing, and that is: Women should not be made comfortable or happy in a relationship with a man because that was subordinating their seniorhood, their womanhood, their feminism, to men, and they should not just get jobs; they should get careers, and a woman who stayed home raising children was selling out. She was not being true to all of her possibilities as a member of the sisterhood, and a lot of women bought into this. I mean, we have to admit that in the early era after modern feminism, it was profoundly successful. You got to the point where you couldn’t open a car door for a woman without getting insulted, for taking, you know, assuming they’re a sex object and not strong enough to do this themselves. You know, that happened to me. It was really rough out there in the early 70s. It really, really was rough out there — and so what’s happened is the women in the early movement believed this and bought into it, sounded good and being independent is not a bad thing.
I mean, go out and produce your own income and not have to depend on somebody? Cool. I understand that. But a strange thing happened. There’s this thing we talk about, you know, the ticking-bomb example posed in the Gonzales hearings last week. Well, there’s this ticking clock inside every woman called the biological clock, Dawn, and it’s just something that happened. You know, the feminists don’t understand it because it’s created by God, but as they get mid-thirties and afterwards and they don’t have children, they get concerned with that. They want to have kids, and so they did and then they demanded. They still couldn’t stay home with the kids, because the feminist leaders at the NAGs didn’t approve of that. So there had to be daycare centers that sprouted up all over the place because once you gave birth, that was the end of it; you farmed your kid out to some government run little daycare center, become little liberals from the first day you put them in the day care center, and then the women didn’t like being that far removed from their kids. Motherhood is motherhood. Birth is birth. The umbilical cord is the umbilical cord.
So they wanted their employers to build daycare centers at the office, so they could take their kids to work, check on them, and so forth, and the employers said, “Okay, we’ll do this,” because there was a bunch of pressure mounted on them, federal pressure and otherwise to do it. So that happened. But that still didn’t satisfy ’em. What slowly but surely began to happen was human nature. It’s one of those dastardly little things that no matter how stridently, ardently you try to change human nature — which is what feminism is really all about — human nature will always previously. Human nature will always dominate. Human nature may take it on the chin for a couple generations or less, but human nature always comes back and asserts itself — and that’s what happened here. Human nature, the women that were eventually getting into the business and having careers and so forth and then getting pregnant in their mid- to late thirties more and more and more and this is still the trend today, decided they wanted to stay at home and raise the baby and not go back to the career. Maybe take a part-time job for whatever. They may not have understood it themselves. It was just a desire they had, and the moment that trend began — and as I say, that trend begins to this day — the very foundation was cut out from underneath feminism.
Because once the women who have babies decide they want to stay home, there’s no more need for the NAGs. There’s no more need for the feminist majority and so forth, because they mock all that. They’re not happy when women choose to do motherhood. You know, the feminist movement was all about “choice,” but, boy, you better make the right one! If you don’t make the right choices, then the feminist movement is going to come after you with a very long answer for selling out the sisterhood or what have you — and that’s basically what’s happening now. In fact, I always thought, at the time women were claiming they had fewer choices and were discriminated against, I always thought it was the other way around. For example, a woman in her mid-to-late thirties can get pregnant and go into the boss, say, “Hey, I’m going to have a baby.”
“Fine, take three months off. We’ll see you when you get back. We’ll hold your job. The federal government makes us do it. Do what you want to do, we’ll have somebody fill in for you, but don’t worry, even if they do a better job than you do, when you’re gone, you get your job back when you want to come back after a maternity leave.” Then we had the Family Medical Leave Act, and that was nine months of medical leave unpaid. Then they figured out most people couldn’t do it unpaid, so they came back and said paid medical and family leave, and that was not just to have a baby, but to take the dog to the vet or whatever else you needed to do, maybe go do your Christmas shopping, you get time off to do that and paid in certain states now — and the feminists looked at that as a huge victory. But even with all of that, let a man try the same thing. Let a man walk in to the boss and say, “You know what? My wife is going to have a baby and I want to stay home for six months and raise it boss may have no choice but than to give the guy maternity leave but his r?sum? is shot
He may not even have the freedom. Women have always had more choice in that regard and the feminists never recognized that as one of the realities. So now they face tough times after the election and they face tough times, not just because there was an election. They face tough times because theirs was never a mainstream philosophy. It violated human nature. Look, all the stuff about women and jobs and equal pay that was good stuff and all the things about women going out and being equal to men in terms of opportunity. All that’s great. All that’s fine. It was the other stuff that did them in. Not to mention abortion, and I don’t want to go there, but I mean, you can’t take that out of this equation, either, ladies and gentlemen. A movement that
The truth of the matter is, though, that the feminist movement as identified as the NAGs or the Fund for the Feminist Majority have never been that big. The largest membership of the NAGs at one time I think was ever 300,000, never millions and millions and millions and millions, and yet whenever one of the leaders for the NAGs spoke, guess what? The mainstream press ran in there and really ballyhooed it because it’s just a bunch of liberals promoting a bunch of liberals, and so when Molly Yard screamed (impression), “I am outraaaaged!” the assumption was made that all women in America were outraged and when Eleanor Smeal said something or Pat Ireland said something it was always portrayed as: “The women in America today are upset, blah, blah, blah, blah.” The gender gap was ascribed to the success of the feminist movement, may have been true at one time, but the bottom line is human nature has caught up with them. Liberalism properly understood equals its doom. It is happening to the mainstream press. It’s happening to the Democratic Party and all of its offshoots, the feminist movement being just one of them.