By: Paul Murano – April, 2017
Modern feminism is a misnomer. It is really masculinism. This is evident from its major dogmas: be like men; do what men do; sin like men sin; and especially repress or exploit all that is uniquely female. This modern, or new wave feminism, springing from 1960s protest culture, Bouncy castle for sale stands in direct opposition to the first-wave feminist movement of the 19th and early 20th centuries. From Susan B. Anthony to Alice Paul, first-wave feminists actually lifted up femininity and demanded that women as women be treated with fundamental dignity and respect. They were staunchly pro-woman, which by extension meant they were staunchly pro-life, pro-family, and pro-children.
A good point was recently made by Andrea Tantoros, author of the new book, “Tied Up In Knots: How Getting What We Wanted Made Women Miserable.”
During an interview on the Dennis Prager radio show, Tantoros mentioned two figures that have deeply influenced contemporary feminism: Gloria Steinem and Helen Gurly Brown. It is interesting to observe how Steinem and Brown represented money and sex respectively, or more precisely financial independence and objectification of women. These second wave feminists did not seek to extol the beauty and dignity of womanhood, but rather sought equality with men by becoming more like them. Unlike the first wave, this was an “if you can’t beat them, join them” strategy.
Steinem’s message in a nutshell was that women can do anything men can do, and do not need men. She’s the one who came up with the slogan, “A woman needs a man like fish needs a bicycle.” Its message to women is to abandon your feminine nature, manipulate your fertility, and compete with men in the workplace to be financially independent of them.’ Helen Gurly Brown, on the other hand, was the editor of Cosmopolitan Magazine and wrote the controversial book, “Sex and the Single Girl.”
Her message to women was: ‘Use your body to get what you want – there’s power in sex and you hold the cards.’ Traditionally, men depended on women’s virtue to put the brakes on premarital sexual activity; and to be worthy of her affections he would have to become virtuous himself. The influence of Gurly Brown and “the pill” radically changed that dynamic between the sexes.
The double message of modern feminism – become independent of men and use your body to attain power over them – eroded authentic femininity, i.e. a woman’s true nature, and left her with two unnatural options: become more like men or more like whores. The media has chosen both. Women are portrayed in the media either as tough ambition-driven go-getters or as half-naked seductive sex kittens. Often they are portrayed as both combined. It’s no wonder so many young women today are confused and dissatisfied. Militating against one’s nature never leads to fulfillment. As a result, men have also become confused and dissatisfied: They have lost sight of how to treat women, and their masculine instinct is dulled – the instinct to lead, protect, and provide no longer fits the narrative. No longer do men aspire to honor and cherish the beauty, mystery, and innocence of authentic womanhood, but rather have come to see women more as sex objects who need no commitment. In short, the de-feminization of women has, in turn, emasculated men.
The delicate balance in the dynamic interplay of the masculine and feminine natures of humanity has all but disappeared. The result is mass confusion for Gen Xers and Millenials. The attributes that both sexes find irresistibly attractive in each other have been relegated to old movies or the “super-religious”. Someone who is comfortable in their own skin, respectful of the opposite sex, and values the unique and sacred character of marriage is a very rare find today. The bar has been lowered greatly as a result of radical feminism – and both sexes are the losers.
One thing both radical wings of contemporary second-wave “feminism” have in common – i.e. the Steinem masculinists and the Brown whorists – is the foundation upon which they depend: contraception. Neither would have had a chance at overthrowing authentic femininity without it. By manipulating the truth of a woman’s body ecology to act more like a man’s via filling her with toxic chemical pollutants that make her infertile at will, contemporary “feminism” seeks not to liberate women from injustice (as the original feminists sought), but to liberate women from womanhood.
It’s time to recognize the goods of womanliness as equal in dignity to the goods of manliness, and to stop pretending there is no real difference. Acting as if women are defective inferior men who must “prove themselves equal” by becoming more like them, which is the subtle message of radical feminism, will never bring about harmony between the sexes. Opposites attract. The present state of our culture is so conditioned by the onslaught of 50 years of false feminism that it does not yet have the self-awareness to overthrow its two counterfeits to authentic womanhood. Until that occurs, men will lack motivation to regain their manhood, and the complementary harmony and tranquility natural to sexual love will remain elusive to many.