A couple of articles written in different British newspapers got my attention today. First there’s this one in the Telegraph written by a cow named Katy Brand (click on the link to see a picture of her and you’ll see what I mean) titled: “Balls to femininity, start shouting Julia Gillard-style”. If you don’t know who Julia Gillard is, she’s the Prime Minister of Australia whose hysterical rant against the opposition leader in parliament, Tony Abbott has become quite the cause de jour for feminists in both Australia and Britain. Here’s the video and I love the reaction by Tony while she’s trying to browbeat him down:
This is my favorite quote from that video:
“He has said, ‘If it’s true that men have more power, generally speaking, than women, is that a bad thing?’ [and] ‘What if men, by physiology or temperament, are more adapted to exercise authority or to issue command?’”
Tony Abbott is the man. Did you see the smirk on his face? I have yet to see this story make it across to the states yet but it’s coming I’m sure. But back to Katy Brand’s article. Here’s how she starts it:
“About ten years ago, I went to the rather posh wedding of a couple in their forties. The guests were a mix of judges, landed gentry, ex-officers and other red trouser types, and their wives. It was not my usual crowd, but I was a plus one, and the mix of good champagne and bad dancing that a posh wedding celebration offers was too much to resist.
I had a good time, but one moment has stuck with me ever since: the best man stood to give his speech, ending it by running through a list of the groom’s finest qualities – he was a successful businessman, a decent chap, a true friend with a great sense of humour, he loved his dogs and children (in that order, that is to say, the correct order) and now he had been blessed with this, his second marriage to the most ‘feminine woman’ he had ever met.”
This of course was met with the predictable response:
“Both clearly felt they had been complimented to the skies, and good luck to them. They were very happy, but I felt grumpy. It struck me that for these people the men ‘do’ and the women ‘are’. It’s an attitude I still encounter depressingly often, from both genders.
And this is my problem: I worry that this desire to be feminine is holding women back. I worry that a certain type of man, who prefers his women feminine, is holding us back. And I particularly worry that it is a gang of precisely this type of man that is currently running things.”
Welcome to 250,000 years of human history Ms. Brand. It’s always been this way and to deny it is to deny essential human biological imperatives. You can read the rest of the article here, but it’s essentially the same girrrl power drivel that every woman who’s Ms. Brand’s age and appearance spout. But then, I found this article in the Daily Mail U.K. that states that women in their younger years don’t identify with feminism. Here’s a few excerpts:
“It is the movement that, among its many triumphs, won women the vote. Yet, for the average modern woman, feminism is dead, research claims.
Just one in seven women describes herself as a ‘feminist’, it found, with younger women even less likely to describe themselves as such.
A third view traditional radical feminism as ‘too aggressive’ towards men, while a quarter no longer view it as a positive label. One in five describe it as ‘old-fashioned’ and simply ‘not relevant’ to their generation.”
“Modern women feel traditional feminism is no longer working for them, as it’s aggressive, divisive and doesn’t take into account their personal circumstances.
‘They simply don’t view men as “the enemy”. And it’s clear there is no longer a “battle of the sexes” but a coming together of the sexes to make society work for everyone in it.”
And the last one:
“Fewer than one in ten women aged 25 to 29 identified with feminism, compared with a quarter of those aged 45 to 50.
One in six said feminism had gone too far, ‘losing sight of the natural roles of men and women’. Instead of fighting for equality, two in five now want to ‘celebrate difference’ instead.
The majority of the 1,300 polled felt feminism should be about ensuring women have ‘real choice over their family, career and lives’, and to reinstate the value of motherhood.”
Did you notice the difference? The young babes are fleeing feminism in droves while the older gals still embrace it. There’s a perfectly good reason for this rejection of feminism by the younger set.
They were raised by feminist women and they’ve witnessed firsthand the damage that’s been done by it.
Unlike what some in the Manosphere think, I don’t think women are stupid. They might not think cognitively like men but they are able to realize when they look around them that what’s happening isn’t right. Plus, I think their biological imperatives are stronger than men’s, have you ever heard of a male biological clock? How would you feel if you were a young woman and had your father ripped away from you at a young age by a mother that really wasn’t interested in you very much, but all she wanted was to be haaaappy? And all you saw afterwards was an endless string of men coming and going and your mother getting more and more haggard until she eventually settled for probably someone abusive or worse, a leech. This is the reality these days for young women and I think they are rejecting this paradigm in numbers that might surprise us.
So ladies, pay attention to Julia Gillard. Is this how you want to live your life when you’re her age? Or do you want to be the woman in the wedding where everyone is loving and wants you to be part of their family?
Hard choice right?