Women Who Make the World Worse

-88-

Registered
48

159523009201sclzzzzzzz2ch.jpg


Book Description
A top conservative writer explores the feminist assault on our families, schools, workplaces, and military

As a woman, Kate O'Beirne can say things a male commentator could never get away with. In her long-awaited first book, she takes on America's leading feministsincluding Hillary Clinton, Gloria Steinem, Eleanor Smeal, Maureen Dowd, Kate Michelman, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and even Sex and the City's Carrie Bradshaw. She confronts them with hard evidence of how women like them have done more harm than good over the last four decades.
O'Beirne is all for women's equality and celebrates the unprecedented opportunities they enjoy today. But she faults those feminists who believe that a hostile patriarchy reigns and that women remain its helpless

victims. Their agenda is not profemale; it's merely antimale.


Women Who Make the World Worse shows how their destructive handiwork can be felt in every corner of American life, including:
"â┚¬Ã…¡ÃƒÆ’”�Å¡¢ fractured families and dispensable dads
"â┚¬Ã…¡ÃƒÆ’”�Å¡¢ offices and schools that have become battlegrounds in the gender wars
"â┚¬Ã…¡ÃƒÆ’”�Å¡¢ military units that put lives at risk to promote social engineering

This book takes on some very powerful women and challenges beliefs that have become feminist orthodoxy, starting with the myth that men are the enemy of women's progress. O'Beirne marshals her allies, prepares for a good fight, and never loses her sense of humor. This is a provocative book that will appeal to anyone, male or female, who wants some old-fashioned common sense about relations between the sexes.

ISBN: 1595230092
 
48


...she takes on America's leading feministsincluding Hillary Clinton, Gloria Steinem, Eleanor Smeal, Maureen Dowd, Kate Michelman, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and even Sex and the City's Carrie Bradshaw...

I hope she didn't forget Gloria Allred.

allred.jpg
 
48

Doc and Mr Kitty are you glad I aint one of these types. I remember in a recent book about Hillary that she fought not to have come out saying that she is a lesbian and approved of all of Bill's sexual exploits. Feminism is really lesbianism if you ask me.

THE FEMINIST AGENDA

1. "The simple fact is that every woman must be willing to be identified
as a lesbian to be fully feminist." (National NOW Times, Jan.1988).

2. "Since marriage constitutes slavery for women, it is clear that the
women's movement must concentrate on attacking this institution. Freedom
for women cannot be won without the abolition of marriage." (radial
feminist leader Sheila Cronan).

3. "Being a housewife is an illegitimate profession... The choice to
serve and be protected and plan towards being a family-maker is a choice
that shouldn't

be. The heart of radical feminism is to change that."
(Vivian Gornick,
feminist author, University of Illinois, "The Daily
Illini," April 25, 1981.

4. The most merciful thing a large family can do to one of its infant
members is to kill it." (Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood,
in "Women and the New Rage," p.67.

5. "In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from
families and communally raise them." (Dr. Mary Jo Bane, feminist and
assistant professor of education at Wellesley College and associate
director of the school's Center for Research on Woman).

6. "Marriage has existed for the benefit of men; and has been a legally
sanctioned method of control over women... We must work to destroy it.
The end of the institution of marriage is a necessary condition for the
liberation of women. Therefore it is important for us to encourage women
to leave their husban
ds a
nd not to live individually with men... All of
history must be re-written in terms of oppression of women. We must go
back to ancient female relig
ions like witchcraft." (from "The Declaration
of Feminism," November 1971).

7. "Overthrowing capitalism is too small for us. We must overthrow the
whole... patriarch!" (Gloria Steinhem, radical feminist leader, editor of
'MS' magazine).

8. In response to a question concerning China's policy of compulsory
abortion after the first child, Molly Yard responded, "I consider the
Chinese government's policy among the most intelligent in the world."
(Gary Bauer, "Abetting Coercion in China," The Washington Times", October
10, 1989).

9. "Let's forget about the mythical Jesus and look for encouragement,
solace and inspiration from real women... Two thousand years of
patriarchal rule under the shadow of the cross ought to be
enough
to turn
women toward the feminist 'salvation' of this world." (Annie Laurie
Gaylor, "Feminist Salvation," "The Humanist", July/August 1988, p.37.

10. "By the year 2000 we will, I hope, raise our children to believe in
human potential, no
t God." (Gloria Steinhem, editor of 'MS' magazine.)
 
48

How about answering a simpler question. Name the woman that have made the world better?
 
48

As I said at the turn of the century, in my contribution to the biggest winners and losers of the 20th century list that were being produced:

Biggest loser: Feminist

Because: At mid century feminist were championing the idea the woman should not shave their underarms, by the end of the century feminist were shaving their sn*tch.
 
48

Originally posted by svejk@Jan 13 2006, 06:34 PM
How about answering a simpler question.â┚¬Ã…¡ÃƒÆ’”�Å¡  Name the woman that have made the world better?
Marie Curie? She won the Nobel prize twice. (No, she was not a Jew. She was an Atheist, but raised Catholic in Poland.)

Feminism is definitely a pestilence, but let's not lose sight of the fact the White man and White woman are a team by sounding mysogynistic. Not accusing you of such, but it's something that needs saying on pretty much all "feminism" threads.
 
48

Originally posted by cltncblondeeagle@Jan 14 2006, 01:58 AM
Hell yeah Doc for without us females you men would be NOTHING.
We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.
Because the beauty of the White Aryan woman must not perish from the earth.

- David Lane
 
48

Originally posted by Dr William Pierce+Jan 13 2006, 11:27 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Dr William Pierce @ Jan 13 2006, 11:27 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-svejk@Jan 13 2006, 06:34 PM
How about answering a simpler question.â┚¬Ã…¡ÃƒÆ’”�Å¡  Name the woman that have made the world better?
Marie Curie? She won the Nobel prize twice. (No, she was not a Jew. She was an Atheist, but raised Catholic in Poland.)

Feminism is definitely a pestilence, but let's not lose sight of the fact the White man and White woman
r
are a team by sounding mysogynistic. Not accusing you of such, but it's something that needs saying on pretty much all "feminism" threads. [/b][/quote]
Yes, Marie Curie would be the obvious first choice by far.

But I'm not sure there is no some political correctness with h
ere winning 2 Nobel Prizes. The first, won in Physics. she shared with two men, including her husband. The second she won in Chemistry and it not clear to me why she won this Nobel Prize. Did she win the second Nobel Prize based on the same work she won the first. But by giving a second Nobel Prize, it could be claimed that she received a Nobel Prize she did not share.

I once read that she basically hung on the coat tails of her husband.

But don't get me wrong, this is woman of extraordinary intelligence with a discipline, determination, and single mindedness possessed by virtually no other woman.


For mathematics, I would
po
int to Sophie Germain, who made minor contributions. But to make a contribution at all means you have genius level IQ. And no, she too was not a jewess.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie_Germain

I have always found it interesting that the literature refers to a set of prime numbers she discovered as "
â┚¬��Ô�Å¡�Sophie primes or sometime Sophie Germain prime. Usually the last name of the mathematician is used in naming a discovery, but almost all reference to her discovery use her first name. I think this is to highlight the discovery was made by a woman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie_Germain_prime

But after these two, Curie and Germain, woman, the field becomes extremely thin.


... let's not lose sight of the fact the White man and White woman are a team by sounding mysogynistic. Not accusing you of such, but it's something that needs saying on pretty much all "feminism" threads.

I agree 100% with you here. I always like to make reference to the team paradigm when arguing with liberals. But I hate the fact that it make me feel like the White who claims he not a racist because he has a black friend (who is most likely at least 50% White).
 
48

Originally posted by cltncblondeeagle@Jan 14 2006, 12:58 AM
Hell yeah Doc for without us females you men would be NOTHING.
No bird has ever chirped more truth.

And right now White men are without their woman and White men are becoming nothing.

White woman have become little more the jew quoting, nigger loving, mestizo hiring, mongoloid adopting, fag-hags.

But like I pointed out in Katrina posting area: 40 plus years of brain washing was undone in less the 40 hours. After the storm, niggers became niggers, feminist become White woman, and metro-sexuals became White men. White woman needed White men to guard w

hile they slept and protect them when they went to the bathroom.
 
48

White woman have become little more the jew quoting, nigger loving, mestizo hiring, mongoloid adopting, fag-hags.

Except for the one that is perched in this forum. Right guys.

Thank you for the verbal hug again you guys.
 
48

The radical feminist plague
By Bernard Chapin

Across the span of human history, men and women have joined together, in complementary roles, to produce a species that is arguably the most successful on earth, yet victory can result in the creation of powerful enemies. Few adversaries have been more potent or destructive in a shorter period of time than radical feminism. With its open hatred of men and complete disrespect for the choices of women, it is unique among the various "isms" currently defiling our culture. It makes a victim out of every female, brings about an element of barbarism to our daily relations, and has conjured up a war between the sexes.

Considering that the media constantly refers to the main feminist organizations as "women's groups" and that pusillanimous politicians pretend that these leftist extremists are representative of the a

verage woman, it is not surprising that there
has been such a frenzied response to the publication of Kate O'Beirne's Women Who Make the World Worse And How Their Radical Feminist Assault is Ruining Our Families, Military, Schools, and Sports. Activists are so threatened by this rather slim volume that they have waged a campaign to downgrade the author's Amazon ranking and fomented considerable madness on the net (which Kathryn Jean Lopez documented in an excellent article). With O'Beirne's masterful detailing of the feminist defilement of both human dignity and culture in general along with her pervasive use of logicthe feminist kryptoniteperhaps hysteria was the only way in which the faithful thought they could keep the general public from discovering the true extent of their contempt for the citizenry.

One of the non-response response methods used to deal with O'Beirne&#39
;s c
ritique will be familiar to conservatives who lived through the taffeta day
s of sperm and innuendo otherwise known as the Clinton Administration. It consists of repeating things like, "are you still dwelling on that? Isn't it time to moveon.org?" Such a tactic was on full display in the New York Times review:

Sure, she tosses invective at some specific (and predictable) targets, but for the most part the women in her book are less a real threat to the contemporary conservative project than a history lesson. Her salvos against such dusty icons as Betty Friedan, Gloria Steinem, Jane Fonda and Catharine MacKinnon do all these women the enormous favor of making them relevant again.

While it is true that these individuals no longer adorn the covers of Newsweek, their ideas, once revolutionary, now reign supreme as conventional wisdom. This aftereffect was far too obvious for the sophistos at The Times to consider. The complaints, recriminations, mental breakdowns, and paranoid
fantasie
s of the feminist avant-garde were given a free pass by hordes of people smart enough to kn
ow better because they cloaked their harangues under the protective cover of femininity. To defy them was supposedly to hate women on the whole. The upshot is that contemporary judges view divorce hearings as a mechanism for punishing men, child custody hearings reflect a considerable bias in favor of women, employers now hire on the basis of chromosomal characteristics, and the workplace, thanks to the sexual harassment industry, is an environment hostile to males.

In these pages, the incompetence and inferiority of the feminist mind is readily evident to the reader as O'Beirne gives us a comprehensive tour of their advocacy and opinion. The Equal Rights Amendment is revealed to be a legal absurdity as its vagueness, should it have passed, would have ensured either tyranny or meaninglessness. The egregious Violence Against Women Act (1994) was designed not to protect women, but, rather, to guara
ntee female
supremacy by elevating them in the eyes of the law. Measures like the Equity Pay Act were pro
posed to allow women to be highly paid for work which matches their personal interests while ignoring the need of consumers. That the root of radical feminism is actually an attempt to procure jobs for the unemployable is a perspective I had never thought of, but it is extensivelyand devastatinglydeveloped here by the author.

The text lives up to its secondary billing by carefully explaining in individual chapters the way in which feminists have denigrated the family, the armed forces, every form of education, and sports. I figured that my favorite chapter would be "Mother Nature's a Btch," but it wasn't because the introduction, albeit quite short, dismantled the jaggedy bricks of this Jacobinism as if they were stones atop Monte Cassino.

The left has tried to dismiss this work as a Coulter-esque rant, but this is clearly not the case. More than anything else, Women w
ho Make the Wor
ld Worse is a scholarly review of the literature surrounding the discrepancy between feminist po
sitions and reality. O'Beirne is not detached from the discussion, however, but she refutes and responds to her opposition far more than she insults them. It would be easy to isolate a quotation like, "A woman being brutally killed alongside men is a long-awaited dream of equality," and pretend that O'Beirne is polemicizing; yet, such a sentence would be taken out of context because it was preceded by a quotation from a retired female general reading, "There's been an acceptance of the fact that women"â┚¬Ã…¡ÃƒÆ’”�Å¡¦are in harm's way and they are being killed. That is defining to me." The author's remark was well-justified in light of the situation.

Perhaps the best reason for the left's outraged reaction to this text is that it exposes the totalitarian foundations of political correctness, an ideology of which feminism is irrefutably a subset. PC has eroded th
e value of a univer
sity education due to its outlawing the search for truth. Indeed, as one psychologist O'Beirne cited remarked concerning daycar
e: "Psychologists must refuse to undertake any more research that looks for the negative consequences of other-than-mother care." Why? Well, the outcomes might not be favorable to the points of view of today's politicized pseudo-scholars, so the findings must be buried when they don't meet the demands of theory.

Radical feminism, with its Manichean outlook and attempt to subjugate men in the name of equality, is a malignant and vile influence upon our society. We should all be thankful that Kate O'Beirne has the courage needed to stand up to these fanatics. It is now time for all of us to stare down these vindictive bullies and prevent them from ruining the lives of any more people than they already have.

http
://www.enterstageright.
com/archive/art...eworldworse.htm
 
48

Debunking the folly of feminism
Mona Charen

Some women protest, "I'm a feminist, just not a radical feminist." Kate O'Beirne is impatient with such qualifications. She is not any kind of feminist, and when you finish her sparkling new book "Women Who Make the World Worse," you won't be one either.

Feminism, far from promoting the happiness and well-being of women and society, has instead left great swaths of melancholy in its wake. O'Beirne cites "One large study of well-being data on one hundred thousand Americans and Britons from the early 1970s to the late 1990s found that while American men had grown happier, women's well-being had dramatically fallen during the period ... women were 20 percent less happy."

The so-called "women's movement" was and is a misnomer. Most women reject the anti-male, anti-fami

ly bias of the professional feminists. But a dedicated cohort of humorless, bitter, c
rusading women - mostly from miserable families - was able to dictate policy in some of the most important realms of life.

Feminists now claim that they were never against marriage and family. But O'Beirne has kept the quotes in her files. In 1971, Ms. Magazine founder Robin Morgan called marriage "a slavery-like practice," adding that "We cannot destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage." Australian feminist guru Germaine Greer recommended that all women leave their husbands in search of more satisfying "rambling organic structures" (sounds vaguely unhygienic). And Jessie Bernard, a Pennsylvania State University sociologist, asserted that the "destructive nature" of marriage was both figuratively and literally making women sick.

Strangely, while feminists were burning with indignation toward men, they also enthusiastically endorsed pro
misc
uity. O'Beirne quotes Harvard Law professor Mary Ann Glendon, who notes that early feminists who sought the vote and other rights
"saw that the ready availability of abortion would facilitate the sexual exploitation of women ... they regarded free love, abortion and easy divorce as disastrous for women and children." Modern feminists, by contrast, were characterized by a "puzzling combination of two things that do not ordinarily go together: anger against men and promiscuity; man-hating and man-chasing."

It is peculiar, but it grew, like so many feminist fantasies, from one foundational error: the idea that men and women are in all important respects alike, and where they are different it is because society has trained them to be so. There are thousands of studies, examples and life experiences that put the lie to this notion, and O'Beirne quotes many. But one stands out particularly. In gauging the attitude of college students toward casual sex, a researcher recentl
y asked
college students to approach a member of the opposite sex and say, "I've been noticing you around campus. I find you very attractive. Would you go to bed
with me tonight?" Seventy-five percent of men said they'd happily carry out the assignment. None of the 48 young women assented.

Feminists have peddled more than their share of myths over the past 40 years - that women earn less than men for the same work; that domestic violence is rife within the traditional nuclear family; that women do not want to take care of their young children and therefore require government-funded day care; that children do better in group care than with their mothers - and Kate O'Beirne debunks them all. But one area in particular deserves wider acknowledgment and that is what feminism has done to the military. Against the better judgment of generals and admirals, women have been given more and more access to combat, to the point where scores of women have been killed and wounded in Iraq.


Many di
d not even recognize, when they entered the service, that they would be deployed so close to the front lines. It isn't just women who suffer. Large numbers of women soldiers a
re mothers (single or married), leaving behind babies and young children. Nor is the participation of women in combat situations good for readiness or morale. Women have far higher rates of injuries and sick days than men, to say nothing of pregnancy, which in one famous case sidelined 10 percent of the women sailors on a Navy ship.

But O'Beirne's argument is completely politically incorrect and completely on the money as to the most profound reason to keep combat an all-male occupation. She quotes historian S.L.A. Marshall, who found that a man will overcome his fear and do what he must because he risks losing "the one thing he is likely to value more highly than life - his reputation as a man among men."

Kate is fearless and funny and a must read.

http://www.heraldnet.com/stories/06/01/15/...i_charen001.cfm
 
Back
Top