It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The goals of feminism were always brilliant in their clarity: Convince women that they were an oppressed class that should agitate for political change. Hold out the promise that political change would yield a world of greater freedom that would eventually bring them greater happiness.
This project has failed. In a recent presentation at a meeting of the American Law and Economics Association, Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers of the University of Pennsylvania outlined what they called the new paradox of declining female happiness. After noting that by most objective measures, “the lives of women in the United States have improved over the past 35 years,” they showed that, nonetheless, “measures of subjective well-being indicate that women’s happiness has declined both absolutely and relative to men.”
Instead, the feminist movement of the 1960s and 1970s gave us a steady stream of women’s complaints disguised as manifestos; institutionalization in the form of women’s studies on college campuses; and a brand of female sexual power so promiscuous that it celebrates everything from prostitution to nipple piercing as a feminist act—in other words, whine, womyn, and thongs.
It is not a surprise that the feminist movement of the late 20th century morphed into vanity and voyeurism rather than sustained political action. Its notions of women as a class were never inclusive. It had little room for women who couldn’t or wouldn’t embrace the Manichean worldview of organized feminism, and no place at all for women whose views rested on the more conservative end of the political spectrum.
Since writing these words last week, I have discovered that before she became a feminist leader, Gloria Steinem worked for the CIA spying on Marxist students in Europe and disrupting their meetings. She became a media darling due to her CIA connections. MS Magazine, which she edited for many years was indirectly funded by the CIA
What Friedan (nee: Betty Naomi Goldstein) didn't say is that she had been a Communist propagandist since her student days at Smith College (1938-1942) and that the destruction of the family has always been central to the Communist plan for world government. See "The Communist Manifesto" (1848).
Friedan dropped out of grad school to become a reporter for a Communist news service. From 1946 -1952 she worked for the newspaper of the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, (UE) "the largest Communist-led institution of any kind in the United States." In 1947, Congress targeted the UE as a Communist front and its membership began a steady decline
Daniel Horowitz, a History Professor at Smith with impeccable Liberal and Feminist credentials documents all this in his book, Betty Friedan and the Making of the Feminine Mystique: The American Left, the Cold War and Modern Feminism (University of Massachusetts Press 1999).
Originally posted by pepsi78There is no such place for the feminist movement in this new milenium. They may exist in countries where cave man still exists, I would have no problem with that.
Originally posted by Dark Ghost
I think the use of Womyn is so that the same word can be written without using the word "man" or "men" as its root. Same as the word "herstory" is used by certain Feminists instead of history - again omitting the masculine root word which happens to be "his" in that case. I suppose these Feminists would say that using a masculine root promotes patriarchy and misogyny...
[edit on 10/7/2010 by Dark Ghost]