Gloria Steinem Blames El Rushbo for Feminism's Failure

RUSH: Okay, folks, change of direction. Time to go back to the Grooveyard of Forgotten Favorites. Dadelut dadelut dadelut dadelut. I haven't done one of these in a while, but we're gonna do it now. We have a feminist update with the Forester Sisters on the theme song. Vocal portrayal...

RUSH: Actual footage from a pro-choice rally back in the mid-1990s. We're fierce, we're feminists, and we're in your face. It's a pro-choice rally. The Forester Sisters there with the vocal portrayal of just one of many feminist update themes. We had You Don't Own Me, by Lesley Gore. We had Born a Woman, by Sandy Posey. Find Born a Woman. That would be great. Find Born a Woman, by Sandy Posey. I know we've got it in the Prophet System because I downloaded it. Just give me a quick flash when you have found Born a Woman, by Sandy Posey.

This is one of the first tunes I ever played as a struggling young disc jockey star of the future back in 1966. When I was 15 I got my first chance, it was called running the board, at a local radio station in Cape Girardeau. I'm vamping here. Have you found Born a Woman, by Sandy Posey? It's not in your Prophet System? You're kidding. Well, it has to be in your Prophet System 'cause if it's in mine, I got it from yours. Oh, what a bummer. I know it's there; we've used it. We have played it. It was one of a rotating series of feminist themes. Well, anyway, we will continue our exhaustive search. It's in the Grooveyard of Forgotten Favorites. That's why we call it that.

So here I am today, I get up at the usual time, and I go through the usual morning preparation. I leave the house, head on in here to work, sit down, get a cup of coffee, cigar, everything ready to go, and I fire up the computer. The last time I looked at the computer was probably 1:30 in the morning. So I've done a lot of show prep up 'til then. I fire it up. One of the first things I went to today was the Drudge page, and I see a headline that Gloria Steinem is blaming me. "Steinem Blames Limbaugh for Ruining the Word 'Feminism.'" I stared at that, and I stared at that. I didn't click on it yet. I stared at it. And finally I said, "Yes!" Then I clicked on the link, and it's to CBS This Morning.

Apparently Gloria Steinem, former Playboy playmate -- you wonder why they stopped publishing the magazine pictures? Gloria Steinem was on CBS This Morning promoting -- I guess she's got a new book out on feminism. And during the Q&A with Norah O'Donnell, Norah O'Donnell said, "You know, there's still some real issues at stake, Ms. Steinem. I want to start with this. Meryl Streep, who stars in the movie Suffragette as Emmeline Pankhurst, she says, Meryl Streep says that she doesn't even consider herself a feminist. She says she considers herself a humanist. Why is it the feminist label, do you think, still has that negative stigma to it?"

STEINEM: The word "feminism" has been turned into a bad word by Rush Limbaugh who talks about feminazis every day, and so -- but if people just go to the dictionary and discover that it means a person, male or female, who believes in the full equality of women and men, then they do subscribe to it and it is a majority now, which it didn't used to be.

RUSH: Right. So, once again, your host, the harmless, lovable, little fuzzball, Rush Limbaugh, now blamed for destroying a word, ruining a word, ruining the definition of a word, feminism. But her definition is not even close to the way the feminazis use the entire feminist movement. It was based in leftist ideology. It was based on men are predators and men are evil and men are men. It was designed to create a war between and against men and women. All I did was expose it. That word "feminazi," they never gotten over because that word actually better explained what they were all about. It rang so true. And we've found the tune, folks. Here we go, Sandy Posey, daughter of Jim Posey. This is one of our very first feminist themes, and this irritated 'em like you can't believe.

RUSH: No price too great to pay. Sandy Posey. It's in 1966. That was one of the early songs in the feminist update rotation.

RUSH: The modern era, the modern incarnation of feminism can be traced back to the late 1960s and really began to intensify in the early seventies, the modern incarnation. A number of different eras of feminism, like the suffrage era. But this era that started in the late sixties and early seventies was one rooted in total anger and remains rooted in total anger. And it was anger primarily at certain other women. Feminism, supposedly Gloria Steinem says, equality for all. Ask Paula Jones about that. Ask any of the women abused by Bill Clinton, where was the NOW gang?

The NOW gang, they're supposedly protecting women against rape and male abuse and behavior like this, and here you have one of the serial female abusers in Bill Clinton, and the NOW gang, the NAGs, my affectionate name for the National Association of Gals, everywhere they could, every chance they had, defended Bill Clinton. If you happened to be a conservative woman, you were not, for all intents and purposes, of any interest to the National Organization for Women. They were a strictly left-wing bunch.

In 1980, I wrote a local newspaper column in Sacramento, California. One day I had writer's block. This is a weekly column and I had writers block. I just couldn't get started on a piece. So I started jotting down one-sentence thoughts and philosophy. And when I got to 30 of them I said, you know what, I'm pretty close to a column here. So I kept going 'til I got 750 words, which is about 35 truths, and that's how the 35 Undeniable Truths of Life were born. And number 24 established me as one of America's scholarly thinkers at the moment it was first heard.

"Feminism was established, in part, to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream."

That was so right on and so true that the reaction to it from the feminists was volcanic. They dropped and lost any sense of humor. They were nothing but a bunch of libs is all it was. It's another manufactured special interest group of liberalism designed to distract people into thinking it was about equality and civil rights for a maligned victim group, women, when in fact all it was was one of the many constituents of the Democrat Party, one of the many disparate groups of the leftist coalition that makes up the Democrat Party.

And they all pushed the same thing: Expansive government, the loss of individual liberty and freedom via the expansive of government, use of government to enforce behavior on people, in this case the feminists thought needed to be punished, which happened to be men. And conservative women. So that's how it all began, and that's why Gloria Steinem says I have destroyed the word "feminism."

Don’t blame Rush, blame the anti-woman Marxist cultural revolution that Kate Millet and other feminazis are engaging in:

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3200158/posts

Marxist Feminism’s Ruined Lives
Frontpagemag.com ^ | 9-2-2014 | Mallory Millett

...During my junior year in high school, the nuns asked about our plans for after we graduated. When I said I was going to attend State University, I noticed their disappointment. I asked my favorite nun, “Why?” She answered, “That means you’ll leave four years later a communist and an atheist!”

What a giggle we girls had over that. “How ridiculously unsophisticated these nuns are,” we thought. Then I went to the university and four years later walked out a communist and an atheist, just as my sister Katie had six years before me.

Sometime later, I was a young divorcee with a small child. At the urging of my sister, I relocated to NYC after spending years married to an American executive stationed in Southeast Asia. The marriage over, I was making a new life for my daughter and me. Katie said, “Come to New York. We’re making revolution! Some of us are starting the National Organization of Women and you can be part of it.”

I hadn’t seen her for years. Although she had tormented me when we were youngsters, those memories were faint after my Asian traumas and the break-up of my marriage. I foolishly mistook her for sanctuary in a storm. With so much time and distance between us, I had forgotten her emotional instability.

And so began my period as an unwitting witness to history. I stayed with Kate and her lovable Japanese husband, Fumio, in a dilapidated loft on The Bowery as she finished her first book, a PhD thesis for Columbia University, “Sexual Politics.”

It was 1969. Kate invited me to join her for a gathering at the home of her friend, Lila Karp. They called the assemblage a “consciousness-raising-group,” a typical communist exercise, something practiced in Maoist China. We gathered at a large table as the chairperson opened the meeting with a back-and-forth recitation, like a Litany, a type of prayer done in Catholic Church. But now it was Marxism, the Church of the Left, mimicking religious practice:

“Why are we here today?” she asked.
“To make revolution,” they answered.
“What kind of revolution?” she replied.
“The Cultural Revolution,” they chanted.
“And how do we make Cultural Revolution?” she demanded.
“By destroying the American family!” they answered.
“How do we destroy the family?” she came back.
“By destroying the American Patriarch,” they cried exuberantly.
“And how do we destroy the American Patriarch?” she replied.
“By taking away his power!”
“How do we do that?”
“By destroying monogamy!” they shouted.
“How can we destroy monogamy?”

Their answer left me dumbstruck, breathless, disbelieving my ears. Was I on planet earth? Who were these people?

“By promoting promiscuity, eroticism, prostitution and homosexuality!” they resounded.

They proceeded with a long discussion on how to advance these goals by establishing The National Organization of Women. It was clear they desired nothing less than the utter deconstruction of Western society. The upshot was that the only way to do this was “to invade every American institution. Every one must be permeated with ‘The Revolution’”: The media, the educational system, universities, high schools, K-12, school boards, etc.; then, the judiciary, the legislatures, the executive branches and even the library system.

It fell on my ears as a ludicrous scheme, as if they were a band of highly imaginative children planning a Brinks robbery; a lark trumped up on a snowy night amongst a group of spoiled brats over booze and hashish.

To me, this sounded silly. I was enduring culture shock after having been cut-off from my homeland, living in Third-World countries for years with not one trip back to the United States. I was one of those people who, upon returning to American soil, fell out of the plane blubbering with ecstasy at being home in the USA. I knelt on the ground covering it with kisses. I had learned just exactly how delicious was the land of my birth and didn’t care what anyone thought because they just hadn’t seen what I had or been where I had been. I had seen factory workers and sex-slaves chained to walls.

How could they know? Asia is beyond our ken and, as they say, utterly inscrutable, and a kind of hell I never intended to revisit. I lived there, not junketed, not visited like sweet little tourists — I’d conducted households and tried to raise a child. I had outgrown the communism of my university days and was clumsily groping my way back to God.

How could twelve American women who were the most respectable types imaginable — clean and privileged graduates of esteemed institutions: Columbia, Radcliffe, Smith, Wellesley, Vassar; the uncle of one was Secretary of War under Franklin Roosevelt — plot such a thing? Most had advanced degrees and appeared cogent, bright, reasonable and good. How did these people rationally believe they could succeed with such vicious grandiosity? And why?

I dismissed it as academic-lounge air-castle-building. I continued with my new life in New York while my sister became famous publishing her books, featured on the cover of “Time Magazine.” “Time” called her “the Karl Marx of the Women’s Movement.” This was because her book laid out a course in Marxism 101 for women. Her thesis: The family is a den of slavery with the man as the Bourgeoisie and the woman and children as the Proletariat. The only hope for women’s “liberation” (communism’s favorite word for leading minions into inextricable slavery; “liberation,” and much like “collective” – please run from it, run for your life) was this new “Women’s Movement.” Her books captivated the academic classes and soon “Women’s Studies” courses were installed in colleges in a steady wave across the nation with Kate Millett books as required reading.

Imagine this: a girl of seventeen or eighteen at the kitchen table with Mom studying the syllabus for her first year of college and there’s a class called “Women’s Studies.” “Hmmm, this could be interesting,” says Mom. “Maybe you could get something out of this.”

Seems innocuous to her. How could she suspect this is a class in which her innocent daughter will be taught that her father is a villain? Her mother is a fool who allowed a man to enslave her into barbaric practices like monogamy and family life and motherhood, which is a waste of her talents. She mustn’t follow in her mother’s footsteps. That would be submitting to life as a mindless drone for some domineering man, the oppressor, who has mesmerized her with tricks like romantic love. Never be lured into this chicanery, she will be taught. Although men are no damned good, she should use them for her own orgasmic gratification; sleep with as many men as possible in order to keep herself unattached and free. There’s hardly a seventeen-year-old girl without a grudge from high school against a Jimmy or Jason who broke her heart. Boys are learning, too, and they can be careless during high school, that torment of courting dances for both sexes.

By the time Women’s Studies professors finish with your daughter, she will be a shell of the innocent girl you knew, who’s soon convinced that although she should be flopping down with every boy she fancies, she should not, by any means, get pregnant. And so, as a practitioner of promiscuity, she becomes a wizard of prevention techniques, especially abortion.

The goal of Women’s Liberation is to wear each female down to losing all empathy for boys, men or babies. The tenderest aspects of her soul are roughened into a rock pile of cynicism, where she will think nothing of murdering her baby in the warm protective nest of her little-girl womb. She will be taught that she, in order to free herself, must become an outlaw. This is only reasonable because all Western law, since Magna Carta and even before, is a concoction of the evil white man whose true purpose is to press her into slavery.

Be an outlaw! Rebel! Be defiant! (Think Madonna, Lady Gaga, Lois Lerner, Elizabeth Warren.) “All women are prostitutes,” she will be told. You’re either really smart and use sex by being promiscuous for your own pleasures and development as a full free human being “just like men” or you can be a professional prostitute, a viable business for women, which is “empowering” or you can be duped like your mother and prostitute yourself to one man exclusively whereby you fall under the heavy thumb of “the oppressor.” All wives are just “one-man whores.”

She is to be heartless in this. No sentimental stuff about courting. No empathy for either boy or baby. She has a life to live and no one is to get in her way. And if the boy or man doesn’t “get it” then no sex for him; “making love” becomes “having sex.” “I’m not ‘having sex’ with any jerk who doesn’t believe I can kill his son or daughter at my whim. He has no say in it because it’s my body!” (Strange logic as who has ever heard of a body with two heads, two hearts, four arms, four feet?)

There’s no end to the absurdities your young girl will be convinced to swallow. “I plan to leap from guy to guy as much as I please and no one can stop me because I’m liberated!” In other words, these people will turn your daughter into a slut with my sister’s books as instruction manuals. (“Slut is a good word. Be proud of it!”) She’ll be telling you, “I’m probably never getting married and if I do it will be after I’ve established my career,” which nowadays often means never. “I’ll keep my own name and I don’t really want kids. They’re such a bother and only get in the way.” They’ll tell her, “Don’t let any guy degrade you by allowing him to open doors for you. To be called ‘a lady’ is an insult. Chivalry is a means of ownership.”

Thus, the females, who are fundamentally the arbiters of society go on to harden their young men with such pillow-talk in the same way they’ve been hardened because, “Wow, man, I’ve gotta get laid and she won’t do it if I don’t agree to let her kill the kid if she gets knocked-up!” Oppressed? Woman has always had power. Consider the eternal paradigm: only after Eve convinced Adam to eat the fruit did mankind fall. I.e., man does anything to make woman happy, even if it’s in defiance of God. There’s power for ya! Without a decent womankind, mankind is lost. As Mae West said, “When women go wrong men go right after them!”

I’ve known women who fell for this creed in their youth who now, in their fifties and sixties, cry themselves to sleep decades of countless nights grieving for the children they’ll never have and the ones they coldly murdered because they were protecting the empty loveless futures they now live with no way of going back. “Where are my children? Where are my grandchildren?” they cry to me...

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.