Here's some candy for you.
Posted on 02/10/2004 1:16:24 PM PST by presidio9
When I was a kid, Valentine's Day meant eating those small, heart-shaped candies, and hoping to get a card from one of the cute girls in class -- in that order of priority, I will admit. But now, our college campuses have come up with a radically different vioew of Valentine's Day: the Vagina Monologues. This play, which celebrates lesbianism and pedophilia, claims to liberate women by the vulgar repetition of the V-word more than a hundred times.
Now, the all-American types who brought us the Vagina Monologues are telling us to forget the chocolates and roses. This year, we should be "Celebrating Vagina Warriors" who protect women from domestic violence (no, I am not making this up).
According to the WHO report on Violence and Health, men are twice as likely as women to die from violence. But the Vagina Warriors want you to think that only female victims of violence are deserving of our sympathy. Things have reached the point that commentators are now urging us to "Take Back Valentine's Day!"
Many would dismiss the Vagina Monologues as absurd. So absurd, people believe they can ignore it, knowing that eventually it will go away. But "eventually" may be a long time in coming.
I don't expect the Vagina Monologues will just go away. That's because this play represents the next logical step in the campaign of radical feminism to impose a genderless society.
Let's go back to the basics.
The radical feminist interpretation of Marxism-Leninism is that the family is the root cause of the patriarchal oppression of women. As Robin Morgan, who would later become editor of Ms. Magazine, explained in a matter-of-fact manner in 1970, "We can't destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage." Therefore, they set out to eradicate it.
But how would any movement go about the job of eliminating marriage? Simple.
In 1971, the National Organization of Women launched its first salvo on heterosexual relationships. The NOW passed a resolution declaring lesbians are the frontline troops of the women's movement. The corollary of this statement is that all women should aspire to be lesbians.
By the 1980s, feminists were beginning to equate marriage with prostitution. Here's University of Michigan law professor Catherine MacKinnon: "Feminism stresses the indistinguishability of prostitution, marriage, and sexual harassment."
But marriage was once a mighty fortress. So a broader assault on gender relationships was called for.
First, you portray men as brutes, clods, deadbeats, and unreliable providers.
Then you try to fill women with contempt for men -- remember Gloria Steinem's famous quip about a woman needing a man like a fish needing a bicycle?
Next, you contort the divorce and child custody laws so prospective fathers come to view marriage as a losing proposition. And when suitors hesitate in making the Big Commitment, you naturally blame men for their hesitation.
The final coup de grace? Dilute the sanctity of marriage by pushing for full legal recognition of lesbian and gay marriages.
The greatest obstacle to the achievement of the feminist utopia is not the patriarchy. The greatest threat to the Sisterhood is the timeless allure of heterosexual romance, love, and matrimony.
And that is exactly what radical feminism has set out to destroy. But the idea is so preposterous -- no one would ever believe it.
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.