Gradual Genocide: Fertility, Feminism And Fascism

ToogoodReports ^ | May 8, 2002 | Henry Makow Ph.D.

[Starmaker]

A smoking gun! The elite doesn't want us to reproduce.

In 1970, Frederick Jaffe, the VP of Rockefeller-sponsored "Planned Parenthood" organization outlined how "social constraints" should be used to achieve "fertility control." ("Family Planning Perspectives" Oct.1970.)

These "constraints" included encouraging "increased homosexuality," altering "the image of the ideal family," and encouraging women to work outside the home.

If this failed, the agency recommended the placement of "fertility control agents in the water supply." We're not talking about unwanted pregnancies here.

The unprecedented decline of the American family since 1960 did not take place by accident. We are victims of a campaign of psychological warfare carried out by the CIA and foundations through the media, government and education.

They put the neutering agent in the cultural drinking water. The main ingredient is the promotion of homosexuality as an alternative to heterosexuality.

Feminism, which masquerades as "woman's rights," is in fact a pathological lesbian movement. It coerces women to believe that their feminine instincts are socially taught, oppressive and evil. It teaches them to fear and compete with men, and to find fulfillment in career instead of family.

Women who devote their lives to their families are the finest aspects of human life. They are saints who bring love and beauty into the world and tend to the real everyday needs of men and children. To disparage these women is a foul, vicious calumny worthy of the devil himself. Yet that's what the feminist movement is all about, though they deny it.

Betty Frieden, the "moderate" feminist founder, who hid the fact that she was a Communist activist, compared homemakers to concentration camp victims. Simone de Beauvoir, another Communist founder, said women must not be given a choice to be mothers and homemakers because they'll choose that option.

According to feminist Ellen Willis, feminism "is the cutting edge of a revolution in cultural and moral values...The objective of every feminist reform, from legal abortion...to child-care programs, is to undermine traditional family values." (The Nation, Nov. 14, 1981)

What part of traditional family values do feminists object to? Love? Sacrifice? Devotion? Loyalty? Security? The preparation of a new generation for life?

THEY'RE NOT CALLED FEMINAZIS FOR NOTHING

Rockefeller financed the Nazis through I.G. Farben. He sponsored the American Eugenics Society that had close links to its Nazi counterpart.

Rockefeller financed Alfred Kinsey, the homosexual pederast whose "Kinsey Report" replaced married love with casual sex.

Rockefeller continues to finance "Women's Studies" which is a training ground for fascist zealots who spread their poison in society as "change agents." (See Daphne Patai, Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women's Studies.)

The elite is promoting homosexuality to bring about a fascist New World Order. Homosexuality is a developmental disorder characterized by a failure to bond with a member of the opposite sex. Lesbianism (feminism) which coerces women to be like men (and vice-versa) makes it difficult to achieve such a bond. As a result, millions of men and women have been defrauded of happiness and suffer the same symptoms as homosexuals, i.e. arrested development, and obsession with sex.

The elite's purpose is to transfer power from the nation state to their minions at the world level. Once our democratic power is gone, the elite will lower the standard of living. Look at the economic disparities in the Third World for a blueprint of the future. For the elite, the motto is "the less there is of you, the more there is for us."

A distracted, dysfunctional population, deprived of its history and culture, will not recognize its fate in time. Men, emasculated and demoralized, will not be able to resist.

FROM ROCKEFELLER CENTER TO WINNIPEG SQUARE

I ran headlong into this stealth elite policy when I was teaching English part-time at the University of Winnipeg. I was exploring the subject of male-female love in works by DH Lawrence, Chekhov and Henry James.

A handful of militant feminists objected to my defense of traditional femininity and wrote a letter slandering me. Constance Rooke, the university president, accepted their allegations without investigation. The university ignored my complaint of discrimination. The Manitoba Human Rights Commission, another feminist bastion, also dismissed my complaint without investigation.

Winnipeg Sun Editor Lyn Cockburn portrayed me as a 50-year-old man who got his jollies by importuning his 18-year-old female students after class with questions about their sex lives. She compared me to a MD who should be disbarred for making "inappropriate remarks and gestures" to a young female patient. I am suing The Winnipeg Sun for defamation in court this week.

Vile slander is the lot of anyone who questions feminist dogma. Professors are afraid to speak to me.

This case is not about protecting innocence.

Last year, Cockburn had nothing to say when the same university was on the front page of The Winnipeg Sun for teaching lesbian masturbation to 14-year-old high school girls. The girls signed on for a summer school course on "women in the arts" and received an introduction to lesbianism instead. They learned that they didn't need men and could use bananas and vegetables. President Rooke was unrepentant but opined that it may have been too early to introduce the girls to this subject.

Normally Rooke would have lost her job for this outrage. But there wasn't a peep from the Minister of Education or other stalwarts of the community. Rooke is brazen because her orders come right from the top.

This became clear when I saw Jim Carr, the executive director of the Manitoba Business Council. I thought the province's leading enterprises would be concerned that feminists teach the hatred of males, the overthrow of capitalism and discrimination in favor of women, minorities and homosexuals.

He denied this is happening. Carr's previous assignment was biographer of Duff Roblin. A former Manitoba Premier, Roblin is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (the elite's US coordinating body.)

Hartley Richardson, a longtime leader of the Manitoba business community, is a member of the Trilateral Commission. Rockefeller interests set up these bodies to promote elite world government and (Canadian PM) Jean Chretien and (Manitoba Premier) Gary Doer dance to their tunes.

In conclusion, elite planners and their stooges (in government, education and the media) are actively promoting homosexuality in order to destabilize and neuter us. Their ultimate goal is to steal our birthright, in every sense of the word.

To comment on this article or express your opinion directly to the author, you are invited to e-mail Henry at scruples@escape.ca .

[Lorianne]

I suspect we'd pick up where we left off in 1820. Which would include a great deal of female labor in cooperation with male labor to get us back to 2002!

[Robert-J]

Hey, Lorianne, the following site is right up your alley:

http://www.geocities.com/chrestianity/

[Lorianne]

LOL! What kind of books DO you read? How do you like this quote?

"No one will ever win the battle of the sexes; there's too much fraternizing with the enemy." -- Henry Kissinger

[THROW?]

Politically active women are not called lesbians. Politically active women that want all the rewards and none of the responsibilities and think that men are the devil are the ones that are called lesbians. You argument about the gay men has no validity in what you were trying to prove. Also, don't worry. The people out in the world with sense know the difference between a lesbian, a femanist, a femnazi, and all other derivatives and connotations of such. It is obvious when you listen or talk to a person which category they "fit" into.

[Arioch7]

Well, you beat me to it. I agree with what she says.

However, she is aligning herself with a group that on the whole is "Anti-men," I am not saying that thinking of oneself as a feminist means that you share the same values as the group of the same name.

The modern Feminist movement has had problems recruiting new members BECAUSE of the ideaology they espouse. I bet Lorianne would agree with my basic values or Petunias values for that matter as well.

I do not like "Groups," I treat people as Individuals, nothing more and nothing less. I think the whole problem on this thread is an issue of semantics.

To want to be a free person as a female might be considered "Feminist," but that is not what we are talking about here. We are talking about the Feminist Movement and how it acts in modern times.

I know I am rambling but I hope I have made my point clear. My sister is an extremely strong woman and she would NEVER call herself a "Feminist," However Lorianne, I think she would probably be a Feminist in the way that you are describing it.

I have no problems with women but I have a big problem with a "Feminist Movement."

As far as individual strong women, I love them and wish them all the success in the world.

[Lorianne]

I couldn't make heads or tails out of that image.

[Robert-J]

It's a funny site. She's so extreme, she makes you look like a supporter of "patriarchy". This person believes that all men and boys are going to hell.

[valkyrieanne]

This is a bogus claim. The vast majority of feminists (like the vast majority of women) is heterosexual.

The numbers of homosexuals vs. heterosexuals isn't the point. The point is that *acceptance* of lesbianism became an a priori condition for calling oneself a "feminist."

[Lorianne]

Well if you don't want to join an organization that's fine. I don't like them either. But to get stuff done one usually has to band with others to make progress. Keep in mind, it is your right under the First Ammendment to freely associate with others of your choosing (or not) and to "petition the government for redress of grievances", and to speak freely even if your message is unpopular. Therefore, if you believe in our system, you have to agree that women, feminists, redheads or whatever, as free citizens, have a right to form political associations and lobby politicians on their own behalf .... just as male citizens do ..... whether or not you agree with their agenda.

The whole point about being politically active is in and of itself making a point ... excercising your First Ammendment rights as a free citizen of the USA. Hey, I don't agree with the agendas of probably 85% of the PACs and lobbyists roaming around Washington today. But it seems like it is only when "feminists" show up on Capital Hill that people go berserk and practically advocate wearing strands of garlic around necks. There is no need for such hysteria (like this article). We can all just go to the polls and vote our conscience.

[Lorianne]

The point is that *acceptance* of lesbianism became an a priori condition for calling oneself a "feminist."

I'm not sure I believe this. I never felt any pressure to accept lesbianism as a pre-requisite to being a feminist. I'm not convinced any real feminist would allow herself to be manipulated in this manner. What would be the point of being a feminist if you're going to let some minority portion of the population push you around?

And keep in mind, there are feminists the world over that are not all joined at the hip with NOW or any American feminist agenda for that matter. To them the whole concept of feminism = lesbianism would be a totally alien concept (as would feminism = abortion).

I agree there are SOME feminists who do try to push an agenda that many women don't want and try to strongarm women into adopting policies they don't want. Example: Hillary Clinton's Congressional Womens Committee trying to push abortion services as part of a woman's health care aid package to Afghan women. The Afghan women held their ground, but then, they know strongarm tactics when they see them and they are used to dealing with dictators, LOL. This despicable display was widely publicized by the Independent Women's Forum among other alert feminist groups while the mainstream of Republicans were asleep at the wheel. So: feminism is not a monolithic lesbian, abortion promoting entity by a long shot.

I think we're talking semantics and "perception". A PR problem I guess, but hardly worth all the hysteria exhibited in the lead article to this thread. Even the hysterical author of this piece slips and admits he had an unpleasant run-in with only"a handful of militant feminists".

[The Giant Apricots]

From the FFL at Geocities website you listed:

"Abortion, in the final analysis, works to the advantage of the exploitative male, not for the female.... Abortion is a male sexual fantasy come true." --Susan Maronek

The other quotes are along the same line.

The problem with such contentions is that they fail miserably to make the critical distinction between pro-choice men, to whom they fairly apply, and pro-life men, to whom they are gender-racism.

The FFL crew needs to stop lumping all men together: that is sexist beyond measure.

Also, if the FFL want to contend that the good and bad sides of human nature are not respectively specific to men and women, they need to acknowledge "exploitative women" as often as they acknowledge "the exploitative male", per the quote above.

[Lorianne]

I agree. I could provide you with some websites more even handed about the pain of men in abortion and pro-Life men's ethical/moral opposition to abortion if you like. I think men and women's role is acknowledged in a more even handed way overall in the pro-Life feminist front.

[steve-b]

We are victims of a campaign of psychological warfare carried out by the CIA and foundations through the media, government and education.

It teaches them to fear and compete with men

"The other team is full of 400-pound gorillas who will stomp you into the mud like bugs! Now get out there and beat 'em!"

arrested development, and obsession with sex

the same university was on the front page of The Winnipeg Sun for teaching lesbian masturbation

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Hartley Richardson, a longtime leader of the Manitoba business community, is a member of the Trilateral Commission.

[cue scary minor chord and evil laugh]

[Arioch7]

Agreed. LOL at the example of the Congressional Womens Committee.

The thing is that NOW and the American Feminist movement are synonomous with the "Feminist," movement. I went to college in Boston and because I was a Republican, the Feminist groups on campus said I was AGAINST Women voting. They said I was a racist, and even my Liberal Government Professor said they were out of line.

I laughed it off but to be honest, I was hurt by this mantra of "Anti-Women," and "Anti-Minority," label I got tagged with.

The above is WHY so many of us are against Feminism... it is because of the "Groups".

I never ONCE voiced my political opinions, I merely said I was a Republican. They said I wanted to take away a womens right to vote and that I was a racist. I NEVER even STATED my views, they just heard I was a Republican and that is what they said.

I can not prove it but I lived it so I know it happened. My business partner is a woman and she kicks ass. If it was up to the "Feminist" majority, I would be blackballed because I was a Republican.

I know that equating the "Feminist" movement with lesbianism might be wrong but I have stood first hand and listened to thier charges against me...

You dont like men strong-arming you, I do not like Feminist groups strong-arming ME.

I am posting this because I know that you will get a hard time with this thread and I am trying to explain why. As I have said, individual women are one thing, I am subserviant to one. The group crap has got to go.

Unless you think that a college class is a good time to scream at a guy that happens to be Republican. I know you dont so please try to see my point.

[weikel]

Great point.

[weikel]

I can't believe people are defending feminism on FR everyone says life was better in ther 50's( im too young) when women to put it bluntly knew their place as petunia said their are strong women who are exceptions but in general women are happier with their home, man, and family the happiest women I know are housewives.

[The Giant Apricots]

I would be interested in those websites, if you include them in a post to me on this thread. And I have no problem with the FFL mercilessly trashing pro-choice men, so long as they always make that distinction. Indeed, given that such a distinction is always made, I'd welcome that happening, because I'm sick to death of the "pro-choice" men being labeled the kind, gentle, sensitive, loving ones. They are not.

[weikel]

True on all points I hate political correctness.

[petuniasevan]

My grandmother is one of those "strong women". She married against her parents' wishes a man her father's age. They had to go to Vegas - and this was 1939!

She had already one child (my mom) when WWII came along; otherwise, she would have been a "Rosie the Riveter". Instead, she did scrap drives and planted a victory garden.

She went on to have three more kids, the last one, Chris, her only son. Chris is severely handicapped (cerebral palsy). At this time grandpa was drinking WAY too much, and grandma had to work to make ends meet by working outside the home - this is 40-45 years ago.

Grandma cared for Chris with the help of Grandpa's brother, and sometimes my dad and mom. Grandpa was getting too old to do much, and the alcohol didn't help. In the early 70's Grandma put him in a rest home. He died in 1977.

By 1980 Grandma had to make the wrenching decision to put Chris in a care facility full-time. I'm sure she didn't do it for any selfish reasons; she was getting older and couldn't care for her full-grown son anymore.

In all my years I've never heard Grandma complain about her lot in life. THAT's a strong woman for you.

[weikel]

Feminist hate men thats the nature of their movement its totalitarian, anti male, and against the natural order.