The initial feminist movement succeeded because it had clear objectives and lauded the virtues of personal responsibility. Today’s version is a disjointed and divisive faction of the far left that wallows in victimhood.
In one of her most famous speeches, the late suffragist Susan B. Anthony addressed a crowd in San Francisco: “I declare to you that woman must not depend upon the protection of a man, but must be taught to protect herself, and there I take my stand.”
Anthony’s message in 1871 asserted that women deserve equal voices in society, which included the right to vote. To achieve this, she called for women to first learn self-reliance and independence. She was a tireless pioneer of the first wave of feminism that eventually secured voting rights for American women and sparked an international movement.
That initial feminist movement, or ‘first wave feminism’, succeeded in its aims because its leaders had clear objectives, a language to define those objectives, and a unified group to carry them out. The vocal leaders of the time spoke of independence, responsibility, courage and hard work – virtues that were deeply appreciated in America. They didn’t reach their goals quickly or easily, but they knew where they were going and how to get there. Thanks to the suffragettes, we have the 19th Amendment here in the United States.
Today’s version of feminism, by stark contrast, looks more like a disconnected political faction of the far left, with no real tangible goals except to drum up anger and divide people through identity politics. This new faction shrugs off personal responsibility in favor of a perpetual victimhood mentality that blames a vague ‘patriarchy’ for women’s problems, with a contempt for white men in particular. In their view, men are the problem, capitalism should be dismantled, and everyone and everything is racist.
In 2017, the Women’s March, which is now considered the head of the modern-day feminist movement, was born not out of the need to help women gain any particular rights we don’t have (that’s because, as we all know, women in America have the exact same rights as men under the law). No, the Women’s March formed as a reaction to the election of former President Donald J. Trump, a man the executive director of the march lamented would be “cruel to women.” In what way he would be cruel, she didn’t say, but she does go into a lengthy lament about him on the organization’s website.
Also on rt.com
‘Feminist’ bookstore BLASTED for ‘sexist’ decision to remove books by bestselling ‘female’ author who turned out to be three men
Besides an emotional rant about the “disgraceful” nature of the Trump administration, you’ll find a page on the Women’s March website that lists the organization’s missions and “unity principles.” These principles encompass everything from “reproductive rights,” “LGBTQIA rights,” and “immigration rights,” to “environmental justice” and “disability rights.” Of course, to round it all out, throughout the site they name “white supremacy” and “systemic racism” as plagues on society.
I’m still not sure what exactly ‘environmental justice’ is, or how women are bound by ‘structural impediments’, as they claim. But I know that all of this is a political power grab, using the guise of ‘women’s rights’ as its cover. I’m also fairly certain that hating a president is not a women’s rights issue, since millions of women voted for Donald Trump, after all. Twice, in fact.
Even if some of the issues they name were exclusive to women, today’s leftist feminists are not relatable to everyday women. Firstly, they don’t share a common language with the majority of women in their own homeland, much less with women around the world. They don’t seem to be able to define what a woman even is, for starters, so how can they claim to be fighting for their rights? I may not be a feminist, but I do know that for any group to achieve a desired outcome, they must first share a common language. They need to be able to agree what words like ‘woman’ mean.
I will contend that some feminists who call themselves ‘radical feminists’ at least acknowledge that ‘woman’ is a sex class that can easily be defined as adult human female. But the majority of vocal feminists in academia and in the media today declare that ‘woman’ is an identity. They profess over and over that ‘trans women are women’, too, so of course Rachel Levine – a biological male who was married with children only a few years ago – is a woman. Bruce Jenner? Also a woman. Because in their view, ‘woman’ is an identity and not a biological reality.
If anyone can be a woman, then there is no longer an argument for women’s concerns to be based on biological sex. But if women are not a sex, but an identity, then why would they need special protection? If being a woman is a mere role that anyone can play – or opt out of at any time – that would mean the state of being female is a choice. But why would anyone choose to be the oppressed gender they claim women surely are?
Also on rt.com
Body Positive movement has nothing to do with concern for obesity levels – it’s a typical woke neglection of truth as ‘unfair’
Of course, back in the real world, most women – and men – fully understand that a woman is simply an adult human female, who was born with a female body. Fortunately so, because without that basic understanding, there would be no basis upon which to fight for the end of female genital mutilation in places like Nigeria. Incidentally, I’m pretty sure everyone there can define what a woman is.
How did American women in 2021 become so far removed from the hard work of the 19th century suffragettes? To answer that, we have to go back to the second wave of feminism and the 1960s sexual revolution, when imported German Marxism reared its ugly head.
Thanks in part to Marxist radicals like activist Kate Millett, author of the 1960s book ‘Sexual Politics’, American values were attacked far and wide. Our academic institutions were infiltrated by extremists of Millett’s ilk who set out to destroy everything from the nuclear family to the concept of monogamy. Kate Millett finally succumbed to her mental illness, but not before poisoning an entire generation with her teachings.
The 1960s revolution didn’t achieve anything for women, but at least back then, they knew what a woman was. Even so, second wave Marxist-based feminism created a wound in our society, and that wound has been festering ever since.
We’re living in a time where we have, for far too long, allowed the cancer of Marxist ideology to creep into nearly all of our American institutions. This is dangerous to both women and men, since Marxism was responsible for the suffering and deaths of tens of millions of people during the 20th century. You know what they say about not learning from history.
Karl Marx was a totalitarian who used the guise of ‘liberation’ to divide and conquer. He called for the destruction of the family. He hated religion, especially Christianity. He loathed free market economics because they give working people choice and a voice, and like all communists, he wanted freedom of choice only for the ruling class, leaving the masses to serfdom. Marx is responsible for internment camps and religious persecution. He contributed to the genocide of entire nations, many of which are still struggling to recover after the atrocities Marx glorified. Venezuela, Cuba, Communist China, and North Korea all have governments that were inspired by Marxism, and all have starved their people and set up forced labor camps and prisons for dissenters.
Far from an ideology that uplifts women (it’s no wonder that two of Marx’s daughters committed suicide), the goal of Marxism is to foment anger among the working class and between the sexes in order to tear down Western society entirely so that it can easily be enslaved by the ruling class. Abolishing the very definition of womanhood would have been celebrated by Marx. To that end, the Women’s March has been honest about its goals, even if they don’t seem wholly aware of it. Perhaps they simply don’t know their history.
Also on rt.com
Cross-dressing ad fiasco shows that advertisers should spare us the tiresome woke sermonising
All of this raises the question: Do women in the Western world – particularly American women – still need feminism? Especially a brand of feminism that is taking cues from the teachings of deranged (fortunately deceased) communists? And what rights, under the law, do women not have that calls for such extremism? If women do face sex-based discrimination, what is the solution then? The answer for all of the aforementioned is already given to us. It’s a matter of holding on to it and defending it. It’s called America.
American women have more freedom than women anywhere else in the world. We aren’t reliant on any government system to provide for us; we are given the opportunity to provide and care for ourselves. That’s the beauty of a free country and of free market capitalism. It is no coincidence that capitalist countries like the US, the UK, and other Western nations are also the freest countries, and the best places for women to succeed. But freedom isn’t free. In a free society, personal responsibility is required. And in 2021, this seems to frighten some people, which might explain this renewed push for socialism.
Here is the truth. Yes, many of us will fail. We won’t always get what we want, and most will have to materially live with much less than others. There is no guaranteed outcome with freedom, only guaranteed opportunity. And the way you succeed, whether you’re a man or a woman, is to first take ownership over yourself and your choices. Blaming others, or blaming a system, is to surrender your fate to the hands of someone else. It means you’re helpless. But in reality, we are far from helpless here.
Women in America have the right to bear arms and physically defend ourselves the same as men. Our Second Amendment gives us not only the liberty to defend ourselves from criminals who would cause us bodily harm, but to defend ourselves against government overreach at the merciless hands of men like the late Karl Marx. One could easily argue that gun rights have equalized more women than all three waves of feminism combined.
In conclusion, maybe it’s time to get back to Susan B. Anthony’s original ideals, and permanently bury Marx and all he stood for – especially the destruction of the family.
Also on rt.com
‘Very difficult years’: Renowned philosophy professor Kathleen Stock quits Sussex University after harassment by trans activists
I propose that alongside – not behind, nor in front of – men, we hold fast to our freedoms by defending them. I propose that we reject outright any ideology that seeks to destroy our society by separating us by sex, race, or class.
Instead of looking outwardly at the world with angry demands, I propose that we instead look inwardly at how we can better ourselves. That we create, build, and contribute to our families and communities in whatever ways we can. I propose that women and men together remember and assert that our rights come not from man or government, but from God. Because in doing all of this, only then are we the true equals the suffragettes worked so hard for us to become. And there I take my stand.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.