Another Woman Who Doesn't Like Feminism. . .

. . . and that's not all she doesn't like!

She writes under the name of 'Male Chauvinist Woman', and her blog is called Female Misogynist. That title says it all. It translates as: "A woman who doesn't like WOMEN".

Whoa!!

But wait, it gets even better. To top it all off. . ( are you ready for this?) . . . she's a lesbian! Yes, I said a LESBIAN!

That's what I said, folks! Don't bother rubbing your eyes - you caught it right the first time! A lesbian! Now doesn't that truly bake the cake? Eh?

A lesbian - who not only loathes feminism worse than a tug-load of squirming maggots in a rotting carcass, but . . . doesn't think so freakin' much of women either!

Lord-a-mercy! Ain't that a caution?? A lesbian who doesn't like women! Witness:

"The difference between me and women like Elizabeth Cady Stanton or Simone de Beauvoir is that I recognize the great value to society of normal women. For most of history, all women, including the handful of geniuses, were forced into the role of ordinary women. Nowadays, ordinary women are driven out of the home, where they could be happy and make a valuable contribution to society, and expected to live the demanding lives that only a few dozen women per century find congenial.

"Had I lived in a saner era - any other era in history, really - I would still be a male chauvinist, but I would not be a misogynist. I would not have had havoc wreaked on my life by women bereft of the support of male authority helping them to behave morally. I would not have to watch as women gleefully destroyed civilization before my eyes. Nor would I be constantly plagued by hearing women repeat the feminist nonsense they've gotten from magazines or from their professors, having no understanding of the tremendous harm these notions of theirs are doing. In short, women of sane eras do not deserve to be hated, though they remain inferior to men.

"In patriarchal eras, women are useful members of society and deserve considerable admiration. In feminist eras, all women can do is destroy, and they deserve only distrust."

Mind you, I'm the Counter-Feminist, and I do have some notoriety for flailing at feminism like John Henry with his hammer! But there is one thing I never do - I never bash women. I may sometimes call individual females to account for their shitty behavior, but I do NOT utter global pejoratives as per the female sex en masse! I never toss around words like skank, slut or slag in other than a hypothetical, intellectualized tonality. I have a cast-iron policy, tersely stated in the seven-point Counter-Feminist Platform: no woman-bashing! Why? Because I deem this counter-productive and politically not astute. I define my task narrowly: to wreck feminism. That is how I choose to conduct my agency. And I honestly don't believe it is wise or necessary to wreck women into the bargain!

Some may wish to cite, as inculpatory evidence, that I publish a blog called Women Doing Lousy Things. They may undertake to convince themselves or others that this blog and its contents, prima facie, demonstrate a misogynistic bias on the part of the author. And they are welcome to argue that case with me personally, but I caution them ahead of time that they will LOSE. And more to that, they will get their tail-feathers roasted.

So much by way of digression. As concerns our featured artist of the day, let me stress that Male Chauvinist Woman (MCW), holds the female sex in somewhat lower regard than do I. And yet I cannot in good conscience fault her for this - nor do I feel entitled to do so. MCW's conclusions are doubtless built upon a fund of life experience which I, in the capacity of my male office, am not and indeed cannot, be privy. It is possible, at least in theory, that MCW knows a thing or four concerning my female fellow-citizens of which I have no inkling, and that I, being less informed in this domain of knowledge, would do wisely in deferring to such expert testimony.

It is also worth remarking, that the diversity of authentic women's voices is here a point at issue. Who am I, as a privileged male citizen, to deprecate a female voice or question the truth which it might convey? Who am I to scoff or disbelieve? It behooves me to shut the hell up and listen sensitively!

Moreover, as I have remarked previously and shall here reiterate: It is no responsibility of mine, or of men "collectively", to oppose misogyny! The insistence that any man, or men generally, should do so, is feminism's way of passing the buck and refusing to answer for itself. And in our presently-referenced case, where the misogyny is of female provenance, that principle operates with a poignant double-irony.

Finally, I would be remiss if I didn't put on my counter-feminist preacher's hat and cut loose with some good old time prediction! Well no, actually, the prediction per se is "old hat". What I find interesting here is the fulfillment of prophecy in a way that I didn't predict! I'm talking about something called the misogynistic shift - which I first described a little over a year ago. The "shift" in question refers to a statistical shifting of the male attitude spectrum in a misogynistic direction as the ineluctable outcome of feminist poison spreading through the social ecology. What I did NOT anticipate, was misogynistic shifting on the part of females! Damn it, but this might force me to write a whole new thesis!

In conclusion, although I would not second the voice of MCW as regards the valuation of women, I have paradoxically no alternative but wish MCW all the best, and welcome her and others like her as worthy and useful allies in this present condition of political warfare slouching toward Armageddon.

Go now, and savor:

http://malechauvinist.blogspot.com/


----------------------
EDIT: MCW, have fun with the feminist trolls which this might send your way. . . ;-)