The Center for the Advancement of Female Narcissism
Here's another women's advocacy org that not only sets women on a pedestal, but continually upgrades that pedestal like the newest model of Saturn or Lexus. Odd, when you reflect that the canonical grumble by the Old School Feminists of the 60s and early 70s was about "putting women on a pedestal". Those old-fangled libbers in their granny dresses thought it was a bad thing to do that!But hey, feminism should stay current and learn from experience, yes? And if it works out that a pedestal is after all an empowering place for women to park themselves, then by all means change the rules to stay at the winning end of the game! (And never fear, you can reactivate the old rules any time you need them, the way my Macintosh can toggle between OS9 and OSX!)
"OUR WORK :We capture women’s top priorities and concerns and put them at the top of the national agenda through broad-based multimedia coverage. Because women’s issues are everyone's issue."But whoa! Hold your horses for a second!! ARE women's issues everyone's issue? Everyone's? Mind you, I'm being a methodological skeptic! Or a devil's advocate if you prefer. I am still entitled to do that; there is still no law against it. And after all, it is theoretically possible to take exception to the statement that "women's issues are everyone's issues".
For example, if you belong to MGTOW or the Ghost Nation, you would undoubtedly take exception to it. You would almost certainly not agree that women's issues are "your" issue - quite the reverse!
You might wonder, for honestly considered reasons, whether "women's top priorities and concerns" truly deserve to be "at the top of the national agenda". My heavens but that's a lofty podium! The rationale behind such a prioritizing of women's issues mightn't be the least bit self-evident to you, and the lack of consideration for your considered viewpoint would very likely trigger a cynical attitude. Moreover, repeated exposure to such multimedia mantras over the course of years might even deepen this cynicism to a profundity bordering on ice-cold nihilistic indifference. A chilling thought, yes? Certainly, it would be the very reverse of what those propagandists had purported to intend.
But look now! I can demolish the charade quite simply and with very little effort. Indeed, I will let their very own words do the work! You will note, elsewhere on the advancewomen.org home page, a variation upon the final sentence in the passage cited above:
"Women's Issues are America's issue."Very well; what does it mean to say that women's issues (plural) are America's issue (singular)? Seriously - what the hell are these people talking about? I don't doubt there is a subtext - don't we all have a subtext? But I would take them to task for their blithe presumption that anybody who reads their sentence ought to swallow that subtext as if signing a contract without reading the fine print.
A moment's consideration will uncloak the fallacy. It is not a bit clear what "women's issues" are: just try to compose a list they would all agree upon! It is likewise unclear who or what "America" is, which problematizes the assignment of secondary ownership for the aforesaid "list". Finally, and most tellingly, are women's issues the ONLY "issue" which "America" has got? Hasn't "America" got other "issues" - in fact, heaps of them?
Certainly, I could allow that women's issues might be ONE issue which America has got - among plenty of others: for example, men's issues!
And this plentitude of American issues constitutes the nub of the difficulty. When I repeat slowly to myself that pesky little sentence that "women's issues are America's issue", I know instinctively that somebody is fobbing something upon me which I am under no moral obligation to accept. Yet what infernal labor it is, to render that feeling into words in a way that will impress significant urgency upon the minds of others! Very few people incline naturally to the tedious sport of hair-splitting, yet there are moments when such tedium must not be avoided.
Happily, this is not one of those occasions, for I am pleased that I can do that job very simply! Consider the following, which is an edited version of the sentence we are considering:
"Women's issues are a portion of America's issues."This emendation, as you may note, generates a more accurate account of the world by furnishing additional information. It does not in the least falsify the original, but to the contrary renders it more complete and more objective in its reportage of the facts. I mean that it does not falsify but rather truthifies the original version. Therefore, on the face of it, you might think that the 'Center for the Advancement of Women' would much prefer to print the amended version on their website. Wouldn't they desire to be more more complete and more objective? Why on earth should they choose to print this:
"Women's Issues are America's issue."When they could just as easily print THIS:
"Women's issues are a portion of America's issues."Mind you, I am not asserting that the first version is less truthful, and that the second is more truthful. Not a bit! To the contrary: I am merely asserting that the second version contains more truth. Do you see the difference?
And to save my mortal soul, I cannot fathom why those 'Center for the Advancement of Women' people would not gladly, willingly, joyfully exchange their present version of the sentence for the upgraded version I have constructed. I'm scratching my head and I just can't figure it out!
Mind you, I am not asserting that these are dishonest people. Not a bit! To the contrary: I am merely asserting that their words lack honesty. Do you see the difference?
----------------------------------------
The address again:
http://tinyurl.com/232sy3
**UPDATE: The slogan "women's issues are America's issue" has disappeared from the CFAW website between the time I started writing this article, and the time I published it. This is to certify that the slogan was present on the site roughly a month ago.
The short paragraph which I quoted (beginning with "OUR WORK") has been modified as follows: "OUR WORK: We capture women’s realities and top priorities and bring them front and center in the national discussion through broad-based multimedia coverage. Because women’s issues are everyone's issue."
=============================================
**Well. I'm thinking that these subtle changes were politically motivated, and tied to Hillary Clinton's recent campaign disasters. . . :-(
posted by Fidelbogen at 8:55 PM
5 Comments:
The bigger problem is not the they are only championing women's issues. The problem is that they are involving the government in personal issues. They will set up a big state(government will be responsible for fixing women's top issues) that will be so misandrist to the point that men will push back (using the courts =government) and demand their share (from the government.) thus the totalitarians get what they want - everyone runs to the government to solve their personal issues. Thus the government becomes in charge of every aspect of our personal lives. Domination by the elites of the masses is the real endgame.
Similarly, There is a group online called Mom's Rising(pro 'women's' issues again.) Initially, their webpage stated their mission included(among a long list of socialist programs like gov't sponsored warm, loving affordable day care - which would cost the tax payers a fortune and be cold and uncaring) "the dismantling of the capitalist system." I wish I'd saved it as it was shockingly blatant but obviously someone in PR suggested they change it. They have since endorsed Obama.
-mandy
Fidelbogen, you ask whether I see the difference between "the second version is more truthful" and "the second version contains more truth."
I confess that I do not.
- Egghead
That's why it's called feMEnism. ME ME ME ME ME!!!!!!
I looked over the site and do see a push for a ME society.
Advancement of women COULD be seen as advancement of America if they would only speak up about the stuff they do for communities and societies which include men and women. (if they do)
My favourite women who do work for the advancement of women are the Pacific Island women.
What did they do with the money they received through feminists funding from other countries and the UN?
They used it do provide clean water to their communities. They used it to promote Health and used it to look after all their people in the simple things we take for granted.
In fact, they are the only ones I know of who accept and provide services for men who are DV victims from women. Pacific Island women ARE violent (just like all other country's women are) and they are very open about it. Not all women of course but then not all men either.
Poverty is what the good women in this are going after. African women can help their communities a lot with the funding the UN gives out to women's advancement.
Women's advancement are NOT things like 'keep parents outside of decisions with their children'. And parents shouldn't be paying for these feminists to fight against them through taxes given to these types of groups. Nor are they about discriminating against men. And nor should men pay taxes to groups that want to destroy them. Nor against fathers, nor against men in education, nor in DV, nor in false rape.
If only the advancement of women was honest, we would not be seeing such a backlash through their discrimination of men and families.
If only the advancement of women wasn't about the destruction of men, we would be able to do some wonderful things together.
If feminists don't start looking at things in a scientific way and continue to destroy men and their children, then we will not see any more given to the advancement of women and their families. And all those third world women will not be able to change their circumstances which no Western Woman can even comprehend.
This is one of the saddest things I have ever witnessed in my life.
ALL women are narcissistic. Narcissism could almost be used as a definition of the feminine - especially in the west. Women for example bear children, the next generation and yet whilst claiming to be nurturing, caring and responsive the truth is that the very drive to reproduce is narcisistic, ie. it is done for the benefit of the woman - not the as yet unborn or even unconceived child. Lest you should doubt this how many women would hand over their child to someone who could raise it better, provide more for it and offer it better prospects and a better future. The answer I would expect to be almost none, the reason is that they have children for their OWN needs, certainly not those of the child.
A similar situation is the way all women wear make up, supposedly to enhance their appearance. If you ask any woman why they wear make up the answer is invariably "I wear it for myself." The absurdity of this is that the woman is the ONLY person who cannot see the effect of the make up without the benefit of a mirror. The truth is they wear make up to impress OTHERS, it is harder to imagine a more false image, one of the very essences of narcissism.
A fiction has been developed that 75% of all narcissists are men. This was first propogated by a certain "self proclaimed" narcissist - this figure seems to have been conjured up from nowhere and yet is quoted repeatedly on all the sites on the internet relating to natcissism. If we read some of the "woe is me" forums on many of these sites we find that probably 99% of the "complainers" are women compaining about their partners (or ex partners) behaving in exactly the same way that the vast majority of women do as a matter of course. They also all seem to complain that their mothers are (were) narcissists also. If all these mothers are narcissists surely the majority of narcissists are women.
The reason so few men compain about narcisstic wives and spouses is that its just the way all woman are anyway.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home