News    |     Forum    |     Humor    |     Blog    |     Video    |     Stratfor    |     Idiot Awards    |    Links    |     September 20, 2020   

Guest Column

Andrew McCarthy:

Ruth Bader Ginsburg's Death Means Trump Should Pivot to This Surprising Strategy
more >
Conservative Links


American Conservative Union

Drudge Report

Right Bias news

Conservative Community

Fox News

National Review
RightWing News



No Dissent Allowed Other articles by this author  

The Reign of the Feminazis
Nancy Morgan
August 22, 2007

Rush Limbaugh earned the eternal enmity of feminists when, years ago, he coined the phrase 'Feminazis' to describe today's' liberated feminists. Rush has been proven, once again, to be ahead of his time. When reviewing the state of feminism today, one can only marvel at his prescience.
Feminism has evolved. Not unlike the evolution of the far left, feminism has turned into a militant, no dissent allowed, alliance of shrill, decidedly un-feminine harpies. The self-anointed leaders of this evolved brand of feminism have arbitrarily declared themselves 'The Experts' on all things relating to the female sex. Period. End of discussion.
Despite their lack of credibility and an increasingly bizarre agenda, a complaisant media has ensured that feminists still have enormous clout. And they have no qualms about using their clout to utterly destroy any heretic who dares disagree with their basic premise.
Their basic premise goes something like this:

Anything women do is OK and anyone who disagrees is a misogynist. Women, including lesbians, transgendered and self-described 'women' who still possess male DNA, are not only equal to men, they are to be regarded as the same as men.
Women are 'oppressed,' victims of the (white) male patriarchy and, by golly, they have the right to censor anyone who disagrees with this settled fact. Oh, and homosexuality is biological. Even though scientists have yet to find that elusive 'gay' gene, feminists have decreed that homosexuality is not a choice, therefore all gays and lesbians and transgendered, etc., etc., are victims. 
These new, evolved feminists still see themselves as 'speaking truth to power', long after they have achieved their goal of emasculating at least half the white males in America. (Or, at least, scaring them into submission)
The latest heretic to run afoul of feminazis is one J. Michael Bailey, a psychologist at Northwestern University, who had the audacity to publish a book in 2003 entitled, 'The Man Who Would be King.' In it, he brazenly disputed a core element of the new, evolved feminism, to wit: Maybe cross-dressing males are motivated by " erotic fascination with themselves as women."
This theory is in direct contravention with a core feminist tenet, that male cross-dressers are victims of a biological mistake. In other words, instead of being perverts, they're victims. And feminazis have decided that these 'victims' are in need of empowerment (liberal speak for validation). Supplied by feminists, of course.
J. Michael Bailey's four year 'punishment' by reigning feminists is the subject of a fascinating article in today's New York Times. Well worth the read. 
J. Bailey now ranks right up there with Lawrence Sumners, late President of Harvard, who also had the audacity to challenge a cherished belief of feminists. For daring to imply that men and women might have differing inclinations for math and science, Sumners was pilloried, fried, and hung out to dry.
Despite his cowardly capitulation in the form of numerous mea culpas (despite the fact that his comment was verifiably true) Sumners was forced to resign from Harvard. Adding insult to injury, Harvard further capitulated to the reigning feminazis in the form of $50 million bucks - added to the coffers of the 'women's study' program. All in all, a pretty tasty meal for feminists, especially since others paid the price.
No wonder men are quaking in their boots. No wonder many men (and women) think twice before challenging even the most crackpot theories put forth by these women. No wonder 'metro-sexuality' is becoming a viable career option for formerly masculine men.

Learn to cry, keep your job. Parrot the feminist line and gain immediate media attention and the valued title of 'pundit.' Wear your sensitivity on your sleeve, and pretty soon you'll be wearing Gucci. A good living for those who agree with the party line. Sound familiar?
These examples are but a small part of a growing trend on the left. From feminists to environmentalists to race hustlers, any dissent from prevailing orthodoxy, as defined by liberals, is akin to blasphemy. And met with instant punishment. Self-anointed 'spokesmen' who blithely don the mantle of 'expert' declare a position, quickly announce that the issue is settled, and then retreat to their war rooms to mete out punishment to anyone who dares challenge their wisdom.
So far, these tactics have worked quite well. Myriad examples of broken men, ruined careers, social ostracization and threat of same have served to stifle most dissenting views. Threats of 'racism' serve to silence any critics of bad behaviour by blacks. Actual loss of grant money and reputations serve to silence global warming 'deniers'. Actual loss of jobs accompany any dissent with feminists. The list goes on.
The good news is, these 'experts' have been lulled into thinking that they are, indeed, the last word on any given subject. They've proven their power and there is no-one in their orbit who thinks any differently.

What they haven't reckoned with is that the 98% of Americans who don't belong to their elite club aren't buying what they're selling. These 'experts' just haven't figured it out yet.
Old axioms usually hold true. Specifically, what goes around, comes around. I'll go out on a limb and predict that the last word has yet to be written. Any dissent on that?
Nancy Morgan is a columnist and a news editor for She lives in South Carolina.

 Share This Story
   Digg     Delicious     NewsVine     Reddit

Posted by SummerBob, 8-22-07

Here's a good example of what you're talking about. A recent law called the International Marriage Broker Regulation Act of 2005 (IMBRA) puts draconian restrictions on the freedom of countless men and women to seek friendship and potential romance with foreign companions. The language of this law and most commentary on it portray foreign friendship seekers who use personals columns as participating in "sex trafficking", "trafficking in 'mail-order' brides", "prostitution" and "marriage brokering". Marriages that result from these communications are portrayed as "sex slavory" and "servitude". Unconfirmed and unfounded claims of "skyrocketing domestic abuse rates" among these couples have been preached as gospel truth. Having married through a so-called "marriage broker" myself, I can testify that their services are no different than your local newspaper personals column. This is just another example of feminism out of control.


Contact Us    Advertise With Us
Rightbias provides provocative articles and a conduit to conservative news, Breaking News, Media News, Political Humor, media, sports News, culture news, studies etc.
Search Engine Optimization by