* * *
Feminism will soon be exposed for the destructive ideology that it is.
The bad news is that women are still being heavily indoctrinated with the view that the 70's feminists achieved great things for women.
And, as we know, they did not.
For example, one only has to look back over the past few centuries to realise that when women wanted to go out to work, they did!
If anything, 70s feminism retarded the progress of women with their gender-divisive policies and their family-breaking agendas.
Life is much more pleasant now for women both at work and in the home because of the progress in science and technology - which had nothing to do with feminism and everything to do with the natures and obsessions mostly of clever men - and because ordinary people were gradually able to loosen the grip over them exerted by the traditional sources of authority e.g. the state, the church, psychoanalysts and employers.
Millions of individual people chipped away at achieving these ends, in their own little way, and many other groups also took significant parts in the battle - e.g. trades unions, students, gays, racial groups, and, most influential of all, pop stars.
And yes, the feminists.
But their agenda was totally selfish and divisive, as it still is today.
Indeed, if the west had not been forced to spend so many billions upon billions of dollars having to cope with the negative consequences of feminism, we would have made much more progress by now.
The streets are less safe for women than they were fifty years ago. There is more violence against women. Women are just as overworked now as they ever were. They are less likely to be able to hold on to their marriages. They are less able to afford not to have to work if they are married with children. And they are less likely to be cared for properly in old age.
It is also the case that I was actually alive well before the arrival of the 70s feminists. And there is absolutely no question in my mind that, for example, gays and blacks were, at the very least, often frowned upon - to put it mildly - but the same was not true of women.
For example, here in the UK during my childhood, young boys of the 50s and 60s were being brought up to respect women (open doors for them etc) to treat them kindly, and to take pains to look after their interests. This was the message that was constantly relayed to the growing youth from every quarter in the land - e.g. the media, the churches, the schools.
Nowadays, this might all sound rather silly, but the point is that women in those pre-feminist days were not seen as inferior beings to men, they were simply seen as different, more fragile, and worthy of greater consideration than men - and with definite talents of their own.
But this is not the image of the past that the feminists have ever wanted to portray.
For example, they would prefer to describe the men of the 50s and 60s who brought up their youths in this silly way as 'oppressors of women'!
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Think about it.
"Now you look here young AH. You open that door for that Lady. Offer your seat to that one over there. Don't you ever raise your hand against a woman. Go and help that woman carry her shopping bags."
And yet, according to feminists, these were the men of the 50s and 60s who hated women and oppressed them!
This is nothing but a pretty disgusting slur - and one that is still propagated throughout the west by feminists, women's studies teachers and the politically correct, all of whom continue to do their best to undermine and demonise men.
Can anyone really believe that women in those days were seen, by men, as being of a lower status than men? Open the door for her. Give up your seat to her. Pull the chair back for her so that she can be seated properly at the table without any effort on her part.. Stand up when she walks into the room. Rush over to the other side of the car and open the door so that she can get out. Walk on the side nearer the (dangerous) cars when walking together on the sidewalk. Raise your hat and bow slightly should you accidentally meet in the street.
On and on it went.
Also, as a teenager during the late sixties, I, needless to say, made a great many friends - such was my beguiling nature. And I got to know many families.
In not one did I know of a father who ruled the roost at home.
This is not to say that this did not happen, and that there were no homes wherein the fathers did, in fact, rule their roosts. (Indeed, since that time, I have met quite a few people for whom this was definitely the case.) But my point is that this was clearly not the rule, by any means. And that, for every man who might have terrorised his family, there were probably just as many women, if not more, who did the same.
And so the notion that the husbands of the 50s and 60s were happily oppressing their wives until the feminists came along in the 70s is utter nonsense. It is pure fabrication.
Now, for all you youngsters out there who might still have some doubts about this, take the following leaf out of my book and do some research while sipping a beer.
Being something of an obsessive anti-feminist, whenever, perchance, a bit of old film footage appears on the TV screen, for any reason, my mind automatically disconnects from whatever topic happens to be under scrutiny at the time, and I focus, instead, solely on examining the faces and the demeanours of any men and women who appear in it, in order to answer the following questions.
Who looks happier in these old pieces of film - the men or the women?
Which gender appears to be the more relaxed, the more comfortable, the less harassed, the less worn, the better cared for?
Well, look for yourself while sipping that beer.
Keep your eyes open.
And see what you see!
This article was first published on Angry Harry's website.