CBMW article: Feminism the culprit for family breakup ....

There is truth on both sides and it begs serious attention because the core of whole societies are at stake, take UK for example,

SHARIA LAW...

ruudvermeij hits on a very good and Truthful, and very dangerous point...in Europe, and I'm sure he knows this, Marxist feminism, has done so much damage, one, yes, to emasculate men, in the legal structure which yes, does erode the rights of the family--and where its dangerous and where, Dobson, is correct, is for the sole purpose of,

the nanny state taking ownership of the children and therefore, molding children into obedient little cogs who will question not authority of the state...whether its right wing fascism or left wing fascism, its all the same and works for the same ends [maybe different means but the ends are the same] and yes,

Marxism, in its most extreme interpretation, a.k.a. Stalinism, hijacked feminism. And I say hijacked because the feminist movement in its conception was Christian Then liberal, the Marxists HATED liberal feminism because it was woman centered AND maternal centered, meaning, preserving the family unit outside of State control.

However, on the catch side of things, feminism, is also, the main threat to, Islam and theocratic patriarchal societies, this is why in Islamic societies where political Islam, fundamentalism [and same can be said of Christian fundamentalism and/or a race supremacy type of government fundamentalism],

Unless, that feminism, can be 'controlled' by a hegemony and centralized party/ideology platform. This is what communists do, they are experts at it, Stalin took many of Kollanti's theories and used them to advance the State, at the demise, however, of feminism, as did Mao. Mao did the same thing but Mao was far more nationalist, hence the influence of nationalist communism to the extreme in N Korea.

All fascism, utilizes feminism to destroy the core and basis of the western philosophical and political systems, because that feminism, if Women centered AND that is centered around Women's Autonomy outside the 'rule of man', is a real threat,

because the one thing that autonomous liberal feminism has with those opposed to fascism, totalitarianism and authoritarianism, religious or otherwise, is the spirit of individual human rights and freedom. So, the authoritarians knew, to crush the individual rights movement, that yes, is also, the rights of individuals to choose their families and their destiny, they would have to control or completely do away with,

feminism, because women are at the core, of society, meaning, they are the carriers of children, they want peace [why nationalists hate women because women will work with other women for peace, for the safety of their children], they are the preservers of culture, economics because they either work or they consume, so forth. [resources] Liberal feminism taken to the extremes can also be detrimental to societies, and Lenin did a good analysis on this, because the extreme of liberal feminism contributes to a social hedonism and deconstruct of family values, for example,

one of the main reasons Stalin cracked down on the progresses of women's rights under Bolshevism was because of the thousands upon thousands of orphaned children, abandoned due to divorce, it was men, btw, that filed for the divorces, 70%, leaving peasant agrarian women with no way to provide for their seven + children, leaving many children to starve, and the state couldn't keep up with the creches, etc., so, Stalin reversed many of the women's policies, why the 'have a child for Mother Russia, be a Proud Mother for Mother Russia, though of course, work like a man in the labor...',

liberal feminism was in opposition in theory to this because liberal feminism, supported by many liberal hedonist men, in Europe of that time, contributed more to the class structure and the ills of systems that thrived on exploitation--privilege. [child labor, poverty, erosion of cities, so forth]

Interestingly though, liberal feminism can also be very controlled or persuaded by the interests of 'men', patriarchy especially in the economic sense, but more so for the sexuality--hedonist reasons, liberal feminist men opposed marriage because they wanted license to be able to sleep around without the bondage of marriage and responsibility. Why Marx's wife was left to beg to feed her children while Marx and Engels both were male whores [my statement, lol]...that was huge in Europe...that whole influence, and in America too in the Gilded Age and Roaring Twenties.

So, in a way, the traditionalists are right...feminism can and often does, destroy society and makes that society ripe for take over...BUT, feminism, that is hijacked by the interests of Males, or, is the cause, of a too strict rigid male structure that devalues and limits women's freedom to be, individuals apart from being the 'other'.

I think the solution is to return to a woman centered and autonomous feminism, that isn't controlled by the extremes, the social engineers, be they Marxists or Patriarchs or Theocratic Authoritarians. But, for this to result,

and this is the huge divide within feminism, women, have to realize they are a 'class' in of themselves, an oppressed class, BUT too, they are also, a Part of the class of oppressors, there are women, who benefit and who want to maintain patriarchy because they benefit from that patriarchy,

and here lies one of the biggest obstacles. Who defines what and who controls what? Where, yes, slavery, entire races of people, could be in solidarity and rise up against their oppressors, but for women, its different because women are not just oppressed by males, patriarchy,

they are oppressed differently yet the same, but differently in that, there are women who suffer both patriarchy and racism, patriarchy and classism, patriarchy and religious oppression. Not only do they suffer, they internalize, that oppression, a.k.a. gender roles not just as gender, but as roles, designed for them depending on the type of community they are under.

Today's biggest threat to real liberation from oppressive patriarchy isn't men, its women, who support the pro-sex ideologies, women who support or are apologetic to cultural relativism, and women, who are a huge part and role in nationalism. As long as there are women who benefit from the oppression of other women, women in power, even though its patriarchal, what Mary Daly terms as the 'painted birds',

patriarchy will exist and flourish unmoved. But now, if those social engineers can utilize feminism which they are, to destroy the foundations of Western individual rights, they will do so,

sadly however, at the worst detrimental move for all women...an oppressive systems that will be impossible, for women to ever, even think to rise up again, against their oppressors because then patriarchy will be, Totalitarian, and a Theocratic Totalitarian, on a global scale. [and yes, the Marxists, nationalist Marxists including Marxist race nationalist liberation feminists, are a huge part of this...some of the worse oppressors of women, are women, Iran, is very good example of it, and that is why, those SS women, moral police, wear Brown. Brown shirts, Brown in fascism...and they are extremely opposed to autonomous feminism.]