Williamson Stands Athwart

by Brad Nelson   2/6/14

Kevin Williamson at National Review Online has written a very good article titled The Feminist Mystique. In it, he notes the tired, haranguing nature of feminism which he sums up simply as “I want.”

StubbornThings is but a mere fly compared to the elephant of National Review Online. And I am often critical of the writers over there. But I do so not to puff up my own sense of worth but because — well — the writers at NRO over the last few years have often been insufferably RINOish and/or bland.

My criticisms have been numerous, but never should that turn into a grievance or a grudge. Williamson has published a bold article that mocks the self-importance of the feminist agitators. I hope other writers gain inspiration from him. Indeed, if you can’t fight back against the Left then why the hell are many of those writers taking up space?

Keep at it, Kevin.
__________________________________________________
Have a blog post you want to share? Click here. • (2041 views)

Share
Brad Nelson

About Brad Nelson

I like books, nature, politics, old movies, Ronald Reagan (you get sort of a three-fer with that one), and the founding ideals of this country. We are the Shining City on the Hill — or ought to be. However, our land has been poisoned by Utopian aspirations and feel-good bromides. Both have replaced wisdom and facts.
This entry was posted in Blog Post and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Williamson Stands Athwart

  1. Timothy Lane says:

    Well, I read the article and commented briefly on it (and gave an up-arrow to the comment by “Fed Up” that identified the contradictory point of gender feminism (as Christina Hoff Somers calls it). I found one blogger’s reference to the reaction of Elaine Morgan interesting, since I have a couple of her books on human evolution (The Descent of Woman and The Scars of Evolution). My own view is that the feminist movement made a decision in the late 1970s that they’d rather ally with man-hating lesbians than with sympathetic men. Over time they’ve become just another liberal power-seeking group, dedicated in their case to preventing children.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      Feminism is another dark, grievance-based force in our society. It’s more of the Marxist “us vs. them” mentality hiding behind words that sound nice. Peace with men is not what they seek. They seek to emasculate men.

      That low information women have bought into this “war on women” stuff just goes to show you the level of ignorance and indoctrination amongst many women.

      You know you’re dealing with a demonic element when it’s clear that the feminist movement will never be satisfied. And they never will be. It’s is not peace or justice they want. They’re mad at something. As one good fellow said at the end of Kevin’s article, it’s as if these women hate themselves for being born women. And I think there’s some truth to that.

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        “haranguing nature of feminism which he sums up simply as “I want.””

        Kevin must be reading Stubbornthings. Some month’s back, I wrote “I want” was the Left’s main platform.

      • Timothy Lane says:

        I think it may have been Tammy Bruce who suggested that leftists suffer from self-loathing. They certainly hate their nation and their culture, and quite often their ancestors as well.

  2. John Kirke John Kirke says:

    Articles like this one is a very big reason I loathe Williamson’s 2012 NR cover story on Mormonism, in which he smeared Christian opponents as unhinged hypocrites. He’s capable of very good writing, but I’m not sure how much he can be trusted after that knife in the back of orthodoxy.

    And as good as that article is, feminists are no longer the vanguard of the Left’s radical assault on traditional institutions, the contraception mandate notwithstanding. Williamson could have written a very similar critique of the gay lobby, their focus on “I Want,” and their often “wildly incompatible propositions.”

    E.g., in the name of tolerance, their behavior must be both tolerated and even celebrated, while people who hold to traditional moral views must be driven out of polite society. And they routinely invoke the privacy of the bedroom to argue that their private lives must be endorsed in a public courthouse: it’s nobody’s business, except that the government that represents everybody must give it our seal of approval.

    The constant posture of wounded outrage — outrage that can only be salved with a ritual offering to the great ‘I Want!’ — makes one poorly suited for the actual business of responsible governance, which is by necessity an exercise in prudent negotiation and compromise.

    It’s a great line, but the more obvious comparison is between modern feminists and the gay lobby, not Texas creationists. But make that comparison, and you’d probably draw criticism from NR editor Jason Lee Steorts, who’s only selectively concerned about civility.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      Some years ago, two British journalists wrote The Right Nation, which looked at conservatism in America. They also noticed that the Left in America basically consists of those who are simply enraged by the world combined with a series of groups each with their own “I want” (my phrasing to link it with this topic here). This is why liberals are extreme teleologues: they’ve been reduced to emotional infants who can’t accept not always getting their way. Veruca Salt, meet Barack Obama.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      I think it would be a great idea for Williamson to move to the next logical target: the goofy and fascistic gay lobby. Here’s to that.

  3. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Also, Charles Cooke had an okay article titled, Obamacare’s Attack on the Work Ethic. You don’t get to the meat of the article until the second page. But it contains this gem:

    Hot Air’s Allahpundit is concerned that the fix is in, and that we will soon witness America follow what Niall Ferguson claimed has been the “decline and fall of the Protestant work ethic in Europe.” “If we’ve reached the stage of welfare-state decadence where it’s a selling point for a new entitlement that it discourages able-bodied people from working,” he wrote, then “there’s no reason to keep going. We’ve lost, decisively.”

    That’s the money quote. No need really to read the article.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *