WhatFinger


Quite a few women like being women. So radical feminists will just have to grit their teeth and endure the Miss America Pageant for a while longer.

Feminists, Lunacy, And The Southern Belle



The recent malicious denigration of Southern sorority girls by radical feminists might appear to have only regional connotations, but it actually has nationwide implications. Excerpts from two journalistic assaults on these young women will illustrate how ridiculous radical feminism has become. The feminist writers of these articles call these young girls "Southern belles." They use the term in a derogatory sense because it implies femininity and charm; gender attributes that feminists maintain are a form of social control, i.e., gender roles prevent women from achieving equality with men. Gender activists fault these young college girls for making themselves attractive and going on dates rather than railing against the campus rape culture. Instead of dating, feminists insist that young women should be promoting women's issues and crusading for diversity and inclusion. By behaving as young females often do, these girls have incurred the wrath of feminists do-gooders.
The motivation and mindset of today's feminists are not new phenomena. History is replete with meddling busybodies and cultural authoritarians. An example is depicted in the classic novel, Bleak House, set in the early 1800s. Charles Dickens wittily portrays such a woman, who neglects her family in her zeal to help create settlements in a remote region of Africa, that she learns about from reading obscure news reports. There is no evidence that her public proselytizing and social protest writings have accomplishied anything, yet she is driven by a personal need to be part of a fashionable cause. Feminist screeds attacking Southern college girls have recently appeared in both the Washington Post and the Birmingham News. Neither were what you would call high caliber journalism. Both sounded more like petty female jealousy rather than serious editorials. It was actually surprising that newspapers printed these articles. Perhaps the editors of the Washington Post and the Birmingham News felt that the articles would generate controversy and boost circulation. The Washington Post carried Elizabeth Boyd's harangue: Remove the Southern Belle from Her Inglorious Perch. Many readers questioned whether Boyd's piece was from the Onion, or at least, a parody. But it appears that Ms. Boyd thought she would be taken seriously. She praises the University of Georgia for banning the hoop skirt, which she maintains is a toxic "racial symbol." Although Boyd is excited that the University banned the hoop skirt, she insists that it must go further and eliminate the very concept of the Southern belle. Ms. Boyd states: "The hoop skirt ban is a great start. But university officials should know that there is more than one way to perform Southern belle... belle performances may not stem from conscious ill intent, but they are surely racial symbols as much as any noose or flag." Boyd asks: "Will observers ever recognize what the hoop — and the contemporary belle — have to do with the hate?" She continued: ... if Southern schools really want to lead, they will not only ban the hoop; they will also go after the belle. They will just say to hell with the belle."

Support Canada Free Press


In the same vein as Boyd's bizarre hit piece, is an attack on a recruitment video produced by a University of Alabama sorority. The Birmingham News printed A.J. Bailey's column , Bama sorority video worse for women than Donald Trump. Ms. Bailey is incensed that the recruitment video depicts pretty young girls having fun by being bouncy, flirty, and vivacious. Her take on the video: "It's all so racially and aesthetically homogeneous and forced, so hyper-feminine, so reductive and objectifying, so Stepford Wives: College Edition. It's all so ... unempowering." The word "unempowering" gives us a key to Ms. Bailey. Empowered is one of those corny clichés so popular with feminists, but perhaps embittered would be a better word. Bailey complains that: "The video lacks any mention of core ideals or service and philanthropy efforts." Is it philanthropic to push the radical feminist agenda and degrade males? - Bailey makes another outlandish comment:"...sororities are known for being pretty and flirty; they aren't bastions of feminist ideologies. But perhaps they shouldn't completely sabotage them either." Does this woman really believe that "pretty and flirty" young sorority girls can sabotage feminist ideologies? Ms. Bailey complains that the video: "... has a clear sales pitch: beauty, sexuality, and a specific look above all." Although she says that women: "...must work diligently to be taken seriously", we can assume that she means that women must work more diligently than men to be taken seriously. That is more consistent with the overall tone of her article. But this across-the-board generalization does not hold up under scrutiny. For instance, does anyone actually believe that Fox News squeezed out Sean Hannity and gave the top anchor slot to Megyn Kelly because she was better qualified or worked more diligently? Does anyone actually think that Megyn Kelly would have been chosen as a television news anchor if she were overweight, middle-aged, and unattractive? A few decades ago, there was an absurd, and short-lived, feminist attempt to change the way women were portrayed in opera. Feminists felt that opera heroines were overly emotional and placed too much importance of the love of a man - Some actually died because of love; we think of La Traviata, Madame Butterfly, and Tristan and Isolde. A book about opera's "ideological bias" against women, was included in the syllabi of many Women's Studies Programs and still may be. But attempts to defeminize opera heroines is just one of many intemperate and ill-conceived gender equity undertakings that fell by the wayside. Although the feminist movement is being heavily promoted by media, its membership is stagnating. Two years ago, polls indicated that only 28% of American women identified themselves as feminists. This year only 18% do. - A substantial segment of younger women haven't joined the movement and many of those who did join are dropping out. Radical feminists have to accept that many of today's women do not agree with the claims of unbridled violence against or harassment of women. And younger women are refusing to buy the myth of a campus rape culture, nor do they lend credence to a collective view of males as oppressors. Quite a few women like being women. So radical feminists will just have to grit their teeth and endure the Miss America Pageant for a while longer.


View Comments

Gail Jarvis -- Bio and Archives

Gail Jarvis is a Coastal Georgia based freelance writer. Following a career as a CPA/business consultant, Mr. Jarvis now critiques the establishment’s selective and misleading reporting of current events and history. Gail can be reached at: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)


Sponsored