Ever since blacks got here, some among the white population have always sought to keep 'blacks in check' through numerous maneuvers, with this modern breed of feminism being one of the key precepts.
Feminism today isn't what the original discontented women intended it to be. It wasn't a movement to turn women into mini-men, but rather a movement to get women more rights such as allowing them to vote and allowing them to get into the workplace. This modern breed of feminism is attempting to completely destroy the concept of womanhood and create some sort of androgynous superclass, aka the 'matriarchy'. Feminism has went from attempting to procure women more rights to some sort of eclectic abomination of lesbianism, whoredom and procurement of benefits while avoiding repercussions.
glbtq >> social sciences >> Lesbian Feminism
In the United States, Canada and Britain, lesbian feminism was the dominant ideology among politicized lesbians during the 1970s and 1980s. Based on the premise that lesbianism and feminism were inextricably linked, the two words were often hyphenated.
Lesbian feminism offered a trenchant critique of patriarchy and the institutionalization of heterosexuality, and claimed that its political impact resided in resistance to male domination. Put into practice, lesbian feminism quickly evolved into a personal style that influenced everything from hairstyles, clothing, and even sexual behavior. Overall, its influence was enormous, though with mixed results.
In fact, feminism is partly CIA funded. Gloria Steinem, prominent feminist, was a CIA agent.
Read more here:
What follows is a fact sheet about Gloria Steinems operations against the various social and political movements in America, particularly her role in creating a hateful and virulent strain of Black feminism that attacks Black men while partnering with the white establishment.
Gloria Steinem first came across the radar of Black men in 1978 when Steinem put a book called Black Macho and the Myth of the Superwoman on the cover of Ms. Magazine, the magazine which she controlled. The book was written by a Black feminist and activist named Micele Wallace who came out of nowhere. Wallace was in her early twenties at the time, yet she was being touted as the leader of Black feminism. In the book, Wallace called abolitionists like Harriet Tubman and Sojouner Truth ugly and stupid for supporting Black men. She called Black Revolutionaries chauvinist macho pigs and advised Black women to go it alone. Gloria Steinem said that Wallaces book would define the future of Black relationships and she pushed hard to make sure the book received massive publicity. Gloria Steinems work triggered a flood of Hate Black Men books and films that continues to this day. Needless to say, some were quite suspicious of Ms. Magazine and Gloria Steinem. Why was Steinem sticking her nose into the affairs of the Black community? So people started doing some research on Steinem. When it came out that Gloria Steinem was probably the ghost writer of the book with Michele Wallaces name on it, Wallace had a nervous breakdown and went into hiding for two years. However, the damage was already done and the Hate Black Men movement was off and running. But the research into Gloria Steinems background continued. What follows is the findings of many different researchers.
BLACK FEMINISM, THE CIA AND GLORIA STEINEM.
Modern feminism also teaches that promiscuity is some sort of liberating trait in a woman, as if it is some noble attempt to shatter a repressive double standard. The only reason this 'double standard' of sexuality exists is because women choose it. Men generally do not wish to marry and provide for promiscuous women. Women could easily make the same choice and not choose to deal with promiscuous men, but on the contrary, women prefer 'men with experience.' The whoredom element is proven via the 'slutwalks' and the proliferation of articles among the feminist community touting the 'liberation of female sexuality.' So essentially, we now have women who embrace pseudo masculinism via the lesbian element, embrace promiscuity and thus increasing the rate of out-of-wedlock children. Where this becomes particularly deadly is when we mix the government stepping in as dad element.
This concept of 'strong, independent woman' is derived from a CIA/government-sponsored version of feminism in which the necessity of a male is eliminated. Why is going to school and getting a decent paid job and being a productive citizen not looked upon by women as being a 'responsible woman' as opposed to an 'independent woman'? Obviously, there is the underlying agenda to remove the male influence from the family structure.
Those elites among the whites always field test on blacks before they take the program elsewhere. look at the Tuskegee experiments for one. They've found that one of the key ways to limit the power of a group of people is to destroy the family structure. In order to do that, you need to make the male disposable, which is what we essentially have today. The father is then replaced by the government, who then uses that role to disseminate whatever values and agendas they have. You don't want to get in line? Then daddy government will cut off the benefits. This is why government dependency is so dangerous.
The policy of male disposability is furthered by demonizing the men in the black community while placing black women in the spot of 'manhood'. Affirmative action gave black women a double helping, since they are essentially two minorities in one-- being black and being women. They will get a job way quicker than black men, as well as entrance into schools, etc. This leads to emasculation of the black man since he is no longer the provider. He isn't respected by his woman and thus he is unable to command authority in his home. To further see the concept of emasculation being targeted at blacks, just look at Dave Chapelle's Oprah interview where he discusses Hollywood attempting to make black men wear dresses in their roles. The government soon becomes the new daddy, and thus, authoritarian in the black community.
We see the disastrous results when we look at the statistics.
Statistics « The Fatherless Generation
43% of US children live without their father [US Department of Census]
90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behaviour, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]
71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]
63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, Dousing the Kindlers, Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]
71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all Gods Children]
70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]
85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]
Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999]
Now is this to show that women are irresponsible at raising children? Absolutely not. Rather, it is showing that a two parent household, with both father and mother, greatly increases the child's probability for success. God built men and women differently and gave us different roles. Each role attempting to play the role of the other-- the man attempting to be the woman and the woman attempting to be the man, is essentially a weak substitution for a critical element of societal success.
As I said before, they field test it on blacks and other minorities before they take it elsewhere. Now, the "plantation owners" of the world, aka globalists, are taking it to white communities, which is why you are seeing all of these movements such as 'men rights' and mgtow. It was ignored when it was a black issue, but now when whites are receiving what they gave, it's no longer a laughing matter.
It is essentially men who are the strongest enforcers of family values, the protector of the family, as well as the greatest dynamic force for social change. When you emasculate men and remove them from the family unit, you essentially get a passive, easily controlled populace, which is obviously what these globalists desire.
G'night coli
