When I was a kid, Valentine's Day meant eating those small, heart-shaped
candies, and hoping to get a card from one of the cute girls in class --
in that order of priority, I will admit.
But now, our college campuses have come up with a radically different
vioew of Valentine's Day: the Vagina Monologues. This play, which
celebrates lesbianism and pedophilia, claims to liberate women by the
vulgar repetition of the V-word more than a hundred times.
Now, the all-American types who brought us the Vagina Monologues are
telling us to forget the chocolates and roses. This year, we should be
"Celebrating
Vagina Warriors" who protect women from domestic violence
(no, I am not making this up).
According to the WHO report on Violence and Health, men are
twice as
likely as women to die from violence. But the
Vagina Warriors want you to think that only female victims of violence
are deserving of our sympathy. Things have reached the point that
commentators are now urging us to
"Take
Back Valentine's Day!"
Many would dismiss the Vagina Monologues as absurd. So absurd, people
believe they can ignore it, knowing that eventually it will go away. But
"eventually" may be a long time in coming.
I don't expect the Vagina Monologues will just go away. That's because
this play represents the next logical step in the campaign of radical
feminism to impose a genderless society.
Let's go back to the basics.
The radical feminist interpretation of Marxism-Leninism is that the
family
is the root cause of the patriarchal oppression of women. As
Robin Morgan, who would later become editor of Ms. Magazine, explained
in a matter-of-fact manner in 1970, "We can't destroy the inequities
between men and women until we destroy marriage." Therefore, they set
out to eradicate it.
But how would any movement go about the job of eliminating marriage?
Simple.
In 1971, the National Organization of Women launched its first salvo on
heterosexual relationships. The NOW passed a resolution declaring
lesbians are the frontline troops of the women's movement. The corollary
of this statement is that all women should aspire to be lesbians.
By the 1980s, feminists were beginning to equate marriage with
prostitution. Here's University of Michigan law professor
Catherine
MacKinnon: "Feminism stresses the indistinguishability of prostitution,
marriage, and sexual harassment."
But marriage was once a mighty fortress. So a broader assault on gender
relationships was called for.
First, you portray men as brutes, clods, deadbeats, and unreliable
providers.
Then you try to fill women with contempt for men -- remember Gloria
Steinem's famous quip about a woman needing a man like a fish needing a
bicycle?
Next, you contort the divorce and child custody laws so prospective
fathers come to view marriage as a losing proposition. And when suitors
hesitate in making the Big Commitment, you naturally blame men for their
hesitation.
The final coup de grace? Dilute the sanctity of marriage by pushing for
full legal recognition of lesbian and gay marriages.
The greatest obstacle to the achievement of the feminist utopia is not
the patriarchy. The greatest threat to the Sisterhood is the timeless
allure of heterosexual romance, love, and matrimony.
And that is exactly what radical feminism has set out to destroy. But
the idea is so preposterous -- no one would ever believe it.
