Search this Site

  • Google


« How Liberals Reason | Main | The Islamization of Paris »

September 02, 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


The problem is the republican party is being taken by feminsts. The Democrats are for African American marxism and the Republican party is for Feminist marxism. In fact feminists of all stripes were very racist because blacks voted before they did. Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin are playing to female envy of men which is why they like a henpecked man like Beck and an unsuccessful politician like Palin.

Some feminists did have kids but their followers did not. Just as many socialists had property although their followers did not. Feminism is a combination of envy of men and as a result of focusing on this envy they detest women that don't envy men and focus on the area's they have more leverage in and G-d also feels they have more knowledge and that is in being a wife and a mother. The bible when it came to Issac and Jacob the women knew more then the men and the men respected this as well and didn't envy the women.

At the same time in other area's the man knew more and the women had to follow the man's lead.

S Wesley Mcgranor

I am white man, and i am reason.


Interesting that under selwyns conception of the family fathers have no role. The only good woman is a stay at home mum (perhaps like the Yates? hmm), while father can go out and do, well whatever, appears to be the answer.

PS the straw woman feminist was very amusing....and you guys keep talking about the left as "haters"?
Really femeinism is nothing more than the idea that women should be the best that they can be, for some that will be stay at home mothers, other will run countries (Maggie Thatchers any righties?), others will be soldiers and defend their countries as in Israel. What is abundently clear is that countires that supress the gifts of 51% of the population are demographically and ecconomically benighted eg: pretty much any middle eastern country.

Anyway the genie is out of the bottle, you may rail and wail but you will not get rid of women's sufferage no matter how much it annoys you.

Philip France

Yoyo missed Selywn's point entirely (as is usual). For penance, she should read the Biblical chapter of Proverbs 28, which deals with and describes what Selwyn alluded to: the virtuous woman.


Philp my sweet, yes re-reading proverbs would indeed be a penance. In return you may like to read any of the sites especially of women and children recovering from the quiverful movement (mostly christian but not all) and the absolute damage done to womens and childrens health by the implementation of the idea that women are just wombs in the service of the lord. Just take a little peek, I dare you! Somehow I find it hard to be envious of "complementarian" lifestyle where my husband has the role of intersessor with god and my children and I are to be "helpmeets", arrows in his quiver etc.

More than that, on a international scale can selwyn really argue that countries without a feminist movement, countries where women are forced into ONLY the domestic sphere are happier or more successful?

Let's see, can you philip or your BFF Selyn name one, just one single country, where women are restricted, either thru social pressure or thru law, to childcare duties solely,and that country ranks in the top 10 on ANY single indicator?


PS Just read 2 different versions of psalm 28 (always prefered the King James) no mention of virtuous women, all in terms of men maybe you are refering to a different psalm, just hope it isn't 127. LOL


Umm, it was Proverbs not Psalms, but I think he meant Proverbs 31, not 28.


Is this what passes for original thinking these days? Didn't Freud already offer the "penis envy" theory, like, early last century? Why are you presenting stale psychoanalysis as some new idea? (((yawn))) Shulamith Firestone already did Freud.

The "American Thinker", we see, borrows heavily from "The Viennese Thinker"--LOL.


Apologies for not registering before commenting.

Then, some will ask why these feminists simply don’t have families themselves.

I'll raise you two grandchildren and a marriage of 23 years duration. How about you? How long have you been married?


There is no envy like demanding equality for others! It shows how badly you wish you owned so much because you are so envious of the rich. Oh wait, no. It means you care for others. I wonder how the hell that got mixed up with envy. Probably because being able to write well doesn't automatically make what you write hold any weight more than a really bad hypothesis.

Philip France


I went to your cherished site. Some sad stuff indeed. To that I reply that it is written:

Yer do err, not knowing the scriptures nor the power of God.

Sticks n Stones

I'm not sure why Mr. Duke writes such researched articles. It is evident by many of the posts that people ignore the reasearch and attempt to pass-off their preconceived theories as truth.

This is not an article about a husband's role; this article shows the downfall of a society when stay-at-home mothers become an extinct personality. He writes of the virtue of being a mother; that there is no shame, regardless of what feminists and lesbians (see Mr. Duke's quotes above) may proclaim.

"Really femeinism [sic] is nothing more than the idea that women should be the best that they can be"

Hahaha! So you call Ti-Grace Atkinson a liar when she said, “Feminism is the theory; lesbianism is the practice."? Or Gloria Steinem and Simone de Beauvoir, who had lesbian affairs, that they missed-the-mark on what the movement they began was really all about? Are you always this arrogant or just really ignorant of truth?

Can any of you say you'd be here without your mother giving birth to you? Didn't think so. Give thanks to God your mother wasn't one of the above mentioned women!

Yoyo, you're oh-so-tolerant of everything evil and show your real personality; a lack of tolerance when anyone points out the truth of your limited ability to accept opposing ideas and a deep love of moral relativity.

A few more years of a society filled with people like you and you will yearn for the good ole days when you could speak freely and not be condemned for political incorrectness. What society gave you this freedom to be a jerk by abusing freedom of speech? In your foolish idylic society, they will run out of Jews and Christians to come for, and you'll be next. So much for progressive thinkers who are really morally relevant tolerant idiots! Talk about not being able to see the forest for the trees!

For you, and some, I say, grow up and accept that there is something seriously wrong with our society. Only then will real "change" occur (internally). Let's hope it's not too little too late to save our children.

Mr. Duke, Keep the Aspidistra flying!


This started out okay, but honestly it's a little offensive... I've seen way too many chicks from my high school class make it their entire life's goal to become a wife and a mother because they think it's what is 1) expected of them and 2) a quick fix to make them happy as opposed to trying to find out who they are and deal with their own emotional issues before making the decision to have full responsibility of another entirely dependent person. And honestly, if that's their decision, cool, but.... the kid's what's really to worry about. I've seen some turned out pretty ****** up as a result of the mother thinking that hurriedly fitting into their "ultimate role" or whatever in society will fix whatever issues they might have. It's really difficult to deny that some guys tend to think of women as beneath them or view them as being little more than sex objects, hell--I've dated them, but I can see how crazy and rampantly malicious some feminists get. However, instead of bringing out a well-thought out, logical argument this article kind of degenerated into quickly slapped together example/attacks as opposed to anything fluid and cohesive. Generalizing makes you seem uneducated about the subject and frankly kind of pompous. :-/


Gee Mel, 'offensive'? Well we wouldn't want to offend your little liberal sensibilities. Would we? Of course there are women who rush into motherhood who have messed up kids. There are also women who rush into careers who end up having messed up kids. Having a happy marriage and family is tough and there are many things that must fall into place for it to happen. But the ideal is still the ideal. Anyway, Duke's article wasn't about rushing into motherhood. He just pointed out one reason why hardcore feminists put down motherhood. Reading what's written actually helps.

We all hope you can function the rest of the day in your terribly offended state.


That's not what I got out of it at all. Using terms like "sacrificing family on the altar of careerism" kind of stipulates that a woman can't have a career and a family at the same time, or it's always the right choice to have kids as opposed to having a career. I'm just saying he's simplifying it too much when the situation's a lot more complex. Being snarky's only making you seem like just as pompous as he is lol.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

February 2024

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29