A Fucked Up Fable
When the Spaniards first recorded their interactions with the indigenous peoples of the Americas, they were amazed at the respect accorded to the women. Since, the criminality of a certain fable that holds women responsible for all of this world’s ills, due to the primal woman’s subversive collusion with a snake, is at the root of a problem, violence against women (and superstitions demonizing female intelligence), that is, these days, hardly unique to any society in the world.
Quoting ‘Church Father’ Tertullian:
“Do you not know you are each an Eve? The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives in this age: the guilt must of necessity live too. You are the devil’s gateway: you are the unsealer of that forbidden tree: you are the first deserter of the divine law: you are she who persuaded him whom the devil was not valiant enough to attack. You destroyed so easily God’s image, man. On account of your desert – that is death – even the Son of God had to die.”
This is prime example at the root of your criminal elements subjecting both: Women & Nature; but in mainstream, the so-called ‘women’s’ & ‘human rights’ organizations, they’ll never go there. Catholic theology = impunity in relation to crimes against women, as well, all other ‘religions’ & ‘faiths’, (these are societal sects & cults, actually) that embrace this “Original Sin” fable underlying their proselytizing peoples across the world. It doesn’t matter to what proportion women (or men) might have abandoned and rejected this malignant story at the intellectual level; inter-generational socialization insures the societal structures remain intact. Subliminally, culturally, nothing changes.
Rather ‘feminism’s’ faux solution to ’empower’ women is for women to become the oppressors in the mold of men, but this ain’t your ‘era’ just yet, baby.
^ advertisement recalling the ‘it’s your era, baby!’ 1970s commercials when the ‘Equal Rights Amendment’ was put forward
In the USA model & history of women’s emancipation moving forward or ‘evolving’, where is the ‘equal rights amendment’ in jurisprudence today? Well, neither men nor women wished to see women subjected to compulsory military service (let’s be honest about this), so the amendment never completed its’ ratification process required by the several states. But if we were of a proclivity to be honest as a society, in fact there had been an equal rights amendment already should have been in force because of an 1860s change in the USA’s basic law, known as the 14th Amendment. When women had been subsequently enfranchised by the 19th Amendment (1920) as ‘full citizens’ in the USA per ‘universal suffrage’ (women granted the right to vote), the following (14th Amendment) foundational law should have come into force per women & men’s equality:
“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”
In fact this law has been used (the foundation underlying Roe v Wade) to allow the abortion of fetuses created from consensual sex, never mind any objection of the biological father, not only abortion in cases of rape or incest (is this an equal protection violation?) but aside from that, what the American court of law does not do is apply ‘the equal protection of the laws’ when exempting women from compulsory military service but not the men. So, which sex has the upper hand here? What deception allows men are equal to women in circumstance of exempt from military conscription? Oh my, is it actually possible sexual discrimination can be a two way street in Western culture?
This cultural hypocrisy poses a philosophical dilemma the feminists refuse to face; in the same moment they demand ‘equal rights’ to men within the Western world’s Judeo-Christian patriarchy, they take advantage of that same patriarchy’s perception of them as ‘the weaker sex.’ What’s more is, it is not only this sort of cheat, it is the larger cheat of silence on the source of the problem; the cultural fable demanding women are cursed and the source of all mankind’s woes, that had delivered us the rape culture behind physical abuse. My question for the feminist leadership is, what’s the source of your cowardice in this regard? Not ready for the real emancipation of men in equal status to your own sex, example given, in a matter of exemption from compulsory military service? Yeah, who in the hyper-militarized & conflict prone Western culture is going to protect your skank butts in that case? Why not admit you’re in a Faustian pact with the Western patriarchy and begin again from a factual premise?
Now, let’s contrast this preceding to my (ten years) time of indigenous ceremonial training (by a male) under the supervision of tribal matriarchs. What was a persistently hammered on theme by the matriarchs, throughout, had been a conservatism of behavior based in tribal ethics. It is here I will note one stark difference pointing to the vast chasm between these matriarchs and modern feminism; in the indigenous ‘pre-rape’ culture (matriarchy) where everything in your experience is approached as sacred, there was no concept of ‘fucking for fun’ that should allow for abortion. You made the baby of your own volition and to kill it is murder. In the paradox of today’s world in relation to this, the more culturally intact (pre-Christian mentality) indigenous community would be both; strongly pro-life and in the same moment opposed to any coercive legislating of morality, because people are supposed to figure their mistakes for themselves. In short, socially stupid people are entitled to go to hell in their own way (and the clearly dishonest approach & associated sociopathy of Western feminism would be shunned.)
It was not so long ago that, not only would the indigenous men respect these women in a manner and to a degree unknown in the modern or ‘civilized’ world, as well, these men would lay down their lives for the women at an instants notice, without question. The trade-off? The indigenous women’s law (matriarchy) insisted these males be treated by the women as though they were gods. What’s so wrong with that?
If it were the Spaniards first noted the incredible (contrasted to Western) respect shown in these tribal cultures towards women, would it not be the intelligent route of today’s feminism to explore deeply and discover what had turned these cultures on their heads and ‘converted’ them into modern misogynist communities? To grasp what these communities had been prior to the introduced and now inter-generational violence of Catholic (Christian) origin? Because you aren’t going to get it right coming from a dishonest relationship within your own culture, when mimicking a Western male psychology that is actually an applied feminist caricature of Western chauvinism, while pretending it is something else.
Ronald Thomas West 