AT THE third annual Women in the World Summit in New York yesterday, Nancy Pelosi called for more power for women. Echoing the claims of the suffragettes, Pelosi asserted that women make better decisions than you-know-whom. “Many ills, one cure—the increased participation of women in leadership and the decision-making,” Pelosi said.
Her shameless denunciation of men and appeal for power was characteristic of this glitzy gathering of elite women in New York. Never in the dark bowels of patriarchal history have men ever gathered like this and openly trumpeted their power as men. The convention, which features feminist celebrities such as Angelina Jolie, Christine Lagarde and Madeline Albright, is all high heels, hot air, and self love. The call for a global women’s movement creates fumes of feminine self-approval above the streets of Manhattan.
Though heavily subsidized by multinational corporations and sponsored by Newsweek, the main organ of feminist propaganda in America, the convention of global goddesses persists in evoking the idea of an embattled movement. Women of immense wealth and influence get away with claiming they are oppressed by linking their cause with the African peasantry or basket-weavers in Bangladesh. Women who ride in limousines and wear artificial, Botox smiles claim victimhood by pointing to their Third World sisters.
Pelosi wants more women in government and leadership positions (the point is, of course, that women have been held back from these positions) but seems uncomfortable with the processes of representative democracy. She said the recent controversy over contraception calls for a new direction.
“We need to take the opportunity to make the changes necessary so that nobody has to fight this fight again,” she said.
I wonder how this remarkable idea could be achieved. Is there a way to make all future generations as blind as this one? Is there a way for Pelosi to rule forever?
Whenever large numbers of women get together to claim they should occupy the corridors of power they unwittingly prove why they should never rule the world. Authority to them is all privilege and no responsibility. Their overweening vanity could never make the world a better place.
— Comments —-
Josh F. writes:
From a conservative perspective, there are females, girls, women, ladies and dykes.
From the liberated perspective, there are really only females and dykes.
In the Created Order, there is a progression from female to girl to woman to lady.
In the liberated “progression” of things, there is a glob of cells and then “poof,” a female autonomist/de facto dyke. What we have in New York is not a gathering of women. It is a gathering of radical female autonomists/de facto dykes and actual devout dykes (think Kagan, Napolitano, Hillary).
We need to change the language. Real women deserve better recognition for what they really are and aim to be and the radical female autonomist and devout dyke should not be allowed to cloak she-self in “woman.” This change in language holds the same for “feminism.” It is a “thing” ENTIRELY DEVOID of the feminine. “Feminism” is the political expression of the devout dyke “nature.” Anti-feminine. Anti-woman. Anti-child. Anti-man. Anti-Created Order.