Radical Feminism is Destroying Us

And making everyone unhappier, especially women

Judith Butler and Simone de Beauvoir, two pseudo-philosophers

In this week’s New Statesman, an article called ‘Angry Young Women’ reported on a poll by Merlin Strategy, carried out for them—and bear in mind that this a left-wing, ‘progressive’ magazine, that has long championed feminism—that demonstrates clearly that feminism has failed to make women happier, even though it has succeeded in many of its initial material aims, such as equality of opportunity, equal salaries and so on. The British women aged 18-30 polled are more likely to have degrees than their male counterparts, earn £2,200 a year more, and are twice as likely to own their own homes. And yet most of them are not happy, or optimistic about their future.

Incredibly, 35% of them have a negative view of men, and another third are neutral—only about a third of British women have a positive view of men. 40% think men don’t understand sexual consent. 20% don’t want to have children. In other words, it’s clear that the decades-long campaign of radical feminist brainwashing, which taught women that men were the root of all evil, has succeeded. Despite the evidence of their own lives, they still seem to believe that patriarchal power structures must be swept away before social justice can be achieved. In this essay I want to consider some of the causes of this catastrophe, which can be boiled down to Marxist and neo-Marxist ‘thought’ (it’s actually much closer to prejudice), and some of the consequences, particularly with regard to demographic collapse, and the colonisation of the West.

The New Statesman notes that young women are more ‘progressive’—though that term is a misnomer—than young men, and much more politically radicalised. 60% of them—a clear majority—say they could not have a relationship with a man who had different views from them on Palestine, or Donald Trump. Think about that. Nearly two-thirds of British women think that it’s impossible to talk to someone who doesn’t hold identical views to themselves on political issues pertaining to countries thousands of miles away. As I’ve said before, this is because to the so-called ‘progressive’ mindset—really a deeply tribal, conformist one—believes that if you disagree, you are not merely mistaken, but evil personified. (To give an example: a female member of my own family this week told me that she would be happy if the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of Israel were assassinated.) Many of them say that they are disappointed because men don’t seem interested in these topics, although their main topic of conversation with their female friends is politics. In other words, the aim of the radical feminists, which was always to liberate women from child-bearing and rearing families, has been achieved. But at what cost?

When I was young, most men supported equal opportunities for women, and implicitly supported feminism, because we thought that women just wanted equality. And of course, some of them did. But increasingly, and particularly since about 2010, the educational system has come under the sway of radical intersectional feminism, which has had a poisonous influence on almost every academic discipline, from literary criticism to history, from philosophy to political science, sociology, and psychology. And it goes without saying that this extreme ideology completely dominates all those spurious ‘disciplines’ which have the word ‘Studies’ in them: Women’s Studies, Queer Studies, African-American Studies, Postcolonial Studies, and so on. All of these pseudo-subjects are premised on the idea that the white patriarchy has oppressed various minorities for centuries and must be smashed. There is no discussion of this central belief, no debate, no attempt to discover and test theories: all research is merely evidence to back up conclusions already accepted by everyone in the field. Even Creative Writing, another ludicrous university subject (which I myself taught) is not quite so futile or antithetical to what academic study should be.

As Camille Paglia has said, feminism treats women like defective men. In this strange cult, which is divorced from reality, men and women are not complementary, do not have a shared destiny, and are not helpmeets for each other, but on the contrary they are in competition with each other. And as feminism identified men as the culprits for everything wrong with the world—racism, colonialism, war, greed, sexism, homophobia—it decided that women would make much better rulers, and men should be taught to be more like women. Our entire educational system is premised on this idea: boys are forced to study like women, and the high grades and prizes go to students who follow the feminine virtues of diligence, discipline, and obedience and conformity. (I’m not saying that only women do well in this system: a certain kind of feminised man can succeed too, particularly if he is self-effacing and apologetic.) So we now have a world in which most young people are unmarried and lonely, compared to the 1960s when 97% of people were married. The birth rate is well under replacement level in every European country, which means immigration is necessary (or so the argument goes) for economic growth. But it’s also the case that women’s maternal instincts, which by nature should have gone on caring for their children, are going towards compassion for, and deep emotional attachment to, immigrants, whom they see as ‘refugees’, although almost all are economic (and often predatory) migrants. Men are less sympathetic. So as the family collapses, and as sex is increasingly not associated with childbirth, but has become fundamentally a form of entertainment, undertaken purely for pleasure, with no consequences (because of contraception and drugs to treat STDs), most people are lonely, the fundamental unit of society is disintegrating (except in the Muslim communities), and everyone is demoralised.

Another interesting statistic from the Merlin poll is that 53% of British white women think Britain is racist—although the majority of ethnic minority women do not. If the society were really racist and ‘far-right,’ one would expect the minorities to feel that most acutely, but in fact it’s precisely the white women, and especially white professional and managerial women, who are convinced that it is so. Obviously, this is because they have been radicalised, indeed brainwashed. But by whom, and why?

Who really benefits from the radical feminisation of society? For a start, as I’ve mentioned before, the propagators of the ideology are older, highly educated, successful women of the Judith Butler/Simone de Beauvoir type. They are past child-bearing age, and so they preach a philosophy of ‘reproductive rights’, of women devoting their lives to careers and self-development rather than families. Why? Could it be jealousy? I am not suggesting they consciously want to propagate their own genes at the expense of young women, or that they necessarily consciously enjoy the wielding of power—though I have met powerful women who clearly did—but subconsciously there can be little doubt that they are exerting their control over the reproductive resources of the tribe or nation this way. The particular kind of miscegenation they favour, namely white women with black men, which is so ubiquitous in advertising, is another typical feature. If young women are to be impregnated by anyone, it should be by black men. White men, the evil dictators who ruled the world for far too long, must be deprived even of the right to mate. I have said before that Margaret Atwood’s novel The Handmaid’s Tale is close to the opposite of the dystopia we can expect if current trends continue: a matriarchy will be in control, and the dictators and tyrants will be older women, and the slaves will be young men.

We must avoid this—indeed, prevent it. I am not suggesting that the past was perfect, nor do I advocate a return to Victorian values. Last week, one of my readers said that I seemed to be presenting a misogynist position, but that’s far from the truth. I believe that women are just as important as men, and deserve lives of equal dignity and freedom, as well as equal opportunities. I just don’t think that they are morally superior. And I know, as a student of history, that in every successful civilisation, men and women see each other as partners, each contributing something essential, and each dedicated to the raising of healthy, happy families, which are the fundamental components of any community or society. Men don’t have to dominate; they do have to be given respect, and allowed to do what they do best. And the neo-Marxist monoculture that feminism wants, and which for example the British Greens openly advocate, in the most authoritarian terms possible—Zack Polanski admits that he would get rid of people who were not on board with his policies, presumably by imprisonment or perhaps execution—must be challenged. For the past few decades, only one view of human nature and philosophy has been taught in western universities, and often students have been compelled to take courses in feminism, intersectionality, and so on. I don’t want to ban such courses: as a believer in free speech, I think students should be able to study them if they wish. But alternatives must be provided. If they are not, all state funding should be cut to those institutions. (In this, at least, the Trump administration has been absolutely correct.) We used to have a genuinely plural society, in which a range of political opinions was not just possible, but encouraged. Debate existed between the proponents of various views. If the right wing comes into power in the next few years, as it must, one of the first things it must do is break the monopoly of the feminist-Marxist-Islamist death cult on the universities, the media, and the civil service, and the armed services.

And for heaven’s sake let’s start believing in love again! We are not just bodies that demand pleasure. We have hearts, minds, and souls. We have to learn to trust each other again, to love each other again, to raise families, and feel proud of ourselves.

That is not only possible, but essential, if we are to survive as a civilisation.