The Feminist Mindset Ensures an Invidious and Sexist State-Imposed Tyranny
© Shane Flait (2011)

Feminist ideology demands state-impose women-advantaged outcomes throughout society. Its propagandized excuse for this is that men's natural oppression of women and women's easy victimization prevents the state's obligation to secure our unalienable rights and their protections for everyone from allowing women to become empowered. Of course feminism's propaganda omits that state-imposed empowerment denies the fundamental rights (and protections) of men. That’s the fraud that state-imposed feminism represents.

 Setting the mindset for tyranny

Feminism introduced its totalitarian mindset when it pushed for state-imposed equal opportunity for women. The idea of equal opportunity for women was a palatable idea for most. Unfortunately feminist indoctrination and positive-sounding 'affirmative action'  euphemisms obscured how state-imposed equal opportunity would create government policies, laws and mechanisms that would not only undermine equal opportunity for all but negate the principles of freedom in favor of a totalitarian control of society's outcomes.

Trying to force equal opportunity is akin to forcing happiness. It's not the same as ensuring our equal right to our fundamental rights and their protections. The fraud of equal opportunity legislature was demanding that the state impose or instigate outcomes in hiring as proof of not discriminating against women. This often translated into the requirement of ‘being a women’ to be hired. That means denying an equal opportunity to compete by men.

Nevertheless, this mindset of justifying state-imposed outcomes to achieve an ‘ideological’ result was established; social engineering by the state could trump individual rights. All that was needed was a ‘greater good’ excuse – i.e. greater than upholding the unalienable rights of each of us that a free society requires.

Implementing it created massive government agencies and funding to force society to ‘empower’ women to occupy positions in business, academics and government. Everyone participated in bringing it about… or else!

Unfortunately, this mindset that justified government’s imposition to prescribe outcomes in society for ideological excuses is a totalitarian approach to engineering society. Feminists happily seized the totalitarian lead in determining government policies and impositions in all facets of society to further its ideology. So was born ‘feminazism’.

The natural expansion of totalitarian control to legal complaints between a man and a woman

Since feminism had captured the government power for state-imposition of women-related entitlements, it concentrated on devising more outcomes that advantaged women as justified by its propagandized oppression of women by men. The protection of individual rights of men was of secondary consideration – if considered at all.

Feminist ideology views marriage as an institution that oppresses women. So, controlling outcomes of divorce and paternity suits can empower women. But, of course, it will do so only at the enormous expense of the fundamental rights of fathers.

No where is a woman-privileged outcome more useful in the feminist social engineering of society than in destroying heterosexual marriage and any vestige of the feminist-vilified family patriarchy. It can create a matriarchal family with enormous benefits for mothers at the direct denial of the unalienable rights of fathers.

Feminists seized on two greater good excuses to justify controlling outcomes to legal family-related claims by women against men. First, feminists contrived the 'abuse excuse' by alleging a proclivity for men to abuse women and the natural victimhood of women due to their feminist-described mental vulnerability. It allowed the law a father - without due process and to restrict his parental rights virtually at mother’s whim based on her subjective statement of ‘fear’ of him.

Feminist coupled this excuse with their support and furtherance of the perverted use of the 'best interest of child' excuse (which should only be used to determine custody of children when no fit parent is present). This constitutionally vague excuse allows the court to deny parental and other fundamental rights of fit fathers while extorting money from them for decades. Along with the ever-present ‘abuse excuse’, women-privileged outcomes of divorce and paternity suits in family court are virtually assured. 

Under this feminist totalitarian control of family justice, fathers are forced to justify why they should have any association with their own children.  Of course, his parental rights play no part other than to mandate his obligations to pay the mother – a clear condition of slavery.

Our unalienable rights - the rights that live in the hearts and minds of men and women - are gone. Ruling committees of feminists determine the direction - and destruction - of fathers, families and freedom for the money, power, and agenda it ensures for all who participate in maintaining this state-run feminist tyranny.

Of course it's not professed this way. The state is taking affirmative action simply to ensure the safety of women and the best interests of the child - who could argue with that! Who could argue with Hitler and Stalin who espoused similar ‘greater good’ excuses while engineering their societies. Only afterwards does history feature the enormous costs that denial of individual rights produce.   

The feminist mindset, inculcated into much of our society and its laws, has helped destroy our freedom. It opposes what freedom stands for and represents a thought process that can only breed tyranny - a malicious and invidious women-privileged tyranny - we now face.   

Its growth and continuing perversion of justice that denies fundamental rights of fathers and other men is its natural consequence. Until this 'greater good' feminist mindset is exposed for its totalitarian consequences and rooted out of our laws and policies, this tyranny that suppresses our freedom and our liberties will prevail.

 

 END

 

 

 

Shane Flait writes on issues confronting freedom