Posts

‘Stephanie’ Crowder Punks Wendy Davis at the Women’s March and It’s Absolutely Brilliant!

Steven Crowder has outdone himself. In what could be his most controversial and hilarious video yet, the Louder with Crowder host infiltrated the national Women’s March held over the weekend … dressed in drag.

That’s right, Crowder and his producer NotGayJared went undercover as transgendered men. Or is it transgendered-women? Trans-women-men? These pronouns are confusing. What’s not confusing is the far-Left, radical agenda Crowder filmed march attendees espousing.

What is “p*ssy economics”?

Watch to find out:

Crowder even punked feminist-icon, leader of the pink revolution Wendy Davis, and got an exclusive interview with her. As she explained her ideas, it turns out the liberal Democratic policies advocated by Davis are all built on negative female stereotypes.

Hypocrisy much? (For more from the author of “‘Stephanie’ Crowder Punks Wendy Davis at the Women’s March and It’s Absolutely Brilliant!” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Nasty Women Writing a Horrifying History of Our Times

I remember an important lesson my parents began teaching me as a young lady. It’s a lesson that has been lost to the liberal tyranny of the crass, and the proof was the Women’s March in Washington D.C. last Saturday.

It’s a simple lesson on its face, but very significant, with far-reaching effects. It was this: As a woman, you teach a man how to treat you.

(That is not meant in any way to disparage men, or to imply that they are too dense to figure things out for themselves.)

What they wanted me to understand was that I had to decide what sort of woman I would be, and that my own behavior would largely determine how I was treated by men. Dad also wanted me to know that if any boorish man treated me badly, and I tolerated it, then I was teaching him it was okay to be a pig, and at that point, I was my own worst enemy.

The point is, by and large, men want to do right by women, so it’s incumbent upon the ladies to inspire them. Men aspire to honor and nobility, and most will respond accordingly when a woman encourages that behavior. I still believe men are inclined to take their cue from the ladies. Unfortunately, a man who is prone to lesser standards won’t need much encouragement at all to sink even further, and when women themselves behave badly, and tolerate bad behavior from a man, then mud begets mud and more mud.

The Crass Women’s March

That brings me to the gargantuan display of crassness that came out of the Women’s March. The profanity and vulgarity exhibited there was disgusting and embarrassing. We’ve all read about or heard Madonna’s foul-mouthed rant, and the same for Ashley Judd’s filthy speech praising nastiness among women as some new badge of honor.

If all that wasn’t enough, the signage carried by non-celebrity women was every bit as crude as what Madonna and Judd spewed from the podium. Grown women walked around dressed in vagina costumes. They wore hats sporting cat ears — a reference to the crass synonym for female genitalia. They carried signs that read, “P**** Grabs Back!” and “The Future is Nasty!” I saw one photo of a mother pushing her two little daughters in a stroller and pinned to the stroller was a sign reading, “Stay Nasty!” (Yes, I do understand the reference to Trump calling Hillary a nasty woman.)

I saw one woman holding a sign on which was painted the full female reproductive system with the slogan, “This Machine Kills Fascists!” What that could possibly mean, I can’t fathom.

The photo that tore my heart was one of a little girl about 3 years old holding onto a big sign in front of her that read, “F*** Your Fascist Bulls***”. Her mother was standing behind her smiling. What kind of woman does that to her daughter??

It seems clear that nasty is the new liberal “feminist” mantra. These women have responded to the degrading talk of a man they despise by being every bit as degrading, except it’s worse because they’re doing it to themselves. And they foolishly believe it makes them powerful or something. It doesn’t. It makes them gross and vulgar.

They’ve decided that nasty is a compliment, and they’re determined to prove just how nasty they can be. On that note, they sure succeeded. They’ve made it perfectly clear that as women, they are merely parts to be objectified. They — not Donald Trump — they have reduced women to nothing but their sexual parts. They have taught every man watching that their womanhood is not a thing of dignity or beauty, but something nasty that revolves entirely around sex. A woman is not a person to be taken as a whole and cherished and protected, but sexual pieces to be dehumanized and profaned.

Their example won’t be forgotten. Nasty women will inspire nasty treatment. Guys will feel free to refer to the female anatomy in crude “locker room” terms, cause hey! The women are doing it themselves!

We expect the men to be decent and honorable when the women are so indecent and vile? How does that work?

Their Killer Motive, The Unimaginable Consequences

Underscoring all the nastiness, of course, was the premier motive of the whole march: Abortion on Demand and Without Apology! We shall kill the“unwanted” if we jolly well want to, and don’t you dare try to take away our “rights!”

This is the tone liberal women in America have set. Genitals on display; crassness, vulgarity, and nastiness, loud and proud; and an absolute, irrevocable license to kill. These are the maxims of women who decry the intolerable offense of a man who once simply took them at their word. (They still love Bill Clinton and Roman Polanski though. Never mind their rapist, lecherous tendencies.)

To sum it up: Venerable Fulton Sheen was right when he told us: “To a great extent the level of any civilization is the level of its womanhood. When a man loves a woman, he has to become worthy of her. The higher her virtue, the more her character, the more devoted she is to truth, justice, goodness, the more a man has to aspire to be worthy of her. The history of civilization could actually be written in terms of the level of its women.”

Ladies and gentlemen, the history being written by the profane conduct from the Women’s March is too horrifying to contemplate. I ask you: what are we going to do about it? (For more from the author of “Nasty Women Writing a Horrifying History of Our Times” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

When Feminism Was Pro-Life

Serrin Foster has been talking about Susan B. Anthony probably for as long as she can remember. She’s president of Feminists for Life, and a Saturday Night Live skit recently gave her even more opportunities.

A skit on that comedy show ended with Anthony telling a group of modern women that “abortion is murder,” providing an unlikely gift to Foster’s group, which aims to educate women about nonviolent alternatives to abortion.

As it happens, Foster was already fielding press calls because of a billboard that Feminists for Life put up in Rochester, New York, where Anthony lived and spent her activist years. “Peace Begins in the Womb,” it says, which was essentially the message that Mother Teresa told Bill and Hillary Clinton and the rest of us when she spoke at the National Prayer Breakfast in 1994.

The billboard didn’t invoke Anthony, but it provoked a debate about her record on abortion. Foster makes the points that Anthony and other “feminist foremothers … without known exception, spoke out against abortion during the first wave.” The suffragettes were unmistakably pro-life, as Foster explains, using words and phrases like “crime against humanity,” “feticide” and “child murder.” “They used infanticide and abortion interchangeably,” Foster says.

What an opportunity for reflection — about the history that Foster and Carol Crossed, the president of the Susan B. Anthony Birthplace Museum, have dedicated years to exploring and communicating and about what we have been doing to ourselves — to human lives, to our culture and law.

“Sometimes SNL gets it right,” Grazie Christie, a doctor in Miami and senior fellow with the Catholic Association, tells me. She saw in the sketch the “superficial banality of modern feminism is in full display.” About Anthony she said: “The suffragist struggled to change a society where women could not divorce a drunk and abusive husband, vote, speak in public, own separate property when married or be joint guardians of their children. The millennials, affluent and liberated heirs to the fruits of her labor, argue about taxi fare and whether to eat on the train or grab takeout.”

Foster sees it as “an opportunity to instruct both sides about our rich, pro-life feminist history. It begins with the women who fought for the rights of slaves to be free and for women to vote, and who also argued to protect women and children from abortion. Women deserve better than abortion — and so do all children. We seek to fulfill the unrealized vision of the first wave feminists. May peace begin in the womb.”

Anthony, who did not have children of her own, was once complimented on what a good mother she would have been. Foster points to her response: “Sweeter even than to have had the joy of caring for children of my own has it been for me to help bring about a better state of things for mothers generally, so that their unborn little ones could not be willed away from them.”

Jeanne Mancini, president of the March for Life Foundation, which every January sponsors a large annual gathering celebrating life and protesting the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision, says, “Given the many conflicting messages these days about what it means to be a woman, to be a feminist, I appreciated the skit and its humorous poke at a sound-bite culture that is lacking a deeper understanding of the inherent dignity and vocation of woman. I appreciated that the skit depicted Susan B. Anthony’s stance on respecting and protecting life from conception.”

I take some solace in the fact that the first major female presidential candidate, who was an extremist on abortion, wasn’t elected. Unlikely as it may be, an SNL skit could be a gateway to liberation from our cultural assumption that women’s politics and health are wedded to legal abortion. It’s not so. It hasn’t been so. It doesn’t need to be so. We can’t live like this forever. And we don’t have to. See the opening now — it’s even showing up on SNL. (For more from the author of “When Feminism Was Pro-Life” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Fake News and FEMINISM! How a Liberal Feminist Learned the Media Sucks

Fake news! Celebrity tantrums! FEMINISM! This week’s “Louder with Crowder” had it all.

Feminist filmmaker Cassie Jaye stopped by to talk about her new documentary, “The Red Pill,” a film that documents the Men’s Rights Movement. She also talked about how her views on feminism have changed since learning about the ways men are disadvantaged and discriminated against.

She shared how the liberal media have viciously gone after her for not conforming to the progressive view on feminism.

For his part, Steven Crowder shared how he was kicked in the nards in grade school.

Yes, he cried.

Also, liberal CNN commentator Sally Kohn came on the program to debate your host (and have fun doing it!). And Not Gay Jared on the shelf is still trying to ruin Christmas. (For more from the author of “Fake News and FEMINISM! How a Liberal Feminist Learned the Media Sucks” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Modern Feminism: Lies, Bullies, and Whiners! Oh My!

If you want to know how to combat the social justice snowflakes of the liberal-Left, read what they’re writing. As unappealing as this sounds, it really is the best way to understand their progressive sentiments and pseudo-humanitarianism, and eventually dismantle their arguments.

Feminist blogger Luvvie Ajayi recently released her first book, “I’m Judging You: The Do-Better Manual,” a collection of essays on life, culture, social media, and fame. If you can get past the overuse of alliteration, painfully cheesy puns, and perpetual whining, you will gain insight into what has to be the most confusing, nonsensical social justice cause of our day: feminism.

Ajayi’s chapter on feminism is proof of a movement so progressive that its own proponents can’t even define it: “Believing that people should make their own choices about their own lives is ultimately what I think it means to be a feminist,” she writes.

According to Ajayi, “everyone should be a feminist,” because feminism is really just about “believing that women, and everyone, really, have the right to live life on their own terms.”
Sounds pretty unobjectionable, right? It even sounds, dare I say, conservative. Too bad not a word of it is true.

“Womanhood should be defined by each person for herself, because we are not all the same, and there’s no one way we can define it as a group,” Ajayi writes.

But if feminism is as subjective as Ajayi professes, why do people even use the term — and choose to define their entire existence on such? One word: victimhood.

Like most progressive movements, modern feminism purports to laud equality, tolerance, and freedom of expression as its primary goals. The truth, however, is that feminism promotes two unappealing visions of equality, neither of which could be considered “tolerant.”

Some feminists have attempted to reach equality by disarming and devaluing men. For these women, equality demands that the status and intrinsic worth of men be lowered for the sake of female liberation, independence, and “leveling the playing field.” This is the “fight the patriarchy” and “the future is female” group.

An alternative and more radical form of modern feminism asserts that equality demands total transcendence of sexual and all other differences — complete uniformity in role, in pay, and, consequently, in perceived value. This view not only attacks men, but any person whose beliefs or values challenge the progressive feminist agenda. I call this camp the “feminist fascists.”

“Ideology can go to hell,” Ajayi writes, “when the people who practice it consider themselves the gatekeeper.” Super tolerant.

Here’s the problem with that sentiment: Feminism is an ideology of sorts, which Ajayi even admits. And every ideology, or worldview, makes a truth claim, even if that claim is that anything goes.

The truth is, modern feminists aren’t OK with ideologies that contradict their liberal beliefs. People like Ajayi use the word “equality” to legitimize their claims of victimhood. They have the superpower of finding new ways to be perpetually offended.

Christina Hoff Sommers, AEI scholar and host of “The Factual Feminist” weekly vlog, explains how the feminist movement evolved into something its founders never intended. Instead of defending the dignity of women in the workplace and in the voting booths, today’s “intersectional feminism” unites women “at the intersection of propaganda, neurosis and rage.”

“They are bullying people now,” the “Who Stole Feminism?” author asserted in a recent interview with fellow feminist Camille Paglia.

Luvvie Ajayi notes in her book that the feminist movement has earned a bad reputation by “becoming synonymous with white women and that insidious white privilege.” Hoff Sommers agrees, and to an extent, so do I.

In her interview with Paglia, they discussed how a sort of “bourgeois protection” is being demanded by women who are least likely to experience any form of discrimination. Think: white middle-class college women and celebrities.

Ajayi writes that feminism “has been cruel by not equally prioritizing … the issues of women of color … and basically any woman who isn’t straight and white.” According to the 30-something blogger, people who question the purpose of the feminist movement “live in a dreamland” where “women are already equal.”

The irony here is that Ajayi’s adoption of “you do you” feminism only worsens this problem.

According to Sommers, intersectional feminism actually emerged in the black and Latino communities as a response to a women’s movement that attended “only to the needs of highly professional, middle class, upper middle class women.” Its main purpose was to address problems pertaining to cultural, racial, and economic minorities.

“But,” Sommers noted, “it has been appropriated by mostly middle class white women on campus.”

The term “safe space,” she added, was originally coined by early black feminists who congregated privately to discuss issues without any censorship from white feminists who didn’t have to worry about racism. As Ajayi notes, “They might be called ‘bitch,’ but we get called ‘n*gger bitch,” (edited).

Again, this is a valid criticism of the modern feminist movement, which is why it’s so mind-boggling that Ayayi, a black woman, would ascribe to an ideology that undermines any legitimate claims of oppression.

This is the tragedy of confused liberal feminism. Feminists today don’t want their “dignity” affirmed. They don’t want “justice.” They love their victim privilege too much.

Modern feminism isn’t about improving the lives of women; it’s radical progressivism by a different name.

“I just want women to be able to thrive, and my form of feminism is pretty simple: I do what I want to do and know I have the right,” Ajayi concludes the chapter.

Luvvie Ajayi does a disservice to any legitimate feminist causes by defending an ideology that doesn’t discriminate between special snowflake syndrome and genuine attacks on human dignity. To that I say, “Luvvie Ajayi, I’m judging you.” (For more from the author of “Modern Feminism: Lies, Bullies, and Whiners! Oh My!” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Vanderbilt Women’s Center to Lecture Men on ‘Healthy Masculinities’

Screen Shot 2015-08-31 at 4.48.12 PMVanderbilt University’s Women’s Center will be hosting a week-long event dedicated to lecturing men about what it means to have “healthy masculinity.”

The “Healthy Masculinities Week” is sponsored by Vanderbilt’s Margaret Cuninggim Women’s Center, which claims to be devoted to “Celebrating Women” while “Empowering All.”

The mission of the Women’s Center is to affirm a “space for all members of the Vanderbilt community that acknowledges and actively resists sexism, racism, homophobia, and all forms of oppression while advocating for positive social change.”

The “core values” of the Women’s Center includes the idea that, “progress toward gender equality calls all of us to be champions for change” while simultaneously claiming to “celebrate the unique differences among all persons and work to build community in diversity.”

“Healthy Masculinities Week” hopes to encourage men to “[e]xplore healthy masculinity through various lenses,” such as “American society, the gay and bisexual community, fraternities, and more.” (Read more from “Vanderbilt Women’s Center to Lecture Men on ‘Healthy Masculinities'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

So Sexist, Right?: Feminists Upset Over Statue of Man and Woman Talking

Scene: You’re a woman, sitting on a bench reading a book. Your male friend sees you on the quad and comes over to say hello and talk. You put down your book, lean back against the bench and smile. He doesn’t sit next to you; instead, he puts his foot on the bench and leans over his knee.

So sexist, right?

That scene is depicted in a statue at the University of the Incarnate Word in San Antonio, Texas, and despite no sign of distress or physical assertion, some women have decided it is a statue of “mansplaining” — a term used to describe men condescendingly explaining something to a woman.

Seriously. Here’s the actual statue and the claim of misogyny:

That tweet went viral over Memorial Day weekend. It all started when Ash Hernandez saw the statue on her way to take a teacher’s certification test. She was so outraged that she ran back to her car to get her phone to snap a picture (Read more from “So Sexist, Right?: Feminists Upset Over Statue of Man and Woman Talking” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.