Jim Goad of Taki’s Magazine (formerly the editor of the short-lived magazine Answer Me!) is crowing about the forthcoming implosion of feminism and, as he sees it, the restoration of the patriarchy. In the article, “Will Feminism’s Next Big ‘Wave’ Finally Be the One That Drowns It?”, Goad wrote walked his readers through his understanding of the three waves of feminism. “Just like menstrual cramps and labor contractions, feminism comes in waves,” he wrote. “From the get-go, [feminism] was tinged with the spiritual idea that women were morally superior to men, a concept that has remained constant throughout all of feminism’s iterations.”
Goad expressed disdain for the women’s suffrage, writing that it was “downright sneaky” of the government to “give women the right to vote” because “women will vote for the government every time.” This particular view is somewhat popular among the far right. Presidential candidate and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee remarked that Democrats “want to insult the women of America by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing for them a prescription each month for birth control because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of the government.” In 2007 (and again in 2015) Ann Coulter expressed her desire to repeal the Nineteenth Amendment, saying that, “If we took away women’s right to vote, we’d never have to worry about another Democrat [sic] president.”
Continuing to the second wave, Goad wrote that feminism “then entered a blessed four-decade stretch of hibernation, only to awake in the early 60s.” This, he said, was “when feminism started to get truly annoying,” and when “women broke ‘free’ of their dependency on men, only to become dependent on that mack daddy pimp alpha male of all alpha males, Big Brother.” He also called second wave feminism a “sham” that was “aided and abetted” by the CIA, and linked to Gloria Steinem’s Wikipedia page. The page notes that Steinem admitted to having worked for Independent Research Service — a foundation that took CIA money — in the ’50s and ’60s, before she attended a single feminist meeting. Still, this talking point appears to be popular among anti-Semites and conspiracy theorists such as Jeff Rense and Henry Makow.
It was the second wave, he said, which “became hopelessly intertwined with Marxism” and which convinced women that they had an “inborn ‘right’ to either kill their fetuses or deliver them to term” while men “had no legal right to object to the woman’s decision.” (As it should be, I might add.) “Remember, lads—“equality” is always a zero-sum game. If they’re gaining something, you’re losing something.”
He saves the worst of his venom for the current wave, referring to modern-day feminists as the intellectual equivalent of third-graders who “yabber endlessly about their vaginas as if it’s somehow profound rather than profoundly silly.” It’s the third wave which “peddles obvious falsehoods such as ‘rape culture’ and the ‘pay gap,’ and, most annoyingly of all, the cruel hoax that we still live in a ‘patriarchy.'” We couldn’t be living in a patriarchy, he insists, because men die younger than women, as a whole. Checkmate, feminists.
The last portions of Goad’s article are where things really go off the rail. Quoting a description of third wave feminism, Goad wrote that third wave feminists insist that gender is a social construct. A fair point since many do, although perhaps just as many see gender as fluid (much like sexual orientation), a point that comes up in the murky discussions on transgender rights. At any rate, Goad — with his profound lack of knowledge on the subject — confuses gender with biological sex, stating that since feminists claim gender is a social construct then this “implies the term ‘woman’ is essentially meaningless” and also means that feminism “by falsely insisting that women exist, will ultimately be dismissed as a tool of the patriarchy.” Right. Okay.
It’s this result — a result of rather twisted reasoning, I might add — that Goad is longing to see come to fruition. “This,” he wrote, “is good news, guys.” Western women who forgo having children will be “slaughtered demographically by the infusion of old-world patriarchal cultures that place a heavy emphasis on breeding.” He cites Scandinavia as an example of “modern feminism taken to its logical extension”; a place where “men are cuckolded into shamed silence” and Muslim men are free to “come in and rape the women.” Goad finished by stating that the “greatest achievement” of feminism will ultimately be the “restoration of the patriarchy.”
Just like menstrual cramps and labor contractions, feminism comes in waves. Apparently we’re at the end of the third wave and on the cusp of the fourth. I don’t know what any of this means, either, so I looked it up.
It is generally agreed that in the USA, the first wave of feminism ended in 1920 when women gained the right to vote. That wave first started building sometime in the mid-1800s. From the get-go, it was tinged with the spiritual idea that women were morally superior to men, a concept that has remained constant throughout all of feminism’s iterations.
It was ultimately wise—if downright sneaky—for government officials to give women the right to vote, because almost without exception, women will vote for the government every time.
Feminism then entered a blessed four-decade stretch of hibernation, only to awake in the early 60s with Betty Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique and its insistence that domestic bliss was actually an endless loop of slave labor and marital rape for American women. Combined with an eagerness to leap muff-first into the “Civil Rights” movement lest women be left behind, the second wave was hatched like a screeching baby pterodactyl.
. . .
It’s when women broke “free” of their dependency on men, only to become dependent on that mack daddy pimp alpha male of all alpha males, Big Brother. And, wouldn’t ya know it, the whole sham was aided and abetted by the CIA. It’s when bras were burned and slogans were chanted and the word “sexism” was coined to compete with “racism.” It’s when feminism became hopelessly intertwined with Marxism and deconstructionism and anticolonialism and all those other -isms that always destroy everything of value. It’s when women claimed an inborn “right” to either kill their fetuses or deliver them to term, and men had no legal right to object to the woman’s decision. Remember, lads—“equality” is always a zero-sum game. If they’re gaining something, you’re losing something.
The second wave lasted into the early 1980s, at which point a schism broke open. Puritanical feminists claimed that all pornography—and even all intercourse—constituted violence against women. They were pitted like female pit bulls against “sex-positive” feminists who claimed that licking all the gash and guzzling all the jizz they could was “empowering.”
The sex-positive dames won that battle, because the third-wavers—not to be confused with third-graders, although I could see how you’d make that mistake—revel in “reclaiming” their “sexuality” by painting the word SLUT on their tits, posing for selfies with their armpit hair dyed blue, and having sex with as many creatures on God’s green Earth as possible just to prove that they will not be shamed into celibacy even though you called them fat. It’s where grown women who really should know better yabber endlessly about their vaginas as if it’s somehow profound rather than profoundly silly. Clearly all of the substantive issues have already been decided in their favor, so we’re left with emotional finger-painting.
But as fun as all that sounds, this has clearly been the most annoying feminist wave of all. It peddles obvious falsehoods such as “rape culture” and the “pay gap,” and, most annoyingly of all, the cruel hoax that we still live in a “patriarchy.”
That must be why men die younger, right? The only possible reason for why black women outlive white men in this country is because we’re still suffocating under the iron armpit of the white-supremacist patriarchy…right?
. . .
Got that? Third-wave feminism insists that “gender” is a social construct. That implies the term “woman” is essentially meaningless. It also suggests that “feminism,” by falsely insisting that women exist, will ultimately be dismissed as a tool of the patriarchy. By succumbing to the deconstructionists, the stalwart upper-middle-class white feminists of yesteryear will be swarmed by invading hordes of angry black chicks and men suffering from gender dysphoria who want to sneak a little slice of women’s Oppression Pie for themselves. The psychosis of deconstructionism will lead feminists down a rabbit hole where they’ll be forced to concede that identifying someone by their sex is the very essence of sexism. These ditzy slits will ultimately deconstruct the term “woman” to the point where “women’s rights” is deemed a tool of the patriarchy that must be destroyed.
. . .
But [feminism’s] tolerance of other “struggles” will prove to be its undoing. White women of the West who are “reclaiming” their bodies—i.e., not having kids—will be slaughtered demographically by the infusion of old-world patriarchal cultures that place a heavy emphasis on breeding.
Scandinavia is a sterling example of modern feminism taken to its logical extension: The men are cuckolded into shamed silence, which allows Muslim men to come in and rape the women.
In the end, feminism’s greatest achievement will be the restoration of the patriarchy.