Covering the Vatican elections, CBS news this morning had a spot with a guest referred to as “the Rebel Nun” (I could only watch it intermittently). One statement that she made was “feminism is the radical idea that men and women are equal.” Not only is this statement incorrect, it is every bit as erroneous and mis-informed as my favorite pseudo-liberal quip, “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.”

In this case, the idea that men and women are equal is actually a modern concept referred to as “Women’s Liberation.” “Feminism” is about irreconcilable inequality: it is the post-modern idea that women and men have a necessarily unequal, and necessarily adversarial, relationship. That any woman who is not actively working to undermine or destroy anything associated with “maleness” (including marriage and families, which require both men and women for their existence), is actively working to enslave women into the bondage of men.

Like all post-modern movements, it is by definition irrational, being based on rejection of the modern values of intelligence and reason.

Published by Little-Known Blogger

I spent the first years of my life in a trailer park outside of a tiny town in rural Missouri. I grew up to be a long-haired, gun-hating, military-hating, Presbyterian super-liberal. Well, perhaps the “growing up” happened later. While in high school, I was on the cross-country and wrestling teams, and actually won my weight-class in a State powerlifting competition. I went on to attend college on a Bright Flight scholarship, where I promptly became an atheist. I trained for a few years in Shotokan karate and Cheng-system taijiquan before training in my first real martial art, Hwarang-Do, under the late Franklin Fowlkes (later the Founder and Grandmaster of the Five Elements Martial Arts System). I married an older Taiwanese woman my junior year, got divorced in short order, and dropped out of college. After completing my AA in Psychology, I decided I needed a complete change of scenery and joined the U.S. Marine Corps (having early been assured that there was no way that a skinny liberal like me would ever survive Boot Camp). Contrary to what the Hipster Zombies will tell you, this did not “brainwash me into being a Conservative”. Instead, it made me a very unhappy, short-haired liberal, surrounded by guns and the military. However, I spent my whole contract (after schools) on the island of Okinawa, where I was exposed to points of view not dominated by the American liberal media. During this time, I taught ESL classes as a side-job, trained under some of the highest-ranking masters of karate on Okinawa, and discovered the practice of Buddhism. I also spent some time in Korea, where I got to train in hapkido. It was during this period that I came gradually to realize how stupid and evil American liberalism actually is. This was partly due to my Military Police command sending me to Small Arms Instructor school, which gave me more exposure to guns than I could ever have imagined—thus negating my idiotic liberal distaste for them. After the active-duty portion of my Marine Corps contract was over, I worked several jobs, from security contracts to operating a forklift in a warehouse. In 2002, however, when the invasion of Iraq was getting under way, I signed up with the Missouri Army National Guard, and have remained with them since, continuing as a Military Policeman. I am also full-time corrections officer, a member of the Anglican Church, and at one time was an Instructor Candidate in Dekiti-Tirsia Serradas Kali (until my instructor moved away). My hobbies (beyond blogging) include strength training, shooting sports, martial arts, creating digital art, and being a huge science and science-fiction geek.

Join the Conversation

4 Comments

  1. my favorite pseudo-liberal quip, “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.”

    This has absolutely nothing to do with liberalism, or conservatism or whatever other ridiculous label you wish to assign. That is pure fact, something which a man with your level of intelligence should not try to distort to further the silly political games America plays.
    Be whatever you are, that’s fine, but we have enough agents of misinformation in our society, we don’t need more.

    1. First, thank you for the compliment. But my motives are clarification of definition, not the furtherance of anyone’s “political games”. These terms do have definitions, and (especially among those who deal with these matters professionally) they are quite distinct:

      A “freedom fighter”, by definition, is a person who FIGHTS to free one group from another, oppressive group. This may involve guerilla tactics–creating fear among them–but it does involve FIGHTING (against valid military targets).

      Terrorists do not fight, nor do they seek freedom. They inflict mass casualties on CIVILIAN targets for the purpose of forcing a government to obey them. Therefore, both their methods and their goals are directly antithetical to the “freedom fighter”.

      The claim conflating them is made exclusively by terrorists, those pseudo-liberals who are sympathetic to terrorists and wish to hinder the efforts against them, and those without background in military science who have been taken in by the previous two. Equating any legitimate military force (such as the US Special Forces, who have fought to free many repressed people around the world) with groups who deliberately and indiscriminately murder civilians for politics, is both factually incorrect and deeply insulting.

      1. ‘…those pseso-liberals!’ There is no possibility for a discussion with you, I unfortunately thought otherwise; you’re a propagandist who seeks to further a specific political agenda. The US Government is a terrorist today and a freedom fighter tomorrow. Palestinians are freedom fighters to their people and those opposed to occupations, but they are terrorists to others, the list goes on forever. Jewish terror organisations were once considered freedoms fighters, etc.,. Terrorist is not an occupation.

      2. I won’t bother to rebut everything you’ve said; I don’t think it would be a productive conversation. However, you call me a “propagandist”. This means that you believe that I am deliberately disseminating false information to further a political agenda. But let’s examine what has been said in the conversation so far: I have offered specific definitions of two terms, used in the appropriate professional communities, which differentiate the terms based on tactics, objectives and methodology. You yourself have made the statement “…is a terrorist today and a freedom fighter tomorrow”, demonstrating that in your own mind, these are different. things.
        Yet you will insult me for not accepting a false equivalence to which you have a particular emotional attachment. I’m not interested in having a big argument on the subject, but I will ask that you consider that fact that there are professional organizations which deal with this topic every day, and the possiblity that such would be more specific in definition than bumper-sticker slogans.

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: