By B.Wlodzimierz Redzioch
The last century was a period of the righteous fight of women against abuses, unjust treatment and humiliating stereotypes. The result of this fight was the rights that guaranteed women equal status. In the 1970s the feminist movement was much influenced by radical ideologies. These ideologies caused that the fight for equal rights for women became a pretext for destroying the traditional family and motherhood as well as for promoting sexual dissolution. By now various offices, which are established by governments and which are to guarantee equal status for women and men, serve to promote radical feminist ideas more than to protect true interests of women and society.
Wlodzimierz Redzioch: - What were the first objectives of the feminist movements in the West?
Dale O'Leary: - Generally speaking, one can say that in the second half of the 20th century the Western societies fought to combine equality between woman and man with their obvious biological differences. In the 1960s women protested against the laws and customs, which made them being treated differently than men. Reacting to those protests the governments introduced laws, which guaranteed equality for women. Women were able to use them very quickly - the number of female students at universities, employed women and those having top governmental posts increased.
- Why did the fight for equal rights for women change into the fight against men and family at some moment?
- In the 1970s the radicals, who regarded women as the prototype of the 'afflicted class' and marriage as well as 'obligatory heterosexualism' as tools of oppression, joined the feminist movement. This philosophical movement comes from Friedrich Engels and his analysis of the origin of the family. In 1884 Engels wrote, 'the monogamous family remains true to its historical origin and clearly reveals the antagonism between the man and the woman expressed in the man's exclusive supremacy'. Shulamith Firestone in her book 'The Dialectic of Sex', published in 1970, modifying the idea of the class struggles, calls to sex-class revolution: 'In order to eliminate sex-classes the inferior class (women) must rebel and take control over reproduction... That means that the aim of the feminist revolution is not only to remove men's privileges, which was the aim of the feminist movement, but also to eliminate the difference between sexes: these differences will never have any meaning'.
- This explains why this new feminism did not only act against men but also against motherhood...
- According to Firestone the essence of oppression of women is motherhood and upbringing of children. Those who support this stand think that abortion on demand, contraception, total sexual freedom, women's employment and keeping children in nurseries, which the state subsidizes, are the essential conditions of women's liberation. Nancy Chodorow in 'The Reproduction of Mothering' claims that until women perform educational-upbringing functions children will grow seeing mankind as divided into two different and, according to her, unequal classes. This is the reason why class oppression is being tolerated.
- Does that mean that radical feminists want children to live without family?
- Yes. The new feminism wants to abolish biological family. Alison Jagger in the manual for women shows what is the desired result of the sex-class revolution. 'Abolishing biological family will also eliminate the need of sexual oppression. Male and female homosexualism and extramarital sexual relationships will not be seen as alternative options in the liberal optics... The very 'institution' of sexual relationships, where woman and man play definite roles, will disappear. At last mankind will return to its natural, multiform and pervasive sexuality'.
- How did the term 'gender' originate?
- The problem, which those
who promoted revolution against family, had to face was to eliminate sex
classes, which are conditioned by biological differences between women and
men. The solution
of this dilemma was the theses of Dr. John Money,
- How did feminists use Dr. Money's theories?
- In her book 'Sexual Politics', 1969, Kate Millet wrote, 'there is no difference between sexes at the moment of birth. Psychosexual personality is something that is learnt after birth'. Thus the idea of gender as a social phenomenon was introduced into the feminist theories. The gender ideology caused that the priority of the feminist movement ceased to be the fight against politics that discriminated women but the priority was to the fight against the ideas that showed the differences between women and men and emphasized the fundamental role of woman in the sphere of education and upbringing.
- Feminists very often used the forum of the United Nations to impose their radical ideas on the world. Was it the case of gender, too?
- Till the 1990s the UN documents emphasized the need to eliminate all forms of women's discrimination, but in the 1990s the problem of gender became the major one. In the UN brochure, which was made by the INSTRAW agency and entitled 'Gender Concepts', the term 'gender' is defined as 'system of roles and relationships between woman and man, which is not biologically determined but depends on the social, political and economic context. As biological sex is given, gender is a product'. A big problem is that sometimes people who use the term 'gender' are not aware of its ideological roots.
- Perhaps we can see that best at some EU world conferences, during which the delegates of many countries signed the documents, in which the term 'gender' was used, not knowing what it exactly meant and not knowing the difference between 'gender' and 'sex'.
- That's right. It is
worth mentioning the World Conference on Women in
- It is obvious that the difference between the roles of men and women is the consequence of natural biological differences! A man cannot be pregnant, cannot breast-feed...
- It is obvious, but from the perspective of the gender ideology it cannot be accepted that a woman can choose motherhood as her most important calling. The words of Simone de Beauvoir confirm that. When Betty Friedan asked her whether women should have the right to choose staying at home and raising children the writer answered, 'Women should not have such a choice because if such a possibility really existed too many women would use it'.
- These are very meaningful words. Let us come back to Dr. Money's theory. Has it been scientifically confirmed?
- Gender ideology became more and more popular whereas its theoretical motivation disintegrated. Dr. Money's theories have been discredited by researches concerning brain development. The prenatal researches have shown that before birth the brains of a boy and girl differ, which influences among other things their different perception of movements, colours and shapes. For example, it causes that there is boy's ‘biological preparation' to use male toys and with girls to use female toys. Women, commencing with mother's womb, are being equipped with special sensitivity to other people, which is needed to perform the mother's role.
- And what of it? Some feminists do not want to acknowledge the unique role of woman in society and they ignore the researches, which confirm that!
- This is a big problem. The scientists who examine the earliest stages of child's development and the development of human brain, express their concerns that the researches concerning the meaning of the relationship between mother and child are ignored by those who would like to see woman as only a labour force and see children only in the nursery school.
- The gender ideology is in favour of a new definition of marriage, which would also embrace couples of the same sex. In recent years there have been many publications that suggest that there is no essential difference between children raised by couples of the same sex and those raised by natural parents. Are such theses reliable?
- Those who have analyzed such researches claim that they are no valid. According to Prof. Lynn Wardle, 'Most researches concerning homosexuals' parenthood are based on inadequate
documentation from the point of quantity as well as on false methodology and analysis (some of little more than anecdotal quality), and consequently, the empirical base is too poor to be decisive as far as social politics is concerned'. On the other hand, numerous researches confirm that the presence of father and mother increases the physical and mental state of a child. Patrick Fagan, Heritage Foundation, collected much evidence that having mother and father who live together is very important to children. Whereas children who 'are brought up by women or whose parents are divorced incur a greater risk to experience poverty, abuse as well as educational and emotional problems'. The future of the society depends on children and therefore, our duty is to regard the good of children as our priority.
Persona y género: ideología y realidad. Cap. I: Origen y desarrollo de
las teorías de género.( Riflessioni sul contesto storico culturale in cui nasce la teoría del gender.
Tres diversos modelos filosóficos sobre la relación entre sexo y género.
Simone de Beauvoir. Teorizzaczione del "gender". Tra filosofia e diritto. The gender
ideology and the global language). Cap.II. Consecuencias sociales, políticas y jurídicas de la
"ideología de género"
(The meaning of "gender" within the United Nations system. La irrelevancia jurídica de la diferenciación
sexual en el Consejo de Europa. La
ideología de género en el derecho español. Sexual orientation and the legal regulation of marriage. Nuevas tecnologías reproductivas y postfeminismo de género. Género y cambio social en la
edad moderna). Cap. III: Género y realidad (Una aproximacion científica a la ideología de género: cerebro de mujer, cerebro de varón.
Aproximación psicológica: el sexo, el género y sus derivados. Ideologia di genere e persona. Reciprocidad hombre-mujer:
igualdad y diferencia. Dos formas de afrontar la identidad sexual:
personalismo e ideología de género. Cultura, naturaleza y persona: género y
Obra publicada en colaboración con el Instituto de Ciencias para la Familia
de la Universidad de Navarra. En el debate actual sobre los derechos humanos
ocupa un lugar destacado la cuestión del género. Ciertamente, ninguna
sociedad democrática puede obviar la necesaria promoción social y jurídica de
la igualdad varón-mujer. No obstante, tras las diferentes "teorías de
género" subyacen planteamientos diversos, distintos modos de entender a
la persona y de articular la relación sexo-género. Este libro, con una
marcada visión interdisciplinar, recoge las aportaciones de reconocidos
especialistas internacionales en el tema, en un intento de clarificar la
cuestión abordada. Desde diversas perspectivas, el hilo conductor del volumen
es la apuesta por el modelo antropológico, y filosófico-jurídico, de la
complementariedad o corresponsabilidad varón-mujer. Se entiende que éste
permite hacer compatibles, de manera adecuada, las categorías de la igualdad
y la diferencia. Asimismo, aporta valiosos elementos a la discusión que
actualmente plantea la articulación del género en la estructura personal del
ser humano, con las implicaciones jurídicas que ello conlleva.
Instituto de Ciencias para la Familia | Universidad de Navarra | 31009
Pamplona | Tel.: 948 425 639 |Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
| III. Reality
The end of the Gender Experiment
Nordic Countries defund Gender Ideology
The decision was made after the Norwegian State Television had broadcasted a television documentary in which the hopelessly unscientific character of the NIKK and its research was exposed.
The producer of the series
is Harald Eia, a
Norwegian comedian, who had gained some popularity in
In his documentary, Mr. Eia just went, in the company of a camera team, and asked
some innocent questions to the leading researchers and scientists of the
NIKK. Then he took the replies and brought them to leading scientists in
other parts of the world, notably in the
What is more, the bogus was exposed to ridicule in front of the entire TV audience, and people began to ask why it was necessary to fund with 56 million Euro of taxpayers’ money some ideology-driven “research” that had no scientific credentials at all.
As it turned out, a few innocent questions, asked by a comedian, were sufficient to bring down the pompous edifice of “Gender Theory”. It is hoped that the lesson will be heard in other countries, or in the EU and the UN, where this ideology still holds sway in the corridors of power…
To watch Mr. Eia’s documentary in full length, visit this site and, when asked to enter a password, type “hjernevask” (the Norwegian word for “brainwash”, which was aptly chosen as title for the documentary). Non-Norwegians don’t need to worry – there are English subtitles.
Source: Posted on 5 Sept. 2012 by J.C. von Krempach, J.D., in www.turtlebayandbeyond.org