Wednesday, April 05, 2006

Feminism Ruins Heros!

I read an article called, “Looking for heroism in all the wrong places” on Ladies Against Feminism and thought I would share a section:

In contrast, the Biblical model is one of romance and heroism. A man who leads and a woman who submits is one of the most romantic and heroic pictures of all. And deep down inside, feminists know this. Even our fallen culture reflects this. Look at what is considered "great" literature today. Look at the dime store novels that are considered romantic. Look at the movies. No truly romantic film involves the woman heroically saving the man. No work of great literature, from The Odyssey to the Lord of the Rings trilogy, has the women saving the men, or even fighting alongside the men.

Feminists recognize this and cry about the “sexism” in literature, but they have yet to produce anything noteworthy of the other kind, because they know it wouldn’t
sell. And the reason it wouldn’t sell is because when we look for heroes, we don’t look to watered down men and defeminized women. We don’t look for egalitarianism; we look for the complementary. Even witchcraft, the most arguably feminist religion of them all, recognizes the differences between men and women and the need for this balance, this dance. The reason they cry against patriarchy is they claim that it only represents one side. They are looking for what God has put into them: “And the Lord God said: 'It is not good for man to be alone: let us make him a help like unto himself'” (Genesis 2:18). They are looking for something their minds won’t allow them to accept but their spirits know exists. Tragically, they are looking in all the wrong places.

What the feminists are trying to promote through "equality" between the genders it is quite comical. Who REALLY would want a woman rescuing a man? Can you imagine Wilma Wallace in Braveheart or Popeye the Sailorwoman? It just does not sound right! The big, strong Knight in Shining Armor is supposed to rescue the Princess. It is just how it is.


Spanish Morning said...

I like your picture of Wilma Wallace and Popeye the Sailorwoman. I'd have to say though that Wilma Wallace is MUCH harder to imagine. :-)

Jacob Mentzel said...

"Says who? These are only culturally shaped and infused ideas and norms. You believe that because that's how you were raised, period. Patriarchy is an ancient, antiquated system that might have been necessary long ago, but we've out-evolved our need for it as a social construct. There is no longer a need for strong heroic men and domestic women. Women today are just as capable of being "heros" as men and men who try to be "heros" end up as nothing more than brutes. Margaret Sanger is more of a hero than William Wallace ever was. How heroic is it to stand up and fight people when compared to standing up against an established societal norm that has dominated human existence for thousands if not millions of years? When are you going to grow up and get with the times? You have the opportunity to be apart of a movement that is going to reshape the entire future of human existence. Besides, what grounds do you really have to make the claims that you do? So Jane Austen glorifies these romantic deals. So what? Why should I buy what she's selling? It's a bill of goods and it's keeping me from progressing and attaining my full potential. Jane Austen may have been great for her time, but she's short-sighted. The hoops that her women had to jump through, the pretenses that they had to maintain, all for what? To expend every gift and talent in the service of some man while the whole of society goes unattended to? What a waste of life. This is exactly what men want, anyhow. They've been suppressing our sex for years in order to maintain their own dominance and now it is more unwarranted than ever. Come on, stand up and fight for your right, women unite."

-Jane Err

Jaclyn said...

Hahaha, Jake, very funny... did you write that or get it from somewhere? I KNOW it is not what YOU would say! You are giving my readers a bad impression of who you are... hahaha... :P

Jacob Mentzel said...

I wrote it :) How would you respond to Jane Err?

By the by, come on over and check/comment on Abram's new post.

Shannon said...

I'm so glad Jaclyn wrote that you were teasing, because as I was reading it I was formulating in my mind what I was going to write to you. It was going to be an ear full.=)

Jaclyn said...

You could still respond to Miss Err with what you would say if it HAD been a real person! I am also formulating a post that will be a reply to Miss Err! (did you hear that, Jake? :) )

Jacob Mentzel said...


I'm sad that Jane's exposure stilled your pen. Jane exists everywhere, and the question that must be addressed when we speak to issues of feminism is not how to rally together for self-affirmation of our understanding of our God-given roles, but how to respond to those like her. I have a lot to say about this, but I'd like to hear your response to Jane. I could almost wish that you would've responded before Jaci did so that the edges wouldn't be dulled. There's obviously much less at stake when you're addressing a fictitous character than a living, breathing soul.

Jacob Mentzel said...

"Well, I didn't expect that you'd have a good answer anyways, so I don't know why I'm checking to see if you responded. Isn't it just like some Christians to throw ridiculous claims out in their own corner of the world and then crawl into a hole and hide and wait for the storm to pass whenever an outsider looks in and dares to challenge their dogmas?"