The ruthless media attacks on Sarah Palin may be seen as just more assaults on a conservative. But in fact they demonstrate a rabid bias against “women” from one faction in America – male media liberals – that always has claimed that it stands for “women’s rights”.
But in truth male liberals are not at all in favor of rights for all “women”. They select a certain minority of “women” out for certain ‘rights’ and they ignore, or debase, the rest. And even those they say they respect they often do not. In many cases they loathe them beyond words, but cannot say so aloud.
Consider the Ancient Media attacks on Palin herself. Many of the attackers are male liberals who grew up in the 1960s. And right there you have the crux of the matter. Because 1960s male ‘hippies’ were among the most misogynist people who ever lived.
Oh, no! says our modern folklore. ‘Hippie’ boys loved and respected women! That was the start of the feminist movement!
Not so fast. The ‘hippie’ boys used women as sex objects. They abused them with drugs and sloth and personal filth – long, dirty hair, foul clothes, sexually-transmitted diseases and more. They ‘loved and respected’ women as long as the women were putting out sexually. Ultimately they exploited millions of “women” in every way. And they never gave it a second thought. Because in their own minds ‘hippie’ boys were the most important people in the world who deserved everything. Just like a classic liberal always is focused on himself.
Look at how “women” have been, and are treated by the rock-music culture that evolved in the 1960s. For decades, they have been treated like cheap pieces of meat to be cast off by the ‘stars’ when they are done with it.
Today, television is the same. The Parents Television Council, a non-partisan group advocating for responsible TV entertainment, recently issued a scathing report called Women in Peril: A Look at TV’s Disturbing New Storyline Trend. The report says that there has been ‘a significant increase in all forms of female victimization storylines; an increase in the depiction of teen girls as victims; an increase in the use of female victimization as a punch line in comedy series; and an increase in the depiction of intimate partner violence.’
And who controls the TV entertainment industry?
Liberals, that is who, many of whom came out of the 1960s.
PTC said that as of 2009:
‘Incidents of violence against women and teenage girls are increasing on television at rates that far exceed the overall increases in violence on television.’
‘Every network but ABC demonstrated a significant increase in the number of storylines that included violence against women between 2004 and 2009.’
‘Although female victims were primarily of adult age, collectively, there was a 400% increase in the depiction of teen girls as victims across all networks from 2004 to 2009.’
‘From 2004 to 2009 there was an 81% increase in incidences of intimate partner violence on television.’
Let’s take Bill Clinton as a sterling example of an abuser of women. Clinton would claim over and over that he is an enlightened 1960s liberal male who “respects” what he calls “women”. But he does not. We have seen instance after instance where Clinton abused every “woman” he ever met sexually, emotionally and physically, including his own wife. He even was accused of raping Juanita Broaddrick. Who knows what other skeletons are in his closet. Probably dozens.
And look at the most famous liberal family of all, the Kennedys. They abused women routinely for decades. We will never know the real story, however.
Where does today’s abuse come from?
From the 1960s, that is where. From college campuses and rock concerts and drug abuse and self-indulgence. From human weakness and insecurity which caused the ‘hippie’ males to exert total control over women while claiming that somehow they respected them. Because despite its claims, liberalism is an ideology of weakness and uncertainty. Just look at Hollywood. They are all leftists – and all fragile as glass.
No wonder the feminist movement of the 1970s took root. Women were tired of being abused by males like Bill Clinton and all the rest of the “chauvinist pigs” who they were in regular contact with, who just happened to be… liberals.
What happened in the 1960s is being played out today with sky-high divorce rates, broken families, loneliness, social alienation and rampant homosexuality. Because the sexual license of the 1960s did not bring about ‘peace and love’ but it created anger between the sexes, driving the sexes apart. Millions of males and females today lost the ability to interact with members of the opposite sex because that relationship was reduced by 1960s behavior to just a physical one. And since then we have been told over and over that casual sex is just harmless fun.
It is not…
We were told that the 1960s was about “peace and love”. It was not. It was about pleasure-seeking and violence, anger and exploitation of females by male ‘hippies’ who were narcissists out for their own gratification. They passed “women” around like pieces of beef. One night here, one night there, forget about marriage or commitment, that was old fashioned. And if she got pregnant, well, then you arranged for an abortion. Or ran away and found another bed to sleep in.
Now we have the media attacks on Sarah Palin who is happily married, Christian, conservative values, five kids, optimistic. Could these attacks be simple jealousy, the most powerful emotion of all? Could Palin’s male media attackers be secretly in love with her like they were temporarily in love with all the women they abused – and lost – throughout the years? Could liberal media males secretly envy Palin because she is not like the beastly feminists that they are married to or work with? Because in the liberal household or workplace, the female rules and the male quietly suffers under her tyranny.
Could all the childless spinster feminists at Harvard and Salon.com be suffering an envious rage about Palin’s handsome husband and her wonderful family, which they missed out on in their climb to the top of the paper tower of liberalism?
And could the one-time ‘hippies’ be envious of Sarah Palin because she is the focus of so much public attention, which was the lifeblood of the narcissist 1960s?
The fact is that conservatives have for years been maligned as misogynist and anti-woman. But that is the opposite of the truth. If you know married conservative couples, they are always more loving and more respectful of each other than most liberal couples. Because in the liberal relationship, the sexes are not equal as feminism implies. The male submits, and this stokes his anger.
Liberals love to point to the Bible as an example of conservative male dominance. In St. Paul’s letter to the Ephesians, it says in Ephesians 5:22:
“Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord.”
And libs love to select out this one quote as a symbol of male dominance. But they ignore the sentence before it which advises husband and wife:
“Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ.”
And the lines later which say:
“Husbands, love you wives as Christ loved the church… Even so, husbands should love their wives as their own bodies.”
The 1960s taught males to exploit the female, not to love and respect her. Yet loving and respecting a woman is the highest form of reverence, and all other genuine equality flows from that, the equality you find in conservative relationships and that is absent from that of many liberals.
So which ideology is really the one that respects women?
The treatment of Sarah Palin explains a lot.
Please visit my website at www.nikitas3.com for more. You can print out for free my book, Right Is Right, which explains why only conservatism can maintain our freedom and prosperity.