Devvy Kidd charges that America has lost its manhood, by
which she means men prepared to defend women and children against the
advancing global tyranny [Devvy Kidd: Where Have All The Men Gone? June
5, 2002, www.newswithviews.com].
“Today the men in this
country,” she writes, “sit around watching mindless trash like Survivor
or Friends on the boob tube, instead of shouting down the roof against
state and federal systems that are utterly and completely rotten beyond
redemption. Systems and agencies that are putting their women and
children into a state of involuntary servitude for all their lives.
Instead they sit back with nary a whisper while state and federal
judges to uphold this carnage against the people. Why is this?”
One might have thought
the answer was obvious - the predictable result of the attacks on men
and masculinity that have come from the feminist movement over the past
two decades, with the backing of the state, and with the acquiescence
of the vast majority of Australian, and American, women. And while Ms
Kidd might wonder where the men prepared to defend women have gone, one
could suggest they have gone where the women prepared to defend men
have gone – into the pages of history.
While millions of men
have died protecting their families (or so they believed), they have
never regarded themselves as sacrificial animals. Their protection of
women and children always came at a price, a price wiser women in the
past understood. Men would protect women and children, provided women
and children gave them something worth protecting. That needn’t be
much: a little respect, love, and a home to defend. Men would stand by
their women and children, so long as their women and children stood by
them. Take away that mostly unstated bargain, and one is left with a
So when feminists started
calling men ‘male chauvinist pigs’, there might have been some women’s
voices raised in defence of men. If there were, they were few and far
between. When newsagents put on sale diaries with women on the cover
screaming, “All men are bastards”, women might have protested at the
blatant sexism. They might have demanded the diaries be withdrawn from
sale. Instead they bought them to show how ‘liberated’ they were,
thereby endorsing the claim.
When men were accused of
being involved in a ‘vast male conspiracy to chain women to kitchen
sinks’ and to turn this into a ‘male dominated society’, there might
have been protests from women at this obvious absurdity, but there
weren’t. What about from the mothers who were training the future crop
of alleged conspirators and women-enslavers - their own sons? Nothing.
When it was revealed
there was a war against boys in the school system, aimed at turning
them into placid little neuters, did their mothers storm Parents and
Citizens meetings demanding a fair go for their sons? Hardly. Instead
they believed the ‘teachers’ who told them male aggression was a form
of social psychosis requiring treatment. Toy trucks and guns should be
taken away, and boys given dolls to play with.
A masculine man came to
be regarded as an insensitive dolt – ‘macho’ was the term of abuse. The
ideal man was a SNAG – a Sensitive New Age Guy, in touch with his
‘feminine side’. Men should be encouraged to cry often, and share their
‘deep inner feelings’ as women supposedly do. If only men were more
like women, the world would be a much better place, was the feminist
mantra, and women generally stood around nodding in agreement.
When the feminists
pronounced that “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle”, did
real women object? No, they were doubled up with mirth. SO funny! When
the feminsts proclaimed their aim was no longer to ‘liberate women’,
but to ‘sink the boot into the groin of the patriarchy’, did any real
women protest to say that wasn’t what they wanted? No. And when
Hollywood started actually showing women kicking men in the groin on
screen as ‘entertainment’, did women object? Did they walk out of the
theatres en masse? Not at all. They made those peculiar ‘whoop, whoop’
noises women make at male strip shows.
Why was it that women
generally didn’t defend men through all this? For one thing, they were
too busy counting the spoils gained on their behalf by the feminists.
Such as affirmative action, because they wouldn’t have to compete so
hard to get a job, and could blame lack of advancement on men and
‘glass ceilings’. And Family Law, because women were almost guaranteed
three-quarters of the property and sole custody of the children most of
the time, simply by pleading womanhood.
Did any women protest at
the obvious injustice? Hardly any. In Australia they started
embellishing their custody applications with false accusations of child
abuse, so their ex-husbands would be denied the right even to visit
their children, ever. Feminist studies appeared, showing fathers were
not only unnecessary, but actually detrimental to childrens’
upbringing. Did women rise up in defence of men over these scandalous
claims? Virtually none. Nor did they object when the feminists accused
men of deliberately causing wars so they could have the pleasure of
being blown to pieces fighting them. Come to think of it, there is
hardly an evil on earth that has not been blamed on men by women over
the past 20 years, with no shortage of coverage by the major media.
Now women – at least some
of them such as Devvy Kidd - are starting to wake up that behind the
feminist and other popular movements are some very ugly scheming people
who want to destroy the institutions of civilisation so they can rule
over the wreckage. Accordingly, Ms Kidd wants men to resume practising
their traditional role as protectors of women and children, and bemoans
the fact that there don’t seem to be any men like that around any more.
Well what did she expect?
What did she think would be the outcome of the twenty-year war on men
and masculinity? Did she think that at the end of the day there would
still be men at women’s beck-and-call no matter what? Does she offer
any apology for the way men have been attacked for the past two
decades? Does she even ask men nicely for their protection? None of
these. She launches yet another attack on men, this time for failing to
do the ‘manly thing’, and protect women and children against the coming
“America,” she proclaims
in disgust, “has lost its manhood.” Really. Well if women want men’s
protection, they’d better start revising their attitude to men - or go