Here’s the statement West made to a group of conservative women that has people on the left riled up: "We need you to come in and lock shields, and strengthen up the men who are going to the fight for you. To let these other women know on the other side — these planned Parenthood women, the Code Pink women, and all of these women that have been neutering American men and bringing us to the point of this incredible weakness — to let them know that we are not going to have our men become subservient. That’s what we need you to do. Because if you don’t, then the debt will continue to grow…deficits will continue to grow". I’m sure West’s use of the word “subservient” was like nails on a chalkboard to the left. After all, servitude is the very thing they pride themselves on having saved women from. The notion that men are in any way subservient is laughable to this group — they think men in America have it made.
Yet West is correct: American men have been demoted. They were once respected providers and protectors; today, they’re considered unnecessary, irrelevant, and downright expendable. Men do need lifting up, and conservative women are precisely the ones to do it. The best example to date of America’s new attitude toward men is a statement actress Jennifer Aniston made in August of last year:
"Women are realizing more and more that you don’t have to settle, they don’t have to fiddle with a man to have a child".Isn’t that just Hollywood talking trash, you ask. Don’t these women live on another planet? Perhaps. But no Hollywood actress would have dared to think, much less say, such a thing forty years ago – whether she was a Republican or a Democrat. One could only feel comfortable making such a statement in a society that’s gone off the deep end. Here’s another example. In a More magazine interview, actress Mary-Louise Parker – who has never married but has two children – was asked what it is it like to date as a single mom. She responded that a man once asked if her being a mom meant the two of them would not be able to go out alone together very much. To which Parker replied,
"Yes, that’s exactly what it means. It means you come fourth, ’cause it’s my kids, my job, and my family".Okay, okay. Perhaps I should leave the women of Hollywood out of this. How ’bout these examples then?
1) Journalist Natalie Angier begins an article in the New York Times by writing this:
"Women may not find this surprising, but one of the most persistent and frustrating problems in evolutionary biology is the male. Specifically . . . why doesn’t he just go away?"2) In a CNN interview with Maureen Dowd about her 2005 book Are Men Necessary? Dowd says,
"Now that women don’t need men to reproduce and refinance, the question is, will we keep you around"? And the answer is, ‘You know, we need you in the way we need ice cream—you’ll be more ornamental".3) Several years ago Katie Couric interviewed a young bride on the Today show who had been jilted at the altar. Jokingly, Couric asked the young woman if she would have “considered castration as an option.”
4) Lisa Belkin, an author and blogger for the New York Times, wrote,
"We are standing at a moment in time when the role of gender is shifting seismically. At this moment an argument can be made for two separate narrative threads—the first is the retreat of men as this becomes a woman’s world."5) In an article in The Atlantic titled “Are Fathers Necessary?” author Pamela Paul wrote,
“The bad news for Dad is that despite common perception, there’s nothing objectively essential about his contribution.”What do all these women have in common? They are card-carrying members of the feminist elite. It’s a bona fide cult, and liberalism is their God. Indeed, if Allen West made any mistake in his analysis, it was his use of the term liberal. A better term is feminist liberal. Modern liberal women are nothing more and nothing less than feminists — and feminists are the most visible group of women of America. Simply put, they drive the bus. But it is time, that we put them to the back of the bus. But the feminist worldview is in direct opposition to the conservative worldview. That’s what Allen West meant, I believe, when he said conservative women must stop liberal women in their tracks. I couldn’t agree more. The problem is that too many Americans, women in particular, are afraid to take a stand against feminism. They think being opposed to feminism means being against women’s rights or being throwbacks to a bygone era when women were at home doing nothing else with their lives but caring for children — which, besides being untrue, is not a bad thing anyway. But that is precisely how liberal women want people to think of feminism: as American women’s saviors. But feminism did not save the women of America. If anything, it ruined them. That’s because feminism is about rejecting the timeless institutions that makes most people happy and any good society flourish: marriage and motherhood. Liberal women don’t explain it this way, of course. They insist they’re not against the traditional family but merely want women to have choices. Hogwash. Not only do feminists subtly and overtly undermine traditional gender roles, they take credit for something they didn’t do. American women’s choices (a.k.a. “progress”) were expanded not from the bra-burning demonstrations that sought to reform society but from a natural evolution that was aided by technology – technology that was invented by men, I might add. American women should be thanking men, not feminists, for the lives they have today. Allen West’s argument that liberal women have neutered men was courageous and spot on. It just wasn’t self-explanatory. West would have done well to quote anti-feminist warrior Carolyn Graglia when making his argument.
"The traditional family will remain in peril until we derail the feminist engine of reform by killing the sexual revolution, by replacing no-fault divorce laws with laws that protect homemakers and families, by ending preferential treatment of women in education and workplace, and by reforming all laws that discriminate against one-income families through requiring them to subsidize child care for two-income families. But these things will not happen until a change occurs in those men who have rejected the value of a woman’s traditional role and of a man’s contributions that make this role viable. Without those contributions, what do men think will define their manhood? If women’s traditional role is expendable, then, as increases in the number of well-educated, never-married mothers indicate, so also are men expendable for all purposes other than sperm donor. The result is a society increasingly like Sweden’s, which has the lowest marriage rate and one of the highest illegitimacy rates and employment rates of working-age women in the western world".I believe this was Allen West’s point. And it’s an excellent one. Thank the GOOD LORD that I live in Monroe County, Alabama.