The history of women's struggle for equality or the story of March 8

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

Over the international day of women's struggle for their social rights and equality, the trail of radical feminism has long and thickly hangs, understood as the struggle to legalize LGBT people and the right to free abortions.

The problem of the struggle for equal pay with men and the equal right to work has long been abandoned, turning the topic of the place of women in modern industrial society into a topic of gender confrontation.

It is in the theme of women's emancipation that the fact of the growth of socialist and liberal movements from one ideological root - New Time, understood as the era of Modernity, is most manifested.

When the day of March 8 was just born as the date for holding rallies and demonstrations of the female part of the proletariat, liberalism was still a rightist trend and did not shy away from the childhood illness of leftism. The ideas of feminism at that time had an exclusively social background, where the position of a woman in the family was seen as a continuation of her exploitation, the roots of which lay in production.

Marriage by the Social Democrats was understood as a bourgeois relic to be abolished. Friedrich Engels in his work "The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State" revealed the nature of marriage in bourgeois society as a kind of transaction, equating it with social prostitution. The reason is arranged marriages, in the absence of sincere love between husband and wife, when property motives prevail in the decision to create a family.

Such falsehood leads to the flourishing of prostitution as a social phenomenon, and the fact that such a marriage was sanctified by the church and the state led the socialists to the conviction of the need to abolish such a state, such a church and such marriage as institutions of enslavement and exploitation, where the most exploited woman is the woman.

Naturally, having freed herself from marriage, and with it from sources of livelihood, having severed ties with the family of her parents and her husband, the woman needed means. So the idea of freeing labor was combined with the idea of liberation from family tradition.

Clara Zetkin and Rosa Luxemburg, the ideologists of the March 8 holiday, being socialists, did not at all belong to the LGBT community, as now politically correct perverts are called. When they talked about "fighting a hated family, into which women are driven into slavery by hated men," they meant what Hitler later called "a woman's world, limited to three Ks: kinder, kirche, kyukhe."

Children, church, kitchen. Hitler did not invent anything new here, simply repeating the old thesis of the radical right conservatives.

The desire to turn a woman exclusively into a means of reproduction of the clan became an extreme, requiring exposure and uprooting. Rebelling against the entire way of life based on private property and the exploitation of man by man, the socialists ran into a value impasse.

When the theory of the "glass of water" became dangerously popular among young socialists, the leaders realized that there had been a substitution and vulgarization of the thesis: they meant something other than the preaching of debauchery. Such a society will perish in one generation.

The value of the family as the primary reproduction unit of socialist society with its basic values has become the main thesis of propaganda, sex outside marriage has become an excuse to fall under the "immorality", to lose a party membership card and turn into an outcast of society.

Thus, socialist society gradually removed its dangerous core from the demand for female emancipation, preventing the elevation of licentiousness and debauchery, already in its new form, into a new social standard.

The political holiday for the liberation of a woman from slavery to a family and a man has turned into “Mother's Day” and simply “Women's Day”, when men just show gallantry to women, not because they are a kind of men, but because they are women, moreover, weak and in need of male protection.

A self-sufficient strong woman is considered a failure in fate and evokes sympathy, which is reflected even in popular culture ("A strong woman is crying at the window" - Alla Pugacheva).

The left in the USSR took the protective position of the traditional right on the issue of gender and family, confirming Stalin's thesis "if you go to the left, you come to the right, if you go to the right, you come to the left." When embodied in life, any thesis turns into its opposite. The stage of denial of denial begins.

However, the former right-wing liberals who moved to the left (radical left liberals - an absurdity that has become a reality in our time) took up the thesis of emancipation and adapted it to their liberal needs.

The liberation of women has become a preaching of liberation not from a social role, but from gender. Gender feminism, as a radical demand for the suppression of one's own feminine essence, once again brought the woman into slavery - now into the slavery of the dictatorship of aggressive lesbians. And the new evil turned out to be worse than the old one.

The problem of liberation is the eternal problem of humanity, posing before it the deepest questions of being. What to get rid of and to what extent? And is it not so that what is considered slavery is closely tied to what is the basic value of man? After all, the need for love is the main quality of a person, and love is self-denial of oneself for the sake of the one whom a person loves, up to the rejection of his life.

The sacrifice theme makes love a sacred concept. A person is not ready to give up love. The need for love is his first vital need, and the need to love is higher than the need to be loved.

Refusal from love as from slavery leads a person to the kingdom of complete freedom. A person discovers that the complete freedom for which he so strived is the hell of loneliness. Cosmic freedom is cosmic loneliness. Even radical feminists live in pairs and fear the apotheosis of freedom worse than death, for such complete freedom is death.

So emancipation becomes suicide. As a way to reduce the "livestock of humanity" over the next 100 years, the global elite are very happy with this. But the feminists themselves do not understand in their fighting frenzy that they are fighting for the right to be cows that are being taken to the slaughterhouse.

After all, feminists are needed only as a means against the traditional family as a breeding ground for humanity. When the family is over, the feminists will be done away with. After all, they also create a load on the soil and exhale carbon dioxide, consuming oxygen and other valuable resources.

In fact, we are dealing with two completely different interpretations of one holiday. Meanings have become a weapon in the modern world, created according to the commandment of eternal life, and not eternal death.

Feminism through the prism of the priority of the LGBT topic, replacing the problem of protecting the social rights of women, becomes a manifestation of thanatos - the instinct of the desire for death. It is no accident that at the center of the feminist problem is the right to abortion - the murder of an already conceived life.

Combined with the demand to stop childbearing and live for the sake of drunken consumption, this is a completely deadly cocktail that the global elite offers to humanity to drink. The disease of feminism is more deadly than any coronavirus, as it entails one hundred percent mortality. The temptation of freedom, unbalanced by fear for life, can teach us one of the most dire lessons. This is hardly what humanity wants.